Can those living today live forever?

Post Reply New Topic

As I said, the universe contradicts. Essentially, that one occurance is the one, but as the universe is both infinite/finite (more contradictions) that one occurance is eternal.
Think of reality as a series of rings that occasionally intersect - and these rings occupy the same space as the other rings, seperate at the same, making a whole.
Damn me - complex physics models are a b***h to express in simple English. Now, if you'll excuse me, there's a bottle of brandy waiting for me...

OK. SO we have the detractors from the idea immortality offering (repeatedly) the following arguments:

1. As it was in the past, so shall it be for evermore.

DNA has no "purpose". It has got us (our emergent minds) here by a nice balance between duration of entity and evolution of entity. That is true. Were it not for the ageing process, evolution would not happen. We've always been an "experiment", in a sense. The better models progressively replacing those not quite so effective.

We are moving on. The "random mutation" game has got us this far. I don't see it taking us much further. Now we are becoming capable of manipulating our own evolution - and must do so. Immortality will not be a static state.

I'm sure it will be a bumpy ride.

is your avatar a picture of you? you look cranky.
your post seems a bit fluffy tonight.

perhaps you have been drinking.

or perhaps my severe autism makes me perceive you in that light.

how can something occur only once in an infinite possibilities?

i do not understand the "recurs but not at once" bit. especially since singular events are not recursive.

i agree that contradiction is only in the mind of beholders.

there is nothing good or bad in the universe except the thoughts that pronounce them so.

Search me, but do only few hold grasp of artistic linguistic expression?
Much of you would make ill parodies of poets... Ah, well. Alone in my way, again.
R9, I will refer you to my statement after that you quoted; judging by the post time, you could not read it.

When I read that I thought of the shows that come on TV, the ones about insects and in these shows the producers try to imitate the eyesights of flies or beetles. They make a bunch of octogons with an image inside each one, this fills the television screen. The image is the same, repeating, but not infinitely.

Each one of us occupies an infinite amount of octogon ocular cells that occur infinitely in the universe's singular eye.

i have no grasp of artistic linguistic expression.
i am sorry that my failure to perceive your artistic linguistic expression resulted in my autistic linguistic response.



what is your way?
yes i have no creative poetic streak in me.
but i am still allowed in the world to talk. and also what i say should not affect you in any way at all if you are strongly who you are.




sorry i do not register what you are saying.

do you mean i posted too quickly? or maybe too slowly?

i really have no idea.

i just did not understand how you could say that a singular occurrence could be recurrent, and you decided not to answer the question but to question my motives or something.
whatever.
i do not need to understand what you meant really.

R9, you were still writing your post when I made mine.
No, I wasn't questioning your motives, but you misinterpreted my words.

Recurring singular occurance was disproven by a photon traveling in a beam of light.

Uh... That's actually a completely different thing, it just sounds similar.

Try living unchanged for the next 10, 000 years, then tell me if you can "handle it." You get me?

You have to remember time is just a measurement and doesn't really exist in OS, not like it does on earth.

There wouldn't be ten thousand years because there wouldn't be any time, just people zooming across the universe seeing new things.

So you're saying time ceases to exist once you leave Earth?

No, that which our concept of time measures is a constant everywhere.

Earth time wouldn't exist. We would still have to repair the nanos to achieve immortality though.

Space-time always exists.
Time is a relative concept.

Last edited by ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo on 06 Oct 2008, 10:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

i am not a clairvoyant so how can i write a response to you before you have posted your sentiment?



i misinterpret words often.
especially uninterpretable ones (to me that is).

be no further snagged by what i said.

thankyou i do not mean to offend.

In relativistic contexts, time cannot be separated from the three dimensions of space, because the rate at which time passes depends on an object's velocity relative to the speed of light and also the strength of intense gravitational fields which can slow the passage of time.

I wonder if human consciousness would be adversely affected by time travel. Maybe consciousness as we know it cannot suffer any space-time fluctuations. Suspended animation might be a requirement for human temponauts.