A technology that can bring dead back to life might be a reality soon

Researchers plan to bring dead to life by freezing their brains and then resurrecting them with artificial intelligence

Bringing the dead back to life is futuristic and final frontier of science and Humai is working on just that. Humai is a technology company based in Los Angeles and is working on a project known as “Atom & Eve” that would let human consciousness be transferred to an artificial body after their death.

The artificial intelligence company has said it can resurrect human beings within the next 30 years. The “conversational styles, [behavioural] patterns, thought processes and information about how your body functions from the inside-out” would be stored on a silicon chip through AI and nanotechnology.

Humai researchers are banking on three technologies – bionics, nanotechnology and artificial intelligence – to achieve their goal of bringing the dead back to life and they feel that it will take around three decades for them to achieve this goal.

The founder of Humai, Josh Bocanegra told the Australian Popular Science: “I accept death, I’m not afraid of it that I’m not 100% sure I’m going to die one day.” While their Facebook page states, “Will death always be inevitable? We don’t think so.”

Bocanegra told Australian Popular Science that the brain of the deceased will be frozen using cryonics technology so that when the technology is fully developed they can implant the brain into an artificial body.

Humai says that bringing a body back to life won’t be easy, or cheap. It’s not known how the brains would be harvested, or for that matter, how much it would cost to bring someone back from the dead. Bocanegra says,”Using cloning technology, we will restore the brain as it matures”. “I don’t think of it as fighting death. I think of it as making death optional. I personally cannot imagine why someone would want to die, but I respect everyone’s wishes,” Bocanegra adds. 

The most astonishing fact about Humai is that it consists of only five members. Two of them are researchers, one is the ambassador and an AI expert.

Should we be playing with the nature and bringing back the dead? Do put in your views in the comments section.


      • Between you and Heni, who suffers a worse fate for being wrong? No offense… if having faith in God, with teachings and messages that inspire a man to be a good man, he has nothing to loose for being wrong. However, a man who denies even the existence of God has much to loose for being wrong.

  1. It is good to know this technology……. but this wont help in any ways,keeping the same Scientist or same political leader harvest no changes in this world moreover we can create a complete AI design based on the human daily activities so that we can have more than one character available.by making this we cant have newer generation.

    • that would definitly force humanity to expand its colonization to other planets, we have the resources, we have the vision, we have the technology, we just dont have the proper world leaders. what is the purpose of life , if it isnt to realize that we are eternal in spirit and we are ment to be eternal in our physical form as well, who wouldnt wanna stop jumping from reencarnation to reencarnation learning and experiencing over and over only to loose that consiousness again at physical death and have to start from scratch in a new body with a newly born consiuousness. the purpose of life is to live forever. we are the divine.

      • The nice thing is the artificial bodies would likely not need to breathe, eat, and could not reproduce. This would make colonization of other worlds simple as we’d only have to worry about rust or breakdown of components! Depending on how the power cells recharged, there may be only minimal needs. The interesting esoteric question is… is the human soul (assuming one exists) innately tied to consciousness or is the seat of our being not tied to consciousness? If for no other reason than to satisfy curiosity, I’d love to give this a try! It would be interesting to find out if sensation also transferred. Does a being that does not need to eat feel hunger? If it feels deep sadness but cannot cry, how is that reconciled? Without a fully functional peripheral nervous system, how will the brain tell the body to move? What about autonomic function? When our brain tells our heart to beat or pancreas to produce insulin, for example, and these organs are non-existent how will our brain reconcile the flaw in information?

  2. this is through true revolution of mankind, I believe it’s possible. but there is one thing how would they keep the brain from dying since when a human dies there’d is a 7 minute window the brain can only survive for 7 minutes on through oxygen stored in the body. and what about neural mechanical communication, would the brain communicate with the the bionic parts and the strain on the brain in doing so….unless they’re Thinking of nano-neural-nerve (as I call it ) communication. or how about we just place the body in a fluid of nanoparticles so that they would create a body around the brain and create connections either the brain at a nano level. that way it would be like Changing a cars body but with the same engine.

  3. This is going against nature and God. You may be an atheist but that does not make God a myth. And I hope y’all are considering the consequences it can have. A lot of people can use such technology for bad reasons. And controlling death can cause an unimaginable population boom, yet we are already dealing with population issues. I think it would be wiser to try to solve more serious problems ’cause death is most certainly not one. About those who die of disease or malnutrition, it would be futile to revive them because it won’t change whatever caused their death in the first place, plus they won’t even afford it. So, according to me, we don’t need this technology so stop trying to change the course of nature and think you are super intelligent.

    • //You may be an atheist but that does not make God a myth.//

      No, people being atheist isn’t what makes god a myth. People are atheists BECAUSE god is a myth. God actually being a myth is what makes god a myth.

      God is a placeholder for ignorance. It is a byproduct of the advent of the cerebral cortex and the ability to imagine but before man had the mental capacity or the capability to examine or explain his empirical world. It is a feeble attempt to attach meaning, intention, and agency to random processes in nature and physical laws where none exists. It is defined by a set of impossible paradoxes, that even if they could be true, (which they can’t), it would mean that it would be unknowable and unfathomable by any of the people who claim any knowledge. God is an irrelevant and superfluous concept that isn’t necessary to the existence or function of anything in the universe, (or any other universe), nor is it necessary to trigger the formation of universes. It is a delusion.

      • I’m not religious but you are just as ignorant and mislead as those who are religious. You’re just playing with words that’s all. You can’t disprove or prove something that does not exist to us. Just because your logic seems to conclude that God is a myth doesn’t mean he is a myth. Maybe he wants you to think he is a myth? And all the religious people have the same problem. Just because a book says it’s true doesn’t mean it’s true. There is no way of knowing and either of you is ignorant towards the other. And what I hate most about you guys is that you like to sound educated or spiritual but you don’t.

      • Jim Matisi, what a moot point. You your very self are an “irrelevant and superfluous concept that isn’t necessary to the existence or function of anything in the universe” yet for some odd reason you exist.

      • Jim Matsi, what a moot point. You yourself are “an irrelevant and superfluous concept that isn’t necessary to the existence or function of anything in the universe” yet oddly enough you exist…

    • Don’t use this technology if it comes out or any other technology that tries to keep us alive. I for one welcome the research.

      “but that does not make God a myth.”
      Feel free to show evidence of its existence.

      “And I hope y’all are considering the consequences it can have”
      Nothing that can’t be solved.

      “A lot of people can use such technology for bad reasons.”
      People use religion for bad reasons.

      “And controlling death can cause an unimaginable population boom”
      You will probably find that if someone knows they can live for thousands of years then they will not produce that many children.

      “I think it would be wiser to try to solve more serious problems ’cause death is most certainly not one. ”
      What is more serious than solving death itself?

      “About those who die of disease or malnutrition, it would be futile to revive them because it won’t change whatever caused their death in the first place, plus they won’t even afford it.”
      Do you use the same argument against cancer treatments?
      I would hope technologies like GE in 30 years would have help with malnutrition. For example, golden rice is nearly ready even after the huge attacks against it from anti-science groups like Greenpeace.

      “So, according to me, we don’t need this technology so stop trying to change the course of nature.”
      We are constantly changing the “course of nature”, and improving our lives because of it.

      “and think you are super intelligent”
      Who thinks this?

  4. There is no way this kind of technology would ever be used for the good of mankind.
    When Skynet becomes self aware and this technology exists, the proverbial shit will hit the fan.

  5. So doubtful from a biological and molecular perspective. Some insects and frogs have a molecular structure that will allow the cells to “jumpstart” after being frozen. The human body (nor brain) does not possess this molecular structure nor can it be added. Fun to imagine but this will remain science fiction.

  6. To restore consciousness after death… Can we yet even clearly define what is consciousness? Maybe brain activity and robotic motor functions could be attained, but an element of the states formula is AI. If the intelligence is artificial, than how can it be said to belong to the person who passed? Will the systwm be mimicing personality traits and patterns of the deceased? If that is the case, than can it really be said the person has been resurrected, or has a copy been made? I you could clone a perfect copy of yourself, then perfectly copy all the info in your brain to your clone, who would you be? Would you be you, the clone, or both? From an outside observer, there would be no difference between you and clone, but from your own perspective, you are self-aware of yourself as you always have been, and when you die while your clone lives on, you will be aware of your death, and your own self-awareness will pass along with you, while the self awareness of your clone diverges the moment it was copied with new experiences and differing memories effectively becoming unique the moment of its creation.

    • All we have in a person (if I talk more specifically) is its memories (which includes its accent, tread etc.) . SO RESURRECTING brain would be enough to revive a person and we are assured to have the same deceased person.

      You said “You will be aware of your death”.
      Since we can’t say anything about how we feel or think after our ‘death’, it seems illogical to say about our perspective.

      Moreover, If we clone our brain in our own life (and the clone is self aware), of course then perspective matters because you would be ‘you’ not clone. But from outsider’s perspective there might or might not be a difference (depends how well the clone is designed to work).

  7. This is the most useless technology man have ever delved in, No Good can come out of this, If defiles the very Law of Nature , I mean don’t you really want to know what life after death feels like? Do you just love this world too much that you can’t leave it for newer generations to take over, I assure you, only those sinners living an ugly life and are scared of hell are going to go for this, God is Watching Us all, Do not let the Devil Use you.

    • What an ignorant point of view. Not everyone believe in an afterlife like you. Some people genuinely just like this place called earth so much they don’t want to miss it.

  8. consciousness is nothing but a memories of a person in his life time and life and death is exist all the time we just going to stop dying thats what is technology is all about and nothing to do with religion or philosophy is just a remedy to get back the person going again from his rigorness to vigorness…. Choose life all the time and all that deny or end life is evil…. its 20th century grow up cause we can really be immortals unless you got a destructive compulsion in living life…. End or debate and agruements about life,science,religion,politics etc. is time for man to shine and get what his long time dream and works…

  9. so basically human will die and we create some kind of robotic zombies to replace them .who will have all the memories but will not have any feeling,,, hurray to science for creating zombies or should i say humanoid zombie


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Read More

Suggested Post