Burial clothes - why so formal?
- Thread starter Kirby
- Start date
Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but why would you need a coffin or clothing at all if you're getting cremated?
Full Body. He thinks in the far future they will cure whatever he dies of. And that they will want to unfreeze and cure him.
He has also thought about transferring his brain into an android body so he can live forever. We obviously consume far too much sci-fi, but his optimism is charming.
I guess the coffin is to save the funeral workers from having to throw dead, naked bodies straight into the furnace. I think, by law, the body has to be in some sort of container.
I don't care if I am naked or not.
I did a quick search but couldn't find the Tasmanian laws concerning coffins and cremation but I suspect our laws are similar to those of South Australia.
A
Amaris
Guest
I was liquidated and reconstituted once. It was awful.
A
Amaris
Guest
I have some dignity. *fishes through pockets*
Now where the hell did that dignity go?
Well, they won't only have to cure whatever he dies from but also be able to correct, and reverse, the damage freezing something does to cells.
As with all things, the answer is nanites. Someone from the future plugs in a CryoPod Nano, and the nanites begin to repair your damaged cells. Easy peasy. No need for further thought on the complexity or logistics required or the amount of heat that would generate. Just say "nanites" three times. It's like Beetlejuice, but science-y.
^^ I'm just not convinced that future people would really even want to thaw a bunch of 20th/21st century uneducated dolts. We don't even know how to use the three shells, so why would they even bother with us? Especially just the heads, a unfrozen head can't do anything... Unless Futurama got it right.
Frozen head bowling is going to be huge in the future.
To answer seriously, if you could revive someone and provide them with a new body or repair their old one, their input on what life was like during their time would be an invaluable research tool. They could give a larger context to the disparate bits of surviving media and technology future historians would find.
To answer seriously, if you could revive someone and provide them with a new body or repair their old one, their input on what life was like during their time would be an invaluable research tool. They could give a larger context to the disparate bits of surviving media and technology future historians would find.
I agree there would be advantages to unfreezing some people for research purposes but surely any future people wouldn't unfreeze everyone, but only those people who are likely to be of the most help to future historians.
We could *probably* argue that any contract for those who under goes cryogenics includes them being revived should the ability to do so ever come. Though I don't know how that contract would be enforced aside from having some *really* dedicated family/lawyers staying active for years, decades or centuries after you've died. We could also probably argue that, like what happened in TNG, that future "morals" would honor-bound future doctors to take the steps to revive the deceased.
But, really, as it stands right now with cryogenics we only know how to solve half the problem. Namely freezing you and keeping you consistently frozen for an extended period of time. And even if we do reach a point to fix or cure whatever it is that killed you that doesn't help us or, mostly, "you." Because freezing stuff does major, major damage to cells in even the best of circumstances (freezing things quickly and keeping them at a constant, very low, temperature.) Right now we're just hoping at some point someone will figure out how to fix this damage.
I think there's *better* "results" in freezing just the brain of someone as the less mass you're freezing the quicker it freezes which makes smaller crystals and minimizes the damage. But NOW you're waiting for someone to figure out how to do brain transplants rather than just solve whatever killed you. And if what killed you was a brain-related problem, Well, ugh.
Maybe there's a reason why only a literal handful of people have taken this route. Well that and that it's very expensive process to undertake.
As for unfreezing someone being a benefit to people of the future to better understand the subject's way of life? Well, first of all that's assuming anyone in the future is going to care about or want to know about the average 20th/21st century person's way of life. That and, well, most of it is going to be pretty well documented barring any kind of major disaster that erases all of records and documentation of current events. There is the possibility of the "digital black hole" problem many speak of but even with that there's plenty of ways to avoid that problem since we know that it is one.
But, really, as it stands right now with cryogenics we only know how to solve half the problem. Namely freezing you and keeping you consistently frozen for an extended period of time. And even if we do reach a point to fix or cure whatever it is that killed you that doesn't help us or, mostly, "you." Because freezing stuff does major, major damage to cells in even the best of circumstances (freezing things quickly and keeping them at a constant, very low, temperature.) Right now we're just hoping at some point someone will figure out how to fix this damage.
I think there's *better* "results" in freezing just the brain of someone as the less mass you're freezing the quicker it freezes which makes smaller crystals and minimizes the damage. But NOW you're waiting for someone to figure out how to do brain transplants rather than just solve whatever killed you. And if what killed you was a brain-related problem, Well, ugh.
Maybe there's a reason why only a literal handful of people have taken this route. Well that and that it's very expensive process to undertake.
As for unfreezing someone being a benefit to people of the future to better understand the subject's way of life? Well, first of all that's assuming anyone in the future is going to care about or want to know about the average 20th/21st century person's way of life.
That and, well, most of it is going to be pretty well documented barring any kind of major disaster that erases all of records and documentation of current events. There is the possibility of the "digital black hole" problem many speak of but even with that there's plenty of ways to avoid that problem since we know that it is one.
When I am dead, then I will make my first, full admission to being a TREK fan, in my Open Casket Funeral, wearing my reproduction black Spock Robe from TMP. What a shame STAR TREK hasn't come out with TREK COFFINS in the shape of a torpedo! Ah ... but it would probably be a cheap piece of shit, no matter how overcharged I'd be for it. Water leaking inside, with worms and insects finding their way in. I gave thought to a burial at sea, for a quick minute, but I don't like the thoughts of being stuck at the bottom of the ocean, like that. Some Giant Squid might start hugging it and out I'd pop and slowly rise to the surface ... with every nibbler in the sea taking a piece out of me, on the way up. Me in my $2000.oo Spock Robe bobbing all over the Atlantic and washing up on the Jersey Shore for crabs to snack on. No, probably best to be buried at Saint Dominick's where I'm sure not to wash up, unless somebody moves the headstones ...
We could *probably* argue that any contract for those who under goes cryogenics includes them being revived should the ability to do so ever come. Though I don't know how that contract would be enforced aside from having some *really* dedicated family/lawyers staying active for years, decades or centuries after you've died. We could also probably argue that, like what happened in TNG, that future "morals" would honor-bound future doctors to take the steps to revive the deceased.
But, really, as it stands right now with cryogenics we only know how to solve half the problem. Namely freezing you and keeping you consistently frozen for an extended period of time. And even if we do reach a point to fix or cure whatever it is that killed you that doesn't help us or, mostly, "you." Because freezing stuff does major, major damage to cells in even the best of circumstances (freezing things quickly and keeping them at a constant, very low, temperature.) Right now we're just hoping at some point someone will figure out how to fix this damage.
I think there's *better* "results" in freezing just the brain of someone as the less mass you're freezing the quicker it freezes which makes smaller crystals and minimizes the damage. But NOW you're waiting for someone to figure out how to do brain transplants rather than just solve whatever killed you. And if what killed you was a brain-related problem, Well, ugh.
Maybe there's a reason why only a literal handful of people have taken this route. Well that and that it's very expensive process to undertake.
As for unfreezing someone being a benefit to people of the future to better understand the subject's way of life? Well, first of all that's assuming anyone in the future is going to care about or want to know about the average 20th/21st century person's way of life.
The funny thing about that episode of TNG, The Neutral Zone is this. The son of the woman who was cryogenically frozen is named Tommy and his birthday was February seventeenth. My name is Tom, but all my family call me Tommy and my birthday is February seventeenth. They are from Secaucus NJ and I'm from Hawthorne NJ, which is a few miles West of Secaucus.
Well, there used to be! http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Eternal_Image
