this isn't my name, so im not the usual poster, but he doesnt use it alot.

correct me if i'm wrong, but memories are stored in neurons in the brain, and thoughts are electric impulses or something between them?

what i was wondering is if you made a blueprint of someones brain, molecule for molecule in every detail, would you be able to rebuild an exact copy of it molecule by molecue? and if you could would it have the same memories?

i guess what i'm asking is, are memories thoughts and personalities stored physically? like a hard drive? or is there something more?

we know that everything is made up of the same basic elements, and we know what those elements are. we know that things work because these basic elements are aranged in a certain patterns. what i was wondering was since we know this, why cant we take those elements from scratch and around them in that certain order? and if we did would it work/live?

I don't think this would ever be possible due to the complexity of the brain (every cross section is completely different). If it were possible to copy these "thoughts" one would also have to decifer how they are stored/coded. How you think is a whole different language then how you speak. How you remember a taste, a person, a picture...these are all "remembered" and stored precisely to your liking. The closest we will ever get is computers, which is basically a knock off of the human brain. We use many functions the brain uses with wires, relays and what not, but never to the mastering abilities of the brain.


I never got a chance to ask my teacher exactly how these "thoughts" are stored in a neuron. I know how the neurons work and how they fire to carry a signal but not how the thought is coded and stored. It makes you wonder if your brain is really an antenna that retrieves signals and then carries them out. Are memories thoughts and personalities stored physically? Being able to only study the world in a physical manner...yes, but there's always more then what meets the eyes (ecspecially when it comes to the brian).


As far as knowing the elements, there's a lot that we know we know, a lot we know we don't know...and there's always what we don't know, that we don't know ;).

Interesting thoughts though mate.




fred

what i was wondering is if you made a blueprint of someones brain, molecule for molecule in every detail, would you be able to rebuild an exact copy of it molecule by molecue? and if you could would it have the same memories?

Technically you should but doing such is highly improbable and nearly impossible (the computing power required alone is unimaginable)

i guess what i'm asking is, are memories thoughts and personalities stored physically? like a hard drive? or is there something more?



Memories are stored (you wouldn't think so by the way you blank out during tests) but much of what you see is wiped clean even before your cortex has had a chance to investigate it. It is kept in STM and wiped clean after a few minutes, hours or days (insignificant stuff). What you keep in LTM stays there though you can't always recall it at will.

thank you.

This reminds me to a thread I started long ago about how our brains store information..... but, hey, pardon me, I shouldn't bother about that anyway, that thread of mine has long disappeared......
You may try to look for it for some additional info though, but the forementioned warning applies.

There is nothing mystical about the brain, but it is incredibly complex. It is just a biological machine, not some magical device. Still, it does not seem possible to construct an exact copy of a particular human brain.

The most formidable problem in reconstructing a human brain are the real time requirements.

The brain (like most of the human body) is a dynamic system, constantly changing. A human brain has something like 10²³ or more atoms with complex interconnections. In 1-2 milliseconds, there are a lot of changes taking place.

Obtaining the blueprint is more than a data collection job. The blueprint must show the brain at a particular instant in time. The data collected last would have to be adjusted for changes occurring during the data collection process.

Suppose you could collect all the required data, how long would it take to construct a brain? If it took 5-10 milliseconds, the part constructed first would not be compatible with the parts constructed in the last milliseconds.

Do the arithmetic on how long it might take to collect all the necessary data about 10²³ atoms. How long would it take to read the information and do the construction? If it took more than a second, forget it. My guess is that you would have to construct the brain in less than 2-3 milliseconds to have a worthwhile result, and would expect some anomalies due to not doing it instantaneously.

This problem has been mentioned in other threads in the context of considering the possibility of making a Star Trek transporter, which is clearly impossible, although there are those who believe that the lower limits to future technology are processes and devices we can imagine.

There is nothing mystical about the brain, but it is incredibly complex. It is just a biological machine, not some magical device. Still, it does not seem possible to construct an exact copy of a particular human brain.

The most formidable problem in reconstructing a human brain are the real time requirements.

The brain (like most of the human body) is a dynamic system, constantly changing. A human brain has something like 10²³ or more atoms with complex interconnections. In 1-2 milliseconds, there are a lot of changes taking place.

Obtaining the blueprint is more than a data collection job. The blueprint must show the brain at a particular instant in time. The data collected last would have to be adjusted for changes occurring during the data collection process.

Suppose you could collect all the required data, how long would it take to construct a brain? If it took 5-10 milliseconds, the part constructed first would not be compatible with the parts constructed in the last milliseconds.

Do the arithmetic on how long it might take to collect all the necessary data about 10²³ atoms. How long would it take to read the information and do the construction? If it took more than a second, forget it. My guess is that you would have to construct the brain in less than 2-3 milliseconds to have a worthwhile result, and would expect some anomalies due to not doing it instantaneously.

This problem has been mentioned in other threads in the context of considering the possibility of making a Star Trek transporter, which is clearly impossible, although there are those who believe that the lower limits to future technology are processes and devices we can imagine.



What exactly is changing in this "1-2 milliseconds"? Also, where did you get this 10²³ atoms number from?

I find the mind mystical in the sense that very little is known. Physically they have information, but the thoughts that are achieved/acquired are behond the physical mindset. The mind reminds me of a maze with clear walls, no end or begining.

There is nothing mystical about the brain, but it is incredibly complex. It is just a biological machine, not some magical device. Still, it does not seem possible to construct an exact copy of a particular human brain..

I very rarely see you say something I take exception to, and hold your opinion in high regard.

What do you mean by "mystical"?

I think there is something mystical about the phenomenon of consciousness from most people's perspective. I ask your definition of mystical because IMO, if it can be, it is not impossible and therefore shouldn't seem as such except that you may have been conditioned to expect it that way if you follow me.

For instance, gravity was a mystical force until newton... nevermind. In essence, gravity is still a mystical force in that there is no accepted theory of quantum gravity at this point. What if one of the current theories like m-branes becomes accepted? Extra dimensions... what? Are those mystical? I ask because I strongly suspect that awareness itself is a condition that takes advantage of compactificated dimensions.

I say that because I don't believe there is a place for meaning... for that which is abstract, in the typical notion space-time. If it were there, it would be ultimately meaningless which I can assure you from the depths that shape my words is not true. So there has to be some place for it. I say that place is in the compactificated dimensions (which I also figure must be the root of quantum effects, uncertainty, blah blah). I think it makes sense. Obviously I might be wrong, but regardless I'm telling you what I think about it.

So to my point: Depending on how you define "mystical", I believe it incorrect to say "there is nothing mystical about the brain" as in the typical usage of the word I believe they very well may be.

The following questions were asked due to my previous post.What exactly is changing in this "1-2 milliseconds"? Also, where did you get this 10²³ atoms number from? What do you mean by "mystical"?Easy question first: Avogadro’s number is approximately 6.02*10²³, which is alleged to be the number of molecules in what is called a gram molecular weight of a substance. I think it is a theoretical number which is considered to be approximately correct. I think the number is based on a classical physics analysis of a perfect gas (a hypothetical substance which is an approximation to real gases). I am not sure how precise it is for purposes of dealing with real substances other than gases, but suspect it is correct to at least 3 significant decimal digits. The basic concept is as follows. Consider table salt (NaCl), which consists of one Sodium (Na) atom and one Chlorine (Cl) atom. Atomic weight of Sodium is 22.989 768 Atomic weight of Chlorine is 35.4527 Molecular weight of NaCl is 58.442 468, the sum of the atomic weights of the atoms in the molecule. The theory says that 58.442 468 grams (about 2 ounces) of salt consists of Avogadro’s number of molecules. This means that 58.442 468 grams (about 2 ounces) of salt contains about 12.04*10²³ atoms.10²³ is a gross underestimate of the number of atoms in about a kilogram (two pounds) of a substance. I usually use 10²³ to 10²⁶ as an estimate of the number of atoms in a human body or some part of it.

BTW: I do not think you can appreciate the requirements of the task without doing the arithmetic yourself and determing some number you can comprehend. 10²⁵ is reasonable estimate of the number of atoms in a human brain. For each atom, you need to know its location and how it is connected to adjacent atoms (and maybe some other data). Could you retrieve the data and do the necessary processing with any less than 1000 executed instructions per atom? I think not. That means 10²⁸ machine language instructions. Suppose you could do one billion instuctions per nanosecond. How long would the processing take? Do the arothmetic yourself. My calculations came to over 300 years. That is just the processing time. What about the actual assemble time? What do you think would occur in the first half of the brain if it took say even 50 years to build the other half?

Some understanding of the human brain is required to develop a bit of intuition about what occurs in a human brain. The computer analogy to a human brain is a very poor model. The human brain cannot be viewed as programs being processed by hardware. Furthermore, there is no clear distinction between processing functions and data. There does not seem to be anything analogous to an indexed database in the human brain. The brain functions by continuously activity analogous to rewiring computer hardware. The human brain does a lot of functions concurrently: It is not even close to being analogous to a single CPU system.

The data associated with (for example) a rose bush is scattered over quite a few distinct areas of the brain. Shape data is encoded in one area. Color data is stored in another area. The words associated with a description of a rose bush are stored elsewhere, perhaps in a few places. The data required to direct the vocal apparatus (via motor nerves signals) to say rose bush are stored in yet another place. Various memories of particular rose bushes are stored in still other places. All of this data is interconnected by mechanisms analogous to hyperlinks.

Storing data in this complex electrochemical object we call a brain is actually accomplished by a process vaguely analogous to rewiring computer hardware, rather than being analogous to updating a device analogous to a computer memory. Collecting data from the brain and using it to respond the external world is a complex process requiring retrieval-like activities from several (many?) areas of the brain, and processing-like activities in two or more areas.

A lot of electrochemical activity takes place in 1-2 milliseconds at many places in the brain. Consider that a human being has a response time of about 150 milliseconds for a world class athlete (I think 2/10 of a second, or 200 milliseconds is about average response time). This includes electrochemical activity in the retina, signals traveling to the brain, brain processing, motor nerve signals traveling to the muscles, and finally muscular action. While driving a car and responding to some emergency, the brain is also directing a lot of autonomic physiological activity, making a record in memory of the passing scenery, making a record in memory of the conversation with a passenger, et cetera. Most of the 150 milliseconds is required to transmit data to & from the brain. In addition, glucose (or some other substance) is being oxidized (burnt) to produce energy to run brain activity, and the waste products of combustion are being removed. There is also some repair activity going on.

Responding to the outside world usually requires estimating the speed of one or more objects, calculating the relative positions of the objects in the next 200-2000 milliseconds, and directing motor response appropriate to what will be happening when the muscles actually react at that future time. This is not trivial processing. If you try to make a copy of the brain while the person is asleep, there are still processing functions due to dreaming and activities directing autonomic activities.

A biochemist might be able to estimate how much change takes place in 1-2 milliseconds. Even if I am incorrect in claiming that a lot takes place in 1-2 milliseconds, it is undoubtedly true that a lot takes place in 5-10 milliseconds. Note that my estimate of 10²³ atoms in the brain is probably at least 1-2 orders of magnitude too small. My main point is that replicating a human brain is a formidable real time task.

Not that making a working copy of a particular brain as it existed in a particular instant of time is a very different task than that of creating a device (electronic or biochemical) which is functionally as useful as a human brain. Making a robot approximately as capable as a human seems easier than building a device functionally equivalent to the Start Trek transporter, although perhaps neither task is possible.

When I say that the brain is not a mystical device, I am claiming that it is not magical. I do not think that the principles of its operation are forever unknowable. I do not believe that the mind is some process or object separate from the physical brain. In principle, it seems possible to build an equivalent device. If we can never understand the brain well enough to build one, it will be due to the complexity being too formidable, not because it is based on unknowable principles.

Chaos theory tells us that we cannot predict the future position and velocity of each of one million objects interacting gravitationally. It is not because we do not understand such a system: It is because the system is too complex and the precision requirements too high to allow meaningful calculations. Now suppose that we consider one million charged particles in a small volume of space and require that we do the necessary calculations fast enough to respond to what will happen in a few seconds. The real time requirements make the problem even more formidable. Once again, we are not thwarted due to magic or mystical phenomena being involved. We are thwarted due to the complexity of the system and the real time requirements imposed.

Wonder if one day nanotech will create a brainy bot.....