As I suspected, you have no specific scientific objections.
I've explained why it is certainly possible above. Simply put, if something doesn't contradict the laws of physics, then it can be done. Superluminal velocities and backward time travel contradict physics. Human biological immortality, suspended animation, and forward time travel through relativistic temporal dilation do not.
The assertion that we must first observe a phenomenon to be certain that it's physically possible is categorically false. Powered flight was known to be possible before the Wright brothers, landing humans on Luna was known to be possible before the Apollo program, and curing hepatitis C was known to be possible decades before it became the first curable chronic viral infection in the previous decade. Likewise, cancer, ALS, MS, and, yes, aging are all known to be curable, just as surely as human voyages to Mars, Alpha Centauri, and Andromeda are certainly possible. The question in all of these cases is one of "when," not "if."
Aging isn't an immutable law of physics. It's a finitely complex biological process which is unquestionably physically possible to indefinitely reverse. There are only thirty trillion cells in the human body, each with only a finite number of possible behaviors and interactions. The whole system is finitely complex, and given sufficient dedication after however many centuries or millennia may be necessary, that finite complexity would inevitably become trivial despite being incomprehensible today. (Plus, as I noted above, there are even ways in which aging could be completely bypassed without understanding the cellular processes behind it.) There is no possibility that any disease or aging may be physically impossible to cure. You're saying that even if we dedicated our entire species' resources toward finding a cure for aging for a billion years straight, we might not be able to find one even then. That is sheer nonsense.
Those who fail to understand this fail to understand the physics of the matter on the most exceedingly rudimentary level, even if they are towering scientific geniuses on par with Lord Kelvin, who—despite his generally immense intellect, insight, education, and achievement—imbecilically declared in 1902 that "no balloon and no aeroplane will ever be practically successful." The Wright brothers first achieved powered flight in 1903, and commercial aviation became commonplace two decades later. Just as surely as there was no question that powered flight was physically possible before it was achieved, there is no question that human aging is physically possible to cure despite not having yet been achieved. This is true regardless of how many latter-day Lord Kelvins hem and haw and proclaim with false authority to the contrary. It can be done, and unless humanity goes extinct first, it will be done, sooner or later.
Given the complexity of the problem and the minimal resources currently allocated toward addressing it (the billionaire race for immortality is a myth, and that eccentric hectomillionaire who spends two million a year on his almost entirely worthless personal "longevity" regimen has no hope of outliving Jeanne Calment), I highly doubt it will happen in our lifetimes. A mere $3.01 billion was spent on aging reversal research in 2023, down from a still-minuscule peak of $9.26 billion in 2021. Interest has certainly grown from the $570 million global investment in 2013, but I don't think it's grown nearly enough. In 2023, the physicist and computational biologist Andrew Steele highly speculatively and optimistically suggested that a cure for aging may be only $100 billion away, which would put it around three decades out if recent funding trends hold, but I think aging may be so complex that it's actually trillions of dollars and centuries away from being cured.
Consequently, Jean Hébert and a few others such as the HydraDAO have recently begun openly promoting body and gradual brain replacement as a means of bypassing aging altogether, which they claim could be achieved for as little as $3.6 billion in as soon as a decade. I've been privately aware of this very nascent line of research for a few years now and am happy to see some of it emerging from stealth mode, but I'm not convinced it will be so easy. For those who understand what both approaches entail, somatoreplacement is obviously orders of magnitude easier than a cellular cure for aging—but that doesn't mean it's anywhere near as easy as they think. The same is true for the cybernetic approach.
That leaves biostasis (encompassing both cryostasis and chemostasis) as the only option currently available for those interested in potentially avoiding infotheoretic death and attaining longevity escape velocity. Brain cryopreservation costs as little as $6,000 upfront and brain chemopreservation is offered for free thanks to Jordan Sparks' philanthropy, and even the most expensive options (which include cryopreservation of the whole body and advanced standby, stabilization, and transport) are accessible to anyone who can afford life insurance. In light of this, I'm surprised that so few futurists and science fiction fans are interested. I'm also amazed that most people think warp drives (!) are more likely than indefinite lifespans.
What a silly comment. I realize that 1) a cure for aging in my lifetime is very unlikely, 2) that the primitive current and likely near future quality of biostasis makes my reanimation highly speculative, and 3) that I will still eventually die even if I am reanimated into a postsenescent future. No rosetinted glasses here, just objective analysis. The pro-aging trance is powerful indeed.
Last edited:
