Immortality.

[LumbergTech]

we use more than 10% of our brain..that is a myth (that we dont use more than 10% of it)

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno
I think we'd be plum retarded after 500 years. Unless we could grow more brain cells it would be kind of pointless.

A good point. I believe that there is such a thing as capacity in the human brain and the brain probably isn't capable of storing 500 years worth of data without a whole lot of forgetting.

Have you looked at the price performance curve for memory or the advances in brain implants. Why assume a biological future for humanity? We are all from 1949 it would seem.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

No thank you.

I'll take my limited time and try my best to enjoy it.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
We'd just need lots more wars to thin out the population. Sure, we could live to be 500 years old...if only we weren't killed at age 36 in a war.

I think we know exactly what would happen. Since Americans are retarded when it comes to politics and especially to dealing with issues like population growth, the end result is that our population would balloon to 2 billion people or so (if it could get that high) and most Americans (aka New AmerIndia) would starve to death. (in contrast, China would end up as the new USA, having a population of only 400 or 500 million.)

 

[BlancoNino]

If everyone lived forever, where would the incentive to work hard and be a good person lie if everyone thought

"I don't know what I want to do with my life, but I'm only 20, I've got a good 300 years to decide."

 

[JacobJ]

think about it --

when social security was created in the US, the life expectation was around 65 or less.

When we were all breaking our backs in the farms, was the average life expectancy 40?

population growth = births - deaths

deaths = #births x years ago where x = average life expectancy

never mind.

I'm bored.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: judasmachine
Haven't they pretty much found that it's the "hairs" that line the genes that degenerate and cause us to age?

Telomeres

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Sure I'd love to live 500 years. Can you imagine what we'll know and can do 500 years from now? Assuming the world isn't blown up or we aren't forcibly praying to allah 5 times a day.

I think "they" would need to put in population control, at least initially. You'd still have loss of life for non-health reasons. Eventually things would even out - i.e. culture would generally accept you not getting married until you were 200, any maybe your first kids at 350

Why the cheap shot at Islam?


As for extending out our lives like that....It sounds awsome to think of all the technological advances we could see occur, not to mention the fact that a human could amass MUCH more knowledge...but I'm not so sure about that marraige at 200 thing

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: judasmachine
Haven't they pretty much found that it's the "hairs" that line the genes that degenerate and cause us to age?

Telomeres

Is it Telomeres that cause us to age? I thought Telomeres help extend the number of times DNA could replicate. Once Telomerase inactivates, and DNA replication cuts the ends short enough they apoptosis comes in...
Or is there another "breakthrough" that shows that the loss of our Telomeres actually contributes to aging?

 

[mc00]

Originally posted by: techs
OK, lets say the genetic researchers have a heck of a year and find the gene that causes aging. They develope a quick and inexpensive fix that not only allows people to live 500 years but also ends heart disease.
What should we do? Give it to everyone who wants it? Would we really want to do that? Wouldn't we have to stop having kids(well, almost all of us) since in a short time our population would be unsustainable?
Would we only make it available for a very high price so only the rich could afford it? Should we only make it available to people who are valuable to society?
Think about it.
Would you even want to live for 500 years? The effects of this type of long life are enormous.

good point - I was talking about this with my wife and my mom, I was the first to say I want live long a$$ time, and my wife said I wouldn't live to long everyone I know is going to be dead and me still alive and my mom said the same thing... Why I would like to live longer because I want to see the future I want to see if human will find other human/alien in the universe, I want to see if we ever be able to travel faster than light all this kind of stuff...

but this magical pill shouldn't be cheap neither, is affordable like buying an house but is limit. no criminal should get it or people have nothing to offer to society they just going to cost problems...

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: JacobJ
think about it --

when social security was created in the US, the life expectation was around 65 or less.

When we were all breaking our backs in the farms, was the average life expectancy 40?

population growth = births - deaths

deaths = #births x years ago where x = average life expectancy

never mind.

I'm bored.

That's why it would be required to forfeit your right to have children if you get life extension.

Another thing...if you are always 25 years in age with life extension, you won't get social security ever.


Life extension doesn't mean that you are able to survive while getting older and older. It means you stop aging. At 300 years since birth, you'll look and be what a 25 year old is today.

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno
I think we'd be plum retarded after 500 years. Unless we could grow more brain cells it would be kind of pointless.

A good point. I believe that there is such a thing as capacity in the human brain and the brain probably isn't capable of storing 500 years worth of data without a whole lot of forgetting.

If that is right perhaps cybernetics could help. Stick a flash memory card with a petabyte of storage in your head. I just mean that given that kind of longevity, we'd be able to solve the inherant problems.

 

[Fox5]

I thought there was a study that showed that human cells are only capable of dividing for about 200-250 years...

 

[sandorski]

Interesting idea. There would be a long adjustment to such a thing. Not only would Births need to be reduced, but I can't imagine anyone who'd be willing to work their asses off like they do now, for centuries. It would be Hell for those people who would be unable to improve their economic position, though many would certainly succeed. Political, Social, and even Economic structures would need to be changed to adjust to the new dynamic. Much of that adjustment would probably require Armed Revolution which would probably happen more in the Third World, but could be rather messy for everyone.

I think such a thing would have to be kept under wraps, because if D Trump and B Gates were living forever, Joe Average would want to live Forever too. Basically, in order to maintain Order, those benefiting it would need to drop out and be unseen or everyone would have to live forever. Maybe a gradual introduction of it could occur, each generation living a few years more than the last.

 

[piasabird]

Just think of the health care industry geriatrics for 500 years. Just think of the banks. We would probably raise the retirement age up to about 350 or something like than and then you could get a 100 year house loan.

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: magomago

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: judasmachine
Haven't they pretty much found that it's the "hairs" that line the genes that degenerate and cause us to age?

Telomeres

Is it Telomeres that cause us to age? I thought Telomeres help extend the number of times DNA could replicate. Once Telomerase inactivates, and DNA replication cuts the ends short enough they apoptosis comes in...
Or is there another "breakthrough" that shows that the loss of our Telomeres actually contributes to aging?

Are you agreeing or disagreeing?

As JustAnAverageGuy indicates, telomeres do seem to be the genetic information that tells a cell how "old" it's supposed to be. That's in agreement with what you wrote about telomere length and telomerase (apoptosis isn't a necessary consequence, though - cells will also just go senescent/quiescent/G0 when the telomeres get too short).

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Interesting idea. There would be a long adjustment to such a thing. Not only would Births need to be reduced, but I can't imagine anyone who'd be willing to work their asses off like they do now, for centuries. It would be Hell for those people who would be unable to improve their economic position, though many would certainly succeed. Political, Social, and even Economic structures would need to be changed to adjust to the new dynamic. Much of that adjustment would probably require Armed Revolution which would probably happen more in the Third World, but could be rather messy for everyone.

I think such a thing would have to be kept under wraps, because if D Trump and B Gates were living forever, Joe Average would want to live Forever too. Basically, in order to maintain Order, those benefiting it would need to drop out and be unseen or everyone would have to live forever. Maybe a gradual introduction of it could occur, each generation living a few years more than the last.

That's the thing. We wouldn't have to work as hard.

Right now we spend about 50-60% working. With life extension you won't need to spend such a large percentage on education or sitting around waiting to die. With life extension you'll always be young and fatigue doesn't build up on you like it does when your old.