When will Ray Kurzweil die?

[jasong]

(Yes, I know I'm resurrecting a 2 year old thread)

Ray Kurzweil and the poll aside, I saw a Ted talk where they said that people in their early 40s right now could probably live to be a thousand if there's no huge global disaster in the future.

His reasoning was that you don't need a treatment to live to be a thousand RIGHT NOW. You just need to stay ahead of the curve.

So if, in ten years, they can come up with a treatment that lets 50 year olds live to be a hundred, than they have 50 years to come up with a treatment for 100 year olds to live to be 200, and so on up to a thousand.

Mind you, this isn't true immortality, because there would still be things like rapid blood loss from injuries and broken spines from accidents and other things like that.

I think, statistically, at the 10,000 year mark, you only have a few people that have managed to avoid accidental death even though they're "immortal." But that's assuming only the life extension tech is the change that happens to the world. Things could actually get worse, or better.

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by jasong

Ray Kurzweil and the poll aside, I saw a Ted talk where they said that people in their early 40s right now could probably live to be a thousand if there's no huge global disaster in the future.

His reasoning was that you don't need a treatment to live to be a thousand RIGHT NOW. You just need to stay ahead of the curve.

Bollocks. Most of our life-expectancy increases have been by combating childhood diseases, not by curing end-of-life issues. If anything year-by-year progress on life extension for middle-aged and older people is going more slowly now.

[CRGreathouse]

Back on the original topic: I made a chart showing the most likely range by year for an average American male, using the Social Security Administration's current (2013) period life table:

This question was posed in 2007, at which point the plurality (37.87%) life expectancy was in the 2026-2035 range. It grows in probability, year after year, through 2022 when it becomes a majority, then becomes a plurality for 2030 before handing off the majority to 2036-2045 which holds it right up to 2045 when 2046 or later takes over. That's right: even if Ray lived to 2044 he would, if typical, be more likely to die than live another two years.

For example, a typical American man alive in 2016 has no chance of dying before 2015 (of course!), a 28.74% chance of dying 2015-2025, a 43.43% chance of dying 2026-2035, a 25.95% chance of dying 2036-2045, and only a 1.88% chance of living to 2046.

Of course I'm not claiming he's typical; there are lots of factors determining life expectancy. But this might help tease apart what does (or does not) make him different from that average case. The 18 votes for before 2015 and 2015-2025, for example, suggest that he wouldn't live as long as the median American of the same age (even if cast in 2007 when this was half again as likely as now).

[MooMoo2]

Originally Posted by jasong

I think, statistically, at the 10,000 year mark, you only have a few people that have managed to avoid accidental death even though they're "immortal." But that's assuming only the life extension tech is the change that happens to the world. Things could actually get worse, or better.

You may be interested in: http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=21568
Someone who always has the mortality rate of a 25 year old male has a 50% chance of living until 520. That person only has a 1 in 600,000 chance of living until 10,000.
Someone who always has the mortality rate of a 57 year old male has a 50% chance of living until 76, which is the life expectancy of American males at birth.

Someone who always has the mortality rate of a 25 year old female has a 50% chance of living until 1350. That person has a 1 in 169 chance of living until 10,000.
Someone who always has the mortality rate of a 63 year old female has a 50% chance of living until 81, which is the life expectancy of American females at birth.

The world's oldest man lived to 116. If you always had the mortality rate of a 25 year old man, your chances of reaching that age would be 86%. Your chances drop to 50% if you always had the mortality rate of a 52 year old man and 6% if you always had the mortality rate of a 70 year old man.

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

Bollocks. Most of our life-expectancy increases have been by combating childhood diseases, not by curing end-of-life issues. If anything year-by-year progress on life extension for middle-aged and older people is going more slowly now.

You're both right and wrong. The life expectancy of a 20 year old today is significantly higher than the life expectancy of a 20 year old in 1900. However, the life expectancy of a 90 year old today is pretty much the same as the life expectancy of a 90 year old in 1900.

[MooMoo2]

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

Back on the original topic: I made a chart showing the most likely range by year for an average American male, using the Social Security Administration's current (2013) period life table:

This question was posed in 2007, at which point the plurality (37.87%) life expectancy was in the 2026-2035 range. It grows in probability, year after year, through 2022 when it becomes a majority, then becomes a plurality for 2030 before handing off the majority to 2036-2045 which holds it right up to 2045 when 2046 or later takes over. That's right: even if Ray lived to 2044 he would, if typical, be more likely to die than live another two years.

Interesting. I looked through the thread and found this post from 2010:

Originally Posted by Historian

I've just pulled up the actuarial tables for 2006:

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html

Plug in Kurzweil's age and sex, and you'll see that he's expected to live for another 19 years. So my vote is 2029.

He's now expected to live for another 15 years (until 2031).