lsparrish comments on Cryonics Wants To Be Big - Less Wrong

28 Post author: lsparrish 05 July 2010 07:50AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (160)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ciphergoth 05 July 2010 08:37:03PM 5 points [-]

Given the large storage mass involved, preventing temperature fluctuations without being at the exact boiling temperature of LN2 is feasible; it could be both highly failsafe and use the ideal cryonics temperature of -135C rather than the -196C that LN2 boiloff as a temperature regulation mechanism requires. Feel free to raise further issues in the comments.

Wow, that's incredibly attractive - it would completely eliminate cracking as we pass through the glass transition temperature. I take it that would also reduce LN2 costs by a further 30% or so?

Comment deleted 05 July 2010 09:03:21PM *  [-]
Comment author: lsparrish 05 July 2010 11:26:01PM 1 point [-]

I'm not convinced it is much of a risk. Maybe if you're assuming thousands of years will need to pass.