[Zer0]

Bill, I Sincerely Apologize. 🌷
Did not mean to offend/insult you in any manner. ✌
I shall certainly refrain from doing so in the future n this offence won't be repeated knowingly/ unknowingly, I assure you. 👍
Rule 1 totally accepted n agreed upon. 😀

[Bill S]

Bill, I Sincerely Apologize. 🌷

Thanks, Zer0.  No one expects you to be a mind reader, but checking with fellow posters before playing silly b*ggers with their names might be considered a matter of courtesy.  No lasting harm.

I hope we can continue to have interesting exchanges.

[Bill S]

Anyone know if João Magueijo is still working on his theory that light speed has changed since the early Universe?

[Zer0]

Eventually the smarty scientifically intellectual froggys that we are, we would have managed to live thrice longer than other dumbo frogs n ended up having ten times more fun compared to them

How does hidernating make you live longer?

Let's just keep the froggy stuff aside n move ahead okay.

Scenario 1 :
Subject (A) was born on 1st Jan 1850 n died 1st Jan 1900.
Subject (B) was born on 1st Jan 1850 n died 1st Jan 1950.
Who lived longer, (A) or (B) ?

Scenario 2 :
Subject (C) will be born on 1st Jan 2050 n grow up to oppose/dislike cryogenics leading a simple & peaceful life n dying natural death on 1st Jan 2150.
Subject (D) will be born on 1st Jan 2050 n grow up to accept/like cryogenics n eventually go under cryopreservation/hibernation on 1st Jan 2100 & wake-up on 1st Jan 2150 n live peacefully until dying  of natural death on 1st Jan 2200.
Who will live longer, (C) or (D) ?

Bill S :
How does hidernating make you live longer?

I know a question cannot be answered with a bunch of follow-up questions, but at times it can help one realize the answer lies within the primary question itself.

(looking forward to know your thoughts n views on the above stated scenarios, and yes statements such as "No lasting harm." (glad to know) & "I hope we can continue to have interesting exchanges." (feeling is mutual) reflect understanding/maturity/kindness/forgiveness so Thanks A lot Bill.)
(0) ☺

[yor_on]

Myself I think that the correct way to imagine a Big Bang is as a emergence cowlinator. In that case it probably becomes wrong to think of it as growing, expanding and accelerating. And considering that the universe should have been 'infinite' even then you meet a problem. The solution to that problem should be redefining what we mean by 'infinity' in this case. If 'SpaceTime' consist of four dimensions in where you 'move', then there is no way to return, that's the simple solution. But then you also can wonder about the way those dimensions connect to each other and ask yourself if there is a 'outside' to it. Either there is, and then from that point of view this 'infinite universe' might become something else as seen from 'outside'. Or, there isn't any meaning in even speculating about it. I hold to the second opinion myself which then naturally defines the universe as 'infinite'. Because you need a frame more to define it otherwise.

[Bill S]

There is a strong tendency these days to equate cryopreservation with hibernation. I think this is unfortunate, as they are quite different. 

Obviously, someone who underwent cryopreservation and who was successfully restored to active life, in the sort of, hypothetical, situation you describe, would be recorded as having lived longer, but, in what way could you claim he/she had travelled into the future to a greater extent that someone who was born later, and died at the same time? 

[Bill S]

If we on the other hand accept the idea of a Big Bang happening 'everywhere' with its subsequent 'inflation', stipulating 'c' to be unchanging, then the CMB should be of a uniform measure as I think of it.

If you accept the Big Bang, is there any alternative to having it happen everywhere?

[yor_on]

Don't know Bill. I think it makes sense thinking of it the way I understands it. To me it fits with a lot of other phenomena, as LorentzFitzgerald contractions - time dilation's f.ex. It makes SpaceTime make a little more sense.

[Zer0]

(1) There is a strong tendency these days to equate cryopreservation with hibernation. I think this is unfortunate, as they are quite different. 

(2) Obviously, someone who underwent cryopreservation and who was successfully restored to active life, in the sort of, hypothetical, situation you describe, would be recorded as having lived longer, but, in what way could you claim he/she had travelled into the future to a greater extent that someone who was born later, and died at the same time?

(1) I completely agree Cryopreservation & Hibernation are two distinct different terms/roads, but when you transcend your scientific thoughts n try looking beyond the cloudy horizon you would realize both these different techniques/roads lead towards the same result/destination.
For Example :
A frog in hibernation is travelling into the future.  🐸 ⏰ ➡
A human being in suspended animation is travelling into the future.  😷 ⏰ ➡
Similarly a future human, n the near future, using futuristic cryopreservation would also be travelling towards the future.  👦 ⏰ ➡

(2) Claiming (he/she had travelled into the future to a greater extent that someone who was born later, and died at the same time?) certainly wont be a task impossible enough to achieve for someone/anyone/no one.
For Example :
All I would have to do is click two snaps/pictures/photos of the two different Tombstones of subjects (C) & (D) respectively n upload them with due respect on Instagram, then even a Kindergartener quite frankly would be able to tell the difference as to who lived longer.  📷 🌐 👶

(to answer it in simplest of words would be to say that even a frog under hibernation will definitely live longer than a frog which ain't under hibernation).  👼

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=12479.0

[Bill S]

A frog in hibernation is travelling into the future.  🐸 ⏰ ➡
A human being in suspended animation is travelling into the future.  😷 ⏰ ➡
Similarly a future human, n the near future, using futuristic cryopreservation would also be travelling towards the future.  👦 ⏰ ➡

True, but we are all travelling towards the future.  Are you suggesting that any of your examples are travelling towards the future at a rate different from that of the rest of us?

All I would have to do is click two snaps/pictures/photos of the two different Tombstones of subjects (C) & (D) respectively n upload them with due respect on Instagram, then even a Kindergartener quite frankly would be able to tell the difference as to who lived longer

Surely you can't be saying that living longer than someone else is the same as travelling through time at a different rate.

[Zer0]

A frog in hibernation is travelling into the future.  🐸 ⏰ ➡
A human being in suspended animation is travelling into the future.  😷 ⏰ ➡
Similarly a future human, n the near future, using futuristic cryopreservation would also be travelling towards the future.  👦 ⏰ ➡

(1) True, but we are all travelling towards the future.  Are you suggesting that any of your examples are travelling towards the future at a rate different from that of the rest of us?

All I would have to do is click two snaps/pictures/photos of the two different Tombstones of subjects (C) & (D) respectively n upload them with due respect on Instagram, then even a Kindergartener quite frankly would be able to tell the difference as to who lived longer

(2) Surely you can't be saying that living longer than someone else is the same as travelling through time at a different rate.

(1) Yes they are travelling at a different rate and this isn't a subjective/personal view rather an objective/universal view.
Guess its my fault, I should have been more specific n clear in pointing out that the link I had posted previously has all valid references to prove the point n also provide valuable clarifications.
So Please take a look at this -
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=12479.0

We age n get older in reference to our individual biological clocks, slowing(hibernation) or pausing(suspended animation)the clock does change the rate of travel into or towards the future.  👍
(keywords/terms that would help in understanding this complex phenomenon are suspended animation, metabolic rate, critical flicker fusion, DNA telomeres). 👼

(2) Yes, you are understanding my point very well as that is exactly what I'm trying to say.
(C) & (D) is the cryopreservation example, (D) would undergo cryonic self preservation hence completely stopping the biological clock which would be turned back on at a later time.
I wouldn't dare say that Science in the near Future would be capable of Resurrecting the Dead considering it to be demeaning/insulting prominent religious beliefs worldwide.
But no one can object or stop me from stating that Medical Science will Indeed someday, Wake Up the Clinically Dead.  ✌

[Bill S]

Zer0, I've just followed your link, for the second time.  I see no evidence that hibernation would turn anyone into a chrononaut.  We must be interpreting things differently.

Perhaps someone else would come in to help sort it out.

[Zer0]

Do you want to tackle these points seriously?  If so, we might need a slightly different approach.

Yes I'm up for it, let the games begin. 💪👊
But just to clarify the Rules of the Game, I'm Hoping the discussions would be Strictly pertaining to Scientific Rationality n not Metaphysical or Philosophical in nature. 🚬
Bill[edited] if you resort to Wonderlanding 🍥 theories n start acting all Alicey 👯 with me, then even I'm gonna go full Rabbity White 🐇 on you.

Chrononaut???   😵

Yes its pretty clear we are certainly interpreting things differently.

Hibernating animals, Suspended Animation techniques and CryoPreserved humans aren't figments of my imagination.

Its a bit disheartening how quickly a scientifically rational conversation at times magically transforms into a trip to Disneyland or Wonderland Physics.

Perhaps it would be futile to expect someone with a scientific temperament to jump into this mess.

I certainly don't see anything left to be sorted out, its pretty clear already.
Thanks for your time Bill.   🙏

[Bill S]

Chrononaut???

Timetraveller.

Yes its pretty clear we are certainly interpreting things differently.

I am always interested to know why someone thinks differently from me about a subject.

I certainly don't see anything left to be sorted out, its pretty clear already.

If you are content to bask in your "clarity", you are probably right, there isn't anything left to be sorted out. 
I'm still hoping that someone else will come in.  One of us is obviously off track.

[Bill S]

Just to be sure we have clarity; this is what I hope someone will scatter some light on.

Does hibernation or cryo-preservation cause the hibernating creature, or object preserved, to travel through time at a different rate from any creature or object not subject to hibernation or preservation?

[David Cooper]

Does hibernation or cryo-preservation cause the hibernating creature, or object preserved, to travel through time at a different rate from any creature or object not subject to hibernation or preservation?

No - it simply slows growth and ageing damage, but other damage from exposure to radiation continues at the same rate as normal, leading to an effective increase in that damage to the preserved creature by the time it's been revived, although you would try to eliminate that by shielding it with lead. The decay rate of any radioactive atoms in the preserved creature would continue to decay at the normal rate though, so that would make a clear distinction between this and relativistic slowing of "time".

[Bill S]

No - it simply slows growth and ageing damage........

That's what I thought.

The next question must be: Am I misinterpreting Zer0's posts; or is he saying that hibernation/cryo-preservation change the rate at which one would travel through time?

[David Cooper]

The next question must be: Am I misinterpreting Zer0's posts; or is he saying that hibernation/cryo-preservation change the rate at which one would travel through time?

I don't know - I don't have time to read them carefully enough to tell. The rate of radioactive decay of the preserved material serves as a clock though which continues to tick unslowed, so all that's being changed is the rate of chemical reactions either by lowering temperature or introducing chemicals which block reactions while the functionality of the atoms themselves continues to run at full speed, and that clearly shows that it makes no difference to the rate at which the preserved stuff is travelling through time. To slow "time" properly, you have to use a relativistic method (high speed or gravity), and then you either have the preserved object follow a shorter path through time into the future (SR/GR) or you have slowed cycles for anything moving at the speed of light within the preserved object, thereby slowing its entire functionality (LET).