One of the resources mined, or rather, gathered, was helium 3, an isotope of the element helium. This by-product of stellar fusion was gathered as a thin, diffuse gas on the surface of the inner rocky planets. Gathering a kilogram of this substance took days on the hot surface of the second planet—the first planet proved impossible to work on, even with the toughest of robotic machines. However, with this substance efficient nuclear fusion reactors could be made to work, not only for the provision of abundant power but for the propulsion of spaceships within the planetary system. Some of the most efficient ships travelled at, in our terms, one million miles per hour. The nuclear fusion reactor was used to heat propulsion gases and the fuel that provided the gases was readily available from icy asteroids. With this propulsion we could get to Mars in a week rather than a year.
The space environment also allowed for experiments into antimatter. Like the attempts to build a nuclear fusion reactor on earth in the late 20th century, the problem with antimatter was one of containment of the reacting plasma. Their success at containing fusion gases encouraged them to try to contain anti-particles and then allow them to react with ordinary particles to produce enormous quantities of energy. Exordium had an equivalent of Einstein who formulated the equation E = mc2. During the early experiments, an entire asteroid and several hundred Exordicans disappeared in a brilliant flash of light. Nonetheless, the experiments continued.
In addition to the physical sciences, a great deal of effort had been put into the biological sciences. Scientific research was exclusively carried out by the alpha stratum of society and any results that filtered through to the other levels were watered down and were mainly treated with indifference by the lower strata.
The enigma of mortality was a subject common to the minds of many and the ability to conquer it either by magic potion or scientific research had been a long-standing aim. With assistance of computers, they managed to break down their genetic code into its constituents. There was a general opinion, held for many years, that the mechanism which switched off cells from replicating, and subsequently caused death to the individual, was a mechanism that could be altered.
Secret work was carried out in this field. Stunning results were obtained when it was discovered that laboratory animals could be kept alive twenty times their normal span. This lifespan existed in a youthful state for all but the last few moments and it was also discovered that the animals maintained their breeding capabilities during this time. Many complications arose, mainly because an interbreeding effect was possible. Unless individual creatures were strictly monitored the population levels grew quickly and chaotically. This problem was eventually rectified and it was also discovered that the lifespans of the creatures, with proper care and conditions, could theoretically be infinite.
This research was carried out in the utmost of secrecy and even those working on specific aspects of the programme were kept in the dark about the rest. Everything was on a need to know basis, except for the upper echelon of the alpha stratum. The next logical step was to apply this longevity technology to themselves.
* * *
Phase 4
Live Long and Prosper
So said Mr. Spock of Star Trek. Maybe the words are contradictory? If you live long, will you prosper? Who wants to live forever? The thought of living forever has more to do with nightmares than daydreams. I think most people would be horrified at the thought of a life which never ended, where we would be trapped with the same physical bodies, minds and their inherent paradoxes for an infinite time. Infinite means just that: it never, ever ends. Many religions espouse the idea of life eternal after death. This is a more complex question. It's bad enough trying to work out what happens after death when life itself isn't properly understood. Philosophers, theologians and scientists have deliberated for centuries on the meaning of life without getting anywhere. Regardless, the religious explanation of life after death isn't really a continuation of our physical selves; it is often referred to as another kind of existence, perhaps one outside space and time.
Forgetting infinite life for a moment, most people would like their chance for a few extra years on the planet, providing of course that they had years of health and vitality and not years of aged senile decay. People have searched for the fountain of youth for eons, trudging through tropical rain forest jungles looking for this mythical spring only to find that it's all in the genes. We survive because there is an inherent will within us that compels us to do so. It is a message from genes within our DNA that gives us the survival instinct. We have it and so do all animals on this planet.
Evidence suggests that antioxidants in the diet can mop up dangerous oxygen radicals in our bodies and so prevent deterioration of cells. Mice certainly live longer with antioxidants and humans probably do too, if accompanied by a sensible diet. Calorie restriction is said to enhance longevity—though eating the diet of a jockey for the rest of your life may not be attractive if you are a person who likes food. Avoidance of cigarettes, drugs and industrial pollution is probably a good idea and there are many constituents of foods which are deemed to be detrimental. Every week in the health sections of newspapers we are told what to eat and what not to eat but it becomes confusing very quickly. It seems to be the case that virtually everything we eat has a harmful effect in some way or another, or, at least that's the way the situation is presented. Eating a sensible diet with everything in moderation is probably the best route to health and longevity.
Diet and lifestyle changes may enable people to live longer, perhaps leading to an average lifespan of a century or more. This effect is already happening, at least in the western world. In the United Kingdom, for example, birth rates have fallen, for various reasons, while life expectancy has increased. We will end up with a society where most people are of the older age bracket. An estimate for the U.K. states that by the mid 21st century, sixty percent of people will be over sixty years old.
This presents a huge problem of finance and adjustment. Society will have to transform itself radically if it is to successfully cope with this change. The amount of money paid by workers will not be sufficient to pay for the pensions of such a large group. Private pensions will be necessary to top up state pensions and a longer working life must come about. Working to the age of seventy will be commonplace within fifty years and it may be the case that retirement age disappears altogether thus allowing people to work as long as they wish. This could be beneficial for many older generations but it may also be a nightmare—imagine poor old folk tied to the treadmill until their dying days, a scene reminiscent of Charles Dickens and the workhouse!
Living older will only work if the people living older do so in good health, otherwise there will not be enough working people to look after the retired. The rich will survive because they'll be able to afford the healthcare, and, once again we reach a stage where health is dependent on how much money you have. So, it can be seen that living longer causes problems and society will have to politically and radically adjust in order to cope.
However, the story of longevity doesn't end there. One of the biggest scientific projects over the last ten years in the U.K. and USA has been the Human Genome Project. This project finished at the beginning of 2001 but, in order to utilise the information, a huge workload lies ahead. The Project's aims were to identify the thirty thousand or more human genes and to determine the sequence of the three billion base pairs that make up DNA. It was originally thought that the Project would take fifteen years but continuous advancements in computer technology have shortened the length of time required. (ten years ago I used a computer with a 1 megabyte memory and 20 MHz possessing speed with a 80 megabyte hard drive—I now use a 256 megabyte memory, a 1000 MHz processor and a 30 gigabyte hard drive and this computer cost less than the one from 10 years ago. Even this is now out of date! By the time this appears in print, it will be a relic.)
Equivalent in effort, some say, to the moon landing, why has all this work been carried out? The
reason is money! Lots and lots of money! Over the next twenty years, the information from the genome code will help to cure many of the diseases and conditions that we are plagued with today. We always used to say that, well, we've cured this disease so probably something else will come along. This is true. In the 19th century, tuberculosis was a dreaded killer and indeed it was a severe problem right up to the 1950's. Wards in hospitals used to be full of long term tuberculosis patients but they're all gone now, just about, and we have cancers and heart disease to think of. HIV and AIDS are worldwide problems and for the older generations, Alzheimer's disease and senile dementia are heartless and soul-destroying conditions. Cure these and you'll make a lot of money.
Why will a lot of money be made? Well, if you had ten thousand pounds saved up but had a terminal disease, the money would be no use to you anyway, but, given the opportunity to pay half that for a reasonable chance of a cure, most people would go for the cure. In life or death situations, people are prepared to pay almost anything.
Some say that multinational drug companies don't wish outright miracle cures but instead want us to buy their drugs over a long period of time to maximise income. The cynical even say that multinational drug companies suppress research that will provide outright cures. Where there may be a grain of truth in this, perhaps this view is overly cynical.
Now, if information from the genome project was utilised to enable cells which normally die, usually after fifty cycles, to live for more cycles or even indefinitely, the human lifespan would increase enormously and the problems discussed above as encountered with a moderate lifespan increase would then be minuscule. The entire civilisation of the planet would irrevocably change, likewise our psychology and outlook on life.
Here is an example. A general off the cuff statistical effect for people who smoke cigarettes is that they experience a 200/1 chance of dying from smoking every year of their lives. Death usually occurs from cancer or heart conditions. People who have smoked for forty years may scoff at this saying, sod it, I've got a 5/1 chance of dying from smoking in my lifetime. That's not so bad, is it? You could get run down by a bus just the same. (Actually, the odds of being run down by a bus are 150000/1 per year). This is fine if the smoker wants to take a 5/1 chance. Fair enough, death from smoking probably won't happen. But, if the person lived a lot longer, say for two hundred years more, then the chances of smoking yourself to death radically increase. Live longer and it's more than likely that smoking will kill you. Many would think again about smoking: many probably wouldn't because nicotine is a drug difficult to resist but the illustration shows what can happen.
This is a relatively minor problem. If, let's say that genetic research enabled people to live indefinitely, or at least for a few thousand years, what effect would this have on the planet? The effect would be catastrophic! In 1950, the population of the world was 2.5 billion. The year 2000 saw the sixth billion and estimates for the year 2050 come in at around nine billion. Although the annual increase is falling, it will still be around the 5% rate by the middle of the 21st century.
Some countries, especially those in Europe, have reached a stable population which is unlikely to increase. Japan even has a negative rate and there the population will decrease to become overloaded with elderly people by the mid century. It's the third world which will show the biggest increases, and India is expected to overtake China to become the world's most populous country sometime around 2025. While it may be fashionable for people in a privileged situation to advocate the use of organic farming methods instead of chemical fertilisers and also call for a ban on GM foods, feeding nine billion within the next fifty years will be a considerable undertaking. Alterations in the way we live and eat will be necessary and to abandon crop trials may be foolhardy.
That's the state of affairs existing now. Imagine the scenario if longevity came along? With few dying and even more being born, very quickly the population would be totally unmanageable. With insufficient resources to keep everyone alive, the dreadful consequences of anarchy, war, the end of civilisation as we know it, to use a hackneyed phase, would be mankind's future.
It is obvious that longevity, should it be possible, will only be available to a few people and in all likelihood the people in this privileged position would be rich and/or powerful. There are many in this stratum of society with the will to purchase longevity for themselves at the exclusion of others. Having a two tier society where a small percentage has everlasting life, wealth and prosperity while the vast majority are left behind, will necessitate the long life people separating themselves from the others otherwise all sorts of problems could arise, but, on a crowded earth, this task is an impossibility. It wouldn't be long before the long life people adopted a supercilious heir of authority and superiority while the others looked on with greed and envy. In times past when similar predicaments arose in the societies of countries, revolution often resulted. I'm sure the same thing could happen again except that the ones taking over would want longevity for themselves and we would be back at square one again.
Can you imagine the feelings aroused when people saw their parents and loved ones die and realised that it didn't have to be so? Looking up to see the long life people in metaphorical ivory towers, casting a disdainful glance in their direction, blood would boil and blood would be spilt!
Dramatists would have fun. We could have the wealthy son of a long life family crossing the boundary to fall in love with the poor but beautiful daughter of ordinary people. With more and more people achieving long life at the expense of a viable future for the planet, it's likely anyway that the secret would not be preserved for the use of any one group
If research provides the answer to the cell reproduction problem and longevity is possible, it's an odds on chance, because of the above mentioned risks, that the outcome will be kept in ultra secrecy to be administered only by the people powerful and rich enough to use it. A secret society? A shadowy stratum of the population hidden from the world? Probably finding it necessary to give the rest of the population something in the way of an improved lifespan, this would likely be on the lines of that discussed earlier: maybe a few decades extra from controlled diet. For all we know, these people could already exist. Maybe the problem has been solved and only a relative few know about it? If there is someone of this financial/power status you witness apparently not ageing while you and yours get progressively grey and wrinkled, I would look into it.
But, the problems don't end there. To those for whom death had ostensibly become a thing of the past, life will have changed beyond all recognition. Although the long life ones don't grow old and die off, not being immune to disease and accidents, they would become recluses, frightened of their own shadows. Admittedly, most of the conditions that kill us now may probably be cured by then; heart disease and the various cancers are major causes of death but it is not beyond the bounds of probability that they will be a diminished threat in twenty years time and maybe all but eradicated by 2050. Other diseases may prove to be more resistant. Mad Cow Disease, to give it a popular name, is an insidious disease. Human variant CJD is totally incurable and the reagent is very resistant to attack from radiation, fire, chemicals and vacuum. If this prion reagent somehow lurks in all of us but is fortunately almost never brought to the surface because we don't live long enough for this to happen, it will definitely happen if we live for thousands of years.
This is a possible example of a disease that could come into its own with different conditions. There may be others but long life people will have to beware of accidents too. Presently in the U.K. about three and a half thousand people are killed on the roads every year. This figure used to be a lot higher but as a result of several factors, including safer cars, better after accident care, the use of seatbelts and the condemnation of drunken driving, the number dying on the roads has fallen and hopefully will fall further in the future. There are also a very large number of non-fatal accidents. Probably if a person lives to be seventy, h
e or she will have a one chance in two hundred and fifty that they will die on the roads. Most seem to regard this as an acceptable risk for the sake of having a convenient form of transport. Certainly not an acceptable risk for a long life person, it dictates that within two hundred and fifty years death probably occurs in the form of a road traffic accident. Maybe the person is lucky and escapes for five hundred years but that's pushing the odds to the extreme. Let's say the person had a lifespan of a couple of thousand years. Not only would he not travel by car, he wouldn't travel by train, boat or plane either. He would neither bungee jump nor parachute for fun. Virtually all sports have an inherent risk factor—out goes any contact with water and the likes of cricket, football, rugby and golf would be non-starters. Golf? Yes, even in golf the chance of being hit by a misguided ball, someone's club thrown in anger or even lightning is a sure thing if you live long enough. Some of these incidents could be fatal. Never to walk under a ladder, cross the street or buy bottle of cola in case accidentally hit by a falling paint pot, run down by a car or choked to death by swallowing the wrong way, his life becomes totally uneventful.
What about murder? This crime seems to be on the increase, so to avoid the likely probability of being murdered at some instant during a long life, the person would need to shun most company and be very careful of those with whom relationships were held.
Accidents in the home are common. He would need to live in an ultra safe house where nothing could go wrong, devoid of most human contact, being petrified of any possible fatal incident. Paranoia could set in—at the very least he would be enormously bored.
Alien Psychology Page 5