Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Honest_Switch1531 t1_j1ox9om wrote

Memory transfer is a scifi technology. We have no idea how it could possibly be done. The workings of memory are almost completely a mystery.

More likely is finding a cure for aging using stem cell and other related technologies. We do have a fairly good idea of how aging happens. It is a combination of around 10 different processes that interact. There are possible cures for some of then be tested right now.

157

Gubekochi t1_j1oz4wg wrote

Mandatory plug for r/longevity in case that sort of thing might interest OP.

40

VektroidPlus t1_j1p7qc4 wrote

I don't really see it ever being possible to upload or transfer your consciousness outside of your body.

Most psychology and biology agree that the brain and body can't really exist without one another.

The brain is also far more complex than what we thought. It's nothing like a computation machine or memory storage device. It's more like a corporation with different departments running different tasks that are governed by a central body that acts as our facing consciousness. It's also incredibly imperfect. It's prone to errors or even certain 'departments' briefly taking over.

These 'departments' very likely mean we have different consciousnesses with different desires, consider themselves a different age, and identify as different genders and have preferred sexualities. They're also all developing at different rates as life happens for a person.

It seems like such a daunting task to comprehend what makes us tick let alone capture that and somehow transfer it over. There's more scientific evidence about reversing cellular degeneration than anything about consciousness transferring.

29

youcandanch t1_j1pyj7p wrote

this is absolutely fascinating, any recommendations on places to start reading on this? would love to dig in a bit more to understand it.

4

VektroidPlus t1_j1qfiyj wrote

Michio Kaku has a great book called the 'The Future of the Mind'. Not exactly the most reputable since he's a theoretical physicist and not a neuroscientist.

His writing though, is very easy to read. He gives a great overview of how humanity has thought about the brain throughout history, important scientific discoveries, and where neuroscience is at now. The rest of the book is his speculation about where he thinks we will go in the future with neuroscience.

5

Teripid t1_j1qd5pb wrote

Well said. I'd add another caveat too. Everyone reading this is currently a collection of cells, electrical impulses, etc.

If you could magically ctrl+c, ctrl+v that person over and had two completely identical human bodies and thoughts you'd likely just have someone who behaved exactly like them but they'd be separate entities. Defining what makes a human and continuing it is still near high-scifi.

4

uh_buh t1_j1pudcq wrote

Recent psych degree graduate, this is absolutely correct, and your analogy to explain is a really great one.

3

TheSinfulBlacksheep t1_j1qc2t8 wrote

So the brain is something more akin to a colony of zooid organisms like a Portuguese man 'o war? Obviously not at the cellular level, but in the sense that these are specialized individual animals that kind of cluster together to build the whole. Am I on the right track here?

3

VektroidPlus t1_j1qj74m wrote

I think we can say that about most living creatures as a whole though and not necessarily just the brain. I'm way oversimplifying it, but most living beings are just a collection of complex cells, from brain to body.

3

LordOfSpamAlot t1_j1qy2qa wrote

>The brain is also far more complex than what we thought. It's nothing like a computation machine or memory storage device. It's more like a corporation with different departments running different tasks that are governed by a central body that acts as our facing consciousness.

Do you have any sources? This is an interesting topic.

2

Nopengnogain t1_j1oz2dm wrote

What if we can figure out how to do a brain transplant one day?

9

AugustusClaximus t1_j1p0fa0 wrote

That doesnt solve the problem of the brain itself aging

22

justmikewilldo t1_j1p3tbc wrote

Non aging cellular organisms exist on earth. It’s a matter of when we figure out how that works, not if.

5

Decryptic__ t1_j1p7z1q wrote

Isn't a type of jellyfish such a thing? And isn't it that jellyfishs don't have a brain to begin with?

3

Otrsor t1_j1piw6f wrote

Well, they do have a nerve net of sorts, but the way they achieve immortality they more like regress back to "baby" form and grow back, so it's more like they just become their own baby.

2

SirDraeos t1_j1p8hhs wrote

Simply figuring out how it works doesn't necessarily mean it's a mechanism we could apply to a completely different cellular structure.

2

Knichols2176 t1_j1pcb5q wrote

That’s more easily solved. Aging is caused directly by hormones and their levels. That can be studied better and a supplement to certain hormones can be administered. There are many hormones beyond just testosterone and estrogen. There’s thyroid, adrenal, and blood cell stimulating as a few examples. With optimal supplementation, aging can be slowed tremendously.

1

Lx99x t1_j1p1cvx wrote

If we can keep the synapses fire along with brain cells alive, we can, in theory, transfer memory. Obviously not the memory itself, but the brain acting as a hard drive. This is why Musks nueralink is exciting. Imagine growing a perfect clone of yourself then doing a brain transplant with nueralink as the bridge. I would imagine that within the next 20-30 years we'll see that happen. Big hurdle would be keeping blood supply to the brain (feeding oxygenated blood through the carotid arteries).

The absolute biggest hurdle I think is curing dementia and alzhiemers. Can't transfer the brain if the brain is no good right?

Were gunna see some crazy medical shit within the next few decades. Just don't get your hopes up though. The tech will be too expensive for us plebians.

6

DniMam t1_j1p75ch wrote

20-30 years is very very optimistic prediction. They imagined flying car. It will be the same for self-driving car. Although we did lot research and progressed by leap and bound, we still face ton of challenge as tagged traffic sign recognition, unpainted road...it's not ready and AI is not able to understand our environment, nor able to do any ounce of adaptation.

We are in a very early stage. Their main asset is finding the correct data and copy-pasta. They can't think.

I wouldn't put any cents in neuralink : this technology already existed and created a connexion between a brain and computer. Nothing more. Musk is only an investor with a sprinkle of personality cult.

We are very far from understanding how brain work, nor illness as depression, bipolar…and that doesn't mean we haven't progressed but we are very far from this step aside connecting brain to computer and moving a mouse on the screen.

If we succeed in memory transfert, there is still lot challenge to solve. We know nothing about our brain and memory.

When you transfert memory data, we will need to make sure various point :

  • that we are able to create new memories, think and use the data received
  • that we can solve possible memory conflict between old brain and new brain.
  • that the data transferred last.
  • Is the clone another version of yourself ? It maybe someone else with a different habit. In fact, you died.
8

Decryptic__ t1_j1p7ugz wrote

Disclaimer, I'm not a scientist nor have a degree in any sort of this thesis. This is my personal thinking. If you disagree, you are free to discuss it.

#Saving the Brain Some say to save the brain as it is, which would require more capacity than we have available right now.

So, every server, every HDD or SSD in the world isn't enough to store a brain.

So there's that problem, the other would be transferring this amount of data into a device. So let's say you could save it. How long would it take?

With our current technology, we can transfer "only" 1.84 Pbit/s (source). This is equivalent to 1840 Terrabytes/s or 1'840'000 Gigabytes/s.

Would this be enough to save a brain? We don't know.

#Age of a Brain The second concern is that Alzheimer and cancer are a problem of aging. The longer you live, the higher the chance to get one of these.

So even if we reverse aging and could toggle it on and off (to stay forever at the age we want), it needs to solve those two problems too. If not, we would likely think ourselves to death.

3

Living-Positive8849 t1_j1qe7lx wrote

Aging is genetic. Aging is controlled by our genes if we don't wanna age we have to change those genetic code that play role in aging.

Although taking regular supplement of chemicals that counter chemicals responsible for aging can also help.

Also memory is stored in nerve cells in our brains (maybe in forms of some chemical or genetic codes), so memory transfer and storage require highest level of tech and knowledge

2

IcyBoysenberry9570 t1_j1qkpkm wrote

They've aged and de-aged rats recently. Made them older, then made them younger. That sounds like we're at the point where we've cured aging but for the bioethicists.

2

xXkiljoyXx t1_j1qtwam wrote

Memory transfer may never be possible. You will not experience the consciousness of the clone even if it has your memories. The clone will essentially be a separate person. It will act like you and think like you but you will still be gone.

2

SirDraeos t1_j1p8w3e wrote

Is aging seriously now considered a disease to be treated/cured? How is this any different from considering a candle that's gone out after melting all its wax, faulty?

I fail to see how aging is anything other than a certainty so much as the sun rising and setting every day, and trying to "solve" it, as ridiculous as attempting to hold the sun hostage at its zenith.

Most people nowadays live an absolutely worthless lives (pardon the coarseness, but I believe this to be true of myself too), so how is aging not the cure to the disease we've turned our existences into?

Edit: unless of course, when speaking of curing aging we refer not to the lengthening of our lives, but the improvement of the quality of our years (which I still consider ironic given how little people are willing to invest time and effort into their own health).

−5

Mokebe890 t1_j1pns4g wrote

Oh boy, and in future sun will burn out. Nothing is certanity so why aging should be? There are immortal animals which dont age so its not something out of natural world.

2

SirDraeos t1_j1u2z4d wrote

So you're saying you want to exchange the complexity of the human body for that of an immortal jellyfish? You do realise that organisms aren't comprised of pieces you can individually pick and choose from, and that you need the whole system in order for that one characteristic to be viable?

And what would YOU do with limitless time? What have you done with the time you've had up until now?

1

Mokebe890 t1_j1uamaz wrote

It is mechanism of genes? Of course we are different species and you cant 1:1 transfer it to mammals but you can tweak our biology into it. Check dr Levin work on regeneration in species that dont posses ability to regenerate limbs. By this I meant it is possible because it occurs in nature.

Nature choose one of two ways, either producing offspring or immortality and I absolutly prefer immortality. We can do it, it is not against biology or physics so its just a matter of time.

Work? Study? Watch? Play video games? Read? Exercise? I dont really need much. There will always be new tasks, new things to study, new series to watch, new games to beat, new books to read and keeping in shape is always going. Absolutly want to do it for as long as I want. If I decide it is time for me and Im already bored then always you can go euthanasia.

1