Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

RobertDyck · 2017-02-19 07:00:11

You would think American medical companies would want to develop rejuvenation. It's a syndrome that absolutely everyone has, and the rich are willing to pay big bucks. The American medical system gouges patients right now, so why ask health insurance to pay for it? This is a way for some enterprising medical company to make billions.

I've been surprised by the number of people who actually oppose the very idea of rejuvenation. It appears they have accepted the limitations of this life, and don't want to accept that those limitations can be changed. But there's already a lot of money spent on cosmetics to look younger, or more dramatically plastic surgery.

And you don't have to worry about "Dracula". There's already blood donations. And if it's just a protein, then that can be cultured. Oldfart1939 could explain how that's done.

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-02-19 09:27:32

They say that now, most people choose to bravely face their end rather than grasp for hope that may not come in time. Religion was invented for that reason, t keep people sane while their time runs out and they are waiting to die. Religion promises them an eternal afterlife, and that is all people have or have had for countless generations. Death will still come, even with rejuvenation, there are countless things that will kill you besides old age, and given enough time they will happen, but that will give enough time for people to have hundreds of children before something kills them. People will be able to migrate to other stars, not because they are traveling near the speed of light but because they will live long enough to get there. Migration will be the way to deal with over population.

SpaceNut · 2017-02-19 10:35:00

I could see this as an advantage for space travel since the stars require you to live longer in order to make it to the destination.

Void · 2018-05-14 19:20:02

Here is a nice update to this topic:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=na … ORM=VRDGAR

Hopefully it is still under development. I do try to query for up to date articles, but am a little nervous about the date on this one. I will search some more for a more up to date article.

Still, it takes real time to establish something like this.

While they say they can extend life span in Mice by 20%, theory suggests that the results will be less for humans. However, the more important thing would be the DNA damage repair, and being more healthy in older age.

I also like the idea that they may be able to help people who were victims of childhood cancer (Which apparently dooms them to other problems later).

Still not proven, but a great hope.

Here is one for Resveratrol (Which I take)
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=da … &FORM=VIRE

Well here is one for NMN I believe, that is more up to date, if I can believe the date on it.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=da … &FORM=VIRE

I think the difference between Resveratrol and NMN, possibly is that Resveratrol (Red Wine similar), only stimulates one Sertuin
NMN stimulates much more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirtuin

This aging thing is so strange. Why doesn't the body already do this stuff? Well one answer is that historically, typical humans did not have sufficient nutrition to support the repair activity. Another theory is that after you exceed the typical reproductive activity, evolution has no use for you and so abandons you to rot so to speak.

For evolution to be more plastic, it is better to kill off the old generation and make room for a new generation of variety, where certain varieties of the whole spectrum will prosper more. Therefor plastic, adapting to short term fluctuations in the environment, and perhaps longer ones as well.

But we are largely beyond evolution at this point. At least beyond that sort of short term bondage to suffering we hope.

....

Other large minded humans I watch are:
Aubrey De Grey
Liz Parrish
Bill Andrews
George Church (Wants to revive a pseudo Mammoth as well)
and others.
Bill Falloon
M. Fossil

They variously think in terms of;
-Viruses to extend Telomeres,
-Chemicals to extend Telomeres,
-A philosophy to repair 7 identified sources of aging damage.

And hope also to be able to deal with cancer in some thinking by shortening Telomeres, (Although it is also possible that in many cases lengthening Telomeres may make the body more capable of killing off cancer before it gets serious).

Some disagreements, but that is good. Maybe there many situations and they each have a piece of the puzzle.

I am not as afraid of death as you might think, but I am not eager to become sick with old age. Would prefer not to.

......

While I am very interested in Aubrey De Greys ideas, I believe that to live 1000 years will require a solution to all 7 of his parts of the solution, and I am not likely to live long enough for it except by the wild possibility that people like David Sinclair and others might do something for me.

......

Liz Parrish is of significant interest.

In this video, she makes a lot of sense.

Gene therapy to fix the immune system, and muscles.

Also the removal of Senescent cells, and where needed the repair of an individuals stem cells outside the body, (Lengthening the Telomeres), returning the stem cells to the body where needed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senescence

That could do a whole lot for a human. Not likely to keep you OK for 1000 years, but along with Dr. Sinclair (And his associates) work, maybe insuring that if I live to 85 or so like my parents, I will be able to be much more fit.

That I would like to have.

......

In case you think that this is impossible, I understand that Lobsters do not appear to age at all. (They do get eaten however).

I believe that their Telomeres do not shorten. Humans Telomeres do shorten.

We have 15,000 base pairs at conception, 10,000 base pairs at birth, and when we drop down to 5000 base pairs, we get very sick and die, senescent cells being part of the problem.

Last edited by Void (2018-05-14 21:25:27)

Void · 2018-05-14 21:19:54

Yes, here is Liz Parrish:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kquZUSlwyZ4

Last edited by Void (2018-05-14 21:20:19)

Void · 2018-05-20 09:45:06

Rob Reid in a conversation with George Church:
https://after-on.com/episodes/024

Interesting stuff. Health benefits for humans emerging, and also a curious method to use Elephants modified for northern climates, to modify the environment back in the direction of the Mammoth Steppe.

The modification of the Elephants, would most likely be to use Asian Elephants as the basic template, and to inject critical changes to alter them towards the ancient capabilities of Mammoths with the use of genetic engineering. Replacing specific parts of the genome with Mammoth genetic material, to make Asian Elephants more adapted to northern high latitudes.

This is intended to keep the permafrost frozen, and so to not allow Carbon to exit the permafrost into the Earths atmosphere, and preferentially, to actually capture Carbon from the atmosphere into the permafrost.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2018-05-20 09:51:12)

Void · 2018-05-20 22:06:03

Prof. George Church

He fascinates me. If only I could be just a little like his kind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqtVg62rVt8

But I can just watch his fantastic communication of his ideas/understanding. But at least I am limiting the amount I post elsewhere in ways that may annoy me. I am entertained.

I like everything, but if you do watch this, note that he says that Cyanobacteria could fix 15% of the CO2 in the atmosphere, if predatory phages did not then cause the bodies of the Cyanobacteria to be converted back to CO2.

Maybe a Mars terraform technique hinted at there. (The previous link)

Here is another which I have not watched yet. The title is catchy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqgeRxegIXw

Last edited by Void (2018-05-20 22:07:14)

Void · 2018-05-21 20:39:16

Not Directly on Topic, but one of George Churches smaller but I think very important activities:
http://reviverestore.org/projects/woolly-mammoth/

I like the following one:
http://reviverestore.org/projects/wooll … s-to-date/

It seems to me that the ideas of health extention / life extention & the idea of establishing Bioms on Mars will be related to the ability to restore Mammoths to Earth.

Further, interestingly, the restoration of the Mammoth Steppe is an action of terraforming Earth, or if you like reverse terraforming it back in the direction of what it was.

.....

I seem to recall that George Church indicated that with just a few genetic manipulations an organism can be made radiation tolerant.

I might speculate that perhaps Cyanobacteria could be made more tolerant of U.V., in addition to being less vulnerable to their typical predators, the Cyanophages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanobacteria

http://www.biologydiscussion.com/bacter … logy/54885

......

In a video by George Church, he indicated that Cyanobacteria fix 15% of the CO2 in the Earths atmosphere into their bodies each Earth year. However, the Cyanophages infect them and cause them to explode, and then other organisms eat the pieces, so the CO2 cycles back.

However for Mars, it might be possible to create a most radiation tolerant Cyanobacteria, and to also give it resistance to the Cyanophages.

Would something else then eat the Cyanobacteria?

Well, if you had a stratified ocean/sea(s) where the upper layer was only partially Oxygenated (Until the whole atmosphere was converted), and the lower layers were anoxic, it might be that much of the organic goo would stay at the bottom, with the exception perhaps of Methane generated by anaerobic digestion.

And if the bodies of water were typically shallow, (As would be likely on Mars), then the Methane greenhouse gas would enter the atmosphere. A good thing I think.

In the beginning I am thinking about ice covered bodies of water, but perhaps in best locations eventually open water.

However, if the atmosphere were converted to O2 dominance, it is to be remembered that it would take about ~2 bar pressure to become as warm as Earth, so after all if O2 dominant, then I expect a rather cold climate. Ice covered water as a general rule.

However if somehow a pressure of 1/3 Bar, I would expect the days at the equator to warm up significantly and to melt water for a few hours a day.

At the Poles? Well with a double long midnight sun, maybe the summers at the poles could be rather cheerful.

So back to the Mammoth restoration. It seems to me that the Mammoth Steppe would end up being the most productive non-aquatic Biome for Mars. (As a general rule). Perhaps forests in locations, maybe the Mariner Rift Valley.

Some use of Mirrors in orbit I expect, in order to modify specific locations, cities, warm water reservoirs, exotic mini-biomes.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2018-05-21 21:03:05)

elderflower · 2018-05-23 03:11:10

Removing CO2 from the Martian atmosphere would leave an even lower pressure environment and it would then be much colder. For significant liquid water to exist on the surface, the atmosphere will have to be more dense and more effective in the greenhouse role. CO2 needs to be maximised and its warming effect needs to be supplemented with other gases. Favoured supplements are Fluorocarbons and Sulphur Hexafluoride.

Void · 2018-05-23 12:09:44

Elderflower stopped by and said:

Removing CO2 from the Martian atmosphere would leave an even lower pressure environment and it would then be much colder. For significant liquid water to exist on the surface, the atmosphere will have to be more dense and more effective in the greenhouse role. CO2 needs to be maximised and its warming effect needs to be supplemented with other gases. Favoured supplements are Fluorocarbons and Sulphur Hexafluoride.

......

To start with just a bit of splicing to make sure we can discuss this extensively and stay reasonably on topic. I believe we can.

The Title: "Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space".

Obviously, to be heathy and live longer in a particular "Space" (Namely Mars), we will want to examine our preferences and real options for Mars. Some options are not definable at this point because of lack of information on future technologies, and facts on the ground, and underground for that matter.

......

So we have a number of desired options for Mars that some think we can achieve. I will list them.
1) Red Mars. (Don't mess with it, we like it like it is).
2) Green Mars. (This presumes that you can green up Mars by warming it planting vegetation, and not yet having large bodies of water).
3) Blue Mars. (This supposes that in the far future Mars will resemble the Earth).

4) Void Mars. (Really a compromise between Green Mars and Blue Mars). (Certainly the best option! )
*Void Mars would be cooler/colder than Blue Mars, so as to retain glacial potentials, and the potential to have ice covered bodies of water.

The reasons:
a) We may wish to store some items in glaciers/ice caps. Excess water, and yes possibly excess CO2, if there are massive amounts of it stored underground. This will likely end up being the South Pole, which also has alpine aspects, and the high shield volcano's. In both cases, rivers of melt water may be produced at high elevations, and bring liquid water to low elevations. Perhaps hydro-electric power.
b) The north polar basin, being filled with an ice covered reservoir (Except for lower latitudes), could be so manipulated that the ice was thin enough to allow photosynthesis, and to allow motor traffic over the ice. Minerals at that polar sea bottom would still be accessible by means of a Dutch style polder. In some locations polders would contain ice which could host air filled vaults at a higher pressure than ambient. If ambient were 70 mb, then the vaults could be considerably higher. If ambient were 333 mb then still the vaults could be higher.

The reasons you could have ice covered sea, and dry polders and icy polders, primarily would be that rivers from more southerly locations would run into the polar sea and help keep it melted. If the polar sea were salty enough, then you would get a solar pond effect per "Antarctic Dry Valley Lakes". And further, mirrors in orbit could distribute extra light to this sea, or poke a hole in the ice with a strong focus, and really heat up the water.

The dry polders may or may not have tundra/alpine vegetation in them. Perhaps mirrors will help for this. If mirrors help, perhaps even nicer vegetation from warmer biomes.

The icy polders can be kept icy, by not focusing a mirror output on them and also with reflectance, and thermal insulation.

Southern low spots such as Hellas could be handled this way as well.

These "Seas" will be especially energy rich, if the Martian nights continue to be rather cold. Of course then you can generate electricity by venting heat from the seas to the night sky, perhaps even the morning and afternoon sky(s) as well.

......

Lets have a look at this again:

Removing CO2 from the Martian atmosphere would leave an even lower pressure environment and it would then be much colder. For significant liquid water to exist on the surface, the atmosphere will have to be more dense and more effective in the greenhouse role. CO2 needs to be maximised and its warming effect needs to be supplemented with other gases. Favoured supplements are Fluorocarbons and Sulphur Hexafluoride.

On the face of it, yes, but actually no. An Oxygen atmosphere (With a pinch of Nitrogen and Argon ect.), would be ~1/2 as effective as a CO2 atmosphere. But that implies that you got rid of ~1/2 of the molecules. In reality you would get rid of the Carbons, and keep the Oxygen, which is ~2/3's of the bulk from CO2.

So Oxygen from that will be better than 1/2 as warming as strait CO2.

But there is more. If the Carbons are being extracted by biology, then you have O2 being produced from H20, as the photo organisms will be sticking Hydrogens onto the Carbons, and tossing the O2 out. So you vent that to atmosphere and then where are you? Not as bad off as you feared.

And what's to become of the hydrocarbons that the photo organisms manufacture? You arrange for the bottom waters of the seas to be anoxic, so that Methane will be generated by other organisms. You vent the Methane to sky. It is a lighter gas and will tend to try to get to the high sky.

Methane is ~28 times as potent as CO2, as a greenhouse gas I believe. It might only last for 100 years, but you would be constantly resupplying it to the atmosphere.

Managing CO2. I have stated that some CO2 might be stored in the south polar ice cap, if there is an excess. That ice cap should be able to store it as a solid, if you don't overwarm the planet. In fact the Earth's south polar ice cap can just barely approach (But not achieve) such a capability, except perhaps if Earth were to go snowball.

I recall Terraformer indicating that humans can develop a tolerance for higher levels of CO2 than we normally deal with on Earth.

So, it is not necessary to entirely remove all CO2 from the Martian atmosphere. It is a heavy gas, and may tend to stay closer to the ground. I hope so, because I want a stratified atmosphere that would allow for an Ozone layer. (That may likely require an Oxygen dominated atmosphere).

Now this part:

Favoured supplements are Fluorocarbons and Sulphur Hexafluoride.

I am hesitant to work with Fluorocarbons, as I fear that they might link up with Chlorine, and produce an Ozone killing process.

Still lets consider Sulphur Hexafluoride:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_hexafluoride
Quote:

Density
6.17 g/L
Melting point
−64 °C; −83 °F; 209 K
Boiling point
−50.8 °C (−59.4 °F; 222.3 K)

Quote:

Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, colorless, odorless, non-flammable, extremely potent greenhouse gas, and an excellent electrical insulator.[4] SF
6 has an octahedral geometry, consisting of six fluorine atoms attached to a central sulfur atom. It is a hypervalent molecule. Typical for a nonpolar gas, it is poorly soluble in water but quite soluble in nonpolar organic solvents. It is generally transported as a liquefied compressed gas. It has a density of 6.12 g/L at sea level conditions, considerably higher than the density of air (1.225 g/L).

Well, it is heavy, so we can hope that it would tend to stay low and away from the Ozone layer, but maybe it is so inert that it will not cause a problem. However, I would be afraid that U.V. light might split off Fluorine from it and that to find Chlorine, and that to then cause problems for Ozone.

But the boiling point is:

−50.8 °C (−59.4 °F; 222.3 K)

So I presume the condensation point is the same. So what about the polar ice caps, and the alpine glaciers. Will it tend to condense into them? It is slightly soluble in water, so can we expect rain and snow and open water to extract it from the atmosphere?

But maybe it can make a contribution as a minor dissolved gas in the Martian atmosphere.

.....

There is another possible abiotic source of Oxygen. Mirrors in orbit could produce a vortex in the atmosphere which would suck water vapor to the high sky. There it may be split by U.V. and the Hydrogen preferably rising to the top of the atmosphere. It will tend to leak away with or without a artificial magnetic field. However the Oxygen will tend to stay.

So this is another source of atmosphere, that would produce Oxygen by Photolysis.

.....

Beyond that there may be the hope of extracting Oxygen and perhaps water and Carbon from asteroids. I would do it in orbit, so as to keep the metals and other solid materials to use in orbit, maybe keep the water in orbit as well, but the Oxygen might be delivered to the atmosphere of Mars. The Carbon could be used in orbit for structures, or delivered to the atmosphere as desired.

That is a more far off method.

......

Now what about the night sky of a terraformed Mars, per clouds, fogs, rain, and snow?

Where I have implied that there is an energy potential to having cold Martian night sky, I can also say that there is also a hydrological and thermal blessing to be had as well.

By cold night sky, I intend a ideal Martian atmosphere of 1/3 Bar of Oxygen dominated atmosphere. Indeed it will try to get very cold, especially in the polar winters and the equatorial nights.

During the day, direct sunlight on ice and snow will tend to melt it, and evaporate it. Also if open water exists the sunlight and night dried air will tend to suck moisture from it to the high sky, just like on Earth. In some locations, the day temperatures may be suitable for tundra and alpine vegetation, and perhaps in certain cases, and especially with assistance from mirror, something from a warmer biome.

The moisture rising to ~50,000 feet??? then the afternoon coming with cooling and the night getting progressively colder into the morning.

Rain and fogs, then snow, and then in the sky perhaps ice fogs. All of these will tend to make the nights less thermally harsh on the ground, and even the snow will put a blanket on the vegetation to protect it from very hard freezes.

And the next morning, if the snow cover is not too thick, it will serve as a greenhouse to a degree for very hardy tundra and alpine plants.
It will melt away as the day swiftly warms, and around you go again.

I admit, that the night sky blankets will interfere with generating electricity by venting heat to the Martian sky, but so what. There will likely be plenty of places, arid places where less of that will happen.

.....

So, you comments which were commanding to the point of implying that no other opinion ought to apply, ain't necessarily gospel gold written on stone tablets.

But really don't take that as hostile. I enjoyed your comments. They prompted me to think about it.

Please continue.

Another continuation of thought. Deserts heat up during the day and cool off fast through the night because of dry cloud free sky.

Humid areas on Mars most likely would burn off fogs and clouds and melt snows that are not too thick in short order, as the amount of atmosphere to warm up will be 1/3 of Earths. In the heating up and the evaporation of water to the sky, during the day, of course water vapor is a greenhouse gas as well.

So, I anticipate that Mars may act like a diode under this terraform plan. Receptive to energy from the sun during the day, but holding onto heat at night due to precipitants of water. So, warmer on average than we should otherwise expect, I think.

The only exception would be if snow pack was so thick that the morning sun could not effectively melt it.

So then controlling the total amount of vapors/water in circulation would be a determining factor. Having largely ice covered reservoirs would be a method to reduce the amount of water vapor held in the atmosphere during the day, and on the ground as the night unwinds to the morning. We might not want it to be more abundant than necessary to keep the night sky warm enough on average to promote vegetation's success over the long term. Occasional hard frosts might be OK.
......

And I did at one point in previous posts mention the midnight sun. Well on Mars, it is ~twice as long. So you might get yourselves a 90 day frost free period at certain latitudes. Particularly in "Dry" polders in the northern sea, you might grow regular crops. Perhaps orbital mirrors might improve productivity, and help extend the growing season.

Not Done

Last edited by Void (2018-05-23 13:46:44)

Void · 2018-05-24 11:00:59

Kind of busy just now but I feel it is important to indicate that post #35 contains something which might be very significant to the history of Mars, and also to the potential to terraform Mars to our liking.

The plan I indicated may or may not be the ideal one, but whatever plan is used (If ever), should include consideration of; "A Nightshade Diode Effect" for Mars.

At current Martian conditions we can see it in operation still, although it is not performing to its maximum potential.
Examples are:
1) Night Fogs.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/new … e-science/
2) Polar Hood.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com … 10JE003693

For Earth, we have similar effects, but typically we either have humid areas were the temperature does not drop that much or have dry areas where the fluctuation between day and night temperatures are at an Earth maximum.

I suggest that we could consider what Mars would be like under different pressures and atmospheric mixes potentially that occurred in the past, and that we could promote in the future.

Just on a guess, I will suggest 3 pressures.

25 mb, 70 mb, 333 mb, and 1000 mb.

25 mb suggests that microbial life could make it on Mars, as liquid water would be evident in warmer places, especially during the sunshine of the day, and under ice covered reservoirs receiving melt water.

70 mb would be for vegetation's sake, as experiments suggest, (from what I have read), that that is about the cutoff for vascular plants to do OK. (Without regarding the risk of night and winter frosts).

333 mb is a pressure sufficient for humans to breath providing that the mix is dominantly of Oxygen.

1000 mb is about Earth normal, and it is very likely that that will ever be achieved on Mars in the next centuries, but it would be interesting to study.

All of the above could also be done using CO2 as the dominant gas, which would of course change the heating and cooling in general and specifically reduce the cooling at night on Mars relative to an O2 atmosphere.

The "A Nightshade Diode Effect" would be just the opposite of how it is supposed that Venus might have retained oceans of water in its early days. For Venus, it is supposed that day clouds would reflect sunlight on the day side, and I am going to suppose that ideally it would have rained out the clouds at night on the night side and let infrared wavelengths out to the night space sky more if the sky's cleared.

......

So I would argue that for a rate of spin, and a composition of an atmosphere and their could be an ideal pressure and moisture content, to best allow sunlight to the planets surface during the day, and to hold infrared in during the night.

So clouds and fog in the night and perhaps rain and snow in the night, but the ability of the morning sunlight to reduce the cloud cover and snow cover so that the rest of the day could warm the planet up.

For Mars, I do not know what that pressure and atmospheric mix that did occur that would be ideal, to warm the planet, but I would like to find out.

For my preferred model I would like O2 to be the dominant gas, and try to have it at 333 mb. If vast amounts of Nitrogen were available, I would want to tilt to a higher pressure with more Nitrogen.

Then I would hope to do dope the atmosphere with greenhouse gasses. Among them Methane, and CO2. Possibly some others.

The quantity of Methane would be a primary control mechanism, as it may influence how much CO2 was in atmosphere as a gas, and how much was entombed in the South Polar ice cap or the high shield volcano's presumed to occur glaciers.

So I do not wish to push the total temperature of Mars up beyond a point where CO2 can be condensed as a solid in some cold locations.

This is because I fear that there may be vast quantities of CO2 and other gasses (Hopefully Nitrous Oxide) entombed in the permafrost of the regolith.

But if I am wrong, and CO2 is limited, then by all means warm the place up more.

As for the presumed bodies of water that will result from daytime melts in the sunlight, I expect that orbital mirrors could be used to modulate the amount of melting.

Further, for fresh bodies of water orbital mirrors may warm them slightly to 39 DegF (On the bottoms).

Forther, for salty bodies of water which would resemble Antarctic Dry Valley Lakes, the bottom waters could be warmed to ~70 DegF or ~20 DegC.

In both cases fresh and salt, the bottom waters could be stratified, and Oxygen would only be in the colder waters above, and the lower layers of water would be anoxic, and there cyanobacteria which had died would be converted in part to Methane by microbes that thrive without Oxygen. The Methane released as desired to the atmosphere as a way to modulate conditions along with orbital mirrors.

......

I have very little doubt that I am "Preaching to the Choir" here, but for those who don't understand an electronic power supply, they can study this and understand and analog to what I think did happen on Mars, and could happen on Mars if we do our manipulations correctly and the resources are actually available on Mars (Which I think are).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectifier

Where day night temperatures can be considered a sine wave on a Mars without an atmosphere and precipitation, with an atmosphere dependent precipitation where precipitation dominantly occurs in the night and winters, then heat is conserved. However, if the precipitation deposits such as frost and snow, (And clouds and fogs), carry to far into the day, then that would reflect sunlight back into space. Since Mars is a cold planet we could hope to warm it by greenhouse effects and "A Nightshade Diode Effect" and possibly orbital mirrors. So with those methods maximizing the input of heat from the sun during the day, and minimizing the loss of heat during the night, so changing from a sine wave of temperature to a modified sine wave with a reduced down side, or possibly the equivalent of a pulsing DC voltage.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2018-05-24 11:41:03)

Void · 2019-05-17 19:39:09

Well, it's been a bit of time, but time demands to occur. Here we are again. Love it.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=da … ORM=VRDGAR

He mentions George Church. I follow that one. I also follow Aubrey De Grey and many others. Liz Perish, Bill Andrews. Others.

They do not all agree on how to make the mark. Still I celebrate all of the efforts of such people in our existence.

We are very probably on the edge of a new reality. Either, I exist to continue celebration, or I die before the event (I will eventually die anyway), or, nin-com-poops will end our chances before a chance occurs. Idiots. Please stop now.

Done

Last edited by Void (2019-05-17 19:48:45)

Void · 2020-12-10 17:46:11

------
This could be of interest to anyone, but also might relate to low g space travel medicines.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-12- … -mice.html
I have been trying to figure out why the human body would do this. It would seem that the body is rather good at self tuning up to about ~~~~The age of 35-40.
This situation where it seems that that the body then either senselessly or intentionally reduces muscle mass is a puzzle.
In terms of supposed natural selection, perhaps how it might work is a weak person either dies and makes room of the young, or lingers on while becomming weaker. Could it be that as you aged you would do less strenuous work around the tribe/camp/village? And then would your nutrition needs per protein be less? A few older people then also being the repositories of tribal knowledge/culture?
That formula will no longer suit the more modern situation. We have books and the internet to store ideas/memes. Although the elder can still be creative/inventive, "outside of the box", in some cases.
Anyway the article contains a chance that beyond 35-40, it may be possible to re-tune the body for a younger profile. However this method which I think might involve daily injections????, would require some better method to implement.
Also there is a chance that long term interference with the body of elders in this way might wake up some other kind of medical problem.
But I will be optimistic and suppose that there are real chances somewhere around this body of new knowledge.
As for elder creativity/inventiveness, I think that in addition to declines that do eventually occur, now it is more likely that an older person can work outside of major institutions. In the past you either belonged to a major institution and made a contribution, or you were isolated from new ideas, and the ablility to contibute to a larger entity.
I believe that with the internet, hard institutional regulation of creativity is reduced.
For instance as I recall, classrooms were of course regulated as to what was the current subject matter, and it also favored people who could quickly come up with answers. Those who might ponder a situation for a longer time, and perhaps research it after the question appeared, would simply be ignored most of the time.
But now we have an environment that is much more favorable to the autodiadactic mind.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autodidacticism
The past was by necessity of need of the time highly regulated, the materials to learn determined by institutions. We may be partially in a new age.
My point being is that if you can make older people more functional, and indeed satisfied with their health and spirit, some of them would possibly be creative and make contributions much later in life. Having had institutional training and yet having the liberty to go after things that excite them.
In my case I would choose as much as possible to not have some institution set my agenda of learning and thinking. I would be much more inerested in following my passions. It is possible that something might come out of that eventually. But the reaction of tradation would then indicate that institutions would then try to take me a captive, and then set me to a less useful purpose. Probably they cannot do much of that to me anymore.
Done

tahanson43206 · 2020-12-10 18:40:17

For Void re #38

Thank you for this essay, which includes mention of creativity and contributions of elders.

I've been trying to convince some members of this forum that this is an idea worth pursuing for forum membership.

My understanding is that the population of the US includes thousands of highly trained, highly productive senior citizens who "graduated" from regular employment in engineering and scientific fields. From my observation, there is a window of opportunity to capture energy that such persons still have available, before the inevitable fade out occurs.

If the net were cast wider than just the US, then the population of highly skilled creative individuals might well number in the hundreds of thousands.

I noticed that the principals of a fusion research organization were both in their 80's when the organization was most productive. Several years have gone by since anything was heard from that group, and indeed, the inevitable may have occurred.

(th)

Void · 2023-09-21 18:34:07

We have not done this sort of thing for a while. David Sinclair seems very optimistic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk_GcwkfJGs Quote:

Aging is Now Optional w/ David Sinclair | EP #60
Peter H. Diamandis
132K subscribers

It sounds rather good.

Done

Sounds like NAD/NMN help with radiation exposure. I am sure NASA has noted that.

George Church is an interesting person, I am planning to review his videos: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=ge … ORM=HDRSC4

Liz Parrish is interesting I need an update about her stuff: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Li … ORM=HDRSC4

There is another associate of hers. I will try to remember him. Bill Andrews is his name.

Aubrey De Grey is also interesting, he has a theory of damage repair: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Au … cc=0&ghpl=

So, i think that it is good that they have such different approaches, as I expect that each may address things the others method may not.

It is interesting in any case.

Done.

Health extension may lead to life extension, and life extension may make space travel more worthwhile. You can go do something and then catch up on what you may have left behind or start something entirely new.

I like the idea anyway.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-09-21 19:50:11)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2017-02-19 07:00:11

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#27 2017-02-19 09:27:32

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#28 2017-02-19 10:35:00

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#29 2018-05-14 19:20:02

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#30 2018-05-14 21:19:54

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#31 2018-05-20 09:45:06

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#32 2018-05-20 22:06:03

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#33 2018-05-21 20:39:16

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#34 2018-05-23 03:11:10

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#35 2018-05-23 12:09:44

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#36 2018-05-24 11:00:59

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#37 2019-05-17 19:39:09

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#38 2020-12-10 17:46:11

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#39 2020-12-10 18:40:17

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

#40 2023-09-21 18:34:07

Re: Heatlth Extension/Life Extension, on Earth or for Space

Board footer