posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 10:54 PM
I think I've read aging comes from garbage that collects in our cells and their maintenance crews cannot handle the load and so the life giving
machinery becomes increasingly clogged until the the cell dies. What I read suggested nanomachines might be able to solve the problem by cleaning up
and keeping the cells going strong.
However I think the more accepted view is aging is "designed" into us by evolution, as opposed to being something evolution hasn't mastered. In
effect, I think we live "forever" through each other by reproducing and said rough copies of ourselves continue our legacy.
One thing that's always interested me is a 30-40 year old woman and a 60 year old man can produce a new life. So a old man and a nearly middle age
woman possess the cellular machinery to produce youth.
My opinion is if we didn't die we'd still have to change to cope. Changing means our identity would change dramatically every X years. So we'd be like
a different person every X years. The fact we DON'T live forever means we can hold onto our identity for eternity and even though we die we can find
satisfaction in knowing other people (especially in sum) are what we approximately would have been had we lived long enough.
Sorry to hear about the OP having pain. There's so much of that in the world. Evolution probably requires it. I for one welcome the onset of a
painless (hopefully meaningful) immortal life, but I wouldn't bet on it.
I read a novel where one of the characters was offered immortality but she declined. Why? I think because the people she had loved had died and she
couldn't let go of the fact any imitation of them can't actually be them. She also felt like her living forever would not be HER.
23-8-2014 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)