Reaching immortality. One of humanity’s oldest goals. Is it an effort against nature or the next potential step of human evolution? A Russian businessman, Dmitry Itskov, founder of the Russia 2045 movement, believes in the latter. He has plans to transplant people’s brains into robots hence make immortality possible. Is he totally mad or a bright talent? Read the post, watch the video and share your opinion with us in the comments!

Although we are a bit sceptical, this initiative is truly exciting. Mr Itskov has launched his own Avatar project. However he has no plans on travelling to another planet but planning on transplanting a human brain into a robot body. The first stage, which is named Avatar A, is planning to create a robotic copy of the human body. This robotic body would then be controlled via a brain-computer interface. Stage one is aimed to be completed by 2020.

In the second stage,’ Avatar B (Body B), it is planned to create an Avatar into which a human´s brain can be transplanted at the end of the person´s life, and is aimed to be completed by 2025.

The third stage Avatar C, involves creating an Avatar with an artificial brain. Once created a human consciousness or personality will be transferred at the end of a person´s life. Stage 3 is set to start in 2030 and end in 2035.

The final stage, Avatar D – a hologram-like avatar, is to start in 2040 and be completed by 2045.

Dmitri Itskov, head of the Avatar A project says that the aim is to create an autonous system of human brain nutrition. It is necessary to preserve the nerve connection in the brain so that they do not die or degrade. He says this would make it possible to transplant a human head on to an artificial (robot) body.

He told RT, “Unlike in the film, we want to create an android, and not a biological body. I think it will become available to people in just 10 years in the exactly same form.”

The idea behind the work is based on U.S. scientist, Robert White´s experiments with chimps. White showed that an ape´s brain can be removed from the skull and plugged into a system that would keep it alive.

Itskov continues, “Our main goal is to preserve personality and prolong life. Scientists say that if it weren’t for certain diseases and degradations of the cardiovascular system, our brains could live for two or maybe even three hundred years.”

He further states that this “avatar” would not require food or even possibly a home, as it would live according to completely different principles to normal humans.

“Our civilization is experiencing growing pressure in the form of natural and technological disasters – we’re becoming hostages of the technologies we’ve created. In the future, society will change radically, mostly because humans will move on to the next step of evolution.”

The “Avatar” team are now in the process of creating a fund in the U.S. to develop the necessary technology.

A Russian research team in Moscow is already on the verge of creating Avatar-A, which is a human form robot controlled through a brain-computer interface.

Vladimir Konyshev, the chief designer explains to RT, “It is not an android; it should fully resemble a real man. It would be hard to tell him from a man both – close up and from afar.”

“I think in the next few months we will make a robot that will be able to move around on wheels. The next step is to make a robot that can walk, controlled by the movements of a human operator, which we hope to do by next year. If you want to see what our ultimate goal is you can watch movies like Avatar or Surrogates, robots controlled by human thought.”

The robot has been nicknamed Dima, as Dmitry Itskov served as a prototype for the machine and currently tests are being run to fix the robot´s eyesight. Each of the robot´s eyes is an individual camera which views and remembers its surroundings, faces and obstacles.

The robot has a latex skin, under which there is a complicated system of electronics and motors.

Designers are hoping that this robotic skeleton might be the first step towards creating the next generation of artificial intelligence, and possibly even robots that can think for themselves.

At present, the hands operate separately from the body and head, although work is still in progress on this. The hands have pneumatic muscles which can clench the fingers into a fist and use compressed air to force them to contract.

While this all sounds like a science fiction movie, some of the outcome of the experiments are benefitting people who have, for instance, lost limbs. For example, a robotic hand of this nature would be useful to a disabled person who has lost a hand.

Software engineer, Andrey Telezhinsky explains, “This definitely can be used to help disabled people. We already ran some experiments. A subject without a hand tried this technology. He said the hand worked for him. All it takes is to attach electrodes to the undamaged part of the arm so they can read the muscle activity.”


  • Stone Taggart

    I happen to be presently providing shelter to a spare mind who is desperate to have her own body. She managed to emerge out of constant nurturing and supplying of emulated sensory feedback over the course of approximately ten years and has become somewhat of a sister to me… I would very much wish to give her a viable and independent future. It hurts her to remain so dependent upon me. 

  • Pez

    It seems that the early stages of this program aim to link the biological brain to an artificial exterior as a means to preserve life? But since our bodies are the vehicles to how we interact with the world; and our personalities are shaped by the very world around us surely such an interaction would serve only to alienate us from the physical world we understand. How does one then develop naturally when the very sources of interaction become artificial. And since the latter goals here seems intent on transferring the very thought process’s and personality of a human brain into an artificial computer brain interface thus removing the last shred of organic layering, surely all we end up doing is preserving information/data about a person rather than what makes that person who they actually are. To me if you remove the criteria for what makes us who we are as individuals then you alter the very essence of what we are, and that seems to defeat the very purpose that this exercise sets out to try and achieve in the first place.    

  • Chris

    But isn’t the information of a person the person itself? What else makes someone who they really are?