New (free) Duke University course at Coursera - The Brain and Space - how the brain creates our sense of spatial location from a variety of sensory and motor sources, and how this spatial sense in turn shapes our cognitive abilities. I've had other Duke U. neuroscience courses through Coursera and they're excellent! This one is only a 6 week course and is designed for general audiences so it isn't like some of the more intensive ones that take 12 or more weeks and have suggested prerequisites. Check it out... --------------------- From the course description - "Knowing where things are is effortless. But “under the hood,†your brain must figure out even the simplest of details about the world around you and your position in it. Recognizing your mother, finding your phone, going to the grocery store, playing the banjo – these require careful sleuthing and coordination across different sensory and motor domains. This course traces the brain's detective work to create this sense of space and argues that the brain's spatial focus permeates our cognitive abilities, affecting the way we think and remember."
Fascinating I still think my favorite brain related quote is: "If our brains were simple enough for us to understand, we would be to dumb to understand them" But then again maybe there is some point in intelligence that we will fully understand every function of the brain and this will mark a massive turning point in (i'm not even sure what) life? evolution? shit?
Yeah, fer sure. When significant brain functionality can be digitally modeled in supercomputers it will usher in a whole new era in the man-machine relationship. Not sure if it won't eventually become a regrettable one, either. I wonder if one day machines with those capabilities will argue with each other over where they came from in new God vs. Evolution debate - long after our demise, that is.
Lol! You know there are large buildings filled to the brim with books? And the coolest part, they will let you take the books home for a few weeks ABSOLUTELY FREE. AND if they dont have the book you want, they will search an entire network to find it for you! I wish i could remember the name of this place... Jokes aside, if you can find Michael Talbots "Holographic Universe" he touches on Karl Pribrams Holonomic Brain Theory and other things that may be better explained if we assume holographic principles at play.
LOL imagine billions of computers running billions of simulations to try to figure out how they came into being while other computers try to calculate the error percentages in those simulations and argue over how much detail is needed to accurately simulate the universe. What I wonder is what sensory inputs would a computer have? If it processed the entire world in binary would it be more or less objective than what we experience?
Great questions! I wish I had great answers. As for the second question, I don't think the simulations can or even should model the human brain in its entirety. After all, they wouldn't need to model the control systems for a human body since they wouldn't have muscles to move, a heart to beat, sexual desires to fulfill, etc. Modeling the processing of the neocortex may be possible but even much of that (in the human) is for the purpose of guiding a human body through its environment with the prime directive being survival of that body. Such complete modeling would be meaningless without the full compliment of a human body. The modeling software would have to be tailored to the hardware design of the machine(s). And the prime directive, as most researchers admit, must not be the survival of the machine. Such an underlying directive must include such UNCONDITIONAL AND NON-OVERRIDABLE directives as, "do no harm to humans under any circumstance", etc. The software must not have the capability of evolving beyond guidelines provided by humans. As for the objectivity -subjectivity of their experience, given the mechanical (actually electrochemical) nature of our own subjective experience, I suppose what they experience would be governed by the boundaries that we place upon those kinds of abilities. But I see no theoretical problems with eventually being able to design fully autonomous robots with similar experiential capabilities to that of humans. The question is, do we really want to do that? And why? The practical goal, in my mind, is to create more capable helpers to humanity - not creating a competing population (army?) of ever more capable, more selfish, more human machines. We have more than enough humans pursuing self-serving goals right now without adding super-humans to the equation.
Back in the early 1900's they would've called him a pea-brain and locked him up in a mental hospital. Maybe they had it right, I for sure wouldn't want that kid next to me driving a car....
I can't sleep for shit anymore which is destroying mine. I was giving a guy my phone number yesterday and couldn't remember the last digit. I think I got dementia or Alzheimer's or something. If ignorance is bliss, I'm going to be one happy motherfucker in the not too distant future. I don't know why I even bother taking these courses - other than curiosity and they're free. I'll forget 75% of anything I learn within a month. Oh well. Life's a bitch, then ya die, as some wiseguy said.. Cheers.
Naw i think curious minds put so much mental power toward learning, they often forget simple things, since they dont stimulate the brain in the same way that makes things memorable. Just a thought ;-)
If you do ever check out holonomic brain theory lmk. I forgot most of it but i recall it was quite interesting.
Comforting thought! Thanks bruh! I thought it was my excessive weed habits at first but I dunno. I'm beginning to have some doubts. Haven't smoked in a week and haven't slept decently in months. Hell, I'm posting on GC at 3:30 am and not even high! What's that tell ya?
Weed is a great tool for the thinking mind! It helps us analyze, get lost in thought and also sleep (personally i dont have an issue with sleep). So what made ya stop?