David_Gerard comments on [LINK] blog on cryonics by someone who freezes things in a cell bio lab - Less Wrong

5 Post author: mwengler 19 October 2012 06:35PM

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

Comments (30)

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

Comment author: Dolores1984 22 October 2012 10:42:14PM 2 points [-]

Which is obvious nonsense. PZ Meyers thinks we need atom-scale accuracy in our preservation. Were that the case, a sharp blow to the head or a hot cup of coffee would render you information theoretically-dead. If you want to study living cell biology, frozen to nanosecond accuracy, then, no, we can't do that for large systems. If you want extremely accurate synaptic and glial structural preservation, with maintenance of gene expressions and approximate internal chemical state (minus some cryoprotectant-induced denaturing), then we absolutely can do that, and there's a very strong case to be made that that's adequate for a full functional reconstruction of a human mind.

Comment author: David_Gerard 22 October 2012 11:45:26PM *  1 point [-]

As you'll see if you read his text, he's responding to proposals to emulate a brain without understanding how it all works, and is noting just how fine you'd need to actually go to do that.

If you want extremely accurate synaptic and glial structural preservation, with maintenance of gene expressions and approximate internal chemical state (minus some cryoprotectant-induced denaturing), then we absolutely can do that, and there's a very strong case to be made that that's adequate for a full functional reconstruction of a human mind.

I've heard the case made at length, but not of, e.g., a C. elegans that's learnt something, been frozen and shows it stil remembers it after it's unfrozen (to name one obvious experiment that, last time this precise Myers article was discussed, apparently no-one had ever done) or something of similar evidentiary value. Experiment beats arguing why you don't need an experiment. Edit: Not the last time this Myers article was discussed, but the discussion of kalla724's "what on earth" neuroscientist's opinion on cryonics practice.

Comment author: Dolores1984 23 October 2012 01:19:57AM 0 points [-]

Right, but (virtually) nobody is actually proposing doing that. It's obviously stupid to try from chemical first principles. Cells might be another story. That's why we're studying neurons and glial cells to improve our computational models of them. We're pretty close to having adequate neuron models, though glia are probably still five to ten years off.

I believe there's at least one project working on exactly the experiment you describe. Unfortunately, C. elegans is a tough case study for a few reasons. If it turns out that they can't do it, I'll update then.

Comment author: jkaufman 24 October 2012 10:44:25AM 0 points [-]

You might find this earlier discussion useful on how far we've gotten with emulating C elegans: http://lesswrong.com/lw/88g/whole_brain_emulation_looking_at_progress_on_c/