Stupid stuff I think about

[Lestat]

I'm not sure what the odds are of someone dying in a plane crash during their lifetime, but let's say they are 1 in 300,000. Let's say the odds of someone dying in an automobile accident are 1 in 70,000. These might be way off, but they are still close enough for the purpose of the question I'm going to ask...

With the above odds any rational person shouldn't think twice about getting on a plane or driving in a car. The odds are still overwhelmingly small their life will end due to a mishap. But that's only because our current lifespans, right?

What if science one day makes it possible for us to live to be 2 million years old? Now we could actually "expect" to die from a plane or car mishap during our lifetimes. So if we could live to 2 million years old, would that mean it would be perfectly logical to avoid air and car travel?

What I think it means is that a 2 million year lifespan would be utterly worthless to us. In other words, even if it were biologically possible to extend our lives to 2 million years old, we could not come close to fully reaping the benefits of such a scientific breakthrough.

Of course, this is all common sense, but I never thought of it in this way before. Even if we could live for 2 million years it would be useless, because we'd die well before that anyway. Just the stupid stuff I think about sometimes.

[chezlaw]

True but its an unlikely scenario. The ability to stay alive; safty prevention, medical treatment etc is likely to keep pace with extended life span to some extent.

chez

[FortunaMaximus]

Random number regenerators.

Grandfathering yourself 'till you're neverborn and you can still smell a cat fart.

Trying to count backwards from a trillion and realize that'll take care of itself anyway.

[Lestat]

But suppose you did have a life expectency of 2 million years and the odds of dying in a plane crash remained somewhere near 1 in 300,000. Would it become rational for you to avoid plane travel?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
But suppose you did have a life expectency of 2 million years and the odds of dying in a plane crash remained somewhere near 1 in 300,000. Would it become rational for you to avoid plane travel?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, which would force them to up the safety.

chez

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
But suppose you did have a life expectency of 2 million years and the odds of dying in a plane crash remained somewhere near 1 in 300,000. Would it become rational for you to avoid plane travel?

[/ QUOTE ]

My math is too poor to even see how that could matter, never mind having a way of explaining it. Best I can do is suggest that if it were true, then it's 'safer' to travel more and more as we age now. or ..
My brother and I are both 1M. We are going to take the same flight. He will never fly again. I will fly again as normal. Is he safer than me?
If he is, then the answer is to always fly with somebody who is on their one and only flight.

luckyme

[51cards]

[ QUOTE ]

My math is too poor to even see how that could matter, never mind having a way of explaining it. Best I can do is suggest that if it were true, then it's 'safer' to travel more and more as we age now. or ..
My brother and I are both 1M. We are going to take the same flight. He will never fly again. I will fly again as normal. Is he safer than me?
If he is, then the answer is to always fly with somebody who is on their one and only flight.

luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

That's so wrong.

[Lestat]

I'm sure you already know that your odds of dying on any one flight remain the same. That is, it's a perfectly acceptable risk to get on a plane and get where you're going. Then again, if you continue flying it is almost certain that your 2 million year life will be cut short due to an aviation fatality.

Btw- I'm sure it's obvious I'm just using air travel as an example. You could apply the same rationale to almost everything else as well. Driving to work, crossing the street, swimming, etc. etc. The bottom line is that a 2 millioin year life span would do us little good. Which, until I looked at it in this particular fashion, I never realized before.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure you already know that your odds of dying on any one flight remain the same. That is, it's a perfectly acceptable risk to get on a plane and get where you're going. Then again, if you continue flying it is almost certain that your 2 million year life will be cut short due to an aviation fatality.

Btw- I'm sure it's obvious I'm just using air travel as an example. You could apply the same rationale to almost everything else as well. Driving to work, crossing the street, swimming, etc. etc. The bottom line is that a 2 millioin year life span would do us little good. Which, until I looked at it in this particular fashion, I never realized before.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the chance of dying from Something must always be 100% in both scenarios. So, if the chancen of dying from an a plane go up, then the chance of dying from a chicken bone go down...which seems a bit strange.
Cars are a higher risk ( in your example) so wouldn't they eventually crowd everything out over sufficient time and there would be next to zero risk fo dying crossing the street?

I wish there were some math nerds on here to lay it out for me.

interesting, luckyme

[luckyme]

Ok, OK, I get it. I was reading this as if we had 2M life expectancy rather than potential life span. ( never mind it doesnt make any sense that way) cheeez. thanks for your patience.

In which case -
If we eliminated all disease/degenerative causes and were left with just accidental/deliberate deaths at the rates they occur now. around 10% of all deaths.
About 1% of people die now each year of all causes.
so 0.1% die from a/c causes.
What would be our life expectancy?

I'd put it at around 1000 yrs but somebody that can read and add might have a different view.

luckyme