Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SAI_Peregrinus 4085 days ago
The second law of thermodynamics answers this question with a definitive "no".
4 comments

They aren't speaking literally. From my point of view, a human who can live, say, 10,000 years is as good as 'immortal'. Sure its literally wrong, but I heard webster now defines 'literally' as 'figuratively' so I'm ready to give up on pedantry.
10,000 years, hmm? Ever read Larry Niven's short story "Cautionary Tales"?
I read a lot of Niven's short stories as a child, but I don't remember that title. Did he illustrate some of the problems we'd have with long life spans?
Not really. It was more of an exploration into different perspectives on search for life-extending technologies by aliens with different life spans. I suggest reading it.
Immortal for certain definitions of forever.
Arbitrary longetivity?
Excluding accidents, natural disasters, murder or suicide.
Even if we had a "permanent" energy source, we have only a finite number of atoms. So one day we would actually also be guaranteed to cycle our thoughts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincar%C3%A9_recurrence_theore...

So for me true immortality is not only about unbounded time but also unbounded size, neither of which seems achievable.

For all purposes of regular human condition though, an approximation is good enough.

Maybe not forever, but eons.