You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

ChristianKl comments on [Open Thread] Stupid Questions (2014-02-17) - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: solipsist 17 February 2014 05:34AM

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

Comments (136)

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

Comment author: ChristianKl 17 February 2014 04:22:17PM 2 points [-]

Why isn't there more research in progress on how to wake up people from cryonics? Or, rather, why aren't more people sticking hamsters and dogs under liquid nitrogen*, then trying to revive them and bring them back to "full life",

Because cryonics is not simply about putting people under liquid oxygen.

It also involve given people a highly toxic substance that prevent ice crystals from forming inside their brains. The substance does no harm if you are frozen is ice but if you would just try to revive people the substance would kill them. You need nanotech to remove it.

Cryonics needs nanotech to revive patients. Currently there no good nanotech for doing so. It makes more sense to wait till we have good nanobots and then attempt to revive organisms.

Comment author: Pfft 17 February 2014 05:35:09PM *  3 points [-]

Well, but for sufficiently small things one may be able to get by without too toxic cryopreservants? Famously, things like embryos and even rabbit kidneys have been frozen and then "revived". If this could be scaled up to e.g. a mouse (something which is big enough to have nontrivial memories), that would resolve lots of worries about there not being enough information preserved in a vitrified brain.

Comment author: CellBioGuy 18 February 2014 06:09:47AM *  1 point [-]

You can freeze nematodes and water bears fairly easily. Notably both of these are evolved to survive dessication and freezing in their normal life cycle and have their largest dimension on the order of one mm. Its a bit of a stretch to call what some frogs can do naturally in the outdoors 'freezing' but again, massive evolutionary pressure.

If you try to freeze a complicated structure bigger than a few cubic centimeters that isn't the ridiculously vascularized and quite small and very homogenous in terms of water content rabbit kidney, you come up with something that is so damaged by the freezing process that it falls apart physically and chemically upon unfreezing. The unfreezing part is not the limiting factor, because there just isn't a paused functional organism left behind by the freezing process.

Comment author: InquilineKea 18 August 2014 12:49:02AM 0 points [-]

What about the wood frog?