Besmrtnost

[Caligula]

Ja se setih Slike Dorijana Greja:)meni se cini da je pricha neozbiljna - nema svoju poentu: naravno da bi duh nastavio da zivi u drugom telu, ali bi bilo za ocekivati da to ne bude vise isti duh -posle nekoliko tela, inkarnacija, vatever - duh bi izgubio fizicki identitet.A cemu zivot u fizickom svetu ako ne znas ko si fizicki? Zasto kazem da nema poentu - zato sto nije dilema, jer prejudicira na tehnicku ostvarljivost plana - zasto bi dusa umrla u tehnicki savrsenom presadjivanju, zato sto je novo telo mladje i u boljem stanju?

Edited May 16, 2008 by CowBoy

[billadni]

Paste-copy duše?Ovaj antidarvinistiški, antistatistički i antisrebroljupski primer ušparaće kintu mnogim potencijalnim investitorima :

Pretpostavimo da je nanotehnologija toliko usnapredovala....te je u stanju da komponuje-gradi materiju atom po atom. Daklem, postane sposobna generisati apsolutno identičnu kopiju svakog fizičkog predmeta...(nešto kao SF transporter)...Takovi usnapredak nanotehnologije obesmišljava potrebu za mukotrpnnim genetskim kloniranjem ili rizičnim presađivanjem mozgova.Milivoje sada svoj nespas može potražiti u potpunom nanotehnološkom paste-kopiranju. Nakon kopiranja-kloniranja se imade sledujušća situjacija: Postoje dva fizički apsolutno identična Milivoja. Bez ijedne razlike! No recite vi, đe je original Miliovojeva svijest? U njemu ili njegovom 100%-tnom klonu? :( Čijim očima koji Milivoje gleda ...?

Zanimljivo?Stopostotni paste-copy, a duša i dalje u originalu? Ili, ima nekaj trulo u državi materijalističkoj?

Edited May 17, 2008 by billadni

[Indy]

A cemu zivot u fizickom svetu ako ne znas ko si fizicki?

Ne samo to, već se može reći da um ne postoji ne samo bez mozga, već ni bez tela:Brains cannot become minds without bodies (Alun Anderson)A common image for popular accounts of the "The Mind" is a brain in a bell jar. The message is that inside that disembodied lump of neural tissue is everything that is you.It's a scary image but misleading. A far more dangerous idea is that brains cannot become minds without bodies, that two-way interactions between mind and body are crucial to thought and health, and the brain may partly think in terms of the motor actions it encodes for the body's muscles to carry out. ...As Rizzolatti puts it, "the fundamental mechanism that allows us a direct grasp of the mind of others is not conceptual reasoning but direct simulation of the observed events through the mirror mechanism." Direct grasp of others' minds is a special ability that paves the way for our unique powers of imitation which in turn have allowed culture to develop.If bodies and their interaction with brain and planning for action in the world are so central to human kinds of mind, where does that leave the chances of creating an intelligent "disembodied mind" inside a computer? Perhaps the Turing test will be harder than we think. We may build computers that understand language but which cannot say anything meaningful, at least until we can give them "extended tactile experiences". To put it another way, computers may not be able to make sense until they can have sex. (--->)

[billadni]

...Milivoje sada svoj nespas može potražiti u potpunom nanotehnološkom paste-kopiranju...u dva fizički apsolutno identična Milivoja. Bez ijedne razlike! No recite vi, đe je original Miliovojeva svijest? U njemu ili njegovom 100%-tnom klonu? :( Čijim očima koji Milivoje gleda ...? (Stopostotni paste-copy, a duša i dalje u originalu? Ili, ima nekaj trulo u državi materijalističkoj?)

... trolovi ćutu... Jeli ovo forum zenttrolova... ??? :D Slučaj 100% klona (i fizički, i informatički ) pokazuje da je paste-copy (presađivanje) duše i tela nesvrsishodan.

Recite onom ludom Grčkom genetičaru da prati malku ovi forum...mož bidne uradi nešto korisno. :D

Milivoje ostaje Miliuvoje! Iako će 100%-tni klon glasati za Velju. Ozbiljsko (logično, konzistentno, fizičko) pitanje:Znade li tko, šta svijest original Milivoja, čini drugačijom od 100% istovetne kopije?

Edited May 20, 2008 by billadni

[billadni]

Nema odgovora ni komentara. :( Da nisam loše formulisao problem? Evo još jedared, malo drugačije:

Marsel Mos je postavio pitanje

pobede

smrti kopiranjem duše u drugog nosioca. Gde bi ona nastavila da živi

posle smrti

individue. Jedan dio

ozbiljne znanstvene elite

vidi pobedu nad besmrtnošću u genetskom kloniranju, drugi u presađivanju mozgova i tome slično.Da se ne bi zamlaćivali, o nemogućnostima realizacije tih ideja, predložio sam da prihvatimo da je to tehnološki izvodljivo. Te da je moguće dobiti 100% klona i na duhovnom i na fizičkom planu.Sada, na bazi apsolutnog klona, dokažimo da on neće rešiti problem (be)smrtnosti. Umesto pravljenja klona nakon smrti individue (npr. Milivoja), neka se klon napravi,

ali za života

. N

ema nikave fizičke razlike između

original Milivoja i njegovog klona. Isti su u kvark, talas i u bit.Međutim, original i biće klon ne percipiraju isto, stoga nemaju istu svijest. Ne može biti jedna svijest i dva bića. Dakle, imamo dve svijesti i nije došlo do kopiranja.Možda će se oni imati isti odziv prema okruženju (npr. glasati isto, isto osjećati, pisati isto..),

ali neće doći do transfera duše

! Milivojeva duša ostaje dalje njegova, bez obzira napravio ko uspelog ili neuspelog klona!

Time je tema o pobedi smrtnosti kloniranjem iscrpena.

Ali,ovde imamo naučni/logički pradoks. Sve isto u obojici, i fizički i informatički, a različita svijest/duša. Ovo je zamišljeni eksperiment, ali zanimljivo pitanje.Po čemu se to bitnom, Milivoje i njegova 100% kopija, razlikuju? U toj razlici može biti suština njihove posebnosti.

Edited May 27, 2008 by billadni

[billadni]

Meni se čini da postoji i logičan i fizički odgovor na ovo pitanje. Evo napisaću ga ođe, jer je i inspiriran Marsel Mosovim pitanjem:

Ako i naprave apsolutnog klona to neće rešiti problem besmrtnosti. Ni klon, ni original, neće pristati da umru da bi onaj drugi živio. Gde je onda njihova posebnost/duša.

Pošto su obojica 100% ista, logično je da nije u njima.

To znači da mora biti izvan njih. Osim u Boga, eve još nekih potencijalnih mesta:

Stari Dalmati druge ljude zovu: onija, ovija, tija,... te more biti u drugim ljudima? ;)

 

Original i klon, iako su isti, imaju različitu genezu nastanka, drugu putanju kroz prostorno vremenski komtium, daklem različitu ISTORIJU.

Istorija fizički ne postoji, reći će neki. Lupetaju.

Sve što je učinjeno neuništivo je zabeleženo u svetu oko vas. O tome da ostatak svijeta ima dinamička memorijska svojstva, dovoljno je spomeniti današnjim fizičarima i računardžijama. Nije uvek bilo tako. Zato, evo ođe jopet pričice Tome Akvinskog, kojom je on čisto misaonim putem dokazao postojanje večneje pamjati:

Čovek nije ono što misli o sebi. Il ća drugi o njem govoridu. Čojek je ono što čini.

Devojka izgubila nevinost pa ošla kod "boga" da joj zakrpi himen. Oće ponovo da bude nevina. "Bog" joj ispuni želju i prilepi novi himen. No može li "bog" promeniti činjeno? Činjenicu, da je đevojka razdevičena, ne može promeniti novi himen.

Da bi se lažirala činjenica da je devojka izgubila nevinost neophodno je da "bog" osim krpljenja himena, uradi barem sledeće:

Skloni sve tragove iza grma đe se to desilo.

Promeni molekularnu i subatomsku strukturu svekolikog okruženja i vrati je u prvobitno stanje, jerbo neki vispreni pripadnik MUPa RS može, na osnovu tragova i analize DNK, a modernom američkom opremom, utvrditi ko je i iza kog grma razdevičen. Oooo... :o

Zaustavi svu reflektovanu svetlost

i spreči, modernom ruskom opremom, rasejanje tih zraka po ostatku vasione. Uff...

Preko katoličke crkve, promeni sva sećanja i refleksije

koja je taj čin izazvao na eventualnim svedocima - učesnicima, pa i samoj đevojci. :P

Preko foruma parapsihologija,

promeni stanje i svoje "božje" svjesti,

sam forum i mnogo šta još...veća muka od drugog svetskog rata, Hitlera, Pape i Amerike zajedno, a sve zbog jedne male laži? (A bre đevojko, gubitak nevinosti je iskustvo, i nije kazna, već nagrada!

Probaj još par puta i samo će ti se kaz..t... i... :)

I ne pokušavaj više lažirati bilo šta

. ;) )

što će reći, teže je lažirati SAMO JEDAN PROšLI ČIN nego uništiti svu materiju/energiju svijeta. A fizičari već dokazali da je energija neuništiva? Dokle je svijeta i vijeka, svoja djela i nedjela niko ne nepromeni.Sve učinjeno je višestruko memorisano u ostatku svijeta.

O kloniranju:

Stoga se Milivoje i njegov klon razlikuju po refleksijama koje su na ostatak svijeta učinili do individualnog svoga SADA. Milivoje svojim odrastanjem, a klon procesom tehnološkog inženjerstva.Ove refleksije se brzinom svetlosti raspršavaju prema ostatku Vasione. Delom prema nebesima.Ali se, kroz interakciju sa ostatkom svijeta, vraćaju originalu, interagujući na određenim nivoima sa svojim ishodištem, Milivojem.

Da bi se Milivoje zbilja klonirao, stoga treba klonirati i ostatak svijeta.

Izvolte. :D

Ne zaboravite. Sve što činimo će nam se vratit, tako da važi:

što sijemo, to i žnjemo

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 4, 2008 by billadni

[GMBogdan]

Pa, ne bas. Ali si blizu. :)Kako kontam, reinkarnacija ima za temu saltanje jedne ili vise dusa kroz razlicite oblike zivota po pravilima koje odredjuje karma. A posto je dusa prilicno relativan pojam, mene zanima da li bi mogli da nastavimo tamo gde smo stali umiranjem ukoliko uspemo da nekako prebacimo (reinkarnisemo) svest i celokupan um u neko drugo telo? Da li bi prebacivanje u drugo telo vaseg uma, svesti i generalno neceg sto ne postoji u fizickoj formi, ali je izvuceno i zapisano, znacilo da ste ta nova osoba i dalje vi ili je upravo to nemoguce jer je ono sto nas cini vise od toga? I tu dolazim do duse i one price o dve vrste stvarnosti materijalne i mislene. Monizam i dualizam.Cela ideja pada u vodu ukoliko bi bilo moguce izvuci taj zapis, prebaci u novu formu, a da osoba iz koje se izvuce ostane ziva. To pobija celu pricu, jer ne mogu da postoje dve iste osobe sa potpuno identicnim umom. Tj. da imaju jednu identicnu stvarnost dve razlicite osobe. Ili mogu? U sustini prilicno sam zbrkan i verovatno napadno nejasan, ali nisam ni smatrao ovu temu nekom ozbiljnom diskusijom in the first place. Parafraziracu Shaw-a, sve velike istine su u pocetku delovale neozbiljno, mada ideja za scenario nije losa. :)

Mislim da je ovo nemoguce, ne moze se sve prebaciti kao sa usb stick pa sa jednog kompjutera na drugi...ta osoba vise nije ista bez obzira sto je zadrzala memoriju tog zivota i sve ostalo. Ako ima neki nastavak zivota mozda je to na nekom drugom svijetu ali za to jos znanost nema nikakvih dokaza, premda je vrlo vjerojatno da taj drugi zivot postoji.

[Zmitjkoe]

Ako ima neki nastavak zivota mozda je to na nekom drugom svijetu ali za to jos znanost nema nikakvih dokaza, premda je vrlo vjerojatno da taj drugi zivot postoji.

Objasni ovu "vrlu verovatnocu".

[bigvlada]

Reaching for immortalityThe quest for immortality goes back to Adam and Eve, but now some smart people are getting serious about actually bringing it within their grasp. And they're getting more attention as well.Let's take Aubrey de Grey, for example: The British gerontologist has been beating the drum for anti-aging therapies for years. He plays a prominent role in a recently published book on the immortality quest titled "Long for this World," a new documentary called "To Age or Not to Age" and a just-published commentary on the science of aging.In this week's issue of Science Translational Medicine, de Grey and nine other co-authors urge the United States and other nations to set up a Project Apollo-scale initiative to avert the coming "global aging crisis." The experts' prescription includes a campaign to raise the general public's awareness about lifestyle changes that can lead to longer and healthier lives; a lab-based effort to develop anti-aging medicines; and a push for new techniques to repair, restore or replace the cellular and molecular damage done by age."There is this misunderstanding that aging is something that just happens to you, like the weather, and cannot be influenced," another co-author, Jan Vijg of Yeshiva University's Albert Einstein College of Medicine, said in a news release. "The big surprise of the last decades is that, in many different animals, we can increase healthy life span in various ways."When it comes to translating anti-aging research into real life, however, the experts face at least three types of challenges: First, the basic lifestyle advice is pretty pedestrian: Eat wisely and exercise moderately. Some folks might wonder what the big deal is all about. "To enjoy the fantastic voyage, stay with the tried and true," Jonathan Weiner writes in "Long for this World."Genetic factors also affect longevity, of course, as pointed out by a recent study (which has come under question, by the way). But it's hard to tease out exactly how those factors interact with each other and with the lifestyle factors. There's no magic bullet ... yet.The second challenge has to do with anti-aging therapies, which could offer a magic bullet someday. Some substances do seem to extend longevity, and caloric restriction has been found to be a life-extender as well ... for worms and mice. But it's not yet clear how these strategies will work for humans. It could well turn out that what works for mice would make humans sicker, or make life so unpleasant that it's not worth living that much longer.The third challenge involves the same issue that Adam and Eve faced: Reaching too hungrily for the fruit on the tree of life might make you seem presumptuous. In his review of "To Age or Not to Age," New York Times film critic Stephen Holden complains that the movie "beats the drums so enthusiastically for a pharmaceutical fountain of youth that you have the uncomfortable sensation of being harangued by snake-oil salesmen."Ptolemaic ProductionsRay Kurzweil is a prophet of the singularity.Like de Grey and his colleagues, futurist/inventor Ray Kurzweil has been facing these challenges for years - not as an anti-aging researcher per se, but as a smart guy who has made his name by predicting trends in information technology that bring benefits on an exponential curve rather than a linear progression. He has applied the "law of accelerating returns" to the rise of artificial intelligence, predicting that A.I. will match human intelligence by 2029 and lead to a technological singularity by 2045 - beyond which predictions can't be made.Extreme longevity is part of Kurzweil's vision for accelerating change in the decades to come. The way he sees it, medical scinece is becoming just another form of information technology, thanks to advances in genetics and molecular biology. And he intends to ride those advances all the way to immortality.Kurzweil and X Prize co-founder Peter Diamandis have set up an institution called Singularity University at NASA Ames Research Park in California's Silicon Valley to train leaders to deal with accelerating change (at tuition rates ranging from $15,000 to $25,000). Next week, there's a special treat in store for the students and invited guests: a two-night double feature about Kurzweil and his ideas. "The Singularity Is Near" is closely tied to Kurzweil's book with the same title, while "Transcendent Man" focuses more on Kurzweil and his fellow travelers on the path to the singularity.Kurzweil and I had a wide-ranging conversation about the movies and his visions for the future this week. In fact, the discussion was so wide-ranging that I'm saving some of the quotes for later, when the movies are out in more theaters. But because the quest for immortality is so much in the news, I thought this would be a good time to roll out Kurzweil's perspectives on radical life extension. Here's an edited transcript:Ray Kurzweil: I've written three health books. The last two have been with a co-author, Terry Grossman, M.D. That's "Fantastic Voyage" and "Transcend: Nine Steps to Living Well Forever." We talk about three bridges to radical life extension. Most of the books are devoted to Bridge 1. That's the bridge you can get on right now - basically, aggressively applying today's knowledge to slow down the aging disease processes as much as possible. In fact, you can do that a lot more than people think. ... People say, 'Well, following this lifestyle and taking these supplements [150 pills a day], do you really think that's going to help you live hundreds of years?' The answer is no. The goal of Bridge 1 is just to get to Bridge 2, because it's not a static situation. In fact, Bridge 1 is constantly changing as we get more information. We get new approaches every week now.Bridge 2 is the full flowering of this biotechnology revolution, where we can really reprogram our genes - turn off genes that promote disease and aging, add new genes that protect us from disease and aging. There's that recent study that showed certain genes, if people have them they live a lot longer. Add those genes. There are many different levels of information processing that underlie biology. It's very much an information process. Craig Venter gave a powerful demonstration of that a few weeks ago by turning a computer file into a living organism. We can reprogram the information that defines our biology. We have 22,000 software programs called genes, and we can change them. There are other ideas as well: regrowing our cells, tissues and organs, using our own DNA. These things are moving along at an exponential pace. They'll be a thousand times more powerful in 10 years, a million times more powerful in 20 years. Fifteen to 20 years from now really will be a different era.So that's Bridge 2. The goal of Bridge 2 is to get to Bridge 3, which is the full flowering of the nanotechnology revolution. Really going beyond biology, not just reprogramming biology, but rebuilding it. Already there's not a single organ that's not being rebuilt or augmented in some way. As we get to the means of re-engineering things at the molecular level, we can do a much more powerful job of that. Eventually this will provide very dramatic extensions to human longevity.Cosmic Log: I was just reading in "Long for this World" that although mean life expectancy is dramatically increasing due to improvements in public health, there still seems to be a maximum time limit around 120 years.Kurzweil: That's not inexorable either. It's for very specific reasons: telomere shortening, increasing rates of genetic errors ... All of these things can be engineered around. There are mitochondrial DNA deletions because they're not protected. They reproduce using single-stranded DNA, which has a high error rate. But you can use gene therapy to put those genes in the nucleus. Each reason why there's a limit of 120 can be engineered around. There's really no absolute limit.Aubrey de Grey uses the metaphor of a house. How long does a house last? Well, it doesn't last a long amount of time if you don't take care of it. If you kinda take care of it routinely, maybe it'll last longer. But if you're very diligent, and constantly fix everything that goes wrong and occasionally upgrade the house, it can go on indefinitely. It can last a very long time, many centuries. The reason we can't do it with the human body right now is because we don't have all the required tools, or the right level of understanding. But that is exactly what is progressing exponentially, and I make the case that we will have those tools pretty soon.This is really a wakeup call to my baby-boomer peers. It's not too late for the baby-boomers to aggressively slow down the aging processes so we can be in good shape just 15 years from now when Bridge 2 comes around. It's not like it's going to arrive on one particular day, it'll pick up speed. Starting a decade from now we're going to see some dramatic advances.Q: I'm sure you hear the criticism every once in a while that this quest promotes a have vs. have-not society. That there'll be one level of society that has access to technology for life extension, and the other level of society will be left out in the cold.A: Well, my response to that is to say, 'Yeah, like cell phones.' Fifteen years ago, you had to be wealthy to have a mobile phone. When somebody took out a mobile phone at a movie, that was a signal that this person was powerful and a member of the wealthy elite. They actually didn't work very well. It took 10 years to put up the first billion cell phones, and three years to put up the second billion, and 14 months to put up the third billion. We're now at 5 billion cell phones for 6 billion people. A third of the individuals in Africa have cell phones. According to industry projections that they will all be smart phones within two or three years. So everybody in the world is going to have access to the Internet from these extremely inexpensive mobile devices.The reason for that is that the law of accelerating returns applies approximately a 50 percent deflation rate for information technology. It's true of every form of information technology, whether it's genetic data, DNA, brain data, bits of computing, bits of memory, bits of communication. Every year the cost comes down by about half. Ultimately, by the time these technologies work well, they're extremely inexpensive.It's also true of health technology. AIDS drugs were about $30,000 per patient per year 15 years ago, and they didn't work very well. Now they actually work pretty well, and they're $100 per patient per year.So at any one point in time, there is a have / have-not divide, based on the current snapshot of circumstances. When it comes to things like AIDS, we should do more than we're doing. But the technology is moving in the right direction, not the wrong direction. Ultimately these things become almost free, and by that time they're extremely powerful and work very well. It's not the case that these are very expensive interventions. They're expensive at the point where they're experimental and don't actually work.Q: Another issue that people talk about is whether, evolutionarily speaking, we're putting too much reliance on technology. People might be concerned about being in such a techno-reliant society that when things break down, some sort of crisis comes about that wipes out a whole segment of humanity.A: What sort of breakdown would wipe out a segment of humanity?Q: Well, let's say it's the kind of bioterror attack you've talked about. Or maybe ... for example, here in Seattle we had a big windstorm and electrical outage a couple of years ago, and it struck me while we were sitting in the dark how dependent my family was on electricity. It made me think ...A: My response to that is that technology is definitely moving toward decentralized solutions. Solar power, for example, can be very decentralized. It doesn't have a point of disruption. There are new water technologies emerging that are very localized, like Dean Kamen's water machine, which could sell for $1,000 and meets the water needs of 100 people. These decentralized solutions aren't subject to that kind of centralized breakdown. It's really more the First Industrial Revolution technologies which are centralized and potentially damaging in that way.That being said, there is intertwined promise and peril in all technologies. That's always been the case. There are dangers in these new technologies that I've talked extensively about. There's no simple pat answer, but the right answer is twofold: Have ethical standards for responsible practitioners, like the Asilomar guidelines for biotech, which have been very successful. And have a rapid-response system for irresponsible practitioners, like terrorists, so we can respond to them and protect ourselves.We've been a technological species for tens of thousands of years, and it's been the case that the technologically superior species has prevailed. There's discussion now why Cro-Magnon man prevailed over Neanderthals, and it appears to be due to fairly subtle differences in our tool use. Our tools were more advanced than the Neanderthals' and that's always what prevails. We've been a human-machine civilization ever since we picked up a stick to reach a higher branch. We've extended our reach with our tools, physically, mentally. We've already done that with our health. Life expectancy was 23 a thousand years ago. I recently told some gifted middle-school kids that if it hadn't been for this progress they all would be senior citizens.Q: I wanted to make sure I touched up your efforts to bring the memory of your father back alive, through cloning and artificial intelligence. Some people have portrayed it as a Frankensteinish exercise, but I'm sure you see it differently...A: It's no more Frankensteiny than people keeping movies and pictures of their loved ones who have passed, which is basically what I'm doing. He was kind of a pack rat like I am. He kept 60 or 70 boxes at his house, all his letters, all his music, he was a great musician. Vinyl records he recorded, old movies, things like that. The scenario is that future A.I.s will be intelligent enough to create avatars that are convincing as people in a virtual-reality environment. Some of these will be imaginative people, like Ramona in my movie. Others will be re-creations, as best as we can do it, of people who have passed, based on the information we have about them. That would include these actual documents of all kinds, video, his works, pictures. It would also include our memories, their DNA if that's available.Would that sort of avatar be my father? You could certainly make a strong case that it's not. But it would probably be closer to my father than my father would have been had he lived, because he'd be quite different today. He would be 98.Q: Is the aim of this to create a sentimental memory, or to keep his legacy alive? I'm sure you've thought deeply about the purpose for doing this.A: Well, this is a good example of the value of information. To me, information is not a dry database. Ultimately, we are information. I believe that we're fundamentally a pattern of information. There's an analogy to water in a stream. The pattern that water makes as it goes around a particular rock can be the same for years, but obviously the water is different from second to second. Am I the same person that you talked to years ago? Actually, the particles are completely different. The pattern isn't exactly the same, either, but the pattern does have continuity.So we are a pattern of information. And that information, ultimately we'll be able to capture that. That's another aspect of extending our lives. Right now we can back up all the valuable information we have on our computers. But it's not just a poem or a metaphor to say this information in our brains, it's very literally data, but we have no backup for it. Ultimately we'll be able to back it up and retain it.How valuable is a person? You could say it's the ultimate value. But a person is information. Information is of sacred value. In fact, going back to the origins of my family, knowledge was sacred in a way. My grandfather came back from Europe, and described how he was actually given an opportunity to handle some original document created by Leonardo da Vinci. He described it in reverential terms. These were documents created by a human, but they contained some precious information.That's really the main point I'm trying to make here. We treasure this information because it's the ultimate value of a human being. We are information - and when I say that, it's not intended to denigrate who we are. It's really intended to elevate the concept of information.http://cosmiclog.msn...for-immortality

[bigvlada]

A u vezi memorije,'Prosthetic' memory to repair damaged brainsGMANews – Thu, Jun 23, 2011After prosthetic limbs, is prosthetic memory coming next?Scientists at the University of Southern California's Viterbi School of Engineering may have developed the first step to this by switching rats' memories on and off.They said this could be a major step toward creating prostheses that may help human victims of Alzheimer's Disease, stroke, or injury.According to the scientists, they replicated in rats an electronic system that duplicates the neural signals associated with memory - even if the rats were drugged to forget."Flip the switch on, and the rats remember. Flip it off, and the rats forget," said Theodore Berger of the USC Viterbi School of Engineering's Department of Biomedical Engineering, in a news release on the USC website.They particularly replicate the brain function in rats associated with long-term learned behavior, even when the rats had been drugged to forget.Berger is the lead author of an article that will be published in the Journal of Neural Engineering.His team worked with scientists from Wake Forest University in the study, building on recent advances in our understanding of the brain area known as the hippocampus and its role in learning.ExperimentIn the experiment, the researchers had rats learn a task, pressing one lever rather than another to receive a reward.Using embedded electrical probes, the experimental research team led by Sam Deadwyler of the Wake Forest Department of Physiology and Pharmacology recorded changes in the rat's brain activity between the two major internal divisions of the hippocampus, known as subregions CA3 and CA1.During the learning process, the hippocampus converts short-term memory into long-term memory."No hippocampus, no long-term memory, but still short-term memory," Berger said.Also, the USC article said the CA3 and CA1 interact to create long-term memory.But in their demonstration, the experimenters blocked the normal neural interactions between the two areas using pharmacological agents.Thus the previously trained rats then no longer displayed the long-term learned behavior."The rats still showed that they knew 'when you press left first, then press right next time, and vice-versa,'" Berger said. "And they still knew in general to press levers for water, but they could only remember whether they had pressed left or right for 5 to 10 seconds."Using a model created by the prosthetics research team led by Berger, the teams developed an artificial hippocampal system that could duplicate the pattern of interaction between CA3 and CA1 interactions."Long-term memory capability returned to the pharmacologically blocked rats when the team activated the electronic device programmed to duplicate the memory-encoding function," the USC article said.Also, the researchers showed that if a prosthetic device and its associated electrodes were implanted in animals with a normal, functioning hippocampus, "the device could actually strengthen the memory being generated internally in the brain and enhance the memory capability of normal rats.""These integrated experimental modeling studies show for the first time that with sufficient information about the neural coding of memories, a neural prosthesis capable of real-time identification and manipulation of the encoding process can restore and even enhance cognitive mnemonic processes," said the paper.Berger and Deadwyler said their next step will be attempts to duplicate the rat results in primates (monkeys).The objective is to eventually create prostheses that might help the human victims of Alzheimer's disease, stroke or injury recover function.Other authors of the paper "A Cortical Neural Prosthesis for Restoring and Enhancing Memory" are:From USC: BME Professor Vasilis Marmarelis and Research Assistant Professor Dong Song;From Wake Forest: Associate Professor Robert Hampson and Post-Doctoral Fellow Anushka Goonawardena.Berger, who holds the David Packard Chair in Engineering, is the Director of the USC Center for Neural Engineering, Associate Director of the National Science Foundation Biomimetic MicroElectronic Systems Engineering Research Center, and a Fellow of the IEEE, the AAAS, and the AIMBE. — TJD, GMA Newshttp://ph.news.yahoo.com/prosthetic-memory-repair-damaged-brains-170007793.html

[dare...]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTgTXal1-9U&feature=relatedJa nisam samo ovo telo...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lT3NZoPO7Hc&feature=relatedI još jedna priča o prelasku... Tatina...Oboje kažu da su tu negde, u nekom novom početku i prostoru medju nama... Tja... Njima je ista vera bila potrebna, a potreba čuda čini... Verovali ili ne, dobro zvuči...

[bigvlada]

Discovery kanal, CuriosityEpizoda 11 Can You Live Forever? What would it be like to be immortal? It's the year 2967 and Adam Savage is 1000 years old. He reflects on his long life revealing how science in the 21st century transformed his body, creating a supercharged cyber-human, allowing him to live forever. Adam Savage October 16, 2011Da li je još neko gledao ovo?

[dare...]

Ima li života posle rodjenja?

[bigvlada]

Can you build a human body?Technology has always strived to match the incredible sophistication of the human body. Now electronics and hi-tech materials are replacing whole limbs and organs in a merger of machine and man.Later this year a team of researchers will try out the first bionic eye implant in the UK hoping to help a blind patient see for the first time. It is one of the extraordinary medical breakthroughs in the field, which are extending life by years and providing near-natural movement for those who have lost limbs.Over the coming weeks, BBC News will explore the field of bionics in a series of features. We start with a selection of the latest scientific developments......http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17235058

[Buck Naked]

Najbolja filozofska o besmrtnosti je ona Alena Stjuarta Konigsberga:"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work... I want to achieve it through not dying."