I want to live forever! (performance, advance, website, sound)

[jonesg]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

Well maybe not forever but I intend to live a very long time, thousands of years or more.

I decided to start this thread here because it has to do with science and the progress of information technology. There is a book called "The Singularity is Near" and a documentary called "Transcendent Man" by Ray Kurzweil. This is the teaser from youtube:



In it he discusses the law of accelerating returns and More's Law that say information technology grows at a exponential rate. When I was a kid in the 1970's computers took up a whole room. Now my cell phone has more computing ability then that computer did and in 20 years computers will be the size of a blood cell. That will allow us to have super strong immune systems and help us be even smarter as our biology will blend with nano technology. They have already found the aging gene and fat gene and are working on being able to stop and even reverse them. Then by 2029 computers will be as intelligent as humans and by 2045 a single computer will be as intelligent as all of the humans on earth combined. We will, also, have virtual reality that will be as real as "the real world". Picture the hollow deck on Star Trek but a 1,000 times better in my life time. I can't wait. This is the best time to be alive!

When I was a young skull full of mush 50 yrs ago I was atheist and terrified of dying.
I thought I liked science and read scientific American magazine, I noticed what I was really looking for was anything that might suggest an answer to aging. Becoming aware of my fear only made it worse as I discovered my motives and the extent to which fear was directing my life decisions. It took over 40 yrs to work through that. I learned faith has nothing to do with what I think.

Read something recently ,25% of atheists appeal to god when they encounter a crisis.
No kidding I thought, they needed a stupid study to figure that out?

Singularity. I don't have enough fear to want that. But be wary what you wish for.

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

In my quest to live forever I want to sequence my genome. I found this company and will have it done this year.


ABOUT US (US)

Dante Labs is transforming genetics. Our mission is to make advanced genomic testing accessible to everyone. We want to empower people with knowledge and insights about their own genetic information so that they can live healthy, long and happy lives.


The link: https://www.dantelabs.com/pages/about-us-us

I work in the field of genomic testing...I would caution you about using direct to consumer companies for this type of testing. If you do research on this company you will find they they really don't say much. Under their about us it states: All of our laboratory partners are certified and have been in operation many years and process high volumes of samples on a daily basis. Thanks to the Dante Labs Network of Labs, you will access the best genetic testing technologies available worldwide.

First what are the other labs certified for? Are they CLIA accredited labs? Are they CAP accredited? Is their test cleared by the FDA? I find it odd they just toss out that the labs they use are certified but fail to say what they are certified for?

Most direct to consumer sequencing companies are not going to be offering you any information about how long you can expect to live. If you are interested in knowing if you have genetic mutations then perhaps you should get your exome sequenced instead.


Not sure what you think you will gain from sequencing your genome. You will not be receiving any mind blowing information from these types of direct to consumer testing.

It might be helpful to understand what a genome sequence is.

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by Matadora

^^^
You are out of touch with reality and don't appear to really understand the issues plaguing the world with respect to overpopulation which is fueling the Holocene extinction. You don't appear to know anything about earths carrying capacity.

Good luck dreaming about colonizing other planets.

If you believe the doom sayers and alarmists, you will have a very negative opinion. "Overpopulation" has been a repeated theme for THOUSANDS OF YEARS. Each time, the elite trot it out to excuse their "thinning of the herd of useless eaters."

And you may have misunderstood the part about colonizing outer space. I do not refer to "colonizing other planets." I refer to fabricating ginormous self sufficient autonomous space habitats to orbit our sun, planets, moons, and so forth.

[] Space colonization via habitats - a better idea
__ http://settlement.arc.nasa.gov/Basics/wwwwh.html#why

“. . . The key advantage of space settlements is the ability to build new land, rather than take it from someone else. This allows a huge expansion of humanity without war or destruction of Earth's biosphere. The asteroids alone provide enough material to make new orbital land hundreds of times greater than the surface of the Earth, divided into millions of colonies. This land can easily support trillions of people.”

. . .
TRILLIONS OF PEOPLE.
1000 BILLION.
. . .
And that's a conservative estimate.

MCKENDREE CYLINDER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKendree_cylinder
McKendree’s design would use carbon nanotubes instead of steel, allowing the habitat to be built much larger.
Habitat would consist of two cylinders approximately 460 km (290 mi) in radius and 4600 km (2900 mi) in length, containing 13 million square kilometers (5.1 million square miles) of living space - nearly as much area as the nation of Russia.
.....
^^^ The computed surface area only refers to one layer - the outermost shell. If the cylinders had nested layers, the surface area is far, far greater.

76560 decks (10 ft)
2 x 10,127,094,564.45 sq.mi.
= 20,254,189,128.9 sq.mi.

Capacity :1,012,709,456,445 (@50 per sq.mi.)
1.01 trillion people
PER COLONY.

. . .
DYSON SWARM - pack ‘em in like sardines

EARTH Aphelion : 152,100,100 km / 94,500,000 miles
Orbital Circumference : 955,673,113.5 km / 593,761,011.5 miles
@4000 km spacing : 238,918 colonies could fit on the plane of Earth’s orbit.

MARS Aphelion : 249.2 Gm / 166.96 million miles
Orbital Circumference : 1565.77 Gm /1,049.07 million miles
@4000 km spacing : 391,442 colonies could fit on the plane of Mars’ orbit.

And those figures do not count "cyclers" (that orbit between planets), or inclined orbits.

And imagine adding banks of colonies extending to the orbit of Venus and out to the Asteroid belt. (Not too sure about approaching Jupiter’s orbit - but who knows?)
. . .
Let’s spitball about 40 billion McKendree sized colonies with 358 trillion space colonists each, roughly holding 14.32 e+24 (septillion) humans. (We’d hit that around 4200 A.D. at current population doubling.)


:-:-:
Futurists are divided into two categories or groups: doomers and boomers.

❏ Doomers (Malthusians / Machiavellians) assume that there is no hope for humanity, and shall destroy the earth from wasting irreplaceable resources.
❏ Boomers (Cornucopians) believe that applied science and technology offer a hope for humanity, especially by colonizing outer space, where there are 'astronomical' amounts of resources, power and expansion room.

I am a cornucopian, and don't plan on accepting genocidal "environmental preservation."

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by Matadora

^^^
You are out of touch with reality and don't appear to really understand the issues plaguing the world with respect to overpopulation.

If you rely on "FLAT" thinking, it looks bad.
But if you think in volumetric terms, it's fine.

To illustrate.
Assuming that by the end of the 21st century, the population rises to 28 billion (two doublings).
Each human being is allotted 2 acres of surface area. If that was incorporated within a 10 story volume, it would require 4.4439% of the planet's surface area (dry land is approx. 1.97E+08 sq mi).
(human habitat would take approximately 8750000 sq mi; or 22662396 sq. km)
That's PIFFLE. 95% of the planet would not be needed for human habitat.

Imagine if that volume was 20 stories up and 10 stories down? Three times the surface area, thus requiring 1/3 less surface area of human habitat.
Go to extremes - 100+ stories up and 30+ stories down - - - woo hoo.

Next step - change building codes so that adding wildlife habitat is acceptable. Now, you can amplify wildlife habitat instead of merely "preserving" it (status quo).

T H I C K E N the life bearing volume, and you have the solution for more abundant life.

[turf3]

I don't.

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by jetgraphics

If you believe the doom sayers and alarmists, you will have a very negative opinion.

Sorry but I don't get my knowledge from doom sayers or alarmists or deniers.

Originally Posted by jetgraphics

This land can easily support trillions of people.”
[/indent]. . .
TRILLIONS OF PEOPLE.
1000 BILLION.
. . .
And that's a conservative estimate.

False: Outpacing Earth's carrying capacity

[Radical_Thinker]

Living forever is the very last thing I want to do. To be stuck in an imperfect body in an imperfect world for decade after decade, for century after century...sounds like a never-ending prison sentence to me. Who wants to be their old, tired "themselves" for all eternity? Not me! I've done this before, and I'll do it again, and I relish the opportunity to continue the evolution of our species in different lives. Dying, just like birthing, is part of the job.

Besides, living without dying is something no human has ever done in all of history. Every single human has 2 things in common. Being born and dying. Granted, some people die at the time of their birth, and a few individuals have made it to 120, or slightly beyond. But that's it - everyone dies. Thinking you can do otherwise is a fool's errand, and will only set you up for heartbreak when it's time to cross over. Better to accept it as part of reality (like taxes...lol) and maybe focus on living a better life. Longer is good too - not many people would turn down a chance to live to a 120 in good health. With tech, maybe we'll get there. Maybe.

[Kivan]

That is now with today's technology and if it would stay the same or grow linearly then I would agree that we would not live much more then we do today. However, its a proven fact that information technology grows at a exponential rate just look at More's law. What Ray has written in his book and said in his documentary is nothing new, I have heard it talked about for decades, he just puts it together in a way that many people have never thought of but once we do it makes total sense. The good thing about it is if someone does not want to live for a very long time they do not have to but in 20 years the ones of us who do want to will have that option. Personally, I plan on spending the new year 2100 on the moon with my BF at the young age of 127 but look like I am 27.

[JockB]

I would eventually get bored, but I find one truth in all the post
"a finding that suggests new treatments for a variety of age-related diseases and cancers."

[ColoGuy]

Reality check? Americans are now living shorter lives. Living to 91 would be alright the way I see it. I am fearful that old age might be a tad boring without any family. Some do fine, many others check out shortly after losing their partner. Nobody to fight with? Or care for?