On 3/20/2013 3:31 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 6:11:18 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 3/20/2013 1:29 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 4:07:10 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 3/20/2013 11:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130320115111.htm
<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130320115111.htm>
"We are examining the activity in the cerebral cortex /as a whole/. The
brain
is a non-stop, always-active system. When we perceive something, the
information does not end up in a specific /part/ of our brain. Rather,
it is
added to the brain's existing activity. If we measure the
electrochemical
activity of the whole cortex, we find wave-like patterns. This shows
that
brain activity is not local but rather that activity constantly moves
from one
part of the brain to another."
Not looking very charitable to the bottom-up, neuron machine view.
The same description would apply to a computer. Information moves
around and it
is distributed over many transistors and magnetic domains.
But it is eventually stored in particular addressed memory locations. It is
not
part of a continuous wave of activity of the entire computer.
There is nothing in the cited article to show that particular information
is never
stored in some area.
Except for the part where they say " *When we perceive something, the information does
not end up in a specific /part/ of our brain*.".
That refers to *when* we are perceiving it. That doesn't show that the information gained
from that perception is not stored in some area in memory. Notice they refer to "when the
subject is given a task", implying that not all information is waving around all the time.
You'll have to take it up with the people who concluded that in their study if
you disagree.
If you looked at a computer you would also see electrical activity that was
not
local and constantly moved from one part to another.
No, not like this. What the brain does would be as if you plugged in a flash drive and
waves propagated the contents of the flash drive throughout the RAM, HD, and CPU,
rolling back and forth mingled in with all of the other processes going on.
Actually that's exactly what my computer would do if I plugged in a thumb drive with a big
complex program, e.g. a multi-player simulation game.
And if it were perceiving its surroundings, as a Mars rover might, to
evaluate its
next move it would obviously have to process data stored in memory as well
as sensor
information.
It would be hard for it to process data stored in memory if it was circulating around
the entire system, mixed with everything else.
On the contrary it can only process data in memory by copying it to registers and the
CPU(s). And if it's a multi-tasking OS it will be "mixed" time-wise with everything else.
As time goes on, I suspect that we will see more and more of these kinds of studies. The
brain does have mechanisms, but it is not a machine. It does computer, but it is not
just a computer.
And I suspect you will still be saying that when Bruno's daughter marries a
robot.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
