seed technology for brain reconstruction?

[Mecsrt]

Hi,
Howdy? I found this in Internet.

https://3dprint.com/286581/high-school- ... landscape/

Demonstration of brain scanning and 3D printing in plastic of a brain.
Posible way to recovery vitrified/vitrifixed/fixed patients on cryonics (Transforme this term in umbrella concept) in a future version where used subcellular resolution scan and 3D print of biological or cybernetic element printing

Connect with this;
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=145&p=463&hilit=Scanner#p463

https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/whole ... on-on-dgx/

Good look and success.

[jordansparks]

Good to see progress from different groups. I think that within about 60 years, we should have massively parallel 3D printers. By that, I mean thousands of very small robotic arms simultaneously 3D printing a single object. 60 years or so after that, such devices will have evolved to the point where they have millions of robotic arms that can lay down individual biological molecules to "print" living tissue, including brain. What we're looking at is a very gradual progression from current technology to that technology. This is described on my future technology page
https://oregoncryo.com/futureTechnology.html
as Molecular Scan and Rebuild. This would involve the controlled movement of about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules. Totally possible with exponential technology growth in about 120 years. Nevertheless, I think revival will instead involve the much simpler technology of uploading, which should be available about 30 years prior to Molecular Scan and Rebuild, or about 90 years from now.

[Mecsrt]

Hi,
Before that we need to develop software based in whole medicine/veterinary/biology/psychology knowledge in the form of expert systems. In order to read the scans of cellular resolution of preserved brains and apply virtual corrections to the ultrastructure for complete recovery of the neural networks, then we need to verify the engrams stored in the synapses.
This imply develop technology for memory verification and try to find coherence in the simulated brain activity.
We need to make calculations for better estimation of the emerging of this technologies. In my mind appear many questions and doubts.
We have a very long road.

[jordansparks]

Absolutely. It's really hard to tell how long it will take because it depends heavily on exponential progress in AI. But I do know it will take a very long time even assuming continued exponential progress. We wouldn't have any hope at all of solving it in a reasonable timeframe if it was linear progress. It's really really complicated, so we need lots of exponential progress. It's fun to try to envision what that means at different points along the way. When I go through my process of imagining scenarios, I end up with two parallel technologies that don't intermix very much. There's the computer side of things and there's the biological side. It's too hard to mingle them. Biological progress will be impressive but will still feel slow because it's much more complicated than people generally assume. For example, artificial milk is coming because it's only a few ingredients in a mixture. I'm really going to enjoy seeing all the dairy farms shut down. But I don't see any sort of cyborg implants in our near future. I'm not at all impressed by Neuralink. No way would I want a bunch of wires inserted into my brain tissue -- too much damage and trauma. But computer technology could still get quite advanced, as you suggest. So lots of progress could be made in uploading various organisms and extracting memories from preserved brains. I think we'll get quite good at that.