Five Science Facts That Will Blow Your Mind

[Doomsday101]

For the next five days, New Yorkers will be learning about science not from a PowerPoint presentation but by watching it firsthand.

The World Science Festival is taking over New York City from June 1 to 5, bringing together scientists, celebrities, researchers and more to discuss the fascinating world of science. Celebrating its fourth year, the fledgling festival has turned into a seasoned veteran, attracting over 185,000 attendants last year, and the festival creators expect the numbers to be even more impressive this year.

The main goal of the festival: to highlight a topic that creators feel hasn't been given proper credit in both the media and mainstream society.

“We realized that science is not presented to a general audience in a way that is truly reflective of the astonishing content,” Tracy Day, co-founder of the World Science Festival, told FoxNews.com. “Usually science is kind of siloed. It’s kind of over there somewhere and the general audience never actually sees it."

"We realized this was an incredible opportunity to take science out of that siloed existence and bring it to the center of popular culture.”


The World Science Festival promises a number of mind blowing revelations. Just consider these ideas, among the many to be presented over the next few days:

* The first person who will live 1,000 years has already been born;

* Our daily physical realities are merely holographic projections formed by light passing through a thin surface layer that surrounds the universe;

* Doctors will soon be able to diagnose diseases simply by smelling them;

* As depicted in the film, “The Matrix,” the workings of the universe may be simulations from a super-advanced computer that runs our daily lives like so much software;

* thinking machines will take over the comprehension of data, concepts, and behaviors that are too big for human minds.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/01/science-facts-blow-mind-2011-world-science-festival/#ixzz1OVU9yOyf

[TheCount]

Those are facts?

[Doomsday101]

Those are facts?

In their world I guess they are.

[Sam I Am]

* The first person who will live 1,000 years has already been born;


Let me guess, they are referring to cryonics?

[Doomsday101]

Let me guess, they are referring to cryonics?

I don't know. I have heard that life expectancy could one day be 150 to 200 years of age. My only question is who can afford that. :eek:

As for living to be 1,000? you got me on that.


I found this tib bit:

Dr. Aubrey de Grey, best-selling author of "Ending Aging: The Rejuvenation Breakthroughs That Could Reverse Human Aging in Our Lifetime." He believes regenerative medicine could, in a matter of decades, extend life expectancy to 1000 years.

[joseephuss]

I don't know. I have heard that life expectancy could one day be 150 to 200 years of age. My only question is who can afford that. :eek:

As for living to be 1,000? you got me on that

I suppose in the far future a person could live to be 1000, but I doubt that person has been born right now. I don't even think there is a person alive right now that will live to be 150 or 200 years. We still have a ways to go to get people to live that long.

Even if they could get people to live that long, what would be the quality of life? Does someone want to live a couple of 100 years with Alzheimer's or schizophrenia?

I agree that these things are not facts, neither are they things that blow my mind. They are 5 interesting theories.

[Doomsday101]

I suppose in the far future a person could live to be 1000, but I doubt that person has been born right now. I don't even think there is a person alive right now that will live to be 150 or 200 years. We still have a ways to go to get people to live that long.

Even if they could get people to live that long, what would be the quality of life? Does someone want to live a couple of 100 years with Alzheimer's or schizophrenia?

I agree that these things are not facts, neither are they things that blow my mind. They are 5 interesting theories.

Let me just say I don't buy into this so called science facts either

As for living 1,000 years even if it could be done is it worth it? Stop and think of an already over crowed world we have now.

[Sam I Am]

I don't see it happening. You can't prevent aging completely. Just because someone finds a way to rejuvenate skin or something like that, the heart, lungs, kidneys etc age too. Not to mention plaque (not teeth, in arteries) build ups, etc and even diseases of different types will kill you first. (heart disease or something similar) That isn't even talking about the deterioration of the brain. Not only from age, but from what people do to themselves.

1,000 year ain't happening. Maybe 150s, but at that point the overcrowding and pollution issues will become so bad that they will start up a Logan's Run scenario.

[LeonDixson]

I don't know. I have heard that life expectancy could one day be 150 to 200 years of age.
I watched a show on the History Channel that talked about this. As long as our cells reproduce normally we don't age as fast. But there comes a time when the cells don't reproduce and then we age rapidly. What causes the cell to quit reproducing is interesting. Each chromosome has a cap on each end of it called a telomere. The telomer doesn't fully replicate itself each time the cell replicates and thus keeps getting shorter and shorter over time. When the telomere is completely gone the chromosome ends start to fray and it can't replicate. The telomere is like the plastic tip on the end of a shoelace that keeps is from fraying.

Cancer cells have long telomeres that don't shorten when it replicates. That why they don't die a normal death.

Scientists are researching a substance that keeps the telomers of normal cells from dying off, which could extend our age to 180 or 200 years. They have to walk the tightrope though because they could turn the cells into cancer cells.

At least, that is the way I understood the show.

[ZeroClub]

Our daily physical realities are merely holographic projections formed by light passing through a thin surface layer that surrounds the universe;

So it's all smoke and mirrors?

[joseephuss]

So it's all smoke and mirrors?

It does seem more philosophy than science. What is reality? Even if it is only a holograph that we all share, then that holograph could be considered reality.

[Doomsday101]

I watched a show on the History Channel that talked about this. As long as our cells reproduce normally we don't age as fast. But there comes a time when the cells don't reproduce and then we age rapidly. What causes the cell to quit reproducing is interesting. Each chromosome has a cap on each end of it called a telomere. The telomer doesn't fully replicate itself each time the cell replicates and thus keeps getting shorter and shorter over time. When the telomere is completely gone the chromosome ends start to fray and it can't replicate. The telomere is like the plastic tip on the end of a shoelace that keeps is from fraying.

Cancer cells have long telomeres that don't shorten when it replicates. That why they don't die a normal death.

Scientists are researching a substance that keeps the telomers of normal cells from dying off, which could extend our age to 180 or 200 years. They have to walk the tightrope though because they could turn the cells into cancer cells.

At least, that is the way I understood the show.

I don't doubt that one day people could live 150 to 200 years, really it is amazing that in 1900 life expectantcy was 49.2 today it is 78

[Sam I Am]

It does seem more philosophy than science. What is reality? Even if it is only a holograph that we all share, then that holograph could be considered reality.

You would be surprised to find out that much of scientific discovery grew out of philosophy first.

[LeonDixson]

I don't doubt that one day people could live 150 to 200 years, really it is amazing that in 1900 life expectantcy was 49.2 today it is 78
I agree. I also agree with your statement above about being able to afford it. Where life expectancy increases slowly over time finances, insurance etc. has a chance to adapt and adjust. If science made it possible virtually overnight for us all to live even to 120 years, we would outlive our retirement and Social Security would go bust even faster than it already is.

[burmafrd]

The 49.2 thing was deceptive. If you lived to the age of 20 you had a very good chance of seeing 60 at least. That is what skews things so much; infant mortality and the death of children.

[Doomsday101]

I agree. I also agree with your statement above about being able to afford it. Where life expectancy increases slowly over time finances, insurance etc. has a chance to adapt and adjust. If science made it possible virtually overnight for us all to live even to 120 years, we would outlive our retirement and Social Security would go bust even faster than it already is.

I agree and that is only looking at it from the US point of view but how about worldwide where starvation already exists. Even here we would not have the resources to take on that amount of people

[Doomsday101]

The 49.2 thing was deceptive. If you lived to the age of 20 you had a very good chance of seeing 60 at least. That is what skews things so much; infant mortality and the death of children.

I agree but even the margin from the 50’s or 60’s compared today is greater and many do expect life expectancy to increase over the next 10 to 20 years. Will it be to the extent of 150 or 200? Who knows but I don't think it is that far fetched. Question I would have is feasible when you take in the realities of the world.

[Wimbo]

* The first person who will live 1,000 years has already been born;




THere can be only one...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/Highlander.jpg

[revospeed]

THere can be only one...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/Highlander.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/Highlander.jpg)

Duncan Macleod>>>Conner Macleod.

[ZeroClub]

THere can be only one...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QsBmrw7Zvto/TQWOS4llTbI/AAAAAAAAAD0/BggJYHXyh38/s320/David_Buehler.JPG

[Hoofbite]

Those are facts?

:lmao2:

[Hoofbite]

Let me just say I don't buy into this so called science facts either

As for living 1,000 years even if it could be done is it worth it? Stop and think of an already over crowed world we have now.

Never been to Wyoming, huh?

[Sam I Am]

Never been to Wyoming, huh?

Why? :laugh2:

Actually, I do want to go to Wyoming. (Jackson Hole / Yosemite National Park)

[Hoofbite]

I don't see it happening. You can't prevent aging completely. Just because someone finds a way to rejuvenate skin or something like that, the heart, lungs, kidneys etc age too. Not to mention plaque (not teeth, in arteries) build ups, etc and even diseases of different types will kill you first. (heart disease or something similar) That isn't even talking about the deterioration of the brain. Not only from age, but from what people do to themselves.

1,000 year ain't happening. Maybe 150s, but at that point the overcrowding and pollution issues will become so bad that they will start up a Logan's Run scenario.

I think part of the idea is to prevent all that stuff you talked about......not just outlast it.

[Hoofbite]

Why? :laugh2:

Actually, I do want to go to Wyoming. (Jackson Hole / Yosemite National Park)

Because Wyoming will kill any idea of overcrowding.

Anyone who drives through Wyoming and isn't screaming for human contact of some sort, be it a jerk driver or decent-sized town, is out of their mind.

[TheCount]

Duncan Macleod>>>Conner Macleod.

Co-Signed!

That being said, I've recently tried rewatching Highlander the tv show and the movie, and both were terribly, terribly campy. Especially the movie, I had to turn it off.

[Sam I Am]

Co-Signed!

That being said, I've recently tried rewatching Highlander the tv show and the movie, and both were terribly, terribly campy. Especially the movie, I had to turn it off.

A lot of old TV shows are that way. I tried to watch The Incredible Hulk and even the A-Team. It was like trying to play the Pong again after playing all of todays games.

http://www.geocities.ws/orion57/flash%20games/pong1.jpg

SUCKS!

[Yeagermeister]

Who would want to live to be 150 to 200?:eek:

[Doomsday101]

Who would want to live to be 150 to 200?:eek:

Depends on what I have going on at the time. :D

[VietCowboy]

Who would want to live to be 150 to 200?:eek:

People who are willing to clone themselves even though that doesn't mean they don't die, just that their replica will live. It's like a twin who was born xx years after you.

[Royal Laegotti]

Gotta love BS. This reminds me of the guy who predicted the world's end a few weeks ago. I guess his magic 8 ball was broke! Or maybe his hologram wasn't coming in clear.

BTW I think doctors can diagnose some diseases by smelling, diarrhia comes to mind.

[ologan]

Who would want to live to be 150 to 200?:eek:

I can think of any number of congressmen or senators who would like the idea. Some even have a pretty good head start on it.

[hairic]

Looks like a couple currently untestable hypotheses there with the 2nd (unless it's just referring to the cornea/brain) and 4th listed items. Also not mind-blowing as I've already had my mind blown by reading that type of philosophy years ago.

The 1000 year old human will be possible. Probably a combination of stem cells, nanotech, and biomechanics/bioengineering. Only some spawn of a wealthy person will be able to afford these things, though.

Don't know that they'll make it to 1,000, but it'll be possible if their support system stays connected and they can avoid dying from things like a nuclear holocaust, alien invasion, murdered by spouse, meteor strike, plane crash, robot attack, etc.

[Yeagermeister]

I can think of any number of congressmen or senators who would like the idea. Some even have a pretty good head start on it.

Can you be alive without a soul????? :laugh1:

[VietCowboy]

Looks like a couple currently untestable hypotheses there with the 2nd (unless it's just referring to the cornea/brain) and 4th listed items. Also not mind-blowing as I've already had my mind blown by reading that type of philosophy years ago.

The 1000 year old human will be possible. Probably a combination of stem cells, nanotech, and biomechanics/bioengineering. Only some spawn of a wealthy person will be able to afford these things, though.

Don't know that they'll make it to 1,000, but it'll be possible if their support system stays connected and they can avoid dying from things like a nuclear holocaust, alien invasion, murdered by spouse, meteor strike, plane crash, robot attack, etc.

His name is Phillip J. Fry. from Futurama. He is 1,000+ years old.

[SaltwaterServr]

I watched a show on the History Channel that talked about this. As long as our cells reproduce normally we don't age as fast. But there comes a time when the cells don't reproduce and then we age rapidly. What causes the cell to quit reproducing is interesting. Each chromosome has a cap on each end of it called a telomere. The telomer doesn't fully replicate itself each time the cell replicates and thus keeps getting shorter and shorter over time. When the telomere is completely gone the chromosome ends start to fray and it can't replicate. The telomere is like the plastic tip on the end of a shoelace that keeps is from fraying.

Cancer cells have long telomeres that don't shorten when it replicates. That why they don't die a normal death.

Scientists are researching a substance that keeps the telomers of normal cells from dying off, which could extend our age to 180 or 200 years. They have to walk the tightrope though because they could turn the cells into cancer cells.

At least, that is the way I understood the show.

The telomere is often also referred to as a "poly-A tail." At the end of a genetic sequence there are repeating series of AAA AAA AAA AAA that continue on for a finite length depending on the cell. As the cell replicates, one of the codons gets lopped off. Once you reach the end point, the cell lineage dies.

The trick isn't just having the poly A tail fail to cleave at the end of the DNA replication process, but to have that one cell divide and the better of the parent and daughter cell survive if there is any differentiation in the genetic code between the two.

And 1000 years? Not unreasonable. A professor at Alabama-Birmingham had taken cat (and now horse as well I believe) somatic tissue samples which had a life expectancy ex-vitro of approximately 3 weeks and had the tissue still alive and fully functioning 2 years after the start of the experiment. That translates to a 34x increase in life span for that particular tissue type.

That said, getting a tissue culture to stay alive and functioning for 34x the normal life expectancy and then translating it fully to an advance mammal to increase the experimental subject's life expectancy in any capacity would be the same as Pasteur telling the world he found a way to curtail infection after a surgery, then expecting him to perform a liver transplant with 100% success rate. The two things are not inherently equal achievements nor are they translatable feats of genetic manipulation. Not by a damn sight.

The 1000 year hypothesis might be in reference to our ability to engineer new parts and pieces for a person as the old ones wear out. The life expectancy of a mammal, and some other animal types, is governed by what is loosely referred to as the "Million Heartbeats Rule". Looking at the overall population of a given species and/or as defined a subspecies as the experiment wishes to delineate, you then look at the amount of time it takes for each individual within that population to have reached one million heartbeats. The elapsed time of the million mark gives you a general idea of the life expectancy, all things being equal.

Of course the life expectancy can be hugely optimized by favorable environmental factors, and the overall life expectancy of a population can be artificially extended by selectively choosing the individuals within the phylogeny of the population that has the longest lifespan, and then only allowing those individuals of both sexes to breed. It's a multi-step generational approach that has been successfully tested in a variety of short-life span animals such as good old Drosophila melanogaster and the common lab mouse. There is of course a point at which life cannot be extended without additional manipulation of the population's genetics beyond artificial selection.

So what you have then is a point at which most of an animal's systems begin to break down. As long as you can engineer replacements for everything that supports the CNS, you can extend life indefinitely. Finding solutions for diseases that affect the CNS is your Holy Grail.

Keep the mind healthy, engineer the supporting organs and systems, and you've got the recipe for a 1000+ year life span.

So simple, in theory.

Of the original 5 point list as shown by the original post; #1, 3 and 5 are the most likely. However they are presented in the bulleted form to strike your attention much like Ripley's Believe It or Not would have done.

Smelling a disease? Perhaps a misrepresentation of the respiratory properties of a diseased cell or tissue set. Put a person in a controlled environment and by judging what their exhaled gas mixture is you could present a possible diagnosis of the disease if you had a full baseline to start from. For years certain 'smells' of a person's breath were indicators of diseases.

Ever so slightly fermenting apples? A sign of an infected appendix. There are also diagnostic smells of other conditions that include smells of certain fruity cheese smells for strep throat, hints of acetone for something, and there's one more but I'd have to go hunting in Taber's to find it.

[ScipioCowboy]

People who are willing to clone themselves even though that doesn't mean they don't die, just that their replica will live. It's like a twin who was born xx years after you.

Ironic, isn't it?

By trying to avoid death through cloning, you're actually subjecting yourself to numerous deaths.

[jubal]

I don't see it happening. You can't prevent aging completely. Just because someone finds a way to rejuvenate skin or something like that, the heart, lungs, kidneys etc age too. Not to mention plaque (not teeth, in arteries) build ups, etc and even diseases of different types will kill you first. (heart disease or something similar) That isn't even talking about the deterioration of the brain. Not only from age, but from what people do to themselves.

1,000 year ain't happening. Maybe 150s, but at that point the overcrowding and pollution issues will become so bad that they will start up a Logan's Run scenario.

Or Soylent Green.

[Doomsday101]

Or Soylent Green.

Umm, Soylent Green with a little hot sauce. Damn good. :laugh2:

[VietCowboy]

Anyone ever read this short story called Learning to be me by Egan? It's about a time in the future where our brain (which will eventually fail) is implanted close to birth with a chip that learns exactly what you do and think and say. Basically, a replica of your brain. When you reach a certain age, the brain is disposed of. In that case, this chip takes over, and is you...for a very long time. Would you say it is still "you" if it would have done everything you would have done?

And then there's the paradox regarding how many replacements will it no longer be "you." Think of the classical example, a ship. Let's say you replace a board on a Ship A. Is it still Ship A? What if you gradually started to replace every single board, material, etc on Ship A. When does it cease to be Ship A? And if it does, if you reassemble all the throwaway materials to make another ship, is that Ship A?

[Sam I Am]

Anyone ever read this short story called Learning to be me by Egan? It's about a time in the future where our brain (which will eventually fail) is implanted close to birth with a chip that learns exactly what you do and think and say. Basically, a replica of your brain. When you reach a certain age, the brain is disposed of. In that case, this chip takes over, and is you...for a very long time. Would you say it is still "you" if it would have done everything you would have done?

And then there's the paradox regarding how many replacements will it no longer be "you." Think of the classical example, a ship. Let's say you replace a board on a Ship A. Is it still Ship A? What if you gradually started to replace every single board, material, etc on Ship A. When does it cease to be Ship A? And if it does, if you reassemble all the throwaway materials to make another ship, is that Ship A?

The question is, after you replace the first light bulb is it still Ship A or Ship A.1? :laugh2:

I think after you replace 50% of it, it becomes Ship B. So, you can have Ship A.3.14159 (or Ship A.Pi ;) )

Now, in a human, the second the brain is no longer functional. It is no longer the person. Your personality IMO accounts for 95% of who you are. It's kind of why I subscribe to the Star Trek Klingon belief. Once you are dead, the body no longer matters. It's just a husk. It wasn't you, but only what housed you. Just like a car, or a house, or a pair of clothes.

[LeonDixson]

The telomere is often also referred to as a "poly-A tail." At the end of a genetic sequence there are repeating series of AAA AAA AAA AAA that continue on for a finite length depending on the cell. As the cell replicates, one of the codons gets lopped off. Once you reach the end point, the cell lineage dies.

The trick isn't just having the poly A tail fail to cleave at the end of the DNA replication process, but to have that one cell divide and the better of the parent and daughter cell survive if there is any differentiation in the genetic code between the two.

And 1000 years? Not unreasonable. A professor at Alabama-Birmingham had taken cat (and now horse as well I believe) somatic tissue samples which had a life expectancy ex-vitro of approximately 3 weeks and had the tissue still alive and fully functioning 2 years after the start of the experiment. That translates to a 34x increase in life span for that particular tissue type.

That said, getting a tissue culture to stay alive and functioning for 34x the normal life expectancy and then translating it fully to an advance mammal to increase the experimental subject's life expectancy in any capacity would be the same as Pasteur telling the world he found a way to curtail infection after a surgery, then expecting him to perform a liver transplant with 100% success rate. The two things are not inherently equal achievements nor are they translatable feats of genetic manipulation. Not by a damn sight.

The 1000 year hypothesis might be in reference to our ability to engineer new parts and pieces for a person as the old ones wear out. The life expectancy of a mammal, and some other animal types, is governed by what is loosely referred to as the "Million Heartbeats Rule". Looking at the overall population of a given species and/or as defined a subspecies as the experiment wishes to delineate, you then look at the amount of time it takes for each individual within that population to have reached one million heartbeats. The elapsed time of the million mark gives you a general idea of the life expectancy, all things being equal.

Of course the life expectancy can be hugely optimized by favorable environmental factors, and the overall life expectancy of a population can be artificially extended by selectively choosing the individuals within the phylogeny of the population that has the longest lifespan, and then only allowing those individuals of both sexes to breed. It's a multi-step generational approach that has been successfully tested in a variety of short-life span animals such as good old Drosophila melanogaster and the common lab mouse. There is of course a point at which life cannot be extended without additional manipulation of the population's genetics beyond artificial selection.

So what you have then is a point at which most of an animal's systems begin to break down. As long as you can engineer replacements for everything that supports the CNS, you can extend life indefinitely. Finding solutions for diseases that affect the CNS is your Holy Grail.

Keep the mind healthy, engineer the supporting organs and systems, and you've got the recipe for a 1000+ year life span.

So simple, in theory.

Of the original 5 point list as shown by the original post; #1, 3 and 5 are the most likely. However they are presented in the bulleted form to strike your attention much like Ripley's Believe It or Not would have done.

Smelling a disease? Perhaps a misrepresentation of the respiratory properties of a diseased cell or tissue set. Put a person in a controlled environment and by judging what their exhaled gas mixture is you could present a possible diagnosis of the disease if you had a full baseline to start from. For years certain 'smells' of a person's breath were indicators of diseases.

Ever so slightly fermenting apples? A sign of an infected appendix. There are also diagnostic smells of other conditions that include smells of certain fruity cheese smells for strep throat, hints of acetone for something, and there's one more but I'd have to go hunting in Taber's to find it.
Yeah, that's what I said:D:D:D

Just Kidding, Salty. That's a great explanation.

[hipfake08]

1,000 year ain't happening. Maybe 150s, but at that point the overcrowding and pollution issues will become so bad that they will start up a Logan's Run scenario.

I thought more of a Soilent Green.....:eek: