Molecular Repair
of the Brain
by Ralph C. Merkle, Ph.D.
|
 |
This article was published in two parts in Cryonics magazine, January
and April 1994. A more highly annotated version can be found on Ralph
Merkle's Cryonics Pages.
See also cryobiologist Dr. Gregory Fahy's critique
of this paper and Dr. Merkle's
response. For an alternative repair scenario contributed by an anonymous biologist that circumvents Dr. Fahy's concerns, see "Realistic Scenario for Nanotechnological Repair of the Frozen Human Brain".
A short version of this paper entitled "The Technical Feasibility of Cryonics,"
appeared in Medical Hypotheses Vol. 39, 1992; 6-16.
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
Cryonic suspension is a method of stabilizing the condition of someone who
is terminally ill so that they can be transported to the medical care facilities
that will be available in the late 21st or 22nd century. There is little dispute
that the condition of a person stored at the temperature of liquid nitrogen
is stable, but the process of freezing inflicts a level of damage which cannot
be reversed by current medical technology. Whether or not the damage inflicted
by current methods can ever be reversed depends both on the level of damage
and the ultimate limits of future medical technology. The failure to reverse
freezing injury with current methods does not imply that it can never be reversed
in the future, just as the inability to build a personal computer in 1890 did
not imply that such machines would never be economically built. This paper considers
the limits of what medical technology should eventually be able to achieve (based
on the currently understood laws of chemistry and physics) and the kinds of
damage caused by current methods of freezing. It then considers whether methods
of repairing the kinds of damage caused by current suspension techniques are
likely to be achieved in the future.
INTRODUCTION
Tissue preserved in liquid nitrogen can survive centuries without deterioration
[note 1]. This simple fact provides an imperfect
time machine that can transport us almost unchanged from the present to the future:
we need merely freeze ourselves in liquid nitrogen. If freezing damage can someday
be cured, then a form of time travel to the era when the cure is available would
be possible. While unappealing to the healthy this possibility is more attractive
to the terminally ill, whose options are somewhat limited. Far from being idle
speculation, this option is available to anyone who so chooses. First seriously
proposed in the 1960's by Ettinger[80] there are now three organizations in the
U.S. that provide cryonic suspension services.
Perhaps the most important question in evaluating this option is its
technical feasibility: will it work?
Given the remarkable progress of science during the past few centuries it is
difficult to dismiss cryonics out of hand. The structure of DNA was unknown
prior to 1953; the chemical (rather than "vitalistic") nature of living beings
was not appreciated until early in the 20th century; it was not until 1864 that
spontaneous generation was put to rest by Louis Pasteur, who demonstrated that
no organisms emerged from heat-sterilized growth medium kept in sealed flasks;
and Sir Isaac Newton's Principia established the laws of motion in 1687, just
over 300 years ago. If progress of the same magnitude occurs in the next few
centuries, then it becomes difficult to argue that the repair of frozen tissue
is inherently and forever infeasible.
Hesitation to dismiss cryonics is not a ringing endorsement and still leaves
the basic question in considerable doubt. Perhaps a closer consideration of how
future technologies might be applied to the repair of frozen tissue will let us
draw stronger conclusions -- in one direction or the other. Ultimately, cryonics
will either (a) work or (b) fail to work. It would seem useful to know in
advance which of these two outcomes to expect. If it can be ruled out as
infeasible, then we need not waste further time on it. If it seems likely that
it will be technically feasible, then a number of nontechnical issues should be
addressed in order to obtain a good probability of overall success.
The reader interested in a general introduction to cryonics is referred to
other sources[23, 24, 80]. Here, we focus on technical feasibility.
While many isolated tissues (and a few particularly hardy organs) have been
successfully cooled to the temperature of liquid nitrogen and rewarmed[59],
further successes have proven elusive. While there is no particular reason to
believe that a cure for freezing damage would violate any laws of physics (or
is otherwise obviously infeasible), it is likely that the damage done by freezing
is beyond the self-repair and recovery capabilities of the tissue itself. This
does not imply that the damage cannot be repaired, only that significant
elements of the repair process would have to be provided from an external source.
In deciding whether such externally provided repair will (or will not) eventually
prove feasible, we must keep in mind that such repair techniques can quite literally
take advantage of scientific advances made during the next few centuries. Forecasting
the capabilities of future technologies is therefore an integral component of
determining the feasibility of cryonics. Such a forecast should, in principle,
be feasible. The laws of physics and chemistry as they apply to biological structures
are well understood and well defined. Whether the repair of frozen tissue will
(or will not) eventually prove feasible within the framework defined by those
laws is a question which we should be able to answer based on what is known
today.
Current research (outlined below) supports the idea that we will eventually
be able to examine and manipulate structures molecule by molecule and even atom
by atom. Such a technical capability has very clear implications for the kinds
of damage that can (and cannot) be repaired. The most powerful repair capabilities
that should eventually be possible can be defined with remarkable clarity. The
question we wish to answer is conceptually straightforward: will the most powerful
repair capability that is likely to be developed in the long run (perhaps over
a few centuries) be adequate to repair tissue that is frozen using the best
available current methods?[note 2] Eigler and Schweizer[49] have already developed
the capability "... to fabricate rudimentary structures of our own design, atom
by atom." Eigler said[129], "...by the time I'm ready to kick the bucket, we
might be able to store enough information on my exact physical makeup that someday
we'll be able to reassemble me, atom by atom."
The general purpose ability to manipulate structures with atomic precision
and low cost is often called nanotechnology (also called molecular engineering,
molecular manufacturing, molecular nanotechnology , etc.). There is widespread
belief that such a capability will eventually be developed [1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8,
10, 19, 41, 47, 49, 83, 84, 85, 106, 107, 108, 116, 117, 118, 119, 121, 122]
though exactly how long it will take is unclear. The long storage times possible
with cryonic suspension make the precise development time of such technologies
noncritical. Development any time during the next few centuries would be sufficient
to save the lives of those suspended with current technology.
In this paper, we give a brief introduction to nanotechnology and then clarify
the technical issues involved in applying it in the conceptually simplest and
most powerful fashion to the repair of frozen tissue.
NANOTECHNOLOGY
Broadly speaking, the central thesis of nanotechnology is that almost any structure
consistent with the laws of chemistry and physics that can be specified can in
fact be built. This possibility was first advanced by Richard Feynman in 1959
[4] when he said: "The principles of physics, as far as I can see, do not speak
against the possibility of maneuvering things atom by atom." (Feynman won the
1965 Nobel prize in physics).
This concept is receiving increasing attention in the research community. There
have been two international research conferences directly on molecular manufacturing
[83, 84, 116, 121] as well as a broad range of conferences on related subjects.
Science [47, page 26] said "The ability to design and manufacture devices
that are only tens or hundreds of atoms across promises rich rewards in electronics,
catalysis, and materials. The scientific rewards should be just as great, as
researchers approach an ultimate level of control -- assembling matter one atom
at a time." "Within the decade, [John] Foster [at IBM Almaden] or some other
scientist is likely to learn how to piece together atoms and molecules one at
a time using the STM [Scanning Tunneling Microscope]."
Eigler and Schweizer[49] at IBM reported on "...the use of the STM at low
temperatures (4 K) to position individual xenon atoms on a single-crystal nickel
surface with atomic precision. This capacity has allowed us to fabricate
rudimentary structures of our own design, atom by atom. The processes we
describe are in principle applicable to molecules also. In view of the
device-like characteristics reported for single atoms on surfaces [omitted
references], the possibilities for perhaps the ultimate in device
miniaturization are evident."
J. A. Armstrong, IBM Chief Scientist and Vice President for Science and
Technology[106] said "I believe that nanoscience and nanotechnology will be
central to the next epoch of the information age, and will be as revolutionary
as science and technology at the micron scale have been since the early
'70's.... Indeed, we will have the ability to make electronic and mechanical
devices atom-by-atom when that is appropriate to the job at hand."
The New York Times said[107]: "Scientists are beginning to gain the
ability to manipulate matter by its most basic components --- molecule by molecule
and even atom by atom." "That ability, while now very crude, might one day allow
people to build almost unimaginably small electronic circuits and machines,
producing, for example, a super computer invisible to the naked eye. Some futurists
even imagine building tiny robots that could travel through the body performing
surgery on damaged cells."
Drexler[1,10,19,41, 85] has proposed the assembler, a small device resembling
an industrial robot which would be capable of holding and positioning reactive
compounds in order to control the precise location at which chemical reactions
take place. This general approach should allow the construction of large atomically
precise objects by a sequence of precisely controlled chemical reactions.
The best technical discussion of nanotechnology has recently been provided
by Drexler[ 85].
RibosomesThe plausibility of this approach can be illustrated by the
ribosome. Ribosomes manufacture all the proteins used in all living things on
this planet. A typical ribosome is relatively small (a few thousand cubic
nanometers) and is capable of building almost any protein by stringing together
amino acids (the building blocks of proteins) in a precise linear sequence. To
do this, the ribosome has a means of grasping a specific amino acid (more
precisely, it has a means of selectively grasping a specific transfer RNA, which
in turn is chemically bonded by a specific enzyme to a specific amino acid), of
grasping the growing polypeptide, and of causing the specific amino acid to
react with and be added to the end of the polypeptide[14].
The instructions that the ribosome follows in building a protein are provided
by mRNA (messenger RNA). This is a polymer formed from the 4 bases adenine,
cytosine, guanine, and uracil. A sequence of several hundred to a few thousand
such bases codes for a specific protein. The ribosome "reads" this "control
tape" sequentially, and acts on the directions it provides.
AssemblersIn an analogous fashion, an assembler will build an arbitrary
molecular structure following a sequence of instructions. The assembler,
however, will provide three-dimensional positional and full orientational
control over the molecular component (analogous to the individual amino acid)
being added to a growing complex molecular structure (analogous to the growing
polypeptide). In addition, the assembler will be able to form any one of several
different kinds of chemical bonds, not just the single kind (the peptide bond)
that the ribosome makes.
Calculations indicate that an assembler need not inherently be very large.
Enzymes "typically" weigh about 10^5 amu (atomic mass units [note 3]), while the ribosome itself is about 3
x 10^6 amu[14]. The smallest assembler might be a factor of ten or
so larger than a ribosome. Current design ideas for an assembler are somewhat
larger than this: cylindrical "arms" about 100 nanometers in length and 30 nanometers
in diameter, rotary joints to allow arbitrary positioning of the tip of the
arm, and a worst-case positional accuracy at the tip of perhaps 0.1 to 0.2 nanometers,
even in the presence of thermal noise[ 85]. Even a solid block of diamond as
large as such an arm weighs only sixteen million amu, so we can safely conclude
that a hollow arm of such dimensions would weigh less. Six such arms would weigh
less than 10^8 amu.
Molecular Computers
The assembler requires a detailed sequence of control signals, just as the ribosome
requires mRNA to control its actions. Such detailed control signals can be provided
by a computer. A feasible design for a molecular computer has been presented by
Drexler[2, 19, 85]. This design is mechanical in nature, and is based on sliding
rods that interact by blocking or unblocking each other at "locks." [note 4] This design has a size of about 5 cubic
nanometers per "lock" (roughly equivalent to a single logic gate). Quadrupling
this size to 20 cubic nanometers (to allow for power, interfaces, and the like)
and assuming that we require a minimum of 10^4 "locks" to provide minimal
control results in a volume of 2 x 10^5 cubic nanometers (.0002 cubic
microns) for the computational element. This many gates is sufficient to build
a simple 4-bit or 8-bit general purpose computer. For example, the 6502 8-bit
microprocessor can be implemented in about 10,000 gates, while an individual 1-bit
processor in the Connection Machine has about 3,000 gates. Assuming that each
cubic nanometer is occupied by roughly 100 atoms of carbon, this 2 x 10^5
cubic nanometer computer will have a mass of about 2 x 10^8 amu.
An assembler might have a kilobyte of high speed (rod-logic based) RAM,
(similar to the amount of RAM used in a modern one-chip computer) and 100
kilobytes of slower but more dense "tape" storage -- this tape storage would
have a mass of 10^8 amu or less (roughly 10 atoms per bit -- see
below). Some additional mass will be used for communications (sending and
receiving signals from other computers) and power. In addition, there will
probably be a "toolkit" of interchangeable tips that can be placed at the ends
of the assembler's arms. When everything is added up a small assembler, with
arms, computer, "toolkit," etc. should weigh less than 10^9 amu.
E. coli (a common bacterium) weighs about 10^12 amu[14, page 123].
Thus, an assembler should be much larger than a ribosome, but much smaller than
a bacterium.
Self Replicating Systems
It is also interesting to compare Drexler's architecture for an assembler with
the von Neumann architecture for a self replicating device. Von Neumann's "universal
constructing automaton"[45] had both a universal Turing machine to control its
functions and a "constructing arm" to build the "secondary automaton." The constructing
arm can be positioned in a two-dimensional plane, and the "head" at the end of
the constructing arm is used to build the desired structure. While von Neumann's
construction was theoretical (existing in a two dimensional cellular automata
world), it still embodied many of the critical elements that now appear in the
assembler.
Further work on self-replicating systems was done by NASA in 1980 in a report
that considered the feasibility of implementing a self-replicating lunar manufacturing
facility with conventional technology[48]. One of their conclusions was that
"The theoretical concept of machine duplication is well developed. There are
several alternative strategies by which machine self-replication can be carried
out in a practical engineering setting." They estimated it would require 20
years (and many billions of dollars) to develop such a system. While they were
considering the design of a macroscopic self-replicating system (the proposed
"seed" was 100 tons) many of the concepts and problems involved in such systems
are similar regardless of size.
Positional Chemistry
Chemists have been remarkably successful at synthesizing a
wide range of compounds with atomic precision. Their successes, however, are
usually small in size (with the notable exception of various polymers). Thus, we
know that a wide range of atomically precise structures with perhaps a few
hundreds of atoms in them are quite feasible. Larger atomically precise
structures with complex three-dimensional shapes can be viewed as a connected
sequence of small atomically precise structures. While chemists have the ability
to precisely sculpt small collections of atoms there is currently no ability to
extend this capability in a general way to structures of larger size. An obvious
structure of considerable scientific and economic interest is the computer. The
ability to manufacture a computer from atomically precise logic elements of
molecular size, and to position those logic elements into a three-dimensional
volume with a highly precise and intricate interconnection pattern would have
revolutionary consequences for the computer industry.
A large atomically precise structure, however, can be viewed as simply a collection
of small atomically precise objects which are then linked together. To build
a truly broad range of large atomically precise objects requires the ability
to create highly specific positionally controlled bonds. A variety of highly
flexible synthetic techniques have been considered by Drexler [ 85]. We shall
describe two such methods here to give the reader a feeling for the kind of
methods that will eventually be feasible.
We assume that positional control is available and that all reactions take
place in a hard vacuum. The use of a hard vacuum allows highly reactive
intermediate structures to be used, e.g., a variety of radicals with one or more
dangling bonds. Because the intermediates are in a vacuum, and because their
position is controlled (as opposed to solutions, where the position and
orientation of a molecule are largely random), such radicals will not react with
the wrong thing for the very simple reason that they will not come into contact
with the wrong thing.
It is difficult to maintain biological structures in a hard vacuum at room
temperature because of water vapor and the vapor of other small compounds. By
sufficiently lowering the temperature, however, it is possible to reduce the
vapor pressure to effectively 0.
Normal solution-based chemistry offers a smaller range of controlled
synthetic possibilities. For example, highly reactive compounds in solution will
promptly react with the solution. In addition, because positional control is not
provided, compounds randomly collide with other compounds. Any reactive compound
will collide randomly and react randomly with anything available (including
itself). Solution-based chemistry requires extremely careful selection of
compounds that are reactive enough to participate in the desired reaction, but
sufficiently non-reactive that they do not accidentally participate in undesired
side reactions. Synthesis under these conditions is somewhat like placing the
parts of a radio into a box, shaking, and pulling out an assembled radio. The
ability of chemists to synthesize what they want under these conditions is
amazing.
Much of current solution-based chemical synthesis is devoted to preventing
unwanted reactions. With assembler-based synthesis, such prevention is a virtually
free by-product of positional control.
To illustrate positional synthesis in vacuum somewhat more concretely, let us
suppose we wish to bond two compounds, A and B. As a first step, we could
utilize positional control to selectively abstract a specific hydrogen atom from
compound A. To do this, we would employ a radical that had two spatially
distinct regions: one region would have a high affinity for hydrogen while the
other region could be built into a larger "tip" structure that would be subject
to positional control. A simple example would be the 1-propynyl radical, which
consists of three co-linear carbon atoms and three hydrogen atoms bonded to the
sp3 carbon at the "base" end. The radical carbon at the radical end is triply
bonded to the middle carbon, which in turn is singly bonded to the base carbon.
In a real abstraction tool, the base carbon would be bonded to other carbon
atoms in a larger diamondoid structure which would provide positional control,
and the tip might be further stabilized by a surrounding "collar" of unreactive
atoms attached near the base that would limit lateral motions of the reactive
tip.
The affinity of this structure for hydrogen is quite high. Propyne (the same
structure but with a hydrogen atom bonded to the "radical" carbon) has a
hydrogen-carbon bond dissociation energy in the vicinity of 132 kilocalories per
mole. As a consequence, a hydrogen atom will prefer being bonded to the
1-propynyl hydrogen abstraction tool in preference to being bonded to almost any
other structure. By positioning the hydrogen abstraction tool over a specific
hydrogen atom on compound A, we can perform a site specific hydrogen abstraction
reaction. This requires positional accuracy of roughly a bond length (to prevent
abstraction of an adjacent hydrogen). Quantum chemical analysis of this reaction
by Musgrave et. al.[108] show that the activation energy for this reaction is
low, and that for the abstraction of hydrogen from the hydrogenated diamond
(111) surface (modeled by isobutane) the barrier is very likely zero.
Having once abstracted a specific hydrogen atom from compound A, we can
repeat the process for compound B. We can now join compound A to compound B by
positioning the two compounds so that the two dangling bonds are adjacent to
each other, and allowing them to bond.
This illustrates a reaction using a single radical. With positional control,
we could also use two radicals simultaneously to achieve a specific objective.
Suppose, for example, that two atoms A1 and A2 which are part of some larger
molecule are bonded to each other. If we were to position the two radicals X1
and X2 adjacent to A1 and A2, respectively, then a bonding structure of much
lower free energy would be one in which the A1-A2 bond was broken, and two new
bonds A1-X1 and A2-X2 were formed. Because this reaction involves breaking one
bond and making two bonds (i.e., the reaction product is not a radical and is
chemically stable) the exact nature of the radicals is not critical. Breaking
one bond to form two bonds is a favored reaction for a wide range of cases.
Thus, the positional control of two radicals can be used to break any of a wide
range of bonds.
A range of other reactions involving a variety of reactive intermediate compounds
(carbenes are among the more interesting ones) are proposed in [85], along with
the results of semi-empirical and ab initio quantum calculations and the available
experimental evidence.
Another general principle that can be employed with positional synthesis is
the controlled use of force. Activation energy, normally provided by thermal
energy in conventional chemistry, can also be provided by mechanical means.
Pressures of 1.7 megabars have been achieved experimentally in macroscopic
systems[30]. At the molecular level such pressure corresponds to forces that are
a large fraction of the force required to break a chemical bond. A molecular
vise made of hard diamond-like material with a cavity designed with the same
precision as the reactive site of an enzyme can provide activation energy by the
extremely precise application of force, thus causing a highly specific reaction
between two compounds.
To achieve the low activation energy needed in reactions involving radicals
requires little force, allowing a wider range of reactions to be caused by simpler
devices (e.g., devices that are able to generate only small force). Further
analysis is provided in [85].
Feynman said: "The problems of chemistry and biology can be greatly helped if
our ability to see what we are doing, and to do things on an atomic level, is
ultimately developed -- a development which I think cannot be avoided." Drexler
has provided the substantive analysis required before this objective can be
turned into a reality. We are nearing an era when we will be able to build
virtually any structure that is specified in atomic detail and which is
consistent with the laws of chemistry and physics. This has substantial
implications for future medical technologies and capabilities.
Repair Devices
A repair device is an assembler which is specialized for repair
of tissue in general, and frozen tissue in particular. We assume that a repair
device has a mass of between 10^9 and 10^10 amu (e.g., we
assume that a repair device might be as much as a factor of 10 more complicated
than a simple assembler). This provides ample margin for increasing the
capabilities of the repair device if this should prove necessary.
A single repair device of the kind described will not, by itself, have
sufficient memory to store the programs required to perform all the repairs.
However, if it is connected to a network (in the same way that current computers
can be connected into a local area network) then a single large "file server"
can provide the needed information for all the repair devices on the network.
The file server can be dedicated to storing information: all the software and
data that the repair devices will need. Almost the entire mass of the file
server can be dedicated to storage, it can service many repair devices, and can
be many times the size of one device without greatly increasing system size.
Combining these advantages implies the file server will have ample storage to
hold whatever programs might be required during the course of repair. In a
similar fashion, if further computational resources are required they can be
provided by "large" compute servers located on the network.
Cost
One consequence of the existence of assemblers is that they are cheap. Because
an assembler can be programmed to build almost any structure, it can in particular
be programmed to build another assembler. Thus, self reproducing assemblers
should be feasible and in consequence the manufacturing costs of assemblers
would be primarily the cost of the raw materials and energy required in their
construction. Eventually (after amortization of possibly quite high development
costs), the price of assemblers (and of the objects they build) should be no
higher than the price of other complex structures made by self-replicating systems.
Potatoes -- which have a staggering design complexity involving tens of thousands
of different genes and different proteins directed by many megabits of genetic
information -- cost well under a dollar per pound.
DESCRIBING THE BRAIN AT THE MOLECULAR LEVEL
In principle we need only repair the frozen brain, for the brain is the most critical
and important structure in the body. Faithfully repairing the liver (or any other
secondary tissue) molecule by molecule (or perhaps atom by atom) appears to offer
no benefit over simpler techniques -- such as replacement. The calculations and
discussions that follow are therefore based on the size and composition of the
brain. It should be clear that if repair of the brain is feasible, then the methods
employed could (if we wished) be extended in the obvious way to the rest of the
body.
The brain, like all the familiar matter in the world around us, is made of
atoms. It is the spatial arrangement of these atoms that distinguishes an arm
from a leg, the head from the heart, and sickness from health. This view of the
brain is the framework for our problem, and it is within this framework that we
must work. Our problem, broadly stated, is that the atoms in a frozen brain are
in the wrong places. We must put them back where they belong (with perhaps some
minor additions and removals, as well as just rearrangements) if we expect to
restore the natural functions of this most wonderful organ.
In principle, the most that we could usefully know about the frozen brain would
be the coordinates of each and every atom in it (though confer note 5 ). This knowledge would put us in the best
possible position to determine where each and every atom should go. This knowledge,
combined with a technology that allowed us to rearrange atomic structure in
virtually any fashion consistent with the laws of chemistry and physics, would
clearly let us restore the frozen structure to a fully functional and healthy
state.
In short, we must answer three questions:
- Where are the atoms?
- Where should they go?
- How do we move them from where they are to where they should be?
Regardless of the specific technical details involved, any method of
restoring a person in suspension must answer these three questions, if only
implicitly. Current efforts to freeze and then thaw tissue (e.g., experimental
work aimed at freezing and then reviving sperm, kidneys, etc.) answer these
three questions indirectly and implicitly. Ultimately, technical advances should
allow us to answer these questions in a direct and explicit fashion.
Rather than directly consider these questions at once, we shall first
consider a simpler problem: how would we go about describing the position of
every atom if somehow this information was known to us? The answer to this
question will let us better understand the harder questions.
Other work which considers the information required to describe a human being
exists[127, 128].
How Many Bits to Describe One Atom
Each atom has a location in three-space that we can represent with three coordinates:
X, Y, and Z. Atoms are usually a few tenths of a nanometer apart. If we could
record the position of each atom to within 0.01 nanometers, we would know its
position accurately enough to know what chemicals it was a part of, what bonds
it had formed, and so on. The brain is roughly .1 meters across, so .01 nanometers
is about 1 part in 10^10. That is, we would have to know the position
of the atom in each coordinate to within one part in ten billion. A number of
this size can be represented with about 33 bits. There are three coordinates,
X, Y, and Z, each of which requires 33 bits to represent, so the position of an
atom can be represented in 99 bits. An additional few bits are needed to store
the type of the atom (whether hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, etc.), bringing the total
to slightly over 100 bits [note 5].
Thus, if we could store 100 bits of information for every atom in the brain,
we could fully describe its structure in as exacting and precise a manner as we
could possibly need. (Dancoff and Quastler[128], using a somewhat better
encoding scheme, say that 24.5 bits per atoms should suffice). A memory device
of this capacity should be quite literally possible. To quote Feynman[4]:
"Suppose, to be conservative, that a bit of information is going to require a
little cube of atoms 5 x 5 x 5 -- that is 125 atoms." This is indeed
conservative. Single stranded DNA already stores a single bit in about 16 atoms
(excluding the water that it's in). It seems likely we can reduce this to only a
few atoms[1]. The work at IBM[49] suggests a rather obvious way in which the
presence or absence of a single atom could be used to encode a single bit of
information (although some sort of structure for the atom to rest upon and some
method of sensing the presence or absence of the atom will still be required, so
we would actually need more than one atom per bit in this case). If we
conservatively assume that the laws of chemistry inherently require 10 atoms to
store a single bit of information, we still find that the 100 bits required to
describe a single atom in the brain can be represented by about 1,000 atoms. Put
another way, the location of every atom in a frozen structure is (in a sense)
already encoded in that structure in an analog format. If we convert from this
analog encoding to a digital encoding, we will increase the space required to
store the same amount of information. That is, an atom in three-space encodes
its own position in the analog value of its three spatial coordinates. If we
convert this spatial information from its analog format to a digital format, we
inflate the number of atoms we need by perhaps as much as 1,000. If we digitally
encoded the location of every atom in the brain, we would need 1,000 times as
many atoms to hold this encoded data as there are atoms in the brain. This means
we would require roughly 1,000 times the volume. The brain is somewhat over one
cubic decimeter, so it would require somewhat over one cubic meter of material
to encode the location of each and every atom in the brain in a digital format
suitable for examination and modification by a computer.
While this much memory is remarkable by today's standards, its construction
clearly does not violate any laws of physics or chemistry. That is, it should
literally be possible to store a digital description of each and every atom in
the brain in a memory device that we will eventually be able to build.
How Many Bits to Describe a MoleculeWhile such a feat is remarkable, it
is also much more than we need. Chemists usually think of atoms in groups --
called molecules. For example, water is a molecule made of three atoms: an
oxygen and two hydrogens. If we describe each atom separately, we will require
100 bits per atom, or 300 bits total. If, however, we give the position of the
oxygen atom and give the orientation of the molecule, we need: 99 bits for the
location of the oxygen atom + 20 bits to describe the type of molecule ("water",
in this case) and perhaps another 30 bits to give the orientation of the water
molecule (10 bits for each of the three rotational axes). This means we can
store the description of a water molecule in only 150 bits, instead of the 300
bits required to describe the three atoms separately. (The 20 bits used to
describe the type of the molecule can describe up to 1,000,000 different
molecules -- many more than are present in the brain).
As the molecule we are describing gets larger and larger, the savings in storage
gets bigger and bigger. A whole protein molecule will still require only 150
bits to describe, even though it is made of thousands of atoms. The canonical
position of every atom in the molecule is specified once the type of the molecule
(which occupies a mere 20 bits) is given. A large molecule might adopt many
configurations, so it might at first seem that we'd require many more bits to
describe it. However, biological macromolecules typically assume one favored
configuration rather than a random configuration, and it is this favored configuration
that we will describe [note 6].
We can do even better: the molecules in the brain are packed in next to each
other. Having once described the position of one, we can describe the position
of the next molecule as being such-and-such a distance from the first. If we
assume that two adjacent molecules are within 10 nanometers of each other (a
reasonable assumption) then we need only store 10 bits of "delta X," 10 bits of
"delta Y," and 10 bits of "delta Z" rather than 33 bits of X, 33 bits of Y, and
33 bits of Z. This means our molecule can be described in only 10+10+10+20+30 or
80 bits.
We can compress this further by using various other clever stratagems (50
bits or less is quite achievable), but the essential point should be clear. We
are interested in molecules, and describing a molecule takes fewer bits than
describing an atom.
Do We Really Need to Describe Each Molecule?A further point will be
obvious to any biologist. Describing the exact position and orientation of a
hemoglobin molecule within a red blood cell is completely unnecessary. Each
hemoglobin molecule bounces around within the red blood cell in a random
fashion, and it really doesn't matter exactly where it is, nor exactly which way
it's pointing. All we need do is say, "It's in that red blood cell!" So, too,
for any other molecule that is floating at random in a "cellular compartment:"
we need only say which compartment it's in. Many other molecules, even though
they do not diffuse freely within a cellular compartment, are still able to
diffuse fairly freely over a significant range. The description of their
position can be appropriately compressed.
While this reduces our storage requirements quite a bit, we could go much
further. Instead of describing molecules, we could describe entire sub-cellular
organelles. It seems excessive to describe a mitochondrion by describing each
and every molecule in it. It would be sufficient simply to note the location and
perhaps the size of the mitochondrion, for all mitochondria perform the same
function: they produce energy for the cell. While there are indeed minor
differences from mitochondrion to mitochondrion, these differences don't matter
much and could reasonably be neglected.
We could go still further, and describe an entire cell with only a general
description of the function it performs: this nerve cell has synapses of a
certain type with that other cell, it has a certain shape, and so on. We might
even describe groups of cells in terms of their function: this group of cells in
the retina performs a "center surround" computation, while that group of cells
performs edge enhancement. Cherniak[115] said: "On the usual assumption that the
synapse is the necessary substrate of memory, supposing very roughly that (given
anatomical and physiological "noise") each synapse encodes about one binary bit
of information, and a thousand synapses per neuron are available for this task:
10^10 cortical neurons x 10^3 synapses = 10^13
bits of arbitrary information (1.25 terabytes) that could be stored in the
cerebral cortex."
How Many Bits Do We Really Need?
This kind of logic can be continued, but where does it stop? What is the most
compact description which captures all the essential information? While many
minor details of neural structure are irrelevant, our memories clearly matter.
Any method of describing the human brain which resulted in loss of long term
memory has rather clearly gone too far. When we examine this quantitatively,
we find that preserving the information in our long term memory might require
as little as 10^9 bits (somewhat over 100 megabytes)[37]. We can
say rather confidently that it will take at least this much information to adequately
describe an individual brain. The gap between this lower bound and the molecule-by-molecule
upper bound is rather large, and it is not immediately obvious where in this
range the true answer falls. We shall not attempt to answer this question, but
will instead (conservatively) simply adopt the upper bound.
CRITERIA OF DEATH
death \'deth\ n [ME deeth, fr. OE
death; akin to ON dauthi death, deyja to die --
more at DIE] 1: a permanent cessation of all vital functions : the end
of life
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary
Determining when "a permanent cessation of all vital functions" has occurred is
not easy. Historically, premature declarations of death and subsequent burial
alive have been a major problem. In the seventh century, Celsus wrote "... Democritus,
a man of well merited celebrity, has asserted that there are in reality, no characteristics
of death sufficiently certain for physicians to rely upon."[87, page 166].
Montgomery, reporting on the evacuation of the Fort Randall Cemetery, states
that nearly two percent of those exhumed were buried alive[87].
Many people in the nineteenth century, alarmed by the prevalence
of premature burial, requested, as part of the last offices, that wounds or
mutilations be made to assure that they would not awaken ... embalming
received a considerable impetus from the fear of premature burial.
New CriteriaCurrent criteria of "death" are sufficient to insure that
spontaneous recovery in the mortuary or later is a rare occurrence. When
examined closely, however, such criteria are simply a codified summary of
symptoms that have proven resistant to treatment by available techniques.
Historically, they derive from the fear that the patient will spontaneously
recover in the morgue or crypt. There is no underlying theoretical structure to
support them, only a continued accumulation of ad hoc procedures supported by
empirical evidence. To quote Robert Veach[15]: "We are left with rather
unsatisfying results. Most of the data do not quite show that persons meeting a
given set of criteria have, in fact, irreversibly lost brain function. They show
that patients lose heart function soon, or that they do not "recover." Autopsy
data are probably the most convincing. Even more convincing, though, is that
over the years not one patient who has met the various criteria and then been
maintained, for whatever reason, has been documented as having recovered brain
function. Although this is not an elegant argument, it is a reassuring." In
short, current criteria are adequate to determine when current medical
technology will fail to revive the patient, but are silent on the capabilities
of future medical technology.
Each new medical advance forces a reexamination and possible change of the
existing ad hoc criteria. The criteria used by the clinician today to determine
"death" are dramatically different from the criteria used 100 years ago, and
have changed more subtly but no less surely in the last decade [note 7]. It seems almost inevitable that the criteria
used 100 years from now will differ dramatically from the criteria commonly
employed today.
These ever shifting criteria for "death" raise an obvious question: is there
a definition which will not change with advances in technology? A definition
which does have a theoretical underpinning and is not dependent
on the technology of the day?
The answer arises from the confluence and synthesis of many lines of work,
ranging from information theory, neuroscience, physics, biochemistry and
computer science to the philosophy of the mind and the evolving criteria
historically used to define death.
When someone has suffered a loss of memory or mental function, we often say
they "aren't themselves." As the loss becomes more serious and all higher mental
functions are lost, we begin to use terms like "persistent vegetative state."
While we will often refrain from declaring such an individual "dead," this
hesitation does not usually arise because we view their present state as "alive"
but because there is still hope of recovery to a healthy state with memory and
personality intact. From a physical point of view we believe there is a chance
that their memories and personalities are still present within the physical
structure of the brain, even though their behavior does not provide direct
evidence for this. If we could reliably determine that the physical structures
encoding memory and personality had in fact been destroyed, then we would
abandon hope and declare the person dead.
The Information Theoretic Criterion of DeathClearly, if we knew the
coordinates of each and every atom in a person's brain then we would (at least
in principle) be in a position to determine with absolute finality whether their
memories and personality had been destroyed in the information theoretic sense,
or whether their memories and personality were preserved but could not, for some
reason, be expressed. If such final destruction had taken place, then there
would be little reason for hope. If such destruction had not taken place, then
it would in principle be possible for a sufficiently advanced technology to
restore the person to a fully functional and healthy state with their memories
and personality intact.
Considerations like this lead to the information theoretic criterion of
death [note 8]. A person is dead according
to the information theoretic criterion if their memories, personality, hopes,
dreams, etc. have been destroyed in the information theoretic sense. That is,
if the structures in the brain that encode memory and personality have been
so disrupted that it is no longer possible in principle to restore them to an
appropriate functional state then the person is dead. If the structures that
encode memory and personality are sufficiently intact that inference of the
memory and personality are feasible in principle, and therefore restoration
to an appropriate functional state is likewise feasible in principle, then the
person is not dead.
A simple example from computer technology is in order. If a computer is fully
functional then its memory and "personality" are completely intact. If it fell
out the seventh floor window to the concrete below, it would rapidly cease to
function. However, its memory and "personality" would still be present in the
pattern of magnetizations on the disk. With sufficient effort, we could completely
repair the computer with its memory and "personality" intact [note 9].
In a similar fashion, as long as the structures that encode the memory and
personality of a human being have not been irretrievably "erased" (to use
computer jargon) then restoration to a fully functional state with memory and
personality intact is in principle feasible. Any technology independent
definition of "death" should conclude that such a person is not dead, for a
sufficiently advanced technology could restore the person to a healthy state.
On the flip side of the coin, if the structures encoding memory and
personality have suffered sufficient damage to obliterate them beyond
recognition, then death by the information theoretic criterion has occurred. An
effective method of insuring such destruction is to burn the structure and stir
the ashes. This is commonly employed to insure the destruction of classified
documents. Under the name of "cremation" it is also employed on human beings and
is sufficient to insure that death by the information theoretic criterion takes
place.
More Exotic ApproachesIt is not obvious that the preservation of life
requires the physical repair or even the preservation of the brain[11,12].
Although the brain is made of neurons, synapses, protoplasm, DNA and the like;
most modern philosophers of consciousness view these details as no more
significant than hair color or clothing style. Three samples follow.
The ethicist and prolific author Robert Veatch said, in Death, Dying, and
the Biological Revolution, "An `artificial brain' is not possible at present,
but a walking, talking, thinking individual who had one would certainly be considered
living."[15, page 23].
The noted philosopher of consciousness Paul Churchland said, in Matter and
Consciousness, "If machines do come to simulate all of our internal cognitive
activities, to the last computational detail, to deny them the status of genuine
persons would be nothing but a new form of racism."[12, page 120].
Hans Moravec, renowned roboticist and Director of the Mobile Robot Lab at Carnegie
Mellon said, "Body-identity assumes that a person is defined by the stuff of
which a human body is made. Only by maintaining continuity of body stuff can
we preserve an individual person. Pattern-identity, conversely, defines the
essence of a person, say myself, as the pattern and the process
going on in my head and body, not the machinery supporting that process. If
the process is preserved, I am preserved. The rest is mere jelly."[50, page
117].
We'll Use the Conservative ApproachRestoration of the existing
structure will be more difficult than building an artificial brain (particularly
if the restoration is down to the molecular level). Despite this, we will
examine the technically more exacting problem of restoration because it is more
generally acceptable. Most people accept the idea that restoring the brain to a
healthy state in a healthy body is a desirable objective. A range of
increasingly less restrictive objectives (as described) are possible. To the
extent that more relaxed criteria are acceptable, the technical problems are
much less demanding. By deliberately adopting such a conservative position, we
lay ourselves open to the valid criticism that the methods described here are
unlikely to prove necessary. Simpler techniques that relax to some degree the
philosophical constraints we have imposed might well be adopted in practice. In
this paper we will eschew the more exotic possibilities (without, however,
adopting any position on their desirability).
Another issue is not so much philosophical as emotional. Major surgery is not
a pretty sight. There are few people who can watch a surgeon cut through living
tissue with equanimity. In a heart transplant, for example, surgeons cut open
the chest of a dying patient to rip out their dying heart, cut open a fresh
cadaver to seize its still-beating heart, and then stitch the cadaver's heart
into the dying patients chest. Despite this (which would have been condemned in
the middle ages as the blackest of black magic), we cheer the patient's return
to health and are thankful that we live in an era when medicine can save lives
that were formerly lost.
The mechanics of examining and repairing the human brain, possibly down to
the level of individual molecules, might not be the best topic for after dinner
conversation. While the details will vary depending on the specific method used,
this could also be described by lurid language that failed to capture the
central issue: the restoration to full health of a human being.
A final issue that should be addressed is that of changes introduced by the
process of restoration itself. The exact nature and extent of these changes will
vary with the specific method. Current surgical techniques, for example, result
in substantial tissue changes. Scarring, permanent implants, prosthetics, etc.
are among the more benign outcomes. In general, methods based on a sophisticated
ability to rearrange atomic structure should result in minimal undesired
alterations to the tissue.
"Minimal changes" does not mean "no changes." A modest amount of change in
molecular structure, whatever technique is used, is both unavoidable and
insignificant. The molecular structure of the human brain is in a constant state
of change during life -- molecules are synthesized, utilized, and catabolized in
a continuous cycle. Cells continuously undergo slight changes in morphology.
Cells also make small errors in building their own parts. For example, ribosomes
make errors when they build proteins. About one amino acid in every 10,000 added
to a growing polypeptide chain by a ribosome is incorrect[14, page 383]. Changes
and errors of a similar magnitude introduced by the process of restoration can
reasonably be neglected.
Does the Information Theoretic Criterion Matter?
It is normally a matter of small concern whether a physician of 2190 would or
would not concur with the diagnosis of "death" by a contemporary physician applied
to a specific patient in 1990. A physician of today who found himself in 1790
would be able to do little for a patient whose heart had stopped, even though
he knew intellectually that an intensive care unit would likely be able to save
the patients life. Intensive care units were simply not available in 1790, no
matter what the physician knew was possible. So, too, with the physician of today
when informed that a physician 200 years hence could save the life of the patient
that he has just pronounced "dead." There is nothing he can do, for he can only
apply the technologies of today -- except in the case of cryonic suspension.
In this one instance, we must ask not whether the person is dead by today's
(clearly technology dependent) criteria, but whether the person is dead by all
future criteria. In short, we must ask whether death by the information
theoretic criterion has taken place. If it has not, then cryonic suspension is a
reasonable (and indeed life saving) course of action.
Experimental Proof or Disproof of CryonicsIt is often said that
"cryonics is freezing the dead." It is more accurate to say that "cryonics is
freezing the terminally ill. Whether or not they are dead remains to be seen."
The scientifically correct experiment to verify that cryonics works (or
demonstrate that it does not work) is quite easy to describe:
- Select N experimental subjects.
- Freeze them.
- Wait 100 years.
- See if the technology available 100 years from now can (or cannot) cure
them.
The drawback of this experimental protocol is obvious: we can't get the results
for 100 years. This problem is fundamental. The use of future technology is an
inherent part of cryonics. Criticisms of cryonics based on the observation
that freezing and thawing mammals with present technology don't work are irrelevant,
for that is not what is being proposed.
This kind of problem is not entirely unique to cryonics. A new AIDS treatment
might undergo clinical trials lasting a few years. The ethical dilemma posed by
the terminally ill AIDS patient who might be assisted by the experimental
treatment is well known. If the AIDS patient is given the treatment prior to
completion of the clinical trials, it is possible that his situation could be
made significantly worse. On the other hand, to deny a potentially life saving
treatment to someone who will soon die anyway is ethically untenable.
In the case of cryonics this is not an interim dilemma pending the (near term)
outcome of clinical trials. It is a dilemma inherent in the nature of the proposal.
Clinical trials, the bulwark of modern medical practice, are useless in resolving
the effectiveness of cryonics in a timely fashion.
Further, cryonics (virtually by definition) is a procedure used only when the
patient has exhausted all other available options. In current practice the
patient is suspended after legal death: the fear that the treatment might prove
worse than the disease is absent. Of course, suspension of the terminally ill
patient somewhat before legal death has significant advantages. A patient
suffering from a brain tumor might view suspension following the obliteration of
his brain as significantly less desirable than suspension prior to such
obliteration, even if the suspension occurred at a point in time when the
patient was legally "alive."
In such a case, it is inappropriate to disregard or override the patient's
own wishes. To quote the American College of Physicians Ethics Manual, "Each
patient is a free agent entitled to full explanation and full decision-making
authority with regard to his medical care. John Stuart Mill expressed it as:
`Over himself, his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.' The legal
counterpart of patient autonomy is self-determination. Both principles deny
legitimacy to paternalism by stating unequivocally that, in the last analysis,
the patient determines what is right for him." "If the [terminally ill] patient
is a mentally competent adult, he has the legal right to accept or refuse any
form of treatment, and his wishes must be recognized and honored by his
physician."[92]
If clinical trials cannot provide us with an answer, are there any other
methods of evaluating the proposal? Can we do more than say that (a) cryonic
suspension can do no harm (in keeping with the Hippocratic oath), and (b) it has
some difficult-to-define chance of doing good?
Failure Criteria
Trying to prove something false is often the simplest method of clarifying exactly
what is required to make it true. A consideration of the information theoretic
criterion of death makes it clear that, from a technical point of view (ignoring
various non-technical issues) there are two and only two ways in which cryonics
can fail [note 10].
Cryonics will fail if:
- Information theoretic death occurs prior to reaching liquid nitrogen temperature
[note 11].
- Repair technology that is feasible in principle is never developed and
applied in practice, even after the passage of centuries.
The first
failure criterion can only be considered against the background of current
understanding of freezing damage, ischemic injury and mechanisms of memory and
synaptic plasticity. Whether or not memory and personality are destroyed in the
information theoretic sense by freezing and the ischemic injury that might
precede it can only be answered by considering both the physical nature of
memory and the nature of the damage to which the brain is subjected before
reaching the stability provided by storage in liquid nitrogen. The following
sections will therefore provide brief reviews of these subjects.
The second failure criterion is considered in the later sections on technical
issues, which discuss in more detail how future technologies might be applied to
the repair of frozen tissue.
As the reader will readily appreciate, the following reviews will consider
only the most salient points that are of the greatest importance in determining
overall feasibility. They are necessarily too short to consider the topics in
anything like full detail, but should provide sufficient information to give
the reader an overview of the relevant issues. References to further reading
are provided throughout [note 12].
FREEZING DAMAGE
There is an extensive literature on the damage caused by both cooling and
freezing to liquid nitrogen temperatures. Some reviews are[5, 6, 68, 70]. Scientific
American had a recent and quite accessible article[57]. In this section, we
briefly review the nature of such damage and consider whether it is likely to
cause information theoretic death. Damage, per se, is not meaningful except
to the extent that it obscures or obliterates the nature of the original structure.
While cooling tissue to around 0 degrees C creates a number of problems, the
ability to cool mammals to this temperature or even slightly below (with no ice
formation) using current methods followed by subsequent complete recovery[61,
62] shows that this problem can be controlled and is unlikely to cause
information theoretic death. We will, therefore, ignore the problems caused by
such cooling. This problem is discussed in [5] and elsewhere.
Further, some "freezing" damage in fact occurs upon re- warming. Current work
supports this idea because the precise method used to re-warm tissue can
strongly affect the success or failure of present experiments even when freezing
conditions are identical[5, 6]. If we presume that future repair methods avoid
the step of re-warming the tissue prior to analysis and instead analyze the
tissue directly in the frozen state then this source of damage will be
eliminated. Several current methods can be used to distinguish between damage
that occurs during freezing and damage that occurs while thawing. At present, it
seems likely that some damage occurs during each process. While significant
damage does occur during slow freezing, it does not induce structural changes
which obliterate the cell.
Present Day Successes
Many types of tissue including human embryos, sperm, skin, bone, red and white
blood cells, bone marrow, and others [5, 6, 59] have been frozen in liquid nitrogen,
thawed, and have recovered. This is not true of whole mammals [note 13]. The brain seems more resistant than most organs to
freezing damage[58, 79]. Recovery of overall brain function following freezing
to liquid nitrogen temperature has not been demonstrated, although recovery of
unit level electrical activity following freezing to -60 degrees C has been demonstrated[79].
FracturesPerhaps the most dramatic injury caused by freezing is
macroscopic fractures[56]. Tissue becomes extremely brittle at or below the
"glass transition temperature" at about 140K. Continued cooling to 77K (the
temperature of liquid nitrogen) creates tensile stress in the glassy material.
This is exacerbated by the skull, which inhibits shrinkage of the cranial
contents. This stress causes readily evident macroscopic fractures in the
tissue.
Fractures that occur below the glass transition temperature result in very
little information loss. While dramatic, this damage is unlikely to cause or
contribute to information theoretic death.
IceThe damage most commonly associated with freezing is that caused by
ice. Contrary to common belief, freezing does not cause cells to burst open like
water pipes on a cold winter's day. Quite the contrary, ice formation takes
place outside the cells in the extracellular region. This is largely due to the
presence of extracellular nucleating agents on which ice can form, and the
comparative absence of intracellular nucleating agents. Consequently the
intracellular liquid supercools.
Extracellular ice formation causes an increase in the concentration of the
extra-cellular solute, e.g., the chemicals in the extracellular liquid are
increased in concentration by the decrease in available water. The immediate
effect of this increased extracellular concentration is to draw water out of the
cells by osmosis. Thus, freezing dehydrates cells.
Damage can be caused by the extracellular ice, by the increased concentration
of solute, or by the reduced temperature itself. All three mechanisms can play a
role under appropriate conditions.
The damage caused by extracellular ice formation depends largely on the
fraction of the initial liquid volume that is converted to ice[6, 57]. (The
initial liquid volume might include a significant amount of cryoprotectant as
well as water). When the fraction of the liquid volume converted to ice is
small, damage is often reversible even by current techniques. In many cases,
conversion of significantly more than 40% of the liquid volume to ice is
damaging[70, page 134; 71]. The brain is more resistant to such injury:
conversion of up to 60% of the liquid volume in the brain to ice is associated
with recovery of neuronal function[58, 62, 66, 82]. Storey and Storey said "If
the cell volume falls below a critical minimum, then the bilayer of
phospholipids in the membrane becomes so greatly compressed that its structure
breaks down. Membrane transport functions cannot be maintained, and breaks in
the membrane spill cell contents and provide a gate for ice to propagate into
the cell. Most freeze-tolerant animals reach the critical minimum cell volume
when about 65 percent of total body water is sequestered as ice."[57].
Appropriate treatment with cryoprotectants (in particular glycerol) prior to freezing
will keep 40% or more of the liquid volume from being converted to ice even at
liquid nitrogen temperatures.
Fahy has said "All of the postulated problems in cryobiology -- cell packing
[omitted reference], channel size constraints [omitted reference], optimal cooling
rate differences for mixed cell populations [omitted reference], osmotically
mediated injury[omitted references], and the rest -- can be solved in principle
by the selection of a sufficiently high concentration of cryoprotectant prior
to freezing. In the extreme case, all ice formation could be suppressed completely
by using a concentration of agent sufficient to ensure vitrification of the
biological system in question [omitted reference]"[73]. Unfortunately, a concentration
of cryoprotectant sufficiently high to protect the system from all freezing
injury would itself be injurious[73]. It should be possible to trade the mechanical
injury caused by ice formation for the biochemical injury caused by the cryoprotectant,
which is probably advantageous. Current suspension protocols at Alcor call for
the introduction of greater than 6 molar glycerol. Both venous and arterial
glycerol concentrations have exceeded 6 molar in several recent suspensions.
If this concentration of cryoprotectant is also reaching the tissues, it should
keep over 60% of the initial liquid volume from being converted to ice at liquid
nitrogen temperatures [note 14].
Concentration Effects"Dehydration and concentration of solutes past
some critical level may disrupt metabolism and denature cell proteins and
macromolecular complexes"[70, page 125]. The functional losses caused by this
mechanism seem unlikely to result in significant information loss. One
qualification to this conclusion is that cell membranes appear to be weakened by
increased solute concentration[5, page 92]. To the extent that structural
elements are weakened by increased solute concentrations the vulnerability of
the cell to structural damage is increased.
DenaturingFinally, denaturing of proteins might occur at low
temperature. In this process the tertiary and perhaps even secondary structure
of the protein might be disrupted leading to significant loss of protein
function. However, the primary structure of the protein (the linear sequence of
amino acids) is still intact and so inference of the correct functional state of
the protein is in principle trivial. Further, the extent of protein denaturation
caused by freezing must necessarily be limited given the relatively wide range
of tissues that have been successfully frozen and thawed.
Intracellular FreezingIntracellular freezing is another damaging event
which might occur[6]. If cooling is slow enough to allow the removal of most of
the water from the cell's interior by osmosis, then the high concentration of
solute will prevent the small amount of remaining water from freezing. If
cooling is too rapid, there will be insufficient time for the water within the
cell to escape before it freezes. In the latter case, the intracellular contents
are supercooled and freezing is abrupt (the cell "flashes"). While this
correlates with a failure to recover function[5, 6, 68, 70] it is difficult to
believe that rapid freezing results in significant loss of information.
Intracellular freezing is largely irrelevant to cryonic suspensions because
of the slow freezing rates dictated by the large mass of tissue being frozen.
Such freezing rates are too slow for intracellular freezing to occur except when
membrane rupture allows extracellular ice to penetrate the intracellular region.
If the membrane does fail, one would expect the interior of the cell to "flash."
Loss of Information versus Loss of Function
Spontaneous recovery of function following freezing to liquid nitrogen temperatures
using the best currently available techniques appears unlikely for mammalian
organs, including the brain. Despite this, the level of structural preservation
can be quite good. The complexity of the systems that have been successfully
frozen and rewarmed is remarkable, and supports the claim that good structural
preservation is often achieved. The mechanisms of damage that have been postulated
in the literature are sufficiently subtle that information loss is likely to
be small; that is, death by the information theoretic criterion is unlikely
to have occurred. Further research aimed specifically at addressing this issue
is needed.
ISCHEMIC INJURY AND PRESUSPENSION INJURY
Although modern cryonic suspensions can involve minimal delay [note 15] and future suspensions might eliminate
delay entirely [note 16], delay is sometimes unavoidable [note 17]. The most significant type of damage
that such delay causes is ischemic injury.
Broadly speaking, the structure of the human brain remains intact for several
hours or more following the cessation of blood flow, or ischemia. The tissue
changes that occur subsequent to ischemia have been well studied. There have
also been studies of the "postmortem" changes that occur in tissue. Perhaps the
most interesting of these studies was conducted by Kalimo et. al.[65].
"Postmortem" Changes in the Human BrainMany researchers have examined
postmortem changes in neuronal tissues. In "A Comparison of Methodologies for
the Study of Functional Transmitter Neurochemistry in Human Brain" Dodd et
al.[124] said
Effects of postmortem delay. Some brain functions are
damaged irreversibly within minutes of the cessation of blood flow to the
tissue. This led to the widespread belief that it would be impossible to
isolate metabolically active and responsive preparations very long after death
and use them to study neurotransmission. However, this is a misconception;
many groups have successfully obtained functional preparations from normal
(Table 1) [not present in this article] and pathological (Table 2) [not
present in this article] human brain tissue from autopsies carried out up to
24 h or more postmortem. This is perhaps less surprising when the stability of
enzymes, receptors, and nucleic acids is taken into consideration (see Hardy
and Dodd, 1983 [reference 123 in this article]). With very few exceptions, the
brain retains the metabolic machinery to reconstitute tissue metabolite and
neurotransmitter pools. It also appears that sufficient structural integrity
is retained to allow the various tissue compartments to remain relatively
intact and distinct.
Experiments with both animal and human brain have shown that viable
preparations can be isolated routinely up to at least 24 h postmortem, a time
scale within which a sufficient number of autopsies is carried out to allow
extensive neurochemical studies. When the human subject has died suddenly (see
below) [not in this article], such preparations exhibit the same range of
characteristics as preparations made from fresh animal tissue, or from fresh
human tissue obtained at biopsy or neurosurgery. Thus incubated synaptosomes
and brain slices from postmortem human brain respire, accumulate tissue
potassium, maintain membrane potentials, release neurotransmitters in a
calcium-dependent fashion, and possess active, sodium - dependent uptake
systems (see Table 1 for references [not in this article]). Electron
microscopic examination of synaptosome preparations from postmortem human
brain showed them to be only slightly less pure than preparations from fresh
tissue, although some degree of damage is evident (Hardy et al., 1982 [not in
this article]). In order to study immediate "postmortem"
changes, Kalimo et. al. perfused the brains of 5 patients with aldehydes within
half an hour of "clinical death". Subsequent examination of the preserved brain
tissue with both light and electron microscopy showed the level of structural
preservation. In two cases, the changes described were consistent with
approximately one to two hours of ischemic injury. (Ischemic injury often begins
prior to declaration of "clinical death", hence the apparently longer ischemic
period compared with the interval following declaration of death and prior to
perfusion of fixative). Physical preservation of cellular structure and
ultrastructure was excellent. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that
information loss was negligible in these cases. In two other cases, elevated
intraparenchymal pressure prevented perfusion with the preservative, thus
preventing examination of the tissue. Without such an examination, it is
difficult to draw conclusions about the extent of information loss. In the final
case, "...the most obvious abnormality was the replacement of approximately
four-fifths of the parenchyma of the brain by a fluid-containing cavity that was
lined by what seemed to be very thin remnants of the cerebral cortex." Cryonic
suspension in this last case would not be productive.
As an aside, the vascular perfusion of chemical fixatives to improve
stability of tissue structures prior to perfusion with cryoprotectants and
subsequent storage in liquid nitrogen would seem to offer significant
advantages. The main issue that would require resolution prior to such use is
the risk that fixation might obstruct circulation, thus impeding subsequent
perfusion with cryoprotectants. Other than this risk, the use of chemical
fixatives (such as aldehydes and in particular glutaraldehyde) would reliably
improve structural preservation and would be effective at halting almost all
deterioration within minutes of perfusion[67]. The utility of chemical
preservation has been discussed by Drexler[1] and by Olson[90], among others.
Ischemia
The events following ischemia have been reasonably well characterized. Following
experimental induction of ischemia in cats, Kalimo et. al.[74] found "The resulting
cellular alterations were homogeneous and uniform throughout the entire brain:
they included early chromatin clumping, gradually increasing electron lucency
of the cell sap, distention of endoplasmic reticulum and Golgi cisternae, transient
mitochondrial condensation followed by swelling and appearance of flocculent densities,
and dispersion of ribosomal rosettes." Energy levels within the cell drop sharply
within a few minutes of cessation of blood flow. The chromatin clumping is a reversible
early change. The loss of energy results fairly quickly in failure to maintain
trans- membrane concentration gradients (for example the Na+K+ pump stops working,
resulting in increased intracellular Na+ and increased extracellular K+). The
uneven equilibration of concentration gradients results in changes in osmotic
pressure with consequent flows of water. Swelling of mitochondria and other structures
occurs. The appearance of "flocculent densities" in the mitochondria is thought
to indicate severe internal membrane damage which is "irreversible."[note 18]
Ischemic changes do not appear to result in any damage that would prevent
repair (e.g., changes that would result in significant loss of information about
structure) for at least a few hours. Temporary functional recovery has been
demonstrated in optimal situations after as long as 60 minutes of total
ischemia[93, 94, 95]. Hossmann, for example, reported results on 143 cats
subjected to one hour of normothermic global brain ischemia[97]. "Body
temperature was maintained at 36 degrees to 37 degrees C with a heating pad. ...
Completeness of ischemia was tested by injecting 133Xe into the innominate
artery immediately before vascular occlusion and monitoring the absence of decay
of radioactivity from the head during ischemia, using external scintillation
detectors. ... In 50% of the animals, even major spontaneous EEG activity
returned after ischemia.... One cat survived for 1 yr after one hour of
normothermic cerebrocirculatory arrest with no electrophysiologic deficit and
with only minor neurologic and morphologic disturbances." Functional recovery is
a more stringent criterion than the more relaxed information theoretic
criterion, which merely requires adequate structural preservation to allow
inference about the pre-existing structure. Reliable identification of the
various cellular structures is possible hours (and sometimes even days) later.
Detailed descriptions of ischemia and its time course[72, page 209 et sequitur]
also clearly show that cooling substantially slows the rate of deterioration.
Thus, even moderate cooling "postmortem" slows deterioration significantly.
LysosomesThe theory that lysosomes ("suicide bags") rupture and
release digestive enzymes into the cell that result in rapid deterioration of
chemical structure appears to be incorrect. More broadly, there is a body of
work suggesting that structural deterioration does not take place rapidly.
Kalimo et. al.[74] said "It is noteworthy that after 120 min of complete
blood deprivation we saw no evidence of membrane lysosomal breakdown, an
observation which has also been reported in studies of in vitro lethal cell
injury[omitted references], and in regional cerebral ischemia[omitted
references]."
Hawkins et. al.[75] said "...lysosomes did not rupture for approximately 4
hours and in fact did not release the fluorescent dye until after reaching the
postmortem necrotic phase of injury. ... The original suicide bag mechanism of
cell damage thus is apparently not operative in the systems studied. Lysosomes
appear to be relatively stable organelles...."
Messenger RNA and ProteinMorrison and Griffin[76] said "We find that
both rat and human cerebellar mRNAs are surprisingly stable under a variety of
postmortem conditions and that biologically active, high-molecular-weight mRNAs
can be isolated from postmortem tissue. ... A comparison of RNA recoveries from
fresh rat cerebella and cerebella exposed to different postmortem treatments
showed that 83% of the total cytoplasmic RNAs present immediately postmortem was
recovered when rat cerebella were left at room temperature for 16 h [hours]
postmortem and that 90% was recovered when the cerebella were left at 4 degrees
C for this length of time .... In neither case was RNA recovery decreased by
storing the cerebella in liquid nitrogen prior to analysis. ... Control studies
on protein stability in postmortem rat cerebella show that the spectrum of
abundant proteins is also unchanged after up to 16 h [hours] at room
temperature...." Johnson et. al.[125] in "Extensive Postmortem Stability of RNA
From Rat and Human Brain" found that postmortem delays of as long as 48 hours
"...failed to reveal degradation of the specific rat brain mRNAs during the
postmortem period." They also said "We find no effect of postmortem delay on RNA
quality in both rat and human."
20 Million Year Survival of DNAThe ability of DNA to survive for long
periods was dramatically illustrated by its recovery and sequencing from a 17 to
20 million year old magnolia leaf[81]. "Sediments and fossils seem to have
accumulated in an anoxic lake bottom environment; they have remained unoxidized
and water- saturated to the present day." "Most leaves are preserved as
compression fossils, commonly retaining intact cellular tissue with considerable
ultrastructural preservation, including cell walls, leaf phytoliths, and
intracellular organelles, as well as many organic constituents such as
flavonoids and steroids[omitted references]. There is little evidence of
post-depositional (diagenetic) change in many of the leaf fossils."
ADDENDUM: A 1997 paper[130] critical of earlier work which
attempted to recover DNA from ancient sources said "Whereas ancient DNA
sequences from specimens younger than 100 000 years old have now been
replicated independently (Hagelberg et al. 1994; Hoss et al.
1994; Taylor 1996), we have singularly failed to recover authentic ancient DNA
from amber fossils."
For present purposes the distinction between 100,000 and 100,000,000 years
is not critical: both are substantially longer than the time that a person
might reasonably expect to stay in cryonic suspension.
Cell Cultures taken after "Death"Gilden et. al.[77] report that
"...nearly two-thirds of all tissue acquired in less than six hours after death
was successfully grown, whereas only one-third of all tissue acquired more than
six hours after death was successfully grown in tissue culture." While it would
be incorrect to conclude that widespread cellular survival occurred based on
these findings, they do show that structural deterioration is insufficient to
disrupt function in at least some cells. This supports the idea that structural
deterioration in many other cells should not be extensive.
Information Loss and IschemiaIt is currently possible to initiate
suspension immediately after legal death. In favorable circumstances legal death
can be declared upon cessation of heartbeat in an otherwise revivable terminally
ill patient who wishes to die a natural death and has refused artificial means
of prolonging the dying process. In such cases, the ischemic interval can be
short (two or three minutes). It is implausible that ischemic injury would cause
information theoretic death in such a case.
As the ischemic interval lengthens, the level of damage increases. It is not
clear exactly when information loss begins or when information theoretic death
occurs. Present evidence supports but does not prove the hypothesis that information
theoretic death does not occur for at least a few hours following the onset
of ischemia. Quite possibly many hours of ischemia can be tolerated. Freezing
of tissue within that time frame followed by long term storage in liquid nitrogen
should provide adequate preservation of structure to allow repair [note 19].
MEMORYIt is essential to ask whether the important structural
elements underlying "behavioral plasticity" (human memory and human personality)
are likely to be preserved by cryonic suspension. Clearly, if human memory is
stored in a physical form which is obliterated by freezing, then cryonic
suspension won't work. In this section we briefly consider a few major aspects
of what is known about long term memory and whether known or probable mechanisms
are likely to be preserved by freezing.
It appears likely that short term memory, which can be disrupted by trauma or
a number of other processes, will not be preserved by cryonic suspension.
Consolidation of short term memory into long term memory is a process that takes
several hours. We will focus attention exclusively on long term memory, for this
is far more stable. While the retention of short term memory cannot be excluded
(particularly if chemical preservation is used to provide rapid initial
fixation), its greater fragility renders this significantly less likely.
To see the Mona Lisa or Niagara Falls changes us, as does seeing a favorite
television show or reading a good book. These changes are both figurative and
literal, and it is the literal (or neuroscientific) changes that we are
interested in: what are the physical alterations that underlie memory?
Briefly, the available evidence supports the idea that memory and personality
are stored in identifiable physical changes in the nerve cells, and that
alterations in the synapses between nerve cells play a critical role.
Shepherd in "Neurobiology"[38, page 547] said: "The concept that brain
functions are mediated by cell assemblies and neuronal circuits has become
widely accepted, as will be obvious to the reader of this book, and most
neurobiologists believe that plastic changes at synapses are the underlying
mechanisms of learning and memory."
Kupfermann in "Principles of Neural Science"[13, page 1005] said: "Because of
the enduring nature of memory, it seems reasonable to postulate that in some way
the changes must be reflected in long-term alterations of the connections
between neurons."
Eric R. Kandel in "Principles of Neural Science" [13, page 1016] said:
"Morphological changes seem to be a signature of the long-term process. These
changes do not occur with short-term memory (Figure 65-6 [not reproduced here]).
Moreover, the structural changes that occur with the long- term process are not
restricted to the [sic] growth. Long- term habituation leads to the opposite
change---a regression and pruning of synaptic connections. With long-term
habituation, where the functional connections between the sensory neurons and
motor neurons are inactivated (Figure 65- 2[not reproduced]), the number of
terminals per neuron is correspondingly reduced by one-third (Figure 65-6[not
reproduced]) and the proportion of terminals with active zones is reduced from
40% to 10%."
Squire in "Memory and Brain"[109, page 10] said: "The most prevalent view has
been that the specificity of stored information is determined by the location of
synaptic changes in the nervous system and by the pattern of altered neuronal
interactions that these changes produce. This idea is largely accepted at the
present time, and will be explored further in this and succeeding chapters in
the light of current evidence."
Lynch, in "Synapses, Circuits, and the Beginnings of Memory"[34, page 3]
said: "The question of which components of the neuron are responsible for
storage is vital to attempts to develop generalized hypotheses about how the
brain encodes and makes use of memory. Since individual neurons receive and
generate thousands of connections and hence participate in what must be a vast
array of potential circuits, most theorists have postulated a central role for
synaptic modifications in memory storage."
Turner and Greenough said "Two non-mutually exclusive possible mechanisms of
brain information storage have remained the leading theories since their
introduction by Ramon y Cajal [omitted reference] and Tanzi [omitted reference].
The first hypothesis is that new synapse formation, or selected synapse
retention, yields altered brain circuitry which encodes new information. The
second is that altered synaptic efficacy brings about similar change."[22].
Greenough and Bailey in "The anatomy of a memory: convergence of results
across a diversity of tests"[39] say: "More recently it has become clear that
the arrangement of synaptic connections in the mature nervous system can undergo
striking changes even during normal functioning. As the diversity of species and
plastic processes subjected to morphological scrutiny has increased, convergence
upon a set of structurally detectable phenomena has begun to emerge. Although
several aspects of synaptic structure appear to change with experience, the most
consistent potential substrate for memory storage during behavioral modification
is an alteration in the number and/or pattern of synaptic connections."
It seems likely, therefore, that human long term memory is encoded by
detectable physical changes in cell structure and in particular in synaptic
structure.
Plastic Changes in Model SystemsWhat, exactly, might these changes be?
Very strong statements are possible in simple "model systems". Bailey and Chen,
for example, identified several specific changes in synaptic structure that
encoded learned memories from sea slugs (Aplysia californica) by direct
examination of the changed synapse with an electron microscope[36].
"Using horseradish peroxidase (HRP) to label the presynaptic terminals
(varicosities) of sensory neurons and serial reconstruction to analyze synaptic
contacts, we compared the fine structure of identified sensory neuron synapses
in control and behaviorally modified animals. Our results indicate that learning
can modulate long-term synaptic effectiveness by altering the number, size, and
vesical complement of synaptic active zones."
Examination by transmission electron microscopy in vacuum of sections 100
nanometers (several hundred atomic diameters) thick recovers little or no
chemical information. Lateral resolution is at best a few nanometers (tens of
atomic diameters), and depth information (within the 100 nanometer section) is
entirely lost. Specimen preparation included removal and desheathing of the
abdominal ganglion which was then bathed in seawater for 30 minutes before
impalement and intrasomatic pressure injection of HRP. Two hours later the
ganglia were fixed, histochemically processed, and embedded. Following this
treatment, Bailey and Chen concluded that "...clear structural changes accompany
behavioral modification, and those changes can be detected at the level of
identified synapses that are critically involved in learning."
The following observations about this work seem in order. First, several
different types of changes were present. This provides redundant evidence of
synaptic alteration. Inability to detect one type of change, or obliteration of
one specific type of change, would not be sufficient to prevent recovery of the
"state" of the synapse. Second, examination by electron microscopy is much
cruder than the techniques considered here which literally propose to analyze
every molecule in the structure. Further alterations in synaptic chemistry will
be detectable when the synapse is examined in more detail at the molecular
level. Third, there is no reason to believe that freezing would obliterate the
structure beyond recognition.
Implications for Human MemorySuch satisfying evidence is at present
confined to "model systems;" what can we conclude about more complex systems,
e.g., humans? Certainly, it seems safe to say that synaptic alterations are also
used in the human memory system, that synaptic changes of various types take
place when the synapse "remembers" something, that the changes involve
alterations in at least many thousands of molecules and probably involve
mechanisms similar to those used in lower organisms (evolution is notoriously
conservative).
It seems likely that knowledge of the morphology and connectivity of nerve
cells along with some specific knowledge of the biochemical state of the cells
and synapses would be sufficient to determine memory and personality. Perhaps,
however, some fundamentally different mechanism is present in humans? Even if
this were to prove true, any such system would be sharply constrained by the
available evidence. It would have to persist over the lifetime of a human being,
and thus would have to be quite stable. It would have to tolerate the natural
conditions encountered by humans and the experimental conditions to which
primates have been subjected without loss of memory and personality (presuming
that the primate brain is similar to the human brain). And finally, it would
almost certainly involve changes in tens of thousands of molecules to store each
bit of information. Functional studies of human long term memory suggest it has
a capacity of only 10^9 bits (somewhat over 100 megabytes)[37]
(though this did not consider motor memory, e.g., the information storage
required when learning to ride a bicycle). Such a low memory capacity suggests
that, independent of the specific mechanism, a great many molecules are required
to remember each bit. It even suggests that many synapses are used to store each
bit (recall there are perhaps 10^15 synapses -- which implies some
10^6 synapses per bit of information stored in long term memory).
Given that future technology will allow the molecule-by- molecule analysis
of the structures that store memory, and given that such structures are large
on the molecular scale (involving at least tens of thousands of molecules each)
then it appears unlikely that such structures will survive the lifetime of the
individual only to be obliterated beyond recognition by freezing. Freezing is
unlikely to cause information theoretic death.
TECHNICAL OVERVIEWEven if information theoretic death has not
occurred, a frozen brain is not a healthy structure. While repair might be
feasible in principle, it would be comforting to have at least some idea about
how such repairs might be done in practice. As long as we assume that the laws
of physics, chemistry, and biochemistry with which we are familiar today will
still form the basic framework within which repair will take place in the
future, we can draw well founded conclusions about the capabilities and limits
of any such repair technology.
The Nature of This ProposalTo decide whether or not to pursue cryonic
suspension we must answer one question: will restoration of frozen tissue to a
healthy and functional state ever prove feasible? If the answer is "yes," then
cryonics will save lives. If the answer is "no," then it can be ignored. As
discussed earlier, effectively the most that we can usefully learn about frozen
tissue is the type, location and orientation of each molecule. If this
information is sufficient to permit inference of the healthy state with memory
and personality intact, then repair is in principle feasible. The most that
future technology could offer, therefore, is the ability to restore the
structure whenever such restoration was feasible in principle. We propose that
just this limit will be closely approached by future advances in technology.
It is unreasonable to think that the current proposal will in fact form the
basis for future repair methods for two reasons:
First, better technologies and approaches are likely to be developed.
Necessarily, we must restrict ourselves to methods and techniques that can be
analyzed and understood using the currently understood laws of physics and
chemistry. Future scientific advances, not anticipated at this time, are likely
to result in cheaper, simpler or more reliable methods. Given the history of
science and technology to date, the probability of future unanticipated advances
is good.
Second, this proposal was selected because of its conceptual simplicity and
its obvious power to restore virtually any structure where restoration is in
principle feasible. These are unlikely to be design objectives of future
systems. Conceptual simplicity is advantageous when the resources available for
the design process are limited. Future design capabilities can reasonably be
expected to outstrip current capabilities, and the efforts of a large group can
reasonably be expected to allow analysis of much more complex proposals than
considered here.
Further, future systems will be designed to restore specific individuals
suffering from specific types of damage, and can therefore use specific methods
that are less general but which are more efficient or less costly for the
particular type of damage involved. It is easier for a general-purpose proposal
to rely on relatively simple and powerful methods, even if those methods are
less efficient.
Why, then, discuss a powerful, general purpose method that is inefficient,
fails to take advantage of the specific types of damage involved, and which will
almost certainly be superseded by future technology?
The purpose of this paper is not to lay the groundwork for future systems,
but to answer a question: will cryonics work? The value of cryonics is clearly
and decisively based on technical capabilities that will not be developed for
several decades (or longer). If some relatively simple proposal appears likely
to work, then the value of cryonics is established. Whether or not that simple
proposal is actually used is irrelevant. The fact that it could be used in the
improbable case that all other technical progress and all other approaches fail
is sufficient to let us decide today whether or not cryonic suspension is of
value.
The philosophical issues involved in this type of long range technical forecasting
and the methodologies appropriate to this area are addressed by work in "exploratory
engineering."[1, 85] The purpose of exploratory engineering is to provide lower
bounds on future technical capabilities based on currently understood scientific
principles. A successful example is Konstantin Tsiolkovsky's forecast around
the turn of the century that multi-staged rockets could go to the moon. His
forecast was based on well understood principles of Newtonian mechanics. While
it did not predict when such flights would take place, nor who would develop
the technology, nor the details of the Saturn V booster, it did predict that
the technical capability was feasible and would eventually be developed. In
a similar spirit, we will discuss the technical capabilities that should be
feasible and what those capabilities should make possible.
Conceptually, the approach that we will follow is simple:
- Determine the coordinates and orientations of all major molecules, and
store this information in a data base.
- Analyze the information stored in the data base with a computer program
which determines what changes in the existing structure should be made to
restore it to a healthy and functional state.
- Take the original molecules and move them, one at a time, back to their
correct locations.
The reader will no doubt agree that this proposal
is conceptually simple, but might be concerned about a number of technical
issues. The major issues are addressed in the following analysis.
An obvious inefficiency of this approach is that it will take apart and then
put back together again structures and whole regions that are in fact functional
or only slightly damaged. Simply leaving a functional region intact, or using
relatively simple special case repair methods for minor damage would be faster
and less costly. Despite these obvious drawbacks, the general purpose approach
demonstrates the principles involved. As long as the inefficiencies are not so
extreme that they make the approach infeasible or uneconomical in the long run,
then this simpler approach is easier to evaluate.
Overview of the Brain.The brain has a volume of 1350 cubic centimeters
(about one and a half quarts) and a weight of slightly more than 1400 grams
(about three pounds). The smallest normal human brain weighed 1100 grams, while
the largest weighed 2050 grams [30, page 24]. It is almost 80% water by weight.
The remaining 20% is slightly less than 40% protein, slightly over 50% lipids,
and a few percent of other material[16, page 419]. Thus, an average brain has
slightly over 100 grams of protein, about 175 grams of lipids, and some 30 to 40
grams of "other stuff".
How Many MoleculesIf we are considering restoration down to the
molecular level, an obvious question is: how many molecules are there? We can
easily approximate the answer, starting with the proteins. An "average" protein
molecule has a molecular weight of about 50,000 amu. One mole of "average"
protein is 50,000 grams (by definition), so the 100 grams of protein in the
brain is 100/50,000 or .002 moles. One mole is 6.02 x 10^23
molecules, so .002 moles is 1.2 x 10^21 molecules.
We proceed in the same way for the lipids (lipids are most often used to make
cell membranes) -- a "typical" lipid might have a molecular weight of 500 amu,
which is 100 times less than the molecular weight of a protein. This implies the
brain has about 175/500 x 6.02 x 10^23 or about 2 x 10^23
lipid molecules.
Finally, water has a molecular weight of 18, so there will be about 1400 x
0.8/18 x 6.02 x 10^23 or about 4 x 10^25 water molecules
in the brain. In many cases a substantial percentage of water will have been
replaced with cryoprotectant during the process of suspension; glycerol at a
concentration of 4 molar or more, for example. Both water and glycerol will be
treated in bulk, and so the change from water molecules to glycerol (or other
cryoprotectants) should not have a significant impact on the calculations that
follow.
These numbers are fundamental. Repair of the brain down to the molecular
level will require that we cope with them in some fashion.
How Much TimeAnother parameter whose value we must decide is the amount
of repair time per molecule. We assume that such repair time includes the time
required to determine the location of the molecule in the frozen tissue and the
time required to restore the molecule to its correct location, as well as the
time to diagnose and repair any structural defects in the molecule. The
computational power required to analyze larger-scale structural damage -- e.g.,
this mitochondria has suffered damage to its internal membrane structure (so
called "flocculent densities") -- should be less than the power required to
analyze each individual molecule. An analysis at the level of sub-cellular
organelles involves several orders of magnitude fewer components and will
therefore require correspondingly less computational power. Analysis at the
cellular level involves even fewer components. We therefore neglect the time
required for these additional computational burdens. The total time required for
repair is just the sum over all molecules of the time required by one repair
device to repair that molecule divided by the number of repair devices. The more
repair devices there are, the faster the repair will be. The more molecules
there are, and the more time it takes to repair each molecule, the slower repair
will be.
The time required for a ribosome to manufacture a protein molecule of 400 amino
acids is about 10 seconds[14, page 393], or about 25 milliseconds to add each
amino acid. DNA polymerase III can add an additional base to a replicating DNA
strand in about 7 milliseconds[14, page 289]. In both cases, synthesis takes
place in solution and involves significant delays while the needed components
diffuse to the reactive sites. The speed of assembler-directed reactions is
likely to prove faster than current biological systems. The arm of an assembler
should be capable of making a complete motion and causing a single chemical
transformation in about a microsecond [85]. However, we will conservatively
base our computations on the speed of synthesis already demonstrated by biological
systems, and in particular on the slower speed of protein synthesis.
We must do more than synthesize the required molecules -- we must analyze the
existing molecules, possibly repair them, and also move them from their original
location to the desired final location. Existing antibodies can identify
specific molecular species by selectively binding to them, so identifying
individual molecules is feasible in principle. Even assuming that the actual
technology employed is different it seems unlikely that such analysis will
require substantially longer than the synthesis time involved, so it seems
reasonable to multiply the synthesis time by a factor of a few to provide an
estimate of time spent per molecule. This should, in principle, allow time for
the complete disassembly and reassembly of the selected molecule using methods
no faster than those employed in biological systems. While the precise size of
this multiplicative factor can reasonably be debated, a factor of 10 should be
sufficient. The total time required to simply move a molecule from its original
location to its correct final location in the repaired structure should be
smaller than the time required to disassemble and reassemble it, so we will
assume that the total time required for analysis, repair and movement is 100
seconds per protein molecule.
Temperature of AnalysisWarming the tissue before determining its
molecular structure creates definite problems: everything will move around. A
simple solution to this problem is to keep the tissue frozen until after all the
desired structural information is recovered. In this case the analysis will take
place at a low temperature. Whether or not subsequent operations should be
performed at the same low temperature is left open. A later section considers
the various approaches that can be taken to restore the structure after it has
been analyzed.
Repair or Replace?In practice, most molecules will probably be intact
-- they would not have to be either disassembled or reassembled. This should
greatly reduce repair time. On a more philosophical note, existing biological
systems generally do not bother to repair macromolecules (a notable exception is
DNA -- a host of molecular mechanisms for the repair of this molecule are used
in most organisms). Most molecules are generally used for a period of time and
then broken down and replaced. There is a slow and steady turnover of molecular
structure -- the atoms in the roast beef sandwich eaten yesterday are used today
to repair and replace muscles, skin, nerve cells, etc. If we adopted nature's
philosophy we would simply discard and replace any damaged molecules, greatly
simplifying molecular "repair".
Carried to its logical conclusion, we would discard and replace all the
molecules in the structure. Having once determined the type, location and
orientation of a molecule in the original (frozen) structure, we would simply
throw that molecule out without further examination and replace it. This
requires only that we be able to identify the location and type of individual
molecules. It would not be necessary to determine if the molecule was damaged,
nor would it be necessary to correct any damage found. By definition, the
replacement molecule would be taken from a stock-pile of structurally correct
molecules that had been previously synthesized, in bulk, by the simplest and
most economical method available.
Discarding and replacing even a few atoms might disturb some people. This can
be avoided by analyzing and repairing any damaged molecules. However, for those
who view the simpler removal and replacement of damaged molecules as acceptable,
the repair process can be significantly simplified. For purposes of this paper,
however, we will continue to use the longer time estimate based on the premise
that full repair of every molecule is required. This appears to be conservative.
(Those who feel that replacing their atoms will change their identity should
think carefully before eating their next meal!)
Total Repair Machine SecondsWe shall assume that the repair time for
other molecules is similar per unit mass. That is, we shall assume that the
repair time for the lipids (which each weigh about 500 amu, 100 times less than
a protein) is about 100 times less than the repair time for a protein. The
repair time for one lipid molecule is assumed to be 1 second. We will neglect
water molecules in this analysis, assuming that they can be handled in bulk.
We have assumed that the time required to analyze and synthesize an
individual molecule will dominate the time required to determine its present
location, the time required to determine the appropriate location it should
occupy in the repaired structure, and the time required to put it in this
position. These assumptions are plausible but will be considered further when
the methods of gaining access to and of moving molecules during the repair
process are considered.
This analysis accounts for the bulk of the molecules -- it seems unlikely
that other molecular species will add significant additional repair time.
Based on these assumptions, we find that we require 100 seconds x 1.2 x
10^21 protein molecules + 1 second times 2 x 10^23 lipids,
or 3.2 x 10^23 repair-machine-seconds. This number is not as
fundamental as the number of molecules in the brain. It is based on the
(probably conservative) assumption that repair of 50,000 amu requires 100
seconds. Faster repair would imply repair could be done with fewer repair
machines, or in less time.
How Many Repair MachinesIf we now fix the total time required for
repair, we can determine the number of repair devices that must function in
parallel. We shall rather arbitrarily adopt 10^8 seconds, which is
very close to three years, as the total time in which we wish to complete
repairs.
If the total repair time is 10^8 seconds, and we require 3.2 x
10^23 repair-machine-seconds, then we require 3.2 x 10^15
repair machines for complete repair of the brain. This corresponds to 3.2 x
10^15 / (6.02 x 10^23) or 5.3 x 10^-9 moles, or
5.3 nanomoles of repair machines. If each repair device weighs 10^9
to 10^10 amu, then the total weight of all the repair devices is 5.3
to 53 grams: a a few ounces at most.
Thus, the weight of repair devices required to repair each and every molecule
in the brain, assuming the repair devices operate no faster than current
biological methods, is about 0.4% to 4% of the total mass of the brain.
By way of comparison, there are about 10^14 cells[44, page 3] in
the human body and each cell has about 10^7 ribosomes[14, page 652]
giving 10^21 ribosomes. Thus, there are about six orders of magnitude
more ribosomes in the human body than the number of repair machines we estimate
are required to repair the human brain.
It seems unlikely that either more or larger repair devices are inherently
required. However, it is comforting to know that errors in these estimates of
even several orders of magnitude can be easily tolerated. A requirement for
530 kilograms of repair devices (10,000 to 100,000 times more than we calculate
is needed) would have little practical impact on feasibility. Although repair
scenarios that involve deployment of the repair devices within the volume of
the brain could not be used if we required 530 kilograms of repair devices,
a number of other repair scenarios would still work -- one such approach is
discussed in this paper. Given that nanotechnology is feasible, manufacturing
costs for repair devices will be small. The cost of even 530 kilograms of repair
devices should eventually be significantly less than a few hundred dollars.
The feasibility of repair down to the molecular level is insensitive to even
large errors in the projections given here.
THE REPAIR PROCESSWe now turn to the physical deployment of these
repair devices. That is, although the raw number of repair devices is
sufficient, we must devise an orderly method of deploying these repair devices
so they can carry out the needed repairs.
Other Proposals: On-board RepairWe shall broadly divide repair
scenarios into two classes: on-board and off-board. In the on-board scenarios,
the repair devices are deployed within the volume of the brain. Existing
structures are disassembled in place, their component molecules examined and
repaired, and rebuilt on the spot. (We here class as "on-board" those scenarios
in which the repair devices operate within the physical volume of the brain,
even though there might be substantial off-board support. That is, there might
be a very large computer outside the tissue directing the repair process, but we
would still refer to the overall repair approach as "on-board"). The on-board
repair scenario has been considered in some detail by Drexler[18]. We will give
a brief outline of the on-board repair scenario here, but will not consider it
in any depth. For various reasons, it is quite plausible that on-board repair
scenarios will be developed before off-board repair scenarios.
The first advantage of on-board repair is an easier evolutionary path from
partial repair systems deployed in living human beings to the total repair
systems required for repair of the more extensive damage found in the person who
has been cryonically suspended. That is, a simple repair device for finding and
removing fatty deposits blocking the circulatory system could be developed and
deployed in living humans[2], and need not deal with all the problems involved
in total repair. A more complex device, developed as an incremental improvement,
might then repair more complex damage (perhaps identifying and killing cancer
cells) again within a living human. Once developed, there will be continued
pressure for evolutionary improvements in on-board repair capabilities which
should ultimately lead to repair of virtually arbitrary damage. This
evolutionary path should eventually produce a device capable of repairing frozen
tissue.
It is interesting to note that "At the end of this month [August 1990],
MITI's Agency of Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) will submit a budget
request for ´30 million ($200,000) to launch a `microrobot' project next year,
with the aim of developing tiny robots for the internal medical treatment and
repair of human beings. ... MITI is planning to pour ´25,000 million ($170
million) into the microrobot project over the next ten years..."[86]. Iwao
Fujimasa said their objective is a robot less than .04 inches in size that will
be able to travel through veins and inside organs[17, 20]. While substantially
larger than the proposals considered here, the direction of future evolutionary
improvements should be clear.
A second advantage of on-board repair is emotional. In on- board repair, the
original structure (you) is left intact at the macroscopic and even light
microscopic level. The disassembly and reassembly of the component molecules is
done at a level smaller than can be seen, and might therefore prove less
troubling than other forms of repair in which the disassembly and reassembly
processes are more visible. Ultimately, though, correct restoration of the
structure is the overriding concern.
A third advantage of on-board repair is the ability to leave functional
structures intact. That is, in on-board repair we can focus on those structures
that are damaged, while leaving working structures alone. If minor damage has
occurred, then an on-board repair system need make only minor repairs.
The major drawback of on-board repair is the increased complexity of the
system. As discussed earlier, this is only a drawback when the design tools and
the resources available for the design are limited. We can reasonably presume
that future design tools and future resources will greatly exceed present
efforts. Developments in computer aided design of complex systems will put the
design of remarkably complex systems within easy grasp.
In on-board repair, we might first logically partition the volume of the
brain into a matrix of cubes, and then deploy each repair device in its own
cube. Repair devices would first get as close as possible to their assigned cube
by moving through the circulatory system (we presume it would be cleared out as
a first step) and would then disassemble the tissue between them and their
destination. Once in position, each repair device would analyze the tissue in
its assigned volume and perform any repairs required.
The Current Proposal: Off-Board RepairThe second class of repair
scenarios, the off-board scenarios, allow the total volume of repair devices to
greatly exceed the volume of the human brain.
The primary advantage of off-board repair is conceptual simplicity. It
employees simple brute force to insure that a solution is feasible and to avoid
complex design issues. As discussed earlier, these are virtues in thinking about
the problem today but are unlikely to carry much weight in the future when an
actual system is being designed.
The other advantages of this approach are fairly obvious. Lingering concerns
about volume and heat dissipation can be eliminated. If a ton of repair devices
should prove necessary, then a ton can be provided. Concerns about design
complexity can be greatly reduced. Off-board repair scenarios do not require
that the repair devices be mobile -- simplifying communications and power
distribution, and eliminating the need for locomotor capabilities and
navigational abilities. The only previous paper on off-board repair scenarios
was by Merkle[101].
Off-board repair scenarios can be naturally divided into three phases. In the
first phase, we must analyze the structure to determine its state. The primary
purpose of this phase is simply to gather information about the structure,
although in the process the disassembly of the structure into its component
molecules will also take place. Various methods of gaining access to and
analyzing the overall structure are feasible -- in this paper we shall primarily
consider one approach.
We shall presume that the analysis phase takes place while the tissue is
still frozen. While the exact temperature is left open, it seems preferable to
perform analysis prior to warming. The thawing process itself causes damage and,
once thawed, continued deterioration will proceed unchecked by the mechanisms
present in healthy tissue. This cannot be tolerated during a repair time of
several years. Either faster analysis or some means of blocking deterioration
would have to be used if analysis were to take place after warming. We will not
explore these possibilities here (although this appears worthwhile). The
temperature at which other phases takes place is left open.
The second phase of off-board repair is determination of the healthy state.
In this phase, the structural information derived from the analysis phase is
used to determine what the healthy state of the tissue had been prior to
suspension and any preceding illness. This phase involves only computation based
on the information provided by the analysis phase.
The third phase is repair. In this phase, we must restore the structure in
accordance with the blue-print provided by the second phase, the determination
of the healthy state.
Intermediate States During Off-Board RepairRepair methods in
general start with frozen tissue, and end with healthy tissue. The nature of the
intermediate states characterizes the different repair approaches. In off-board
repair the tissue undergoing repair must pass through three highly
characteristic states, described in the following three paragraphs.
The first state is the starting state, prior to any repair efforts. The
tissue is frozen (unrepaired).
In the second state, immediately following the analysis phase, the tissue has
been disassembled into its individual molecules. A detailed structural data base
has been built which provides a description of the location, orientation, and
type of each molecule, as discussed earlier. For those who are concerned that
their identity or "self" is dependent in some fundamental way on the specific
atoms which compose their molecules, the original molecules can be retained in a
molecular "filing cabinet." While keeping physical track of the original
molecules is more difficult technically, it is feasible and does not alter
off-board repair in any fundamental fashion.
In the third state, the tissue is restored and fully functional.
By characterizing the intermediate state which must be achieved during the
repair process, we reduce the problem from "Start with frozen tissue and
generate healthy tissue" to "Start with frozen tissue and generate a structural
data base and a molecular filing cabinet. Take the structural data base and the
molecular filing cabinet and generate healthy tissue." It is characteristic of
off-board repair that we disassemble the molecular structure into its component
pieces prior to attempting repair.
As an example, suppose we wish to repair a car. Rather than try and diagnose
exactly what's wrong, we decide to take the car apart into its component pieces.
Once the pieces are spread out in front of us, we can easily clean each piece,
and then reassemble the car. Of course, we'll have to keep track of where all
the pieces go so we can reassemble the structure, but in exchange for this
bookkeeping task we gain a conceptually simple method of insuring that we
actually can get access to everything and repair it. While this is a rather
extreme method of repairing a broken carburetor, it certainly is a good argument
that we should be able to repair even rather badly damaged cars. So, too, with
off-board repair. While it might be an extreme method of fixing any particular
form of damage, it provides a good argument that damage can be repaired under a
wide range of circumstances.
Off-Board Repair is the Best that can be AchievedRegardless of the
initial level of damage, regardless of the functional integrity or lack thereof
of any or all of the frozen structure, regardless of whether easier and less
exhaustive techniques might or might not work, we can take any frozen structure
and convert it into the canonical state described above. Further, this is the
best that we can do. Knowing the type, location and orientation of every
molecule in the frozen structure under repair and retaining the actual physical
molecules (thus avoiding any philosophical objections that replacing the
original molecules might somehow diminish or negate the individuality of the
person undergoing repair) is the best that we can hope to achieve. We have
reached some sort of limit with this approach, a limit that will make repair
feasible under circumstances which would astonish most people today.
One particular approach to off-board repair is divide-and- conquer. This
method is one of the technically simplest approaches. We discuss this method in
the following section.
Divide-and-ConquerDivide-and-conquer is a general purpose
problem-solving method frequently used in computer science and elsewhere. In
this method, if a problem proves too difficult to solve it is first divided into
sub-problems, each of which is solved in turn. Should the sub-problems prove too
difficult to solve, they are in turn divided into sub-sub-problems. This process
is continued until the original problem is divided into pieces that are small
enough to be solved by direct methods.
If we apply divide-and-conquer to the analysis of a physical object -- such
as the brain -- then we must be able to physically divide the object of analysis
into two pieces and recursively apply the same method to the two pieces. This
means that we must be able to divide a piece of frozen tissue, whether it be the
entire brain or some smaller part, into roughly equal halves. Given that tissue
at liquid nitrogen temperatures is already prone to fracturing, it should
require only modest effort to deliberately induce a fracture that would divide
such a piece into two roughly equal parts. Fractures made at low temperatures
(when the material is below the glass transition temperature) are extremely
clean, and result in little or no loss of structural information. Indeed, freeze
fracture techniques are used for the study of synaptic structures. Hayat [40,
page 398] says "Membranes split during freeze-fracturing along their central
hydrophobic plane, exposing intramembranous surfaces. ... The fracture plane
often follows the contours of membranes and leaves bumps or depressions where it
passes around vesicles and other cell organelles. ... The fracturing process
provides more accurate insight into the molecular architecture of membranes than
any other ultrastructural method." It seems unlikely that the fracture itself
will result in any significant loss of structural information.
The freshly exposed faces can now be analyzed by various surface analysis
techniques. Work with STMs supports the idea that very high resolution is
feasible[46]. For example, optical absorption microscopy "...generates an
absorption spectrum of the surface with a resolution of 1 nanometer [a few
atomic diameters]." Kumar Wickramasinghe of IBM's T. J. Watson Research Center
said: "We should be able to record the spectrum of a single molecule" on a
surface. Williams and Wickramasinghe said [51] "The ability to measure
variations in chemical potential also allows the possibility of selectively
identifying subunits of biological macromolecules either through a direct
measurement of their chemical- potential gradients or by decorating them with
different metals. This suggest a potentially simple method for sequencing DNA."
While current devices are large, the fundamental physical principles on which
they rely do not require large size. Many of the devices depend primarily on the
interaction between a single atom at the tip of the STM probe and the atoms on
the surface of the specimen under analysis. Clearly, substantial reductions in
size in such devices are feasible.
High resolution optical techniques can also be employed. Near field microscopy,
employing light with a wavelength of hundreds of nanometers, has achieved a
resolution of 12 nanometers (much smaller than a wavelength of light). To quote
the abstract of a recent review article on the subject: "The near-field optical
interaction between a sharp probe and a sample of interest can be exploited
to image, spectroscopically probe, or modify surfaces at a resolution (down
to ~12 nm) inaccessible by traditional far-field techniques. Many of the attractive
features of conventional optics are retained, including noninvasiveness, reliability,
and low cost. In addition, most optical contrast mechanisms can be extended
to the near-field regime, resulting in a technique of considerable versatility.
This versatility is demonstrated by several examples, such as the imaging of
nanometric-scale features in mammalian tissue sections and the creation of ultrasmall,
magneto-optic domains having implications for high-density data storage. Although
the technique may find uses in many diverse fields, two of the most exciting
possibilities are localized optical spectroscopy of semiconductors and the fluorescence
imaging of living cells."[111]. Another article said: "Our signals are currently
of such magnitude that almost any application originally conceived for far-field
optics can now be extended to the near-field regime, including: dynamical studies
at video rates and beyond; low noise, high resolution spectroscopy (also aided
by the negligible auto-fluorescence of the probe); minute differential absorption
measurements; magnetooptics; and superresolution lithography."[100] [note 20] .
How Small are the PiecesThe division into halves continues until the
pieces are small enough to allow direct analysis by repair devices. If we
presume that division continues until each repair device is assigned its own
piece to repair, then there will be both 3.2 x 10^15 repair devices
and pieces. If the 1350 cubic centimeter volume of the brain is divided into
this many cubes, each such cube would be about .4 microns (422 nanometers) on a
side. Each cube could then be directly analyzed (disassembled into its component
molecules) by a repair device during our three-year repair period.
One might view these cubes as the pieces of a three- dimensional jig-saw puzzle,
the only difference being that we have cheated and carefully recorded the position
of each piece. Just as the picture on a jig-saw puzzle is clearly visible despite
the fractures between the pieces, so too the three-dimensional "picture" of
the brain is clearly visible despite its division into pieces [note 21].
Moving Pieces
There are a great many possible methods of handling the mechanical
problems involved in dividing and moving the pieces. It seems unlikely that
mechanical movement of the pieces will prove an insurmountable impediment, and
therefore we do not consider it in detail. However, for the sake of
concreteness, we outline one possibility. Human arms are about 1 meter in
length, and can easily handle objects from 1 to 10 centimeters in size (.01 to
.1 times the length of the arm). It should be feasible, therefore, to construct
a series of progressively shorter arms which handle pieces of progressively
smaller size. If each set of arms were ten times shorter than the preceding set,
then we would have devices with arms of: 1 meter, 1 decimeter, 1 centimeter, 1
millimeter, 100 microns, 10 microns, 1 micron, and finally .1 microns or 100
nanometers. (Note that an assembler has arms roughly 100 nanometers long). Thus,
we would need to design 8 different sizes of manipulators. At each succeeding
size the manipulators would be more numerous, and so would be able to deal with
the many more pieces into which the original object was divided. Transport and
mechanical manipulation of an object would be done by arms of the appropriate
size. As objects were divided into smaller pieces that could no longer be
handled by arms of a particular size, they would be handed to arms of a smaller
size.
If it requires about three years to analyze each piece, then the time
required both to divide the brain into pieces and to move each piece to an
immobile repair device can reasonably be neglected. It seems unlikely that
moving the pieces will take a significant fraction of three years.
Memory Requirements
The information storage requirements for a structural data- base that holds the
detailed description and location of each major molecule in the brain can be met
by projected storage methods. DNA has an information storage density of about
10^21 bits/cubic centimeter. Conceptually similar but somewhat higher
density molecular "tape" systems that store 10^22 bits/cubic centimeter
[1] should be quite feasible. If we assume that every lipid molecule is "significant"
but that water molecules, simple ions and the like are not, then the number of
significant molecules is roughly the same as the number of lipid molecules [note 22] (the number of protein molecules is
more than two orders of magnitude smaller, so we will neglect it in this estimate).
The digital description of these 2 x 10^23 significant molecules requires
10^25 bits (assuming that 50 bits are required to encode the location
and description of each molecule). This is about 1,000 cubic centimeters (1 liter,
roughly a quart) of "tape" storage. If a storage system of such capacity strikes
the reader as infeasible, consider that a human being has about 10^14
cells[44, page 3] and that each cell stores 10^10 bits in its DNA[14].
Thus, every human that you see is a device which (among other things) has a raw
storage capacity of 10^24 bits -- and human beings are unlikely to
be optimal information storage devices.
A simple method of reducing storage requirements by several orders of
magnitude would be to analyze and repair only a small amount of tissue at a
time. This would eliminate the need to store the entire 10^25 bit
description at one time. A smaller memory could hold the description of the
tissue actually under repair, and this smaller memory could then be cleared and
re-used during repair of the next section of tissue.
Computational Requirements
The computational power required to analyze a data base with 10^25
bits is well within known theoretical limits[9,25,32]. It has been seriously proposed
that it might be possible to increase the total computational power achievable
within the universe beyond any fixed bound in the distant future[52, page 658].
More conservative lower bounds to nearer-term future computational capabilities
can be derived from the reversible rod-logic molecular model of computation, which
dissipates about 10^-23 joules per gate operation when operating at
100 picoseconds at room temperature[ 85]. A wide range of other possibilities
exist. Likharev proposed a computational element based on Josephson junctions
which operates at 4 K and in which energy dissipation per switching operation
is 10^-24 joules with a switching time of 10^-9 seconds[33,
43]. Continued evolutionary reductions in the size and energy dissipation of properly
designed NMOS[113] and CMOS[112, 120] circuits should eventually produce logic
elements that are both very small (though significantly larger than Drexler's
mechanical proposals) and which dissipate extraordinarily small amounts of energy
per logic operation. Extrapolation of current trends suggest that energy dissipations
in the 10^-23 joule range will be achieved before 2030[31, fig. 1].
There is no presently known reason to expect the trend to stop or even slow down
at that time[9,32].
Energy costs appear to be the limiting factor in rod logic (rather than the
number of gates, or the speed of operation of the gates). Today, electric power
costs about 10 cents per kilowatt hour. Future costs of power will almost certainly
be much lower. Molecular manufacturing should eventually sharply reduce the
cost of solar cells and increase their efficiency close to the theoretical limits.
With a manufacturing cost of under 10 cents per kilogram[ 85] the cost of a
one square meter solar cell will be less than a penny. As a consequence the
cost of solar power will be dominated by other costs, such as the cost of the
land on which the solar cell is placed. While solar cells can be placed on the
roofs of existing structures or in otherwise unused areas, we will simply use
existing real estate prices to estimate costs. Low cost land in the desert south
western United States can be purchased for less than $1,000 per acre. (This
price corresponds to about 25 cents per square meter, significantly larger than
the projected future manufacturing cost of a one square meter solar cell). Land
elsewhere in the world (arid regions of the Australian outback, for example)
is much cheaper. For simplicity and conservatism, though, we'll simply adopt
the $1,000 per acre price for the following calculations. Renting an acre of
land for a year at an annual price of 10% of the purchase price will cost $100.
Incident sunlight at the earth's surface provides a maximum of 1,353 watts per
square meter, or 5.5 x 10^6 watts per acre. Making allowances for
inefficiencies in the solar cells, atmospheric losses, and losses caused by
the angle of incidence of the incoming light reduces the actual average power
production by perhaps a factor of 15 to about 3.5 x 10^5 watts. Over
a year, this produces 1.1 x 10^13 joules or 3.1 x 10^6
kilowatt hours. The land cost $100, so the cost per joule is 0.9 nanocents and
the cost per kilowatt hour is 3.3 millicents. Solar power, once we can make
the solar cells cheaply enough, will be over several thousand times cheaper
than electric power is today. We'll be able to buy over 10^15 joules
for under $10,000.
While the energy dissipation per logic operation estimated by Drexler[ 85]
is about 10^-23 joules, we'll content ourselves with the higher estimate
of 10^-22 joules per logic operation. Our 10^15 joules
will then power 10^37 gate operations: 10^12 gate operations
for each bit in the structural data base or 5 x 10^13 gate operations
for each of the 2 x 10^23 lipid molecules present in the brain.
It should be emphasized that in off-board repair warming of the tissue is not
an issue because the overwhelming bulk of the calculations and hence almost all
of the energy dissipation takes place outside the tissue. Much of the
computation takes place when the original structure has been entirely
disassembled into its component molecules.
How Much Is Enough?Is this enough computational power? We can get a
rough idea of how much computer power might be required if we draw an analogy
from image recognition. The human retina performs about 100 "operations" per
pixel, and the human brain is perhaps 1,000 to 10,000 times larger than the
retina. This implies that the human image recognition system can recognize an
object after devoting some 10^5 to 10^6 "operations" per
pixel. (This number is also in keeping with informal estimates made by
individuals expert in computer image analysis). Allowing for the fact that such
"retinal operations" are probably more complex than a single "gate operation" by
a factor of 1000 to 10,000, we arrive at 10^8 to 10^10
gate operations per pixel -- which is well below our estimate of
10^12 operations per bit or 5 x 10^13 operations per
molecule.
To give a feeling for the computational power this represents, it is useful
to compare it to estimates of the raw computational power of the human brain.
The human brain has been variously estimated as being able to do 10^13[50],
10^15 or 10^16[114] operations a second (where "operation"
has been variously defined but represents some relatively simple and basic action)
[note 23]. The 10^37 total logic operations
will support 10^29 logic operations per second for three years, which
is the raw computational power of something like 10^13 human beings
(even when we use the high end of the range for the computational power of the
human brain). This is 10 trillion human beings, or some 2,000 times more people
than currently exist on the earth today. By present standards, this is a large
amount of computational power. Viewed another way, if we were to divide the
human brain into tiny cubes that were about 5 microns on a side (less than the
volume of a typical cell), each such cube could receive the full and undivided
attention of a dedicated human analyst for a full three years.
The next paragraph analyzes memory costs, and can be skipped without loss of
continuity.
This analysis neglects the memory required to store the complete state of
these computations. Because this estimate of computational abilities and
requirements depends on the capabilities of the human brain, we might require an
amount of memory roughly similar to the amount of memory required by the human
brain as it computes. This might require about 10^16 bits (10 bits
per synapse) to store the "state" of the computation. (We assume that an exact
representation of each synapse will not be necessary in providing capabilities
that are similar to those of the human brain. At worst, the behavior of small
groups of cells could be analyzed and implemented by the most efficient method,
e.g., a "center surround" operation in the retina could be implemented as
efficiently as possible, and would not require detailed modeling of each neuron
and synapse. In point of fact, it is likely that algorithms that are
significantly different from the algorithms employed in the human brain will
prove to be the most efficient for this rather specialized type of analysis, and
so our use of estimates derived from low-level parts-counts from the human brain
are likely to be conservative). For 10^13 programs each equivalent in
analytical skills to a single human being, this would require 10^29
bits. At 100 cubic nanometers per bit, this gives 10,000 cubic meters. Using the
cost estimates provided by Drexler[85] this would be an
uncomfortable $1,000,000. We can, however, easily reduce this cost by
partitioning the computation to reduce memory requirements. Instead of having
10^13 programs each able to "think" at about the same speed as a
human being, we could have 10^10 programs each able to "think" at a
speed 1,000 times faster than a human being. Instead of having 10 trillion
dedicated human analysts working for 3 years each, we would have 10 billion
dedicated human analysts working for 3,000 virtual years each. The project would
still be completed in 3 calendar years, for each computer "analyst" would be a
computer program running 1,000 times faster than an equally skilled human
analyst. Instead of analyzing the entire brain at once, we would instead
logically divide the brain into 1,000 pieces each of about 1.4 cubic centimeters
in size, and analyze each such piece fully before moving on to the next piece.
This reduces our memory requirements by a factor of 1,000 and the cost of
that memory to a manageable $1,000.
It should be emphasized that the comparisons with human capabilities are used
only to illustrate the immense capabilities of 10^37 logic
operations. It should not be assumed that the software that will actually be
used will have any resemblance to the behavior of the human brain.
More Computer PowerIn the following paragraphs, we argue that even more
computational power will in fact be available, and so our margins for error are
much larger.
Energy loss in rod logic, in Likharev's parametric quantron, in properly
designed NMOS and CMOS circuits, and in many other proposals for computational
devices is related to speed of operation. By slowing down the operating speed
from 100 picoseconds to 100 nanoseconds or even 100 microseconds we should
achieve corresponding reductions in energy dissipation per gate operation. This
will allow substantial increases in computational power for a fixed amount of
energy (10^15 joules). We can both decrease the energy dissipated per
gate operation (by operating at a slower speed) and increase the total number of
gate operations (by using more gates). Because the gates are very small to start
with, increasing their number by a factor of as much as 10^10 (to
approximately 10^27 gates) would still result in a total volume of
100 cubic meters (recall that each gate plus overhead is about 100 cubic
nanometers). This is a cube less than 5 meters on a side. Given that
manufacturing costs will eventually reflect primarily material and energy costs,
such a volume of slowly operating gates should be economical and would deliver
substantially more computational power per joule.
We will not pursue this approach here for two main reasons. First, published
analyses use the higher 100 picosecond speed of operation and 10^-22
joules of energy dissipation[ 85]. Second, operating at 10^-22 joules
at room temperature implies that most logic operations must be reversible and
that less than one logic operation in 30 can be irreversible. Irreversible logic
operations (which erase information) must inherently dissipate at least kT x
ln(2) for fundamental thermodynamic reasons. The average thermal energy of a
single atom or molecule at a temperature T (measured in degrees K) is approximately
kT where k is Boltzmann's constant. At room temperature, kT is about 4 x 10^-21
joules. Thus, each irreversible operation will dissipate almost 3 x 10^-21
joules. The number of such operations must be limited if we are to achieve an
average energy dissipation of 10^-22 joules per logic operation.
While it should be feasible to perform computations in which virtually all
logic operations are reversible (and hence need not dissipate any fixed amount
of energy per logic operation)[9, 25, 32, 53, 112, 120], current computer architectures
might require some modification before they could be adapted to this style of
operation. By contrast, it should be feasible to use current computer architectures
while at the same time performing a major percentage (e.g., 99% or more) of
their logic operations in a reversible fashion.
Various electronic proposals show that almost all of the existing combinational
logic in present computers can be replaced with reversible logic with no change
in the instruction set that is executed[112, 113]. Further, while some instructions
in current computers are irreversible and hence must dissipate at least kT x
ln(2) joules for each bit of information erased, other instructions are reversible
and need not dissipate any fixed amount of energy if implemented correctly.
Optimizing compilers could then avoid using the irreversible machine instructions
and favor the use of the reversible instructions. Thus, without modifying the
instruction set of the computer, we can make most logic operations in the computer
reversible.
Further work on reversible computation can only lower the minimum energy expenditure
per basic operation and increase the percentage of reversible logic operations.
Much greater reductions in energy dissipation might be feasible[105]. While
it is at present unclear how far the trend towards lower energy dissipation
per logic operation can go, it is clear that we have not yet reached a limit
and that no particular limit is yet visible.
We can also expect further decreases in energy costs. By placing solar cells
in space the total incident sunlight per square meter can be greatly increased
(particularly if the solar cell is located closer to the sun) while at the same
time the total mass of the solar cell can be greatly decreased. Most of the mass
in earth-bound structures is required not for functional reasons but simply to
insure structural integrity against the forces of gravity and the weather. In
space both these problems are virtually eliminated. As a consequence a very thin
solar cell of relatively modest mass can have a huge surface area and provide
immense power at much lower costs than estimated here.
If we allow for the decreasing future cost of energy and the probability that
future designs will have lower energy dissipation than 10^-22 joules
per logic operation, it seems likely that we will have a great deal more
computational power than required. Even ignoring these more than likely
developments, we will have adequate computational power for repair of the brain
down to the molecular level.
Chemical Energy of the BrainAnother issue is the energy involved in the
complete disassembly and reassembly of every molecule in the brain. The total
chemical energy stored in the proteins and lipids of the human brain is quite
modest in comparison with 10^15 joules. When lipids are burned, they
release about 9 kilocalories per gram. (Calorie conscious dieters are actually
counting "kilocalories" -- so a "300 Calorie Diet Dinner" really has 300,000
calories or 1,254,000 joules). When protein is burned, it releases about 4
kilocalories per gram. Given that there are 100 grams of protein and 175 grams
of lipid in the brain, this means there is almost 2,000 kilocalories of chemical
energy stored in the structure of the brain, or about 8 x 10^6
joules. This much chemical energy is over 10^8 times less than the
10^15 joules that one person can reasonably purchase in the future.
It seems unlikely that the construction of the human brain must inherently
require substantially more than 10^7 joules and even more unlikely
that it could require over 10^15 joules. The major energy cost in
repair down to the molecular level appears to be in the computations required to
"think" about each major molecule in the brain and the proper relationships
among those molecules.
Determining the Healthy StateIn the second phase of the analysis,
determination of the healthy state, we determine what the repaired (healthy)
tissue should look like at the molecular level. That is, the initial structural
data base produced by the analysis phase describes unhealthy (frozen) tissue. In
determination of the healthy state, we must generate a revised structural data
base that describes the corresponding healthy (functional) tissue. The
generation of this revised data base requires a computer program that has an
intimate understanding of what healthy tissue should look like, and the
correspondence between unhealthy (frozen) tissue and the corresponding healthy
tissue. As an example, this program would have to understand that healthy tissue
does not have fractures in it, and that if any fractures are present in the
initial data base (describing the frozen tissue) then the revised data base
(describing the resulting healthy tissue) should be altered to remove them.
Similarly, if the initial data base describes tissue with swollen or
non-functional mitochondria, then the revised data base should be altered so
that it describes fully functional mitochondria. If the initial data base
describes tissue which is infected (viral or bacterial infestations) then the
revised data base should be altered to remove the viral or bacterial components.
While the revised data base describes the healthy state of the tissue that we
desire to achieve, it does not specify the method(s) to be used in restoring the
healthy structure. There is in general no necessary implication that restoration
will or will not be done at some specific temperature, or will or will not be
done in any particular fashion. Any one of a wide variety of methods could be
employed to actually restore the specified structure. Further, the actual
restored structure might differ in minor details from the structure described by
the revised data base.
The complexity of the program that determines the healthy state will vary with
the quality of the suspension and the level of damage prior to suspension. Clearly,
if cryonic suspension "almost works", then the initial data base and the revised
data base will not greatly differ. Cryonic suspension under favorable circumstances
preserves the tissue with good fidelity down to the molecular level. If, however,
there was significant presuspension injury then deducing the correct (healthy)
structural description is more complex. However, it should be feasible to deduce
the correct structural description even in the face of significant damage. Only
if the structure is obliterated beyond recognition will it be infeasible to
deduce the undamaged state of the structure.
ALTERNATIVES TO REPAIR
A brief philosophical aside is in order. Once we have generated an acceptable
revised structural data base, we can in fact pursue either of two distinctly different
possibilities. The obvious path is to continue with the repair process, eventually
producing healthy tissue. An alternative path is to use the description in the
revised structural data base to guide the construction of a different but "equivalent"
structure (e.g., an "artificial brain"). This possibility has been much discussed[11,
50], and has recently been called "uploading" (or "downloading")[26]. Whether
or not such a process preserves what is essentially human is often hotly debated,
but it has advantages wholly unrelated to personal survival. As an example, the
knowledge and skills of an Einstein or Turing need not be lost: they could be
preserved in a computational model. On a more commercial level, the creative skills
of a Spielberg (whose movies have produced a combined revenue in the billions)
could also be preserved. Whether or not the computational model was viewed as
having the same essential character as the biological human after which it was
patterned, it would indisputably preserve that person's mental abilities and talents.
It seems likely that many people today will want complete physical
restoration (despite the philosophical possibilities considered above) and will
continue through the repair planning and repair phases.
RESTORATIONIn the third phase of repair we start with an atomically
precise description (the revised data base) of the structure that we wish to
restore, and a filing cabinet holding the molecules that will be needed during
restoration. Optionally, the molecules in the filing cabinet can be from the
original structure. This deals with the concerns of those who want restoration
with the original atoms. Our objective is to restore the original structure with
a precision sufficient to support the original functional capabilities. Clearly,
this would be achieved if we were to restore the structure with atomic
precision. Before discussing this most technically exacting approach, we will
briefly mention the other major approaches that might be employed.
We know it is possible to make a human brain for this has been done by
traditional methods for many thousands of years. If we were to adopt a
restoration method that was as close as possible to the traditional technique
for building a brain, we might use a "guided growth" strategy. That is, in
simple organisms the growth of every single cell and of every single synapse is
determined genetically. "All the cell divisions, deaths, and migrations that
generate the embryonic, then the larval, and finally the adult forms of the
roundworm Caenorhabditis Elegans have now been traced."[103]. "The embryonic
lineage is highly invariant, as are the fates of the cells to which it gives
rise"[102]. The appendix says: "Parts List: Caenorhabditis elegans (Bristol)
Newly Hatched Larva. This index was prepared by condensing a list of all cells
in the adult animal, then adding comments and references. A complete listing is
available on request..." The adult organism has 959 cells in its body, 302 of
which are nerve cells[104].
Restoring a specific biological structure using this approach would require
that we determine the total number and precise growth patterns of all the cells
involved. The human brain has roughly 10^12 nerve cells, plus perhaps
ten times as many glial cells and other support cells. While simply encoding
this complex a structure into the genome of a single embryo might prove to be
overly complex, it would certainly be feasible to control critical cellular
activities by the use of on board nanocomputers. That is, each cell would be
controlled by an on-board computer, and that computer would in turn have been
programmed with a detailed description of the growth pattern and connections of
that particular cell. While the cell would function normally in most respects,
critical cellular activities, such as replication, motility, and synapse growth,
would be under the direct control of the on-board computer. Thus, as in C.
Elegans but on a larger scale, the growth of the entire system would be "highly
invariant." Once the correct final configuration had been achieved, the on-board
nanocomputers would terminate their activities and be flushed from the system as
waste.
This approach might be criticized on the grounds that the resulting person
was a "mere duplicate," and so "self" had not been preserved. Certainly, precise
atomic control of the structure would appear to be difficult to achieve using
guided growth, for biological systems do not normally control the precise
placement of individual molecules. While the same atoms could be used as in the
original, it would seem difficult to guarantee that they would be in the same
places.
Concerns of this sort lead to restoration methods that provide higher
precision. In these methods, the desired structure is restored directly from
molecular components by placing the molecular components in the desired
locations. A problem with this approach is the stability of the structure during
restoration. Molecules might drift away from their assigned locations,
destroying the structure.
An approach that we might call "minimal stabilization" would involve
synthesis in liquid water, with mechanical stabilization of the various lipid
membranes in the system. A three-dimensional grid or scaffolding would provide a
framework that would hold membrane anchors in precise locations. The membranes
themselves would thus be prevented from drifting too far from their assigned
locations. To prevent chemical deterioration during restoration, it would be
necessary to remove all reactive compounds (e.g., oxygen).
In this scenario, once the initial membrane "framework" was in place and held
in place by the scaffolding, further molecules would be brought into the
structure and put in the correct locations. In many instances, such molecules
could be allowed to diffuse freely within the cellular compartment into which
they had been introduced. In some instances, further control would be necessary.
For example, a membrane- spanning channel protein might have to be confined to a
specific region of a nerve cell membrane, and prevented from diffusing freely to
other regions of the membrane. One method of achieving this limited kind of
control over further diffusion would be to enclose a region of the membrane by a
diffusion barrier (much like the spread of oil on water can be prevented by
placing a floating barrier on the water).
While it is likely that some further cases would arise where it was necessary
to prevent or control diffusion, the emphasis in this method is in providing the
minimal control over molecular position that is needed to restore the structure.
While this approach does not achieve atomically precise restoration of the
original structure, the kinds of changes that are introduced (diffusion of a
molecule within a cellular compartment, diffusion of a membrane protein within
the membrane) would be very similar to the kinds of diffusion that would take
place in a normal biological system. Thus, the restored result would have the
same molecules with the same atoms, and the molecules would be in similar
(though not exactly the same) locations they had been in prior to restoration.
To achieve even more precise control over the restored structure, we might
adopt a "full stabilization" strategy. In this strategy, each major molecule
would be anchored in place, either to the scaffolding or an adjacent molecule.
This would require the design of a stabilizing molecule for each specific type
of molecule found in the body. The stabilizing molecule would have a specific
end attached to the specific molecule, and a general end attached either to
the scaffolding or to another stabilizing molecule. Once restoration was complete,
the stabilizing molecules would release the molecules that were being stabilized
and normal function would resume. This release might be triggered by the simple
diffusion of an enzyme that attacked and broke down the stabilizing molecules.
This kind of approach was considered by Drexler[1].
Low Temperature Restoration
Finally, we might achieve stability of the intermediate structure by using low
temperatures. If the structure were restored at a sufficiently low temperature,
a molecule put in a certain place would simply not move. We might call this method
"low temperature restoration."
In this scenario, each new molecule would simply be stacked (at low
temperature) in the right location. This can be roughly likened to stacking
bricks to build a house. A hemoglobin molecule could simply be thrown into the
middle of the half-restored red blood cell. Other molecules whose precise
position was not critical could likewise be positioned rather inexactly. Lipids
in the lipid bi-layer forming the cellular membrane would have to be placed more
precisely (probably with an accuracy of several angstroms). An individual lipid
molecule, having once been positioned more or less correctly on a lipid bi-layer
under construction, would be held in place (at sufficiently low temperatures) by
van der Waals forces. Membrane bound proteins could also be "stacked" in their
proper locations. Because biological systems make extensive use of self-
assembly it would not be necessary to achieve perfect accuracy in the
restoration process. If a biological macromolecule is positioned with reasonable
accuracy, it would automatically assume the correct position upon warming.
Large polymers, used either for structural or other purposes, pose special
problems. The monomeric units are covalently bonded to each other, and so simple
"stacking" is inadequate. If such polymers cannot be added to the structure as
entirely pre-formed units, then they could be incrementally restored during
assembly from their individual monomers using the techniques discussed earlier
involving positional synthesis using highly reactive intermediates. Addition of
monomeric units to the polymer could then be done at the most convenient point
during the restoration operation.
The chemical operations required to make a polymer from its monomeric units
at reduced temperatures are unlikely to use the same reaction pathways that are
used by living systems. In particular, the activation energies of most reactions
that take place at 310 K (98.6 degrees Fahrenheit) can not be met at 77 K: most
conventional compounds don't react at that temperature. However, as discussed
earlier, assembler based synthesis techniques using highly reactive
intermediates in near-perfect vacuum with mechanical force providing activation
energy will continue to work quite well, even if we assume that thermal
activation energy is entirely absent (e.g., that the system is close to 0
Kelvins).
An obvious problem with low temperature restoration is the need to re-warm
the structure without incurring further damage. Much "freezing" injury takes
place during rewarming, and this would have to be prevented. One solution is
discussed in the next two paragraphs.
Generally, the revised structural data base can be further altered to make
restoration easier. While certain alterations to the structural data base must
be banned (anything that might damage memory, for example) many alterations
would be quite safe. One set of safe alterations would be those that correspond
to real-world changes that are non-damaging. For example, moving sub-cellular
organelles within a cell would be safe -- such motion occurs spontaneously in
living tissue. Likewise, small changes in the precise physical location of cell
structures that did not alter cellular topology would also be safe. Indeed, some
operations that might at first appear dubious are almost certainly safe. For
example, any alteration that produces damage that can be repaired by the tissue
itself once it is restored to a functional state is in fact safe -- though we
might well seek to avoid such alterations (and they do not appear necessary).
While the exact range of alterations that can be safely applied to the
structural data base is unclear, it is evident that the range is fairly wide.
An obvious modification which would allow us to re-warm the structure safely
would be to add cryoprotectants. Because we are restoring the frozen structure
with atomic precision, we could use different concentrations and different types
of cryoprotectants in different regions, thus matching the cryoprotectant
requirements with exquisite accuracy to the tissue type. This is not feasible
with present technology because cryoprotectants are introduced using simple
diffusive techniques.
Extremely precise control over the heating rate would also be feasible, as
well as very rapid heating[126]. Rapid heating would allow less time for damage
to take place. Rapid heating, however, might introduce problems of stress and
resulting fractures. Two approaches for the elimination of this problem are (1)
modify the structure so that the coefficient of thermal expansion is very small
and (2) increase the strength of the structure.
One simple method of insuring that the volume occupied before and after
warming was the same (i.e., of making a material with a very small thermal
expansion coefficient) would be to disperse many small regions with the opposite
thermal expansion tendency throughout the material. For example, if a volume
tended to expand upon warming the initial structure could include
"nanovacuoles," or regions of about a nanometer in diameter which were empty.
Such regions would be stable at low temperatures but would collapse upon
warming. By finely dispersing such nanovacuoles it would be possible to
eliminate any tendency of even small regions to expand on heating. Most
materials expand upon warming, a tendency which can be countered by the use of
nanovacuoles.
Of course, ice has a smaller volume after it melts. The introduction of
nanovacuoles would only exacerbate its tendency to shrink upon melting. In this
case we could use vitrified H20 rather than the usual crystalline variety. H20
in the vitreous state is disordered (as in the liquid state) even at low
temperatures, and has a lower volume than crystalline ice. This eliminates and
even reverses its tendency to contract on warming. Vitrified water at low
temperature is denser than liquid water at room temperature.
Increasing the strength of the material can be done in any of a variety of
ways. A simple method would be to introduce long polymers in the frozen
structure. Proteins are one class of strong polymers that could be incorporated
into the structure with minimal tissue compatibility concerns. Any potential
fracture plane would be criss-crossed by the newly added structural protein, and
so fractures would be prevented. By also including an enzyme to degrade this
artificially introduced structural protein, it would be automatically and
spontaneously digested immediately after warming. Very large increases in
strength could be achieved by this method.
By combining (1) rapid, highly controlled heating; (2) atomically precise
introduction of cryoprotectants; (3) the controlled addition of small
nanovacuoles and regions of vitrified H20 to reduce or eliminate thermal
expansion and contraction; and (4) the addition of structural proteins to
protect against any remaining thermally induced stresses; the damage that might
otherwise occur during rewarming should be completely avoidable.
The proposal that all four methods be used in combination is open to the valid
criticism that simpler approaches are likely to suffice, e.g., precise distribution
of cryoprotectants coupled with relatively slow warming[131]. The proposals
advanced in this paper should not be taken as predictions about what will happen
or what will be necessary, but as arguments that certain capabilities will be
feasible. A belt is sufficient to hold up a pair of pants. When explaining that
it is possible to hold up a pair of pants to someone who has never seen or heard
of clothing, it is forgiveable to point out that the combined use of both belt
and suspenders should be effective in preventing the pants from falling down.
CONCLUSIONCryonic suspension can transport a terminally ill patient
to future medical technology. The damage done by current freezing methods is
likely to be reversible at some point in the future. In general, for cryonics to
fail, one of the following "failure criteria" must be met:
- Pre-suspension and suspension injury would have to be sufficient to cause
information theoretic death. In the case of the human brain, the damage would
have to obliterate the structures encoding human memory and personality beyond
recognition.
- Repair technologies that are clearly feasible in principle based on our
current understanding of physics and chemistry would have to remain
undeveloped in practice, even after several centuries.
An examination of potential future technologies[ 85] supports the argument that
unprecedented capabilities are likely to be developed. Restoration of the brain
down to the molecular level should eventually prove technically feasible. Off-
board repair utilizing divide-and-conquer is a particularly simple and powerful
method which illustrates some of the principles that can be used by future technologies
to restore tissue. Calculations support the idea that this method, if implemented,
would be able to repair the human brain within about three years. For several
reasons, better methods are likely to be developed and used in practice.
Off-board repair consists of three major steps: (1) Determine the coordinates
and orientation of each major molecule. (2) Determine a set of appropriate
coordinates in the repaired structure for each major molecule. (3) Move them
from the former location to the latter. The various technical problems involved
are likely to be met by future advances in technology. Because storage times in
liquid nitrogen literally extend for several centuries, the development time of
these technologies is not critical.
A broad range of technical approaches to this problem are feasible. The
particular form of off-board repair that uses divide-and-conquer requires only
that (1) tissue can be divided by some means (such as fracturing) which does not
itself cause significant loss of structural information; (2) the pieces into
which the tissue is divided can be moved to appropriate destinations (for
further division or for direct analysis); (3) a sufficiently small piece of
tissue can be analyzed; (4) a program capable of determining the healthy state
of tissue given the unhealthy state is feasible; (5) that sufficient
computational resources for execution of this program in a reasonable time frame
are available; and (6) that restoration of the original structure given a
detailed description of that structure is feasible.
It is impossible to conclude based on present evidence that either failure
criterion is likely to be met.
Further study of cryonics by the technical community is needed. At present,
there is a remarkable paucity of technical papers on the subject [note 24]. As should be evident from this paper
multidisciplinary analysis is essential in evaluating its feasibility, for specialists
in any single discipline have a background which is too narrow to encompass
the whole. Given the life-saving nature of cryonics, it would be tragic if it
were to prove feasible but was little used.
APPENDIX
Approximate values of interesting numbers. Numbers marked by * are extrapolations
based on projected technical capabilities ( nanotechnology and molecular computing).
- Volume of the brain:
- 1350 cubic centimeters
- Weight of the brain:
- 1400 grams
- Weight of proteins in the brain:
- 100 grams
- Weight of a ribosome:
- 3 x 10^6 amu
- *Weight of a repair machine:
- 10^9 to 10^10 amu
- *Length of a repair machine arm:
- 100 nanometers
- Weight of water in brain:
- 1100 grams
- Weight of protein in brain:
- 100 grams
- Weight of lipids in brain:
- 175 grams
- Weight of "other solids":
- 35 grams
- Weight of "typical" protein:
- 50,000 amu
- Weight of "typical" lipid:
- 500 amu
- Weight of water molecule:
- 18 amu
- Weight of carbon atom:
- 12 amu
- Density of carbon (diamond):
- 3.51 grams/cubic centimeter
- Number of proteins in brain:
- 1.2 x 10^21
- Number of lipid molecules in brain:
- 2 x 10^23
- Number of water molecules in brain:
- 4 x 10^25
- Time to synthesize a protein:
- 10 seconds
- *Time to repair one protein molecule:
- 100 seconds
- *Time to repair one lipid molecule:
- 1 second
- *Time to repair all brain macromolecules:
- 3.2 x 10^23 repair-machine seconds
- *Number of repair machines to repair all brain molecules in three years:
- 3.2 x 10^15 repair machines
- *Weight of that many repair devices:
- 5.3 to 53 grams
- Number of bits needed to store the molecular structure of the brain:
- 10^25 bits
- *Energy dissipated by a single "rod logic" (gate) operation (including a
few percent of irreversible operations):
- 10^-22 joules
- *Speed of a single "rod logic" (gate) operation:
- 100 x 10^-12 seconds
- Estimated cost of 10^15 joules of energy generated on earth in
the future:
- 10,000 dollars
- *Number of gate operations 10^15 joules can support:
- 10^37 gate operations
- *Size of a single "lock" (gate) plus overhead (power, etc.):
- 100 cubic nanometers
- *Volume of gates that can deliver 10^37 operations in three
years (a larger volume will in fact be required to accommodate cooling
requirements):
- 1 cubic centimeter
- Power of 10^15 joules dissipated over a three year period:
- 10 megawatts (100,000 light bulbs for three years)
- Chemical energy stored in the structure of the brain:
- 8 x 10^6 joules (2,000 kilocalories)
- Boltzmann's constant k:
- 1.38 x 10^-23 joules/Kelvin
- Approximate thermal energy of one atom at room temperature (kT at 300
degrees K):
- 4.14 x 10^-21 joules
- One watt:
- one joule per second
- One kilowatt hour:
- 3.6 x 10^6 joules
- Avogadro's number (the number of atoms in one mole):
- 6.0221367 x 10^23
- One mole of a substance:
- that quantity of the substance that weighs (in grams) the same as its
molecular weight
- amu (atomic mass units):
- By definition, one atom of carbon 12 weighs 12 amu
- Joules per (dietary) Calorie:
- 4,186
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It is the authors pleasant duty to acknowledge the many people who have commented
on or encouraged the work on this paper as it evolved. The reviewers were not
selected because of their opinions about cryonics: some support it, some don't,
and some reserve final judgment. While the quality of the result could not have
been achieved without their help, the author must accept responsibility for
any errors in the final version. The author would like to thank: Dave Biegelsen,
Arthur C. Clarke, Mike Darwin, Thomas Donaldson, Eric Drexler, Greg Fahy, Steve
Harris, Leonard Hayflick, Hugh Hixon, Peter Mazur, Mark Miller, David Pegg,
Chris Peterson, Ed Regis, Paul Segall, Len Shar, Irwin Sobel, Jim Southard,
Jim Stevens and Leonard Zubkoff.
REFERENCES
- 1. "Engines of Creation" by K. Eric Drexler, Anchor Press, 1986.
- 2. "Nanotechnology: wherein molecular computers control tiny circulatory
submarines", by A. K. Dewdney, Scientific American, January 1988, pages 100 to
103.
- 3. "Foresight Update", a publication of the Foresight Institute, Box 61058,
Palo Alto, CA 94306.
- 4. "There's
Plenty of Room at the Bottom" a talk by Richard Feynman (awarded the Nobel
Prize in Physics in 1965) at an annual meeting of the American Physical Society
given on December 29, 1959. Reprinted in "Miniaturization", edited by H. D.
Gilbert (Reinhold, New York, 1961) pages 282-296.
- 5. "Principles of Tissue Preservation" by David Pegg, chapter 4, pages 69
to 105 from "Progress in Transplantation", Volume Two, edited by Peter J.
Morris and Nicholas L. Tilney.
- 6. "Freezing of living cells: mechanisms and implications", by Peter
Mazur, American Journal of Physiology, Vol 247 (Cell Physiology 16):
C125-C142, 1984.
- 7. "Scanning Tunneling Microscopy and Atomic Force Microscopy: Application
to Biology and Technology" by P. K. Hansma, V. B. Elings, O. Marti, and C. E.
Bracker. Science, October 14 1988, page 209-216.
- 8. "Molecular manipulation using a tunnelling microscope," by J. S.
Foster, J. E. Frommer and P. C. Arnett. Nature, Vol. 331 28 January 1988,
pages 324-326.
- 9. "The fundamental physical limits of computation" by Charles H. Bennet
and Rolf Landauer, Scientific American Vol. 253, July 1985, pages 48-56.
- 10. "Molecular Engineering:
An Approach to the Development of General Capabilities for Molecular Manipulation,"
by K. Eric Drexler, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA),
Vol 78, pp 5275-78, 1981.
- 11. "The Mind's I", by Douglas R. Hofstadter and Daniel C. Dennett.
Bantam, 1982.
- 12. "Matter and Consciousness: A Contemporary Introduction to the
Philosophy of Mind", by Paul Churchland, second edition, 1988, the MIT press.
- 13. "Principles of Neural Science", third edition, by Eric R. Kandel,
James H. Schwartz and Thomas M. Jessel. Elsevier, 1991.
- 14. "Molecular Biology of the Gene", fourth edition, by James D. Watson,
Nancy H. Hopkins, Jeffrey W. Roberts, Joan Argetsinger Steitz, and Alan M.
Weiner. Benjamin Cummings, 1987. It can now be purchased as a single large
volume.
- 15. "Death, Dying, and the Biological Revolution", revised edition, by
Robert M. Veatch, Yale University Press 1989.
- 16. "Human Biochemistry" by James M. Orten, Tenth Edition, Mosby 1982.
- 17. "Tiny surgical robot being developed", San Jose Mercury News, Feb. 18,
1989, page 26A
- 18. Eric Drexler, private communication.
- 19. "Rod Logic and Thermal Noise in the Mechanical Nanocomputer", by K.
Eric Drexler, Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Molecular
Electronic Devices, F. Carter ed., Elsevier 1988.
- 20. "Submarines small enough to cruise the bloodstream", in Business Week,
March 27 1989, page 64.
- 21. "Calcium and Ischemic Injury", by Joseph Y. Cheung et. al., The New
England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 314 No. 26 page 1670.
- 22. "Differential Rearing Effects on Rat Visual Cortex Synapses. I.
Synaptic and Neuronal Density and Synapses per Neuron" by Anita M. Turner and
William T. Greenough, Brain Research, 329 (1985) pages 195-203.
- 23. "Cryonics: reaching for tomorrow", by Brian Wowk and Michael Darwin,
Alcor, 1991, 104 pages. Available from the Alcor Life Extension Foundation,
Scottsdale AZ,, 800-367-2228.
- 24. "Many are cold, but few are frozen: A Humanist looks at Cryonics", by
Steven B. Harris, M.D., Free Inquiry, Vol. 9 No. 2, Spring 1989, pages 19-24.
- 25. "Conservative Logic", by Edward Fredkin and Tommaso Toffoli,
International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 21 Nos. 3/4, 1982, pages
219-253.
- 26. "The Tomorrow Makers", Grant Fjermedal, MacMillan 1986.
- 27. "Computer analysis of neuronal structures" by Robert D. Lindsay,
Plenum 1977.
- 28. "The microcomputer in cell and neurobiology research" by R. Ranney
Mize, Elsevier 1985.
- 29. "Intracellular control of axial shape in non-uniform neurites: a
serial electron microscopic analysis of organelles and microtubules in AI and
AII retinal amacrine neurites", by Sharon E. Sasaki-Sherrington, J. Roger
Jacobs, John K. Stevens, Journal of Cell Biology 98, April 1984, 1279-1290
- 30. "Guinness Book of World Records," Donald McFarlan et. al., Bantam
1989.
- 31. "Dissipation and noise immunity in computation and communication" by
Rolf Landauer, Nature, Vol. 335, October 27 1988, page 779.
- 32. "Notes on the History of Reversible Computation" by Charles H. Bennett,
IBM Journal of Research and Development, Vol. 32, No. 1, January 1988.
- 33. "Classical and Quantum Limitations on Energy Consumption in
Computation" by K. K. Likharev, International Journal of Theoretical Physics,
Vol. 21, Nos. 3/4, 1982.
- 34. "Synapses, Circuits, and the Beginnings of Memory," by Gary Lynch, MIT
press 1986.
- 35. "Memory Storage and Neural Systems," by Daniel L. Alkon, Scientific
American, July 1989, pages 42-50.
- 36. "Morphological basis of long-term habituation and sensitization in
Aplysia" by Craig H. Bailey and Mary Chen, Science 220, April 1, 1983, pages
91-93
- 37. "How Much Do People Remember? Some Estimates of the Quantity of Learned
Information in Long-term Memory," by Thomas K. Landauer, in Cognitive Science
10, 477-493, 1986
- 38. "Neurobiology," by Gordon M. Shepherd, Oxford 1983.
- 39. "The anatomy of a memory: convergence of results across a diversity of
tests," by William T. Greenough and Craig H. Bailey, Trends in Neuroscience,
1988, Vol. 11, No. 4, pages 142-147.
- 40. "Principles and Techniques of Electron Microscopy: Biological
Applications," Third edition, by M. A. Hayat, CRC Press, 1989.
- 41. "Machines of Inner Space" by K. Eric Drexler, 1990 Yearbook of Science
and the Future, pages 160-177, published by Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago
1989.
- 42. "Stopping Biological Time: The Freezing of Living Cells" by Peter
Mazur, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 541: 514-531, 1988.
- 43. "Reversible Conveyer Computation in Array of Parametric Quantrons" by
K. K. Likharev, S. V. Rylov, and V. K. Semenov, IEEE Transactions on
Magnetics, Vol. 21 No. 2, March 1985, pages 947-950
- 44. "Basic Human Physiology: Normal Function and Mechanisms of Disease" by
Arthur Guyton, M.D., Saunders 1971.
- 45. "Theory of Self Reproducing Automata" by John Von Neumann, edited by
Arthur W. Burks, University of Illinois Press, 1966.
- 46. "The Children of the STM" by Robert Pool, Science, Feb. 9, 1990, pages
634-636.
- 47. "A Small Revolution Gets Under Way," by Robert Pool, Science, Jan. 5
1990.
- 48. "Advanced
Automation for Space Missions", Proceedings of the 1980 NASA/ASEE Summer
Study, edited by Robert A. Freitas, Jr. and William P. Gilbreath. Available
from NTIS, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA 22161; telephone 703-487-4650, order no. N83-15348
- 49. "Positioning Single Atoms with a Scanning Tunnelling Microscope," by
D. M. Eigler and E. K. Schweizer, Nature Vol 344, April 5 1990, page 524-526.
- 50. "Mind Children" by Hans Moravec, Harvard University Press, 1988.
- 51. "Microscopy of Chemical-Potential Variations on an Atomic Scale" by
C.C. Williams and H.K. Wickramasinghe, Nature, Vol 344, March 22 1990, pages
317-319.
- 52. "The Anthropic Cosmological Principle" by John D. Barrow and Frank J.
Tipler, Oxford University Press, 1988.
- 53. "Time/Space Trade-Offs for Reversible Computation" by Charles H. Bennett,
SIAM J. Computing, Vol. 18, No. 4, pages 766-776, August 1989.
- 54. "
Large Scale Analysis of Neural Structures," by Ralph C. Merkle, Xerox
Technical Report CSL-89-10, November 1989. Available from: Xerox Corporation,
Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 Coyote Hill Road, Palo Alto, CA 94304.
- 55. "Cerebral Hypothermia and Circulatory Arrest," by Robert J. White,
Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Vol. 53, July 1978, page 452.
- 56. "Postmortem examination of three cryonic suspension patients," by Michael
Darwin, Hugh Hixon, and Jerry Leaf. Available from Alcor.
- 57. "Frozen and Alive", by Kenneth B. Storey and Janet M. Storey,
Scientific American, Vol. 263 No. 6, Dec. 1990, pages 92-97.
- 58. "Viability of Long Term Frozen Cat Brain In Vitro" by Isamu Suda, K.
Kito and C. Adachi, Nature Vol. 212, October 15, 1966 page 268.
- 59. "Analysis of "solution effects" injury: rabbit renal cortex frozen in
the presence of dimethyl sulfoxide" by Gregory M. Fahy, Cryobiology
17:371-388, 1980.
- 60. "The Etiology, Concept, and Prophylaxis of Childbed Fever" by Ignaz
Semmelweis, translated by K. Codell Carter, University of Wisconsin Press,
1983.
- 61. Alcor has chilled and re-warmed over ten dogs to 0 degrees to 4 degrees
C with full recovery in almost all cases.
- 62. "Studies on golden hamsters during cooling to and rewarming from body
temperatures below 0 degrees C. III. Biophysical aspects and general
discussion," by J. E. Lovelock and A. U. Smith, Proc. Royal Society, Biology
(Lond) Series B 145:427-442, 1956.
- 64. "Frozen Dreams: A Matter of Life and Death" by Cynthia Gorney,
Washington Post, May 1, 1990.
- 65. "Cellular and Subcellular Alterations of Human CNS: Studies Utilizing
in Situ Perfusion Fixation at Immediate Autopsy" by Hannu Kalimo, Julio H.
Garcia, Yoshinari Kamijyo, Junichi Tanaka, Jesus E. Viloria, Jon M.
Valigorsky, Raymond T. Jones, Kook M. Kim, Wolfgang J. Mergner, Robert E
Pendergrass, Benjamin F. Trump. Arch. Pathol. Vol 97, June 1974, pages
352-359.
- 66. "Revival of Mammals from body temperatures below zero," by A. U.
Smith. In: Biological Effects of Freezing and Supercooling by A. U. Smith.
Edward Arnold, London, 1961, pages 304-368.
- 67. "Fixation for Electron Microscopy" by M. A. Hayat, Academic Press,
1981.
- 68. "The Biophysics of Organ Cryopreservation" by David E. Pegg and Armand
M. Karow, Jr., Plenum, 1987.
- 69. "Calcium blockers given after CPR may save brains denied blood up to
an hour," Medical World News, January 18, 1982, pages 11-13.
- 70. "Metabolic Arrest and the Control of Biological Time," by Peter W.
Hochachka and Michael Guppy, Harvard 1987.
- 71. "Vitrification: a New Approach to Organ Crypreservation," by Gregory
M. Fahy, pages 305-335, in "Transplantation: Approaches to Graft Rejection",
edited by H.T. Meryman, 1986.
- 72. "Cell Death in Biology and Pathology" edited by I. D. Bowen and R. A.
Lockshin, Chapman and Hall, 1981.
- 73. "The Relevance of Cryoprotectant `Toxicity' to Cryobiology" by Gregory
M. Fahy, Cryobiology 23, 1-13, 1986.
- 74. "The Ultrastructure of `Brain Death', II. Electron Microscopy of
Feline Cortex after Complete Ischemia," by Hannu Kalimo, Julio H. Garcia,
Yoshinari Kamijyo, Junichi Tanaka, and Benjamin F. Trump, Virchows Archiv B
Cell Path. 25, 207-220 (1977).
- 75. "Lysosome and Phagosome Stability in Lethal Cell Injury" by Hal K.
Hawkins, Jan L. E. Ericsson, Peter Biberfeld, and Benjamin F. Trump. Am J.
Pathol. 68:255-288, 1972.
- 76. "The isolation and in Vitro translation of Undegraded Messenger RNAs
from Human Postmortem Brain," by Marcelle R. Morrison and W. Sue T. Griffin,
Analytical Biochemistry 113, 318-324 (1981).
- 77. "Human Brain in Tissue Culture: Acquisition, Initial Processing, and
Establishment of Brain Cell Cultures" by Donald H. Gilden et. al., J. Comp.
Neur., 161: 295-306.
- 78. "Brain States: Death, Vegetation, and Life" by Julius Korein, pages
293-351, chapter 15, from "Anesthesia and Neurosurgery", 2nd Edition, Cottrell
and Turndorf, 1986.
- 79. "Bioelectric discharges of isolated cat brain after revival from years
of frozen storage," by I. Suda, K. Kito, and C. Adachi. Brain Research
70:527-531, 1974.
- 80. "The Prospect of Immortality," by Robert C. W. Ettinger, Sidgwick and
Jackson, 1965.
- 81. "Chloroplast DNA sequence from a Miocene Magnolia species," by Edward
M. Golenberg, David E. Giannasi, Michael T. Clegg, Charles J. Smiley, Mary
Durbin, David Henderson, and Gerard Zurawski, Nature, Vol 344, April 12 1990,
page 656.
- 82. "The Cryobiological Case for Cryonics," from Cryonics, March 1988. Reprints
available from The Alcor Life Extension Foundation, Scottsdale AZ,,
800-367-2228.
- 83. "Nonexistent technology gets a hearing," by I. Amato, Science News,
Vol. 136, November 4, 1989, page 295.
- 84. "The Invisible Factory," The Economist, December 9, 1989, page 91.
- 85. "
Nanosystems: Molecular Machinery, Manufacturing and Computation," by K.
Eric Drexler, John Wiley 1992.
- 86. "MITI heads for inner space" by David Swinbanks, Nature, Vol 346,
August 23 1990, page 688-689.
- 87. "Cerebral Death" by A. Earl Walker, Second Edition, Urban and
Schwarzenberg 1981.
- 88. "Fundamentals of Physics," Third Edition Extended, by David Halliday
and Robert Resnick, Wiley 1988.
- 89. "General Chemistry" Second Edition, by Donald A. McQuarrie and Peter
A. Rock, Freeman 1987.
- 90. "A Possible Cure for Death" by Charles B. Olson, Medical Hypotheses
1988 Vol 26, pages 77-84.
- 92. "American College of Physicians Ethics Manual. Part II: Research,
Other Ethical Issues. Recommended Reading." by the Ad Hoc Committee on Medical
Ethics, American College of Physicians; Annals of Internal Medicine, July
1984; Vol. 101 No. 2, pages 263-267.
- 93. "Neurochemical Determinants of Ischemic Cell Damage" by Carl-Henrik
Nordstrom, M.D. and Bo K. Siesjo, M.D., pages 49- 66; from "Protection of the
Brain from Ischemia" edited by Philip R. Weinstein and Alan A. Faden, Williams
and Wilkens 1990.
- 94. "Hemodynamics of Postischemic Reperfusion of the Brain," by K.-A.
Hossmann, M.D., Ph.D., pages 21-36; from "Protection of the Brain from
Ischemia" edited by Philip R. Weinstein and Alan A. Faden, Williams and
Wilkens 1990.
- 95. "Post-ischemic resuscitation of the brain: selective vulnerability
versus global resistance" by K.-A. Hossman; from Progress in Brain Research,
Vol. 63, edited by K. Kogure, K.-A. Hossman, B. K. Siesjo and F. A. Welsh,
1985, pages 3-17.
- 96. Leonard Hayflick, personal communication in January of 1991.
- 97. "Resuscitation potentials after prolonged global cerebral ischemia in
cats" by Konstantin-Alexander Hossmann, MD, Ph.D., Critical Care Medicine, Vol
16, No. 10, 1988, page 964-971.
- 98. "Charles Babbage On the Principles and Development of the Calculator
and Other Seminal Writings" by Charles Babbage and others. Dover, New York,
1961.
- 99. "Molecular Mechanics" by U. Burkert and N. L. Allinger, American
Chemical Society Monograph 177 (1982).
- 100. "Breaking the Diffraction Barrier: Optical Microscopy on a Nanometric
Scale" by E. Betzig, J. K. Trautman, T.D. Harris, J.S. Weiner, and R.L.
Kostelak, Science Vol. 251, March 22 1991, page 1468.
- 101. "Molecular Repair of the Brain" by Ralph C. Merkle, Cryonics Vol. 10
No. 10, October 1989, pages 21-44. This is a much earlier version of the
current paper.
- 102. "The embryonic cell lineage of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans,"
by J.E. Sulston, E. Schierenberg, J.G. White, J.N. Thomson, Developmental
Biology, Vol. 100, 1983 pages 64-119.
- 103. "Caenorhabditis elegans: Getting to Know You," by Jean L. Marx,
Science, Vol. 225, July 6 1984, pages 40-42.
- 104. "Why is Development So Illogical?" by Roger Lewin, Science Vol. 224,
June 22 1984, pages 1327-1329.
- 105. " Two Types of Mechanical Reversible Logic," by
Ralph C. Merkle, Nanotechnology 4 (1993) pages 114-131.
- 106. J.A. Armstrong, Creativity, Vol 10 No. 2, June 1991.
- 107. "Atom by Atom, Scientists build `Invisible' Machines of the Future,"
Andrew Pollack, The New York Times, Science section, Tuesday November 26,
1991, page B7.
- 108. "Theoretical analysis of a site-specific hydrogen abstraction tool,"
by Charles Musgrave, Jason Perry, Ralph C. Merkle and William A. Goddard III,
Nanotechnology, Vol 2 No. 3/4 1991, pages 187-195.
- 109. "Memory and Brain" by Larry R. Squire, Oxford University Press, 1987.
- 110. "Physics and Life Prolongation" by Gerald Feinberg, Physics Today,
November 1966, page 45.
- 111. "Near-Field Optics: Microscopy, Spectroscopy, and Surface
Modifications Beyond the Diffraction Limit" by Eric Betzig and Jay K.
Trautman, Science, Vol. 257, July 10 1992, pages 189-195.
- 112. " Reversible Electronic Logic using Switches," by
Ralph C. Merkle, Nanotechnology 4 (1993) pages 21-40.
- 113. "Hot-Clock nMOS" by Charles Seitz, et. al 1985 Chapel Hill Conference
on VLSI, Computer Science Press, pages 1-17. >
- 114. "Energy Limits to the Computational Power of the Human Brain" by Ralph
C. Merkle, Foresight Update No. 6 page 1.
- 115. "The Bounded Brain: Toward Quantitative Neuroanatomy," by Christopher
Cherniak, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Volume 2, No. 1, pages 58-68.
- 116. "Nanotechnology: Research and Perspectives" edited by B.C. Crandall
and James Lewis, MIT press 1992.
- 117. " Self Replicating Systems and Molecular Manufacturing"
by Ralph C. Merkle, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 45,
pages 407-413, 1992.
- 118. " Computational Nanotechnology" by Ralph C. Merkle,
Nanotechnology 1991; 2 (3 & 4): 134-141.
- 119. "NASA and Self Replicating Systems," by Ralph C. Merkle, Foresight
Update No. 9.
- 120. "Towards Practical Reversible Logic ," by Ralph C. Merkle, in Workshop
on Physics and Computation, PhysComp '92, October, Dallas Texas; IEEE press
1992.
- 121. Nanotechnology 1991; 2 (3 & 4), special issue on the Second
Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology.
- 122. Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 45, 1992, special
issue on molecular manufacturing.
- 123. "Metabolic and Functional Studies on Post-mortem Human Brain," by
J.A. Hardy and P. R. Dodd, Neurochem. Int. 5, 253-266, 1983.
- 124. "A Comparison of Methodologies for the Study of Functional
Transmitter Neurochemistry in Human Brain," by Peter R. Dodd, John W. Hambley,
Richard F. Cowburn and John A. Hardy; Journal of Neurochemistry, 1988, pages
1133-1345.
- 125. "Extensive Postmortem Stability of RNA From Rat and Human Brain," by
S. A. Johnson, D. G. Morgan, and C. E. Finch; Journal of Neuroscience Research
Volume 16, pages 267-280, 1986.
- 126. "Cold Start," by Ralph C. Merkle, Cryonics 11(11), November 1990,
page 11.
- 127. "Efficiently coded messages can transmit the information content of a
human across interstellar space," by William A. Reupke, Acta Astronautica,
Vol. 26, No. 3/4, pages 273-276, 1992.
- 128. "The information content and error rate of living things," by Sidney
M. Dancoff and Henry Quastler, pages 263-273 of "Essays on the use of
information theory in biology," edited by H. Quastler, University of Illinois
Press (1953).
- 129. "The next frontier: invisible," by Charles Siebert, The New York
Times Magazine, September 29, 1996, pages 137-140.
- 130. "Problems of reproducibility -- does geologically ancient DNA survive
in amber-preserved insects?" by Jeremy J. Austin, Andrew J. Ross, Andrew B.
Smith, Richard A. Fortey and Richard H. Thomas; Proceedings of the Royal
Society, London B (1997) 264, 467-474.
- 131. Greg Fahy, private communication.
NOTES1) Peter Mazur, a well known cryobiologist
and critic of cryonics, has said: "Cryobiologists are often asked how long cells
can remain viable at -196 degrees C, the temperature of boiling liquid nitrogen
(which is the usual cryogenic fluid). The answer is clear -- more than 1000
years. The reason is that direct ionizations from background radiation are the
only source of damage at such temperatures. Ordinary chemical reactions cannot
occur. The pertinent question then is not storage stability, it is how can one
get cells down to -196 degrees C and back without killing them."[42] The record
for storage is held by Leonard Hayflick, who has kept normal fibroblasts from
embryonic human lungs in liquid nitrogen for 28 years (as of June 1990) without
noticeable deterioration[96].
2) There is no implication here that the most powerful
repair method either will (or will not) be used or be necessary. The fact that
we can kill a gnat with a double-barreled shotgun does not imply that a
fly-swatter won't work just as well. If we aren't certain whether we face a gnat
or a tiger, we'd rather be holding the shotgun than the fly- swatter. The
shotgun will work in either case, but the fly-swatter can't deal with the tiger.
In a similar vein, we will consider the most powerful methods that should be
feasible rather than the minimal methods that might be sufficient. While this
approach can reasonably be criticized on the grounds that simpler methods are
likely to work, it avoids the complexities and problems that must be dealt with
in trying to determine exactly what those simpler methods might be in any
particular case and provides additional margin for error.
3) An atomic mass unit is the same as a Dalton. Different
authors in different fields have different preferences for the name used to
describe this unit, and so no single abbreviation will satisfy everyone. The use
in this paper of the atomic mass unit, abbreviated as amu, was a compromise
intended to be most easily understood by the widest audience.
4) A wide variety of mechanical computer designs are feasible.
Perhaps the most famous proposal for a mechanical computer was made by Charles
Babbage[98] in the early to mid 1800's. Mechanical systems can be scaled down
to the molecular size range and still function, although the analysis of such
molecular mechanical systems requires the use of (appropriately enough) molecular
mechanics: a thriving field which models molecular behavior by the use of force
fields to describe the forces acting on the individual nuclei[99]. The time
evolution of the locations of the nuclei can be followed using relatively straightforward
computational methods.
5) To fully specify the state of each atom would, strictly
speaking, require that we specify the states of all its electrons. For the most
part, however, these states are known or can be readily inferred once the type
of atom is given. For example, a sodium atom in solution will normally be the
ion, Na+. Likewise, the bonding structure of two carbon atoms separated by a
certain distance can normally be inferred from the distance. The state of
magnetization, while relevant for computers (the state of magnetization of a
floppy disk is obviously of importance) is of negligible importance in
biological systems. People are routinely exposed to magnetic fields of several
Tesla to make diagnostic images, and appear none the worse for the experience.
While coordinate information should be sufficient in almost all cases, we can
always add a few bits of additional information if there is some ambiguity. This
won't increase our estimate of 100 bits per atom by very much, and because 100
bits is a conveniently round number we'll continue to use it.
6) Because proteins are always produced as a linear chain,
they must of necessity be able to adopt an appropriate three dimensional
configuration by themselves. Usually, the correct configuration is unique. If it
isn't, it is usually the case that the molecule will spontaneously cycle through
appropriate configurations by itself, e.g., an ion channel will open and close
at appropriate times regardless of whether it was initially started in the
"open" or "closed" configuration. If any remaining cases should prove to be a
problem, a few additional bits can be used to describe the specific
configuration desired.
7) "For many years, it was thought that irreversible
cellular damage unavoidably occurs after only a few minutes of complete cerebral
ischemia. This opinion has been modified during the past decade [omitted
reference]. Provided that the conditions for recovery are optimal, short-term
restoration of brain functions may be achieved after periods of ischemia lasting
as long as 60 minutes..."[93]. "Most clinical and experimental studies suggest
that the normothermic brain is not able to withstand complete ischemia of >8
to 10 min. There is, however, firm experimental evidence of functional and
biochemical recovery of a substantial part of the brain after complete
cerebrocirculatory arrest of one hour [omitted references]."[97]. "It turned out
in fact that appropriate treatment of post-ischemic recirculation disturbances
led to recovery of energy metabolism and neuronal excitability after complete
cerebro-circulatory arrest of as long as 1 hour at normal body temperature
[omitted reference]"[95].
8) Definitions that are similar or identical to the one
given here are well known in the cryonics literature[23].
9) This issue is of great concern to computer users. A
variety of tools and techniques exist for recovering information from damaged or
otherwise inoperative disk drives, with the intent of recovering the memory and
"personality" of the computer so that the user will not suffer a (sometimes
traumatic) loss.
10) Cryonics will also fail if a person is prematurely
thawed. This failure mode, however, is not an argument against cryonics, rather
it is an argument for reliable refrigerators. A person injured in a car crash
might die if their ambulance was struck by a train. This is not an argument that
we should cremate accident victims rather than use an ambulance to transport
them to a hospital!
11) There is fairly general agreement that death by the
information theoretic criterion will not occur during storage of tissue at the
temperature of liquid nitrogen, confer note 1. For this reason we neglect the
possibility that significant information loss occurs during storage even though
this might be viewed as theoretically possible.
12) Criticisms of cryonics are not supported by the extant
literature. Interestingly (and somewhat to the author's surprise) there are no
published technical articles on cryonics that claim it won't work. As one might
suspect, there are also no articles in the neuroscience literature that address
the issue of erasure of memory in the information theoretic sense, and there are
no articles in the cryobiological literature that address the impact of freezing
on the retention of long term memory in the information theoretic sense. There
is an almost absolute conceptual failure to either understand or consider the
implications of the information theoretic criterion of death. This conceptual
failure is a severe impediment to research in this area. Even worse, the Society
for Cryobiology has gone so far as to adopt by- laws calling for the expulsion
of members who support cryonics. Members in good standing who support cryonics
have been threatened with firing if they discuss their views publicly. Open
discussion and review has proven to be a remarkably effective engine for driving
scientific advance. The suppression of open discussion by a scientific society
runs counter to one of the most central principles of scientific research and
seriously impedes progress.
13 Many non-mammalian animals can be frozen to
temperatures as low as -50 degrees C and survive[57].
14) Unpublished work by Darwin, Leaf and Hixon suggests
that penetration of glycerol into the axonal regions of myelinated nerve cells
is poor, and that increased damage to the axon results. This is consistent with
the observation that penetration of glycerol through the many layers of the
myelin sheath would presumably be slowed. However, myelinated axons are
relatively large and serve a relatively well defined function: the transport of
information. Even significant damage to the axon would not obliterate the fact
of its existence or the path over which it carried its signal. As a consequence,
this damage is unlikely to result in information theoretic death.
15) Suspension usually begins immediately upon
pronouncement of legal "death." If legal death is pronounced upon cessation of
heartbeat in a terminally ill patient who is being continuously monitored, then
the ischemic interval can be kept under 5 minutes.
16) There are at least two likely ways in which cryonic
suspensions conducted prior to legal death could be legalized. First, polls
support the creation of a "right to die" for the terminally ill patient and an
active movement is seeking to translate this support into some form of law.
Second, terminally ill patients have sought and will presumably continue to seek
the legal right to be cryonically suspended before (rather than after) a
deteriorative disease (brain cancer, for example[64]) has destroyed their brain.
It is difficult to argue that such individuals should be forced to suffer an
agonizing death, knowing that this agony is also destroying their brain and
hence any chance for a future life.
17) There are various reasons for delay when a person is
cryonically suspended, ranging from purely pragmatic issues such as delay
following abrupt and unexpected accidents to legal and social forces that
mandate that suspension not be started until after a legal declaration of
"death." Whatever the cause, the effect is to increase the level of damage that
takes place prior to suspension.
18) It should be clear that the claim of "irreversibility"
is unsupported. Mitochondrial function is well understood: they provide energy
for the cell. Even the complete absence of mitochondria would not cause death by
the information theoretic criteria.
19) Much current work advances the (correct) claim that
cellular, organ, and body function is lost under certain conditions. This loss
of function is incorrectly and misleadingly labeled "death," "irreversible
injury," etc. This work forms the backdrop against which tissue damage to
cryonically suspended patients is measured by most biologists, cryobiologists,
doctors and other health care workers. Clearly, this work predisposes such
workers to dismiss cryonics because, by these criteria, much "irreversible"
damage has occurred in most cryonically suspended patients. The implications of
adopting the information theoretic criterion of death have simply not been
considered, and we can reasonably expect a delay of several years to a few
decades before they are. This would be consistent with historical data
concerning the slow acceptance of new ideas. Ignaz Semmelweis demonstrated in
1848 that washing your hands in chlorinated lime after leaving the autopsy room
and before entering the maternity ward reduced maternal deaths from childbed
fever from as high as 25% to about 1%. Despite this, his proposal was widely
ridiculed and little practiced for several more decades[60]. Interestingly, few
of even the most severe critics of cryonics claim that death by the information
theoretic criterion is likely to have occurred when the question is posed to
them directly.
20) It is interesting to note that current research into
the three- dimensional structure of neurons often embeds neural tissue in plastic,
and then produces a series of thin sections (typically 50 to 100 nanometers
thick in electron microscopic reconstruction work) by using an ultramicrotome.
The serial sections are then examined by a person (typically a graduate student)
and the structures of interest in each section are outlined on a digitizing
tablet and entered into a computer. The resulting data-base is used to build
a three-dimensional image of the neuron[54]. This work has been quite successful
at determining the three-dimensional structure of small volumes (small enough
for a graduate student to examine in a few weeks or months) despite the adverse
effects of tissue preparation and sectioning. Sections vary in thickness. They
also buckle, fold, and tear. Despite these difficulties, the human visual system
can reconstruct the original shape of the object in three dimensions. Current
electron microscopic reconstructions are quite capable of analyzing even the
finest dendrites and thinnest axons, as well as determining the location and
size of synapses[27,28], and even finer detail[29]. It seems reasonable that
the less damaging method of inducing a fracture at low temperature, and the
more informative and less damaging analysis possible with nanotechnology (as
opposed to destructive analysis of thin sections by a high energy electron beam)
will produce more information about the structure being analyzed.
21) Under favorable circumstances, we might be able to
terminate the division process sooner. That is, it might be that a relatively
large piece of tissue (several tens of microns or larger) was relatively intact,
and required little if any repair. Devising methods to take advantage of the
minimal damage that might occur under favorable circumstances is beyond the
scope of this paper.
22) For those concerned about the omission of water
molecules and the like, we could just as easily store the coordinates of every
molecule. This would increase the storage requirement, but would still be
entirely feasible.
23) Despite the notorious difficulty in obtaining accurate
information about specific aspects of brain "hardware," as discussed by
Cherniak[115], it is still the case that rather rough bounds can be usefully
derived.
24) A literature search on cryonics along with personal
inquiries has not produced a single technical paper on the subject that claims
that cryonics is infeasible or even unlikely. On the other hand, technical papers
and analyses of cryonics that speak favorably of its eventual success have been
published. It is unreasonable, given the extant literature, to conclude that
cryonics is unlikely to work. Such unsupported negative claims require further
analysis and careful critical evaluation before they can be taken seriously.
|