But can they put my head on a robot body? :hmm:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/07/02/newser-head-transplant/2483085/
QuoteHuman head transplants are possible, says neuroscientist
Ruth Brown, Newser 1:11 p.m. EDT July 2, 2013
Story Highlights
Scientists have been carrying out head transplants on animals since the 1970s, when a monkey's head was moved to another monkey's body; the resulting creature survived, paralyzed, for a few days. But so far, no one has attempted to put a human head on a different human body. That's because, in part, they haven't had a way to properly connect the donor body's spinal cord up to the head, so the head-body hybrid would be similarly paralyzed below the transplant area. But a new paper by an Italian neuroscientist says the technology now exists "for such linkage," Quartz reports.
Dr. Sergio Canavero believes the best method would be to sever both spinal cords with an ultra-sharp knife, then rapidly fuse the two together mechanically, using plastics like polyethylene glycol, which has been successfully used to fuse severed spines in dogs. (Spinal cords from two separate animals have not yet been connected though.)
Popular Science states the obvious: This kind of transplant would be "enormously complicated," and involve reconnecting much more than the spine: bones, tissue, and millions of nerve fibers. The reconnection procedure would be strict to the extreme: The heads would have to be cut at precisely the same moment and then cooled to between 54.6 and 59 degrees, for instance.
Theoretically, the procedure would offer paraplegics the chance at a new body. But it wouldn't come cheap — Canavero estimates it would cost at least $13 million. (In the meantime, another amazing paralysis breakthrough is a reality.)
Rather than stupid shit like tranplanting the head, why don't they just use spine-fixing technology to fix the spine of the cripple?
Quote from: Neil on July 04, 2013, 11:37:25 PM
Rather than stupid shit like tranplanting the head, why don't they just use spine-fixing technology to fix the spine of the cripple?
What Tricky Dick said.
Seen this when it first hit Newser, which wasnt today.
Tim this is theory and until they do it....bullshit.
Quote from: Neil on July 04, 2013, 11:37:25 PM
Rather than stupid shit like tranplanting the head, why don't they just use spine-fixing technology to fix the spine of the cripple?
:lol:
Yeah, that's the first thought that came to mind for me reading this. You'd think the ability to cure spinal damage would be a bit of a bigger headline.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 04, 2013, 11:29:47 PM
But can they put my head on a robot body? :hmm:
Not when it's been jammed so far up your ass for so long.
Had a conversation over wine with a neurosurgeon once and he mentioned that even if we could remove a human brain and put into a perfectly immortal body, or some sort of robotic body that could support it the brain itself has an aging process and would fall to extreme dementia over time and become basically non-functional. So we'd have to find a way to fix that before going into a robot body would make any sense.
Tim, I think you were born too early to be able achieve immortality through robotic science.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 05, 2013, 12:14:14 PM
Had a conversation over wine with a neurosurgeon once and he mentioned that even if we could remove a human brain and put into a perfectly immortal body, or some sort of robotic body that could support it the brain itself has an aging process and would fall to extreme dementia over time and become basically non-functional. So we'd have to find a way to fix that before going into a robot body would make any sense.
But Timmay's brain is already basically non-functional, so it wouldn't be a problem in his case.
Why all the Tim-hate?
If he wants to transplant his brain into a robot body, I say, I'm all for him volunteering. :D
Quote from: Malthus on July 05, 2013, 02:49:44 PM
Why all the Tim-hate?
If he wants to transplant his brain into a robot body, I say, I'm all for him volunteering. :D
Yes, I second this, he should volunteer.
Quote from: Malthus on July 05, 2013, 02:49:44 PM
Why all the Tim-hate?
If he wants to transplant his brain into a robot body, I say, I'm all for him volunteering. :D
Busting his chops. I like his news posts.
Quote from: lustindarkness on July 05, 2013, 02:57:51 PM
Quote from: Malthus on July 05, 2013, 02:49:44 PM
Why all the Tim-hate?
If he wants to transplant his brain into a robot body, I say, I'm all for him volunteering. :D
Yes, I second this, he should volunteer.
In fact, I think we should make it mandatory that he volunteer.
Everybody jumps on the robot body bandwagon, but how about the possibility of having two-headed bodies? :hmm:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tentonhammer.com%2Fimage%2Fview%2F86484&hash=e7e279cc5b08c82259840b36690e5642c0c5de0c)
Who controls what?
The "robot body" concept is rather silly. I find it much more likely that we will have electromechanical brains controlling biological bodies than vice versa.
Does this mean you're volunteering to become a Malthus/Liep hybrid?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 05, 2013, 04:06:19 PM
Does this mean you're volunteering to become a Malthus/Liep hybrid?
:lol:
No. Just a general statement, made (no doubt simultaniously) by heads finding themselves in such a predicament. ;)
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 05, 2013, 12:14:14 PM
Had a conversation over wine with a neurosurgeon once and he mentioned that even if we could remove a human brain and put into a perfectly immortal body, or some sort of robotic body that could support it the brain itself has an aging process and would fall to extreme dementia over time and become basically non-functional. So we'd have to find a way to fix that before going into a robot body would make any sense.
Yep. Even if it didn't have an aging process per se (which is theoretically reparable), there's a space limit to the human brain as well, iirc estimates put it around 1000 years worth of normal memories high maximum.
Of course, if you're at the point that you can wire existing brains into immortal bodies and repair the brains on the fly, you probably have the technological capacity to create storage modules out of brain tissue for back-up purposes.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 05, 2013, 08:19:57 PM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on July 05, 2013, 12:14:14 PM
Had a conversation over wine with a neurosurgeon once and he mentioned that even if we could remove a human brain and put into a perfectly immortal body, or some sort of robotic body that could support it the brain itself has an aging process and would fall to extreme dementia over time and become basically non-functional. So we'd have to find a way to fix that before going into a robot body would make any sense.
Yep. Even if it didn't have an aging process per se (which is theoretically reparable), there's a space limit to the human brain as well, iirc estimates put it around 1000 years worth of normal memories high maximum.
Embryonic stem cells. It's what's for dinner.
Quote from: Neil on July 04, 2013, 11:37:25 PM
Rather than stupid shit like tranplanting the head, why don't they just use spine-fixing technology to fix the spine of the cripple?
This is the real news right here, folks. That's a huge advancement in spinal regenerative therapies, as opposed to finally reviving zombie Walt Disney.
Quote from: Malthus on July 05, 2013, 04:09:34 PM
:lol:
No. Just a general statement, made (no doubt simultaniously) by heads finding themselves in such a predicament. ;)
Might backfire on him if the other head decides to control the hands.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on July 05, 2013, 09:14:57 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 04, 2013, 11:37:25 PM
Rather than stupid shit like tranplanting the head, why don't they just use spine-fixing technology to fix the spine of the cripple?
This is the real news right here, folks. That's a huge advancement in spinal regenerative therapies, as opposed to finally reviving zombie Walt Disney.
Do we actually have those therapies?
Quote from: garbon on July 05, 2013, 09:57:52 PM
Do we actually have those therapies?
Good point. "Potential for spinal regenerative therapies." Since, you know, these haven't actually been tested with human genetic material.
As the article says, head transplants were performed "successfully" on monkeys as far back as the '70s.
Quote from: Ideologue on July 05, 2013, 08:19:57 PM
there's a space limit to the human brain as well, iirc estimates put it around 1000 years worth of normal memories high maximum.
Whoa, where di you get this from?
I can I use it to support biblical studies that in the Torah, before the Flood (Noah's time), human used to live for 1000 years?
I mean, why would we have a 1000 years of memory capacity if we cannot possibly use it?
Brilliant!
Quote from: Siege on July 09, 2013, 02:44:19 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 05, 2013, 08:19:57 PM
there's a space limit to the human brain as well, iirc estimates put it around 1000 years worth of normal memories high maximum.
Whoa, where di you get this from?
I can I use it to support biblical studies that in the Torah, before the Flood (Noah's time), human used to live for 1000 years?
:bleeding:
:lol:
The key problem with creationists summed up in one neat sentence.
I don't think :bleeding: is a sentence. :hmm:
Quote from: Siege on July 09, 2013, 02:44:19 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 05, 2013, 08:19:57 PM
there's a space limit to the human brain as well, iirc estimates put it around 1000 years worth of normal memories high maximum.
Whoa, where di you get this from?
I can I use it to support biblical studies that in the Torah, before the Flood (Noah's time), human used to live for 1000 years?
I mean, why would we have a 1000 years of memory capacity if we cannot possibly use it?
Brilliant!
I forget, though it's mentioned in Frank Tipler and David Deutsch's futurist books, amongst other sources. Iirc, the idea was to imagine memories as requiring the minimum number of neurons to store, then assuming they can all be used for fact memory (i.e., "Moscow is the capital of Russia," "My father's name is ____ and looks like a Sean Connery," and they can't), then multiplying times number of neurons. There is no rigorous science behind any exact number, but obviously the brain, as a physically finite object, has finite information storage capacity.
I suppose your basis for using it in a Creationist style would be to argue that the human brain would not be created to store X number of memories when we only live Y number of years, but bear in mind the human brain is also selected to be highly redundant, as well as the fact many facets of human anatomy are useless and/or poorly "designed."
Quote from: Siege on July 09, 2013, 02:44:19 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 05, 2013, 08:19:57 PM
there's a space limit to the human brain as well, iirc estimates put it around 1000 years worth of normal memories high maximum.
Whoa, where di you get this from?
I can I use it to support biblical studies that in the Torah, before the Flood (Noah's time), human used to live for 1000 years?
I mean, why would we have a 1000 years of memory capacity if we cannot possibly use it?
Brilliant!
Some of us can learn a thousand year's worth of stuff in a couple decades or so.
Some of us never learn jack shit.
Quote from: dps on July 22, 2013, 11:11:58 PM
Quote from: Siege on July 09, 2013, 02:44:19 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 05, 2013, 08:19:57 PM
there's a space limit to the human brain as well, iirc estimates put it around 1000 years worth of normal memories high maximum.
Whoa, where di you get this from?
I can I use it to support biblical studies that in the Torah, before the Flood (Noah's time), human used to live for 1000 years?
I mean, why would we have a 1000 years of memory capacity if we cannot possibly use it?
Brilliant!
Some of us can learn a thousand year's worth of stuff in a couple decades or so.
Some of us never learn jack shit.
Odd.