the importance of surviving 40 more years

October 6, 2013 #theories

Everyone knows they’re supposed to have healthy habits so they can live a long life, but for everyone alive right now something far greater is on the line- something much bigger than a few extra years of old age. Thanks to the dramatic growth curve of science and technology, within 40 years I predict our tools will have progressed to the point where the human lifespan is extended indefinitely. In a moment I’ll get into why and how, but the important thing to remember is that everyone alive right now is in a race to see if they can last 40 years. If you do, you may never die.

Setting aside any moral or philosophical questions, let’s first talk about whether this prediction is realistic. Historically dying has been an evolutionarily beneficial behavior that gave our species a nice balance between living long enough to prosper and dying enough to drive adaptation. That algorithm worked out differently for different species, and especially well for the Galapagos Tortoise, which lives around 177 years. Fruit flies, not so much.

galapagos_tortoiseFruit_flies_sex

Almost 200 years for the Tortoise compared to 30 days for the fly. I’d be getting busy too…

The comparative lifespan of a tortoise and fruit fly is important because it reinforces the fact that dying is not an inevitability; it’s a process engineered by evolution and coded into our DNA. And if something is engineered it can be re-engineered, which is exactly what scientists are doing right now. Take for example the Harvard scientists who recently sped up the aging process in mice and then reversed those effects entirely by manipulating the enzyme telomerase. Each time a cell divides in our body the telomere shortens, eventually getting so short the cell doesn’t reproduce itself correctly. The net result of these cellular degradations is old age. In many ways the telomere is like a built in count down clock for our bodies. By ensuring the telomere did not shorten however, the aging process slowed to almost nothing in the mice. And almost more incredibly, by lengthening the telomere the aging process was reversed- the mice got younger.

Telomere_caps

Human chromosomes (grey) capped by telomeres (white)

This is just one of many studies being done. Another good example is a US team that recently identified a mechanism in the hypothalamus that can be tweaked to shorten or lengthen lives.

They found that a chemical called NF-kB became more active in the hypothalamus of mice as they got older. When the researchers blocked the substance, mice lived up to 1,100 days, compared with 600 to 1000 days for normal healthy mice. When they boosted NF-kB in mice, they all died within 900 days. Tests on the animals six months into the study found that those without NF-kB had more muscle and bone, were better at learning, and had healthier skin han controls.

Further work showed that NF-kB lowered levels of a hormone called GnRH, which is better known for the central role it plays in fertility and the development of sperm and eggs. When the scientists gave old mice daily jabs of GnRH, they found this too extended the animals’ lives, and even caused fresh neurons to grow in their brains. Cai said there may be several ways to slow down ageing, with drugs that dampen the activity of NF-kB in the brain, or raise levels of GnRH. “For now, we are going to work on understanding the mechanism,” he said.

Point being, there’s lots of progress being made with respect to understanding and modifying the mechanisms by which our bodies break themselves down over time. However is that process moving along fast enough to indefinitely expand the lifespan within 40 years? Maybe.. but maybe not. Messing with the cell cycle tends to cause cancer, and each of these techniques raises almost as many questions as it answers. So why am I predicting 40 years?

Because there is another, better way.

This second approach requires the realization of your brain as a computer and your self as data. You may look at your arms and legs and casually consider your body to be just as much “you” as our brain is, but consider a valet parker stepping into many different cars. Does the driver change by entering a new car? Similarly, consciousness is not in your body, it’s in your brain, where approximately 86 billion neurons are ceaselessly processing information and relaying messages. And at the heart of all that processing is data. Your brain stores and transfers information using chemical and electrical potentialities to represent information much like how a computer utilizes bits. As an example, researchers have recently developed mind controlled prosthetics that allow your thoughts (data flowing through your brain) to move an attached device. Once the brain is understood well enough to be modeled digitally, it stands to reason that the complete set of data representing an individual person (at a particular state of time) could be copied or transferred just like saving a file.

I think the brain is like a programme in the mind, which is like a computer, so it’s theoretically possible to copy the brain on to a computer and so provide a form of life after death. -Steven Hawking

I think he meant to say the mind is a program in the brain, but regardless this why it made so much sense when google recently joined the effort by launching a company named Calico- because they specialize in big data. Google also recently hired Ray Kurzweil, who has been predicting this for many years now, and wrote perhaps the defining book on the subject called “The Singularity”.

The Singularity is an era in which our intelligence will become increasingly nonbiological and trillions of times more powerful than it is today—the dawning of a new civilization that will enable us to transcend our biological limitations and amplify our creativity. -Ray Kurzweil

Tying the timeline of lifespan expansion to the timeline of brain research is especially exciting because of how rapidly our understanding of the brain has grown in recent years, and how many groups are pitching in. To highlight just a few recent noteworthy projects:
• In 2010 the National Institutes of Health launched a five-year, $40 million effort to study neural networks called Human Connectome Project.
• In 2012 the Allen Brain Institute in Seattle began a privately funded $300 million effort to map the brain’s basic circuitry of perception.
• In 2013 President Obama announced a large scale brain-mapping project, promising $100 million a year in federal seed money.

Combine that kind of funding with major recent breakthroughs in brain imaging and circuitry manipulation and perhaps you can see why I’m so optimistic this problem will be solved within 40 years. Frankly that may even be a conservative estimate. According to Moore’s Law our ability to process information will have doubled 20 times over the next 40 years. Mind you that’s exponential growth- so wayyyy more than 20 times what it is now. For example 5 times 20 is just 100 but 5²º is 95,367,431,640,625. Certainly it would be unfair to do a simple correlation between our ability to store data and the amount of data in the brain, but it is fair to make the argument that based on Moore’s Law our technology will be sufficiently advanced to where a system like the brain is substantially more modest than the digital systems that surround it.

The human brain contains roughly 100 billion neurons. Each of these neurons seems capable of making around 1,000 connections, representing about 1,000 potential synapses, which largely do the work of data storage. Multiply each of these 100 billion neurons by the approximately 1,000 connections it can make, and you get 100 trillion data points, or about 100 terabytes of information. -Robert Gonzalez

100 Terabytes seems like a lot right now, but soon it will not. A brave new world lies ahead my friends. Drive safe and always back up your data.

26 thoughts on “the importance of surviving 40 more years

  1. vrai moncler says:

    thanks, nice post.

  2. aris says:

    i have the same thoughts. also i was thinking about maybe living 10 years more means that you have greater chances of living 20 years more etc etc so in fact it’s not as important to make it directly to 40 years as long as you don’t die very soon..

    • admin says:

      I agree 100%. But like I said, I suspect the timeline for understanding the brain’s mechanism for storage and communication is going to accelerate past our ability to stop EVERY disease and performance issue arrising from a very complex and balanced biological system. Maybe that’s contradictory but I see them as very different problems.

  3. Pingback: The Importance of Surviving 40 more years | Rocketboom

  4. Pingback: Hold on For Another 40 Years | Daniel Miessler

  5. Do you see any actions individuals should take aside from minimizing risk? How much do you think this will cost and should we save significantly more since retirement is not the going to be before an inevitable death?

    I know a lot of questions, and thank you for well researched article!

    • admin says:

      Yes I think there are lots of things people can do to minimize risk. I had them in the original article but took it out because I felt like it was too long. Perhaps I’ll write a sequel, considering this is my most popular post.

      And yes, I do think economics will play a large role. Not sure if you’ve read my Monopoly essay over there, but that process is also very much at the heart of how this will all go down.

  6. I really enjoyed reading your post, this is a very cool topic. One area I thought will be discussed here in your the article are tips for geeks how to survive 40 years in the best possible shape :)

  7. Inanc Gumus says:

    Hey Peter,

    This subject is my dream.

    I have been also following these kind of news from similar resources and reached the nearly same conclusion just like you about that “the life is just an engineering problem” (as Wired said).

    What I couldn’t agree with you is that 40 years ahead for immortality is not a conservative prediction. I think at least 100 years or so is needed. This is coming not from some data directly but from my subconscious (it has been saving data for 15+ years about these topics). OK, I know about Moore but without understanding how brain works the last solution can’t be viable and I think that brain will not be understood well enough in 40 years.

    But, I trust those things they do with telomeres. If they can find a solution also for cancer. We will lengthen our lives then we wait and then jump to the consciousness to computer transfer solution. And like in Arthur Clarke’s Space Odyssey, we will be radiotic life forms.

    I know I am thinking about the worst case but I hope it will happen in 40 years or less.

    Life is too beautiful to die.

    Thanks for the article.

  8. T.M. says:

    Uploads are not people!

  9. Albert Perrien II says:

    Even better than the robot leg as an example, is the thought controlled robot arm that was demonstrated earlier this year. It is controlled by the brain directly, and they’re planning on building a wireless version soon. Once that is done, A bunch of exciting things won’t be far behind.

  10. Joe V says:

    I think Kurzweil mentioned potential human immortality in re the genome project and the advent of nanotechnology and stem cell research. They have have some success so far in regenerating human vital organs in sick parients, specifically new heart tissue, correct? Is this what u r getting at?

    • admin says:

      Partly.. as mentioned there’s two very different approaches here. One is strictly biological, and the other is more about data mapping.

  11. Omarimous says:

    Nice post. Just one quick comment: Moore’s law does not apply to storage but to processing power

  12. Jim says:

    Oh good. So in 40 years, I can have a perfect copy of my mind made, so that a clone of me can exist with my memories.

    I don’t get why people seem to think that our perfect duplicates will somehow transfer our self awareness over to a new body. Is it magical thinking? Or do people simply believe that as long as a duplicate of themselves exist, it’s enough?

    Sorry, but it won’t be me. It would be my twin with my memories. Maybe no one else will be able to tell, and maybe he will think he’s me, but I’ll either be killed in the process, or I will still be an old man.

    And the same goes for copying my mind to a computer. It’s STILL not me. It’s just a copy.

    About the only benefit to making a copy of my mind is that if I lose my memory, I’ll be able to have it copied back. It won’t actually let me live one day longer.

    • admin says:

      The only magical thinking here is your presumption that self awareness emerges from a system other than the mechanics of your brain.

  13. Jim says:

    Had another thought. Technically, this would be cloning yourself and then copying your memories over ot the clone. Here’s the thing: if you’re actually transferring your self awareness to the new body, then what happens to the one in there now? Aren’t you technically killing whatever infant mind is in that body?

    If you’re not transferring your self awareness to that body, and he keeps his self awareness but just has a new set of memories, then you’re really just brainwashing another person into thinking he’s you. The fact that he looks like a younger you doesn’t make it ok.

    The only way to avoid that would be to imprint your memories on him as you 3d print his body and brain. 3d print his brain with the memories.

    But it would still be effectively the same thing. Fooling a new person into thinking he’s you.

  14. LiorZ says:

    With everything said and done, there is no way anyone is going to live indefinitely. First, because living indefinite amount of time requires indefinite amount of energy, and that’s something I’m pretty sure doesn’t exist.
    Second, you are your brain. You can move the information with it to a cyborg or any external device or even another brain – but it will just be a copy of you and not “you”.
    When your brain ceases to function – you’ll die. and that will happen sooner or later. 80 years or a thousand…

    The book “The mind’s I” is a great book that deals exactly with this topic. Highly recommended!

    • admin says:

      I agree I use the term “indefinitely” very liberally. But purposefully- because now it’s a completely different set of questions we have to answer for our “survival”, and questions that in theory have substantial longevity.

      A copy of you is just that- a copy of you. And that’s the only thing necessary. So long as the memories are kept, it’s just as good as you. And if there are two of you then so what. Twins are running around all over the world and aside from the casual entertainment nobody seems to be freaking out about that.

  15. James says:

    “consciousness is not in your body, it’s in your brain”

    This where the whole this goes wrong. This assumption could be (and highly likely) false.

  16. Pingback: Weekend reading recommendations « Martin's thoughts on the web. And life.

  17. karylmiller says:

    Fascinating post, Peter. I especially love the idea of living 40 more years b/c statistically, I’ve got 19 years left, tops. My question is, if people live indefinitely – where the hell are we going to put them? The world is already over-populated. According to some: Our economy is strained because people are living too long.
    Other considerations: If people lived indefinitely, youth would cease to rule b/c they’d be in the minority. Old people would be calling the shots and setting the styles. Hahaha. Come to think of it, I’m beginning to like this idea more and more. Seniors rule!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>