# Is there a chance that I will l\[i\]ve forever?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [September 29, 2013, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945 "2013-09-29T19:36:25Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 3
### Author:  [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2013, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/41 "2013-09-30T17:40:08Z")
> [@chappachula](#):
>
> ummm…
> I saw that show, too, or one just like it. But, (and here’s the rub)…I saw it _a few decades ago._
> (I had just bought a house, and hooked up the latest high-tech invention: cable TV, with 25 channels, including BBC.) It was 1989. And the show talked about telemeres, and how we could stop the process of aging–and, _in only a few decades_–we would live forever.
>
> So don’t hold your breath.
> It’s like atomic fusion power. Or jet packs.
> Or, like they say about soccer in America: it’s the sport of the future—and always will be.
>
> Moore’s law works for computers, but not biology. Human beings are not made of silicon, with simple binary circuits. Biology is complicated. We aren’t going to see miracles in the near future. Wonderful progress may occur, but it will be measured in centuries, not within decades.
I’m living forever, goddammit! :mad:
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2013, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/42 "2013-09-30T18:40:49Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Quoth **get lives** :
>
> Why would the fundamental aspect(s) of planned senescence be any different? We share a common ancestor, which inherited planned senescence from ITS ancestors, and so forth. Why would the mechanism have changed all that fundamentally?
This is a perfect illustration of the problem. We have no idea how the human mechanisms could be any different from those of other mammals. But yet, the evidence is incontrovertible that, whether we understand it or not, there _is_ a fairly big difference. We clearly don’t even know the right questions to ask yet.
---
### Author:  [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2013, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/43 "2013-09-30T18:45:15Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> By the time the average American woman dies, there is not one single non-human mammal on the planet that was alive when she was born.
What about the bowhead whale?
> **[Bowhead whale | Lifespan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowhead_whale#Lifespan)**
>
> Bowhead whales are considered to be the longest-living mammals, living for over 200 years. In May 2007, a 15 m (49 ft) specimen caught off the Alaskan coast was discovered with the 89 mm (3.5 in) head of an explosive bomb lance of a model manufactured between 1879 and 1885 lodged in its body, so the whale was probably bomb lanced sometime between those years, and its age at the time of death was estimated at between 115 and 130 years. Spurred by this discovery, scientists measured the age A great...
---
### Author:  [@Find\_Friends](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Find_Friends)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2013, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/44 "2013-09-30T18:55:08Z")
> [@copperwindow](#):
>
> Yes, I’m looking to sheer luck. I don’t care if my calculator can’t tell the difference, if the chance is \>zero percent chance, than that’s what I’m banking on.
Then send me all of your money.
Now, I expect that by your set of calculations, the chance that you will not regret doing so would turn out to be so clsoe to zero that a 10-place calcuator could not tell the duifference.
I expect the same from my set of calculations.
The chance would nevertheless be \>zero percent, so I would have something to “bank” on. 😉
---
### Author:  [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/45 "2013-09-30T19:17:16Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> This is a perfect illustration of the problem. We have no idea how the human mechanisms could be any different from those of other mammals. But yet, the evidence is incontrovertible that, whether we understand it or not, there _is_ a fairly big difference. We clearly don’t even know the right questions to ask yet.
I’m sorry, but your assertion that humans live 4 times longer than they should is just not supported by the facts.
Captive chimps live about 50-60 years, on average. Given their higher metabolic rate and smaller body size, that fits pretty well with the typical human life span of roughly 80 years.
Mice live about 2-3 years in captivity, on average. Given their smaller size and higher metabolic rate, they still aren’t that much shorter-lived than you would expect, comparing them with humans.
So like I said before, planned senescence is probably _very_ similar in all mammals.
---
### Author:  [@Stealth\_Potato](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stealth_Potato)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2013, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/46 "2013-09-30T23:15:14Z")
> [@get\_lives](#):
>
> You are far more confident in your bets that I am. I wouldn’t dare bet anything on when Moore’s Law will stop.
I’d take that bet. Moore’s Law has already peaked; growth rate has been slowing for several years now as hardware engineers begin running into ineluctable physical limitations. Furthermore, you’ve been restating a popular misunderstanding; Moore’s Law is an observation that transistor density on ICs has tended to double every two years. It has nothing to do with speed.
But that aside, if you think that just making computers faster by any degree will make it possible for us to solve the human aging problem, you simply don’t understand computing. “AI” in the sense you seem to imagine does not exist, and slow computers ain’t what’s holding us back.
---
### Author:  [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/47 "2013-10-01T01:10:54Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#):
>
> I’d take that bet. Moore’s Law has already peaked; growth rate has been slowing for several years now as hardware engineers begin running into ineluctable physical limitations. Furthermore, you’ve been restating a popular misunderstanding; Moore’s Law is an observation that transistor density on ICs has tended to double every two years. It has nothing to do with speed.
>
> But that aside, if you think that just making computers faster by any degree will make it possible for us to solve the human aging problem, you simply don’t understand computing. “AI” in the sense you seem to imagine does not exist, and slow computers ain’t what’s holding us back.
People have been betting against the increases in computer performance for the last 40+ years, and it hasn’t stopped yet. Quantum computing has yet to show its possible might, so again, I’m making no assumptions.
---
### Author:  [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/48 "2013-10-01T01:12:49Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#):
>
> “AI” in the sense you seem to imagine does not exist…
Mmkay. good luck with betting against advances in AI. ROFL
I remember the days when people talked about “maybe one day a computer can beat a chess grandmaster”. That’s old hat now. Even AI winning Jeopardy is old news. ROFL
---
### Author:  [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/49 "2013-10-01T01:47:35Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#):
>
> I’m living forever, goddammit! :mad:
Does Thailand cover immortality under their UHC plan?
I’ve also heard in the next few decades we could have treatments that extend life by 20-60 years. But I have no idea if they will ever make the jump from animal models to safe, reliable interventions for humans in the next few decades.
---
### Author:  [@copperwindow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/copperwindow)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/50 "2013-10-01T02:30:56Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> Unfortunately, though, this depends on technological advances extending lifespan, which is something that has never happened yet. Even back in the days of Solomon, the human lifespan was about 70 or 80 years, and it still is. Medicine has done great things to help us reach that span without being cut short first, but people still die of old age at the same point they always have. Now, maybe we will hit on the secret sometime in the next few decades, and do what we’ve never done before, but you probably shouldn’t bet on it.
How long is the oldest possible age I may live to?
---
### Author:  [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/51 "2013-10-01T04:01:59Z")
> [@copperwindow](#):
>
> How long is the oldest possible age I may live to?
[Jeanne Calment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_calment) made it to a verifiable 122. Hers is the record to shoot for.
Just for grins, the wife and I used to send her a birthday card every year. We’d simply address it to “Jeanne Calment, World’s Oldest Living Person, Arles, France,” and it never came back to us. One year while looking at cards, I found one that said something like: “There may be people richer than you, and there may be people older than you …” Uh-oh! Couldn’t send that one.
---
### Author:  [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/52 "2013-10-01T04:11:17Z")
> [@copperwindow](#):
>
> How long is the oldest possible age I may live to?
> [@Siam\_Sam](#):
>
> [Jeanne Calment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_calment) made it to a verifiable 122. Hers is the record to shoot for.
>
> Just for grins, the wife and I used to send her a birthday card every year. We’d simply address it to “Jeanne Calment, World’s Oldest Living Person, Arles, France,” and it never came back to us. One year while looking at cards, I found one that said something like: “There may be people richer than you, and there may be people older than you …” Uh-oh! Couldn’t send that one.
Oops! I just remembered you already had that age listed in your OP. So I guess you answered your own question.
---
### Author:  [@Stealth\_Potato](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stealth_Potato)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/53 "2013-10-01T04:51:45Z")
> [@get\_lives](#):
>
> People have been betting against the increases in computer performance for the last 40+ years, and it hasn’t stopped yet. Quantum computing has yet to show its possible might, so again, I’m making no assumptions.
It’s not really a fair bet when it’s already happened. Moore’s law is peaking as we speak. You may not be making overt assumptions, but your whole angle rests of pure speculation. Quantum computing might be revolutionary but not in the way you seem to think.
> [@get\_lives](#):
>
> Mmkay. good luck with betting against advances in AI. ROFL
>
> I remember the days when people talked about “maybe one day a computer can beat a chess grandmaster”. That’s old hat now. Even AI winning Jeopardy is old news. ROFL
Both of these things are far, far simpler than the mythical “strong” AI or the kind of simulated domain expert that could be unleashed on a detailed model of human physiology and somehow discover the cure for aging. They are so much simpler that it’s absolutely absurd to talk about differences of “degree.”
Winning at chess is classic game theory; the method for selecting best moves from a decision tree is relatively straightforward. The cleverness has all been a matter of applying good heuristics to prune the tree, which is much too large for even the machines of today to exhaustively search. Playing chess is an excellent example of a problem where increasing your computing power trivially increases the quality of your results. Again, that’s because the problem is so simple.
Watson, the Jeopardy AI, is an awesome example of a knowledge search engine coupled with some natural language processing – but it’s a pile of hacks specifically built, engineered, and tweaked to be good at only one thing: pulling out desired information from common Jeopardy clues. The distance by which it falls short of being real “intelligence” can be gauged by the answers it gives – a real “understanding” of the information would never result in responses like “What is leg?” or identifying Toronto as a U.S. city – but mere correlation and collocation would.
I’m not “betting against advances in AI.” I’m pointing out that the thing you seem to be basing your speculations on does not exist yet, and it’s not even on the horizon. Increasing computing power will make the systems we’ve already come up with faster, but it doesn’t help us directly to come up with the underpinnings of “truly” intelligent systems.
---
### Author:  [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/54 "2013-10-01T13:10:49Z")
Here’s the thing–people have been talking about strong AI for a long time now…but if Moore’s Law can hang on for another 10 years or so, we’ll actually have computers that equal the human brain in processing power. _that_ would be a game-changer. As to whether Moore’s law will continue, I have no idea. Maybe it will stop and start back up. Who knows?
---
### Author:  [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/55 "2013-10-01T14:37:47Z")
> [@get\_lives](#):
>
> If Moore’s law can hang on foranother 10 years or so, we’ll actually have computers that equal the human brain in processing power
HUH?
The human brain is not made of silicon, and its processing power is not binary. It works totally differently–with massive parallel processes all taking place at once. No matter how fast computers become, (due to your beloved Moore’s law), they will still be based on binary switches flashing in consecutive order. That’s not equal to a human brain. It is vastly better than a human brain at certain activities, but inferior to a brain at other activities.
There’s an old expression: Both a computer and a person can play a great game of chess. But only the human being can enjoy it.
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/56 "2013-10-01T15:15:26Z")
Computers have been beating humans at processing power for over fifty years now. Processing power isn’t all you need for AI.
---
### Author:  [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/57 "2013-10-01T15:57:48Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> Computers have been beating humans at processing power for over fifty years now. Processing power isn’t all you need for AI.
do tell.
---
### Author:  [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/58 "2013-10-01T16:02:34Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> Computers have been beating humans at processing power for over fifty years now. Processing power isn’t all you need for AI.
I agree that processing power isn’t ALL you need. However, enough processing power can make up for lacks in heuristics.
---
### Author:  [@copperwindow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/copperwindow)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/59 "2013-10-01T16:12:41Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#):
>
> [Jeanne Calment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_calment) made it to a verifiable 122. Hers is the record to shoot for.
>
> Just for grins, the wife and I used to send her a birthday card every year. We’d simply address it to “Jeanne Calment, World’s Oldest Living Person, Arles, France,” and it never came back to us. One year while looking at cards, I found one that said something like: “There may be people richer than you, and there may be people older than you …” Uh-oh! Couldn’t send that one.
I’m not asking who the record to beat is, I’m asking how long is it possible to lice for. Can I beat her? If so, by how much?
---
### Author:  [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2013, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945/60 "2013-10-01T16:25:44Z")
I intend to beat her record. I’ll let you know.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945.md?page=2)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-a-chance-that-i-will-l-i-ve-forever/669945.md?page=4)