ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath + molecular brain scan

Welcome to the Oregon Cryonics forum
Rib Jig
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:08 pm

ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath + molecular brain scan

Postby Rib Jig » Thu May 24, 2018 3:13 pm

In layman's terms, how do the two differ? :?: :?: :?:
Does assisted death in OR allow for immediate $1K aldehyde bath?
Will O.C. be embracinig & offering ASC ???
Thanks in advance. :D :D :D
Last edited by Rib Jig on Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

jordansparks
Site Admin
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:59 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby jordansparks » Fri May 25, 2018 6:43 am

Here it is in layman's terms:
ASC is pumping aldehyde through the arteries so that it reaches every single cell. This is done immediately, before the cells have time to degrade. The $1K aldehyde bath is when aldehyde is applied from the outside of the brain rather than through the arteries. In this case, there is a delay of hours caused by removing the brain from the skull, and it also takes hours/days for the aldehyde to soak through the tissue. So ASC and aldehyde bath are really completely different things with completely different results. I'm skeptical that we are preserving any memories with aldehyde bath, but maybe.

The standard protocol at OC is essentially ASC. We have a protocol that we think will work well, but it remains untested. We couldn't just use the exact ASC protocol from the paper, because we wanted it to be better in certain technical areas. For example, our CT scanner requires the presence of sulfur atoms, so we added sulfur atoms. Incidentally, both Alcor and CI have changed their protocols slightly from what was developed in the lab, and they haven't validated those changes, either.

Our protocol is very similar to ASC, and it's very likely to produce the same results in an ideal situation.

Rib Jig
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:08 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby Rib Jig » Tue May 29, 2018 6:21 pm

Thanks!

Any prediction on when molecular-level WBE scan will be available to paying customers?
2040? 2060? 2100? Other?
Am assuming scan upload to computer-avatar will come many decades later than scan service...?
Any reason such a customer will not fully feel their life-existence is continuing after revival?
(except for time gap between scan & death -- which could be "learned about" at least...)

jordansparks
Site Admin
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:59 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby jordansparks » Tue May 29, 2018 10:51 pm

I think molecular-level is overkill, but I'm guessing around 130 years from now, or 2150. While it wouldn't violate any laws of physics, there are a LOT of intermediate engineering stages that I can envision, each taking a number of years to develop. Since the scan would be destructive, I don't think anyone would do it without already having perfected the emulation side of things. If you scan too early, the risk would be that you wouldn't do a high enough quality scan. Why not wait, if the emulation wouldn't even run yet? One reason they might not feel full continuation is because of some level of amnesia from damage done during the dying and preservation process. There will be damage -- maybe a little or, quite possibly, a lot. This is simply our least-worst option.

Rib Jig
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:08 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby Rib Jig » Wed Jun 06, 2018 6:24 pm

jordansparks wrote:a. Since the scan would be destructive
b. If you scan too early, the risk would be that you wouldn't do a high enough quality scan.
c. Why not wait...?
d. One reason they might not feel full continuation is because of some level of amnesia from damage done during the dying and preservation process.
e. This is simply our least-worst option.


Thanks for response.

a. don't people get PET-MRI-CT all the time now with no noticeable destructive side effects?
Why would future molecular level scan be any different, especially if non-destruction is a requirement?

b. once molecular level scans are reality, why not annually? And once someone reaches, say, 80, then monthly?

c. if MolecLevelScan are reality before upload to computer-avatar possible, anyone wanting revival will absolutely want
their brain scanned for future revival, even if into a new "vessel", right???

d. IMO, a reason for "gap" would be time between last MLScan & death -- reason for monthly scans in final years.
(perhaps some kind of constant AI-monitored diary of person would allow one to "catch up" on one's gap,
the idea being learning about the gap is next best to remembering it...?)

e. only option, current cryonics, is better-than-nothing longshot from what I've read of clearly destructive shrinkage, etc.
Your 2150 prediction for MLScan, wow, was hoping optimistically by 2045 as I may still be around...
Certainly hoping for advances in cryonics, like non-destructive ASC perfusion becoming a choice.
That could be followed later by MLScan upload to new vessel...?

jordansparks
Site Admin
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:59 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby jordansparks » Wed Jun 06, 2018 11:09 pm

When I say "scan" I mean slicing up the brain into millions of physical slices. Yes, chopping up the brain. I've been trained in radiology. I don't think a non-destructive scan like you envision would ever be possible. The thicker the sample, the blurrier the image. There are limits to physics that engineering cannot overcome, and a non-destructive scan is very likely far beyond those limits. You have to take the brain apart to see what's inside. Physics says that's really easy with enough engineering.
An external scan that can capture the wiring of the mind is fake sci-fi technology, just like antigravity, warp speed, and transporter beams. None of these has any known basis in physics. They all seem to violate the laws of physics. So it must be a destructive scan, which means to you get one shot at it, and it's irreversible.

Rib Jig
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:08 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby Rib Jig » Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:12 am

Ah. So molecular scan destructive, macro PET-MRI-CT nondestructive.
Somewhere in-between is nondestructive limit.
Go too small, get blurriness.
What about multiple blurry nondestructive scans stacked into one ?nonblurry? molecular scan???
Physics limits scanning but not future computer ability to interpret blurred scans correctly...?
Imagine millions of interpretations, one so good that when uploaded it is "you" confirming
that you are cognizant of your past, your memories, & your revival wishes...?
All the inferior interpretations are deleted...
Last edited by Rib Jig on Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

DetnPx
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:41 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby DetnPx » Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:37 am

Although I'm not a supporter of the ASC and/or uploading approaches, I can imagine that "scanning tissue on the molecular scale" in ~50 years would simply mean an injection of nanoscale robots which work their way through tissue and independantly transmit what structure they come across, to a nearby receiver. The receiver reconstructs all this molecular data into a full scale computer model. Scanning the full brain then probably takes ~1 hour or less and would be non-destructive.

The only problem may be, that this technology would generally be developed for living tissue, not cryopreserved tissue (with or without ASC). This may demand different nanorobots, which do not float around between cells, but crawl around in a mechanical fashion.

jordansparks
Site Admin
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:59 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby jordansparks » Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:17 am

If we have nanorobots in 50 years, they might be in the bloodstream. That's somewhat reasonable. But they wouldn't be small enough to leave the bloodstream. That's really complicated and would take another 50 years. If those robots are just operating by feel, then they would not be able to "see" the structure of the insides of cells or the synapses without physically taking apart those structures to some degree, and repair would be very difficult. I think you might be saying they could also see the xrays to enhance the scan. I guess so, but not in 50 years. If you are going to imagine a technology that advanced, you have to take the time to imagine all the intermediate steps. There are a lot of intermediate engineering steps. I think domestic robots would need to happen many decades prior to robots in the bloodstream, for example.

Rib Jig
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:08 pm

Re: ASC vs. O.C. $1K aldehyde bath

Postby Rib Jig » Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:53 am

> I'm not a supporter of the ASC and/or uploading approaches...


Isn't what one now supports influenced by what one expects
to be available towards end of one's current life?
(assuming one wants to be revived in future...)
80 yr olds now MUST support current cryonics,
30 yr olds can reject current cryonics...


Return to “Forum”