why don't we live forever

[her34]

why do bodies age until death, instead of aging until adulthood and maintaining that state.

is death evolutionary necessary?

 

[intogamer]

cause we are in the matrix. our minds control death haha

 

[MetalStorm]

I don't think the answer to that question is fully known, and I doubt you'll get a deep insight in to the processes involved unless there are any cellular biologists on these forums.

 

[Farmer]

That's a question people have been asking themselves for a while, and no one really can answer. All I can say is that, though people more educated than me have a thorough understanding of 'how' we age, we don't have much knowledge on 'why.' It is currently beyond our scope of understanding. "Death" is also a questionable term, until you define "dead" and "alive." If you look at it from an obtusely technical standpoint, nothing ever "dies", since "living" things are simply large masses of atoms. "Death" and "life" is the association of properties given to certain "alive" bunches of atoms (such as the ability to move, think, grow, change, talk, etc...) that we, as humans, interpret to be the state of being "alive."

I'm sure others more in the know will give a scientific answer closer to the type of response you were looking for, but know that nothing really is true, it's just general accepted. In other words, there is no such thing as a 'objective' opinion, since we are all human. It's only relatively objective. And hence the necessity for humans to believe in greater beings and institute religions.

 

[bobsmith1492]

It's not subjective. Your cells can only divide a limited amount of times. After that, your body's systems start to fail, and you die. Quite simple.

Anyway, the most likely reason is that after the Flood, God said he would limit man's days to 120 (years, that is) which is about what it is. He probably changed our cells' timers so that they die off after that much time. It all comes back to the original sin though. If you want an evolutionary answer, it's because we're not fully enough evolved. Yay.

And now, the flames begin, then this thread gets locked.......

 

[Farmer]

Sorry, I mean "it's not objective."

Well, that's seems like an easy enough answer.

"Mommy, why do I have to eat vegetables?"

"Because I said so."

"Mommy, why do people die?"

"Because God said so."

Yes, my cells divide only a limited number of times. Great. So you're saying that, dispite infinite resources, it is absolutely impossible to make that cell divide more than those numbers of times? Sure, not with our current capabilities, but perhaps in the future.

If a man ever lives to be 121, would that mean the collapse of the Christian religion?

It's quite simple. IMHO, take away death, and you take away the reason for the existence of most religions.

 

[Toki]

the oldest known person was actually 122, i think.

 

[Farmer]

124

 

[Gibsons]

Imo, the short answer, and I'm quoting a Nobel laureate, is "evolution has no need of grandparents."

On a cellular level, one major factor seems to be telomeres. These are the tip ends of chromosomes. Due to the way DNA replication works, they get shorter every time the genome gets replicated (mitosis). It seems that when they get too short the cells show signs of senescence and fail to replicate well or at all. The nots and bolts mechanism behind this hadn't been elucidated last I heard, but it's been a while. What's convincing about this theory is that there's an enzyme called telomerase which can "re-grow" the telomeres -- if you force it's expression in otherwise normal cells, they'll be able to overcome the senescence. There's more than a little speculation that this might be involved in cancers as well (but again, I haven't looked at this specific topic in over a year).

Yes, my cells divide only a limited number of times. Great. So you're saying that, dispite infinite resources, it is absolutely impossible to make that cell divide more than those numbers of times? Sure, not with our current capabilities, but perhaps in the future

In the most technical sense we already do have cells that have an infinite (or nearly) capacity to divide. Something like 95% of the U.S. is positive for EBV (virus that causes mononucleosis). EBV infected B-cells are immortalized (maybe not 100%, but enough), meaning they can replicate indefinitely. One could argue that this is a bad thing though.

 

[Farmer]

Gibsons:

Good to know! That's odd, though, that they would call it "telomerase." Such an enzyme would suggest descruction of telomeres.

Mentioning cancers, perhaps the catalyzation of telomere degredation (as opposed to it's preservation) might be a remedy for cancer. Ironic, isn't it?

 

[imported_FryLock]

Of course no one has brought up resources. Once you have passed on your genes to the next generation, unless there is a benefit to your decendants, such as passing on stored knowledge(shaman and elders for example), you have to die to stop competing for the resources that they need. Could you imagine how overpopulated the world would be if everyone born after 1830 stopped aging at age 50?

 

[zakee00]

yes, if everyone lived forever, then the following would probably happen:
1. we would have advanced farther technologicly. einstein, etc would still be alive ..but
2. the earth probably wouldnt be habitable right now, lack of resources. BUT...
3. we might have developed technology to go to mars and live there!!! or...
4. we might not have...and we all die
5. wait...we are talking about people living forever..SOOOOO
6. the earth becomes a GIANT pile of bodes that can never die!!! we just keep piling up, and reproducing!!!
this could go on forever, its all speculation.

 

[Machine350]

They've found that DNA actually codes how many times cells will divide and replenish the body. They have also found that DNA is a digital sequence. It is almost as if a programmer went in and wrote in our lifespan. But to answer the question, Adam sinned against God (a capital offense) which is punishable only by death. We are all descendants of Adam, so we inherit the the sin nature in our genes, therefore the body dies. Fortunately, God did make a way for our spirits to live forever. I didn't mean to wax spiritual on you guys, just answering the question.

 

[Tiamat]

If you are interested in living longer than normal, then you have to look into stem-cell research, cloning, etc. When you get to a certain age, you collect stem-cells you need and differentiate them to create organs that will be compatible with you. Of course, this wont be happening for a while - at least in terms of normal people being able to afford such processes.

 

[Gibsons]

They've found that DNA actually codes how many times cells will divide and replenish the body.

Well... sorta.

They have also found that DNA is a digital sequence.

Huh???

7 entries found for digital.
dig·i·tal Audio pronunciation of "digital" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dj-tl)
adj.

1. Of, relating to, or resembling a digit, especially a finger.
2. Operated or done with the fingers: a digital switch.
3. Having digits.
4. Expressed in numerical form, especially for use by a computer.
5. Computer Science. Of or relating to a device that can read, write, or store information that is represented in numerical form. See Usage Note at virtual.
6. Using or giving a reading in digits: a digital clock.

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

It is almost as if a programmer went in and wrote in our lifespan.

Or not at all like that.

so we inherit the the sin nature in our genes,

Here's a link where you can find pretty much the entire sequence of the human genome.

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techre...me/posters/chromosome/

please point out the sequences or genes or even just regions of a chromosome which carry this "sin nature." I would like to clone these sequences. Then I'll use them to make super sinful mice. Next I'll make sinless mice, assuming the knockouts are viable. I'll split the Nobel prize money with you.

 

[RichPLS]

We don't live forever because in the design of life as it is, there would be overcrowding and lack of natural resources.
That is why the government has black projects underway exploring methods of weeding out those less desirables from existence through chemical contrails like the ones trailing behind jets, and by chemicaly altering flu and military vaccinations so after one reaches physical peak, the person becomes frail and sickly, dying a horrible death.

 

[CycloWizard]

There's a big article in PopSci Jan 2005 about this very issue.

 

[Yassarian]

Death is evolutionary necessary to ensure the survival of the species -- because procreation is necessary. Think about it -- lets assume you can live forever, and that you SOMEHOW developed the ability to manipulate your own genes to ensure that you can fight off all past/current/and or future bugs. If you don't have the power to procreate, you are going to be extinct due to something like a nature catastrophy. And if you can procreate -- there will be overcrowding to deal with.

Realistically, we do not have the ability to modify out somatic cells at will. Like any machinery, our body wears out. We are survived by our progenies -- such is our legacy. In a sense, death IS evolutionary! (if you believe in evolution... hehe)

For those that doesn't believe in it -- think of it from a philosophical perspective: How can we be alive, if we can never die? Life is transitory -- death is what gives life it's urgency. Without it, the world stagnates.

Either that, or we really do live in the Matrix...

cheers,

Yass

 

[Farmer]

Yassarian:

Going to be extinct? Why, no! You live forever, even if the Sun supernovas!

True. No reproduction. What's the fun in life? But then, if we lived foreever, we'd either 1.) not really need to reproduce, and thus not really have any feelings on the subject matter or 2.) have the feature to keep us busy through our infinitely long lives.

"For those that doesn't believe in it -- think of it from a philosophical perspective: How can we be alive, if we can never die? Life is transitory -- death is what gives life it's urgency. Without it, the world stagnates."

Good point to bring up. But this is assuming we somehow learn to be immortal, but do still recognize what death means, or at least used to mean. Nobody can really be an 'authority' on this matter, because frankly, no one knows how it 'feels' to be dead. So you can talk about leading neurologists and respectable sources all you want, I won't believe one damn word, because they've never died.

RichPLS:

Yes, I could see how the US government would go through all that to kill people. Please remember that this "US Government" is not some higher power, its just a bunch of people.

I know you kid. You are a crackhead.

 

[DiseasedCow]

Well for a more technical answer, each living cell in your body contains a telmere which is basicly a longevity strand. Each time the cell replicates, the strand becomes shorter then is copied into the new cell. Once the strand reaches an end, the cell stops replicating and is eventually what we call aging. Once enough cells stop replicating then death can occur by this biological "aging" process.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: RichPLS
That is why the government has black projects underway exploring methods of weeding out those less desirables from existence through chemical contrails like the ones trailing behind jets, and by chemicaly altering flu and military vaccinations so after one reaches physical peak, the person becomes frail and sickly, dying a horrible death.

:laugh::thumbsup:

 

[Farmer]

DiseasedCow:

It's wonderful how we just completely ignore the data already presented? Google makes me brilliant.

 

[DiseasedCow]

 

[ReiAyanami]

Originally posted by: intogamer
cause we are in the matrix. our minds control death haha

the irony is that the human brain supposedly can hold 3-10TB of data. theoretically if you could digitize all the data from chemical storage to electronic storage, then one could live forever, if you could call that living.

turtles max out at 200 yrs. so do lobsters.
trees: thousands of years, red growth

your skin replaces itself every 30 days. all the cells in your body are replaced every 7 years.

 

[Gibsons]

all the cells in your body are replaced every 7 years.

incorrect for neurons, egg cells (ovaries) and I suspect quite a few others. Immune system memory cells might be an exception of sorts. Certainly when you lose them, something else will reside physically where they did, but the information they held (the important part) isn't replaced.