Scientists will build 'human brain'...

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Our brains have 100 billion neurons. Each one performs billions of ‘calculations’ per second – roughly similar to a desktop computer. So the brain computer will need to be able to do a billion billion calculations which will require the output of a nuclear power station.



Richard Walker, who works with Professor Markram, said: ‘Our brains consume tiny amounts of energy but they last for 90 or more years.


The article itself was an excellent read, those two quotes just jumped off the page for me.
The simulated brain they want to make would require it's own nuclear power plant, yet we don't.
That's just amazing, so much left unknown.

The potential for aiding in the development of medicines or studying neurological conditions is well quite amazing.
I can picture one day this in combination with advanced brain scans that map individual brains being used in treatment.
No longer would doctors say "lets try this pill".
They could scan your brain, and plug the scan into a simulator and than try each pill and even advance it over time to see if the choice helps.
That might not happen for a few decades after this is built, but still it's closer now then when even I was a kid.

I think they should tackle the origins of the "brain fart" first though.
Cure that and we would all save time every day.




posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by EmperorXyn
What you see in movies and comparing it to real life is obvously dumb and I think you get that, there is a risk, but small risk if they scientists know what there REALLY doing. Small margin for error, but also small margin to even come a scientist if you get what I mean. There not stupid.


Your wrong, there is a huge risk that has been acknowleged already.

en.wikipedia.org...

There is a whole institute dedicated to the study of "friendly" AI. I suggest reading that page and about the possible upcoming technological singularity and what it means to humanity.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   


I think they should tackle the origins of the "brain fart" first though. Cure that and we would all save time every day.


Yes, exactly!! Those brain farts really.... errr....

Well, anyways, I noticed the article stated it could help the 2 billion people annually affected by brain impairments. I can't help but think Nancy Pelosi on this one... so within the last 3.5 years everyone has been affected with a brain impairment? I'm thinking that number is off.... Just a little bit...
edit on 17-4-2012 by sting130u because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by sting130u
 


The number affected seemed a bit off, but I wonder if that was globally.
It could also be counting all the spectrum disorders.
Such as those who have mild Aspergers like me, or OCD.
I've learned to deal with them since they are mild but other people have it much worse than I do.

I'm actually very happy with helping those with impairments.

After taking care of my Father who had Alzheimer's I find it very hard to watch TV shows, read books, the news, or read news papers when they deal with Alzheimer's patients.
If we can even improve their lives 10% it would make the patients and their families suffer much less.

I hope we make serious strides in that department.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by squandered
 


Dear squandered,

I agree with what you said, the brain cannot be recreated mechanically. I believe that is why some scientists think it can. They believe we are nothing more than flesh machines.



Consciousness is another thing. Science doesn't really touch that and the New Age lecturer's (for want of a better term) had more to say about what it is. I left with the view that the detail / the spark of life is beyond detection and exists on all planes: macro and micro.


I am far from a "New Age" believer; but, because scientists will not discuss the most obvious thing in the world (that our consciousness is real and the only thing we can prove to ourselves) then it is left for others to discuss. Historically, philosophers would discuss it; but, philosophy has devolved into justification for selfishness. The biggest problem science faces in duplicating the human brain is free will and selflessness. A computer cannot understand those things. Peace.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pigraphia
reply to post by sting130u
 


The number affected seemed a bit off, but I wonder if that was globally.
It could also be counting all the spectrum disorders.
Such as those who have mild Aspergers like me, or OCD.
I've learned to deal with them since they are mild but other people have it much worse than I do.

I'm actually very happy with helping those with impairments.

After taking care of my Father who had Alzheimer's I find it very hard to watch TV shows, read books, the news, or read news papers when they deal with Alzheimer's patients.
If we can even improve their lives 10% it would make the patients and their families suffer much less.

I hope we make serious strides in that department.


Yes, perhaps it does need to be more specific. I am told I have OCD and ADHD, which explains some things, but at the same time it is what makes me me.

Who determines the brain disabilities/disorders/impairments? I understand the obvious, but tell someone they have OCD over small things seems more like a financial gain to me, maybe I just like things clean and closed.

My ADHD stems from my learning disability, which is dyscalculia. They did nothing in school to address this problem, and if you take time to wiki it you will see how much of a problem it can be.

We see kids acting normally and the parents are led to believe by teachers and doctors that their children has a disorder, be it ADHD, ADD, OCD, PTSD, hyperactivity, and many others.

It's really hard to say who has these disorders, but if someone doesn't like the way you are, they will label you. I believe its all about money.

That is not to say there are serious cases out there, but 2 billion a year? My ex-wife had all these disorders until a came to psych exam to try and get her son back. She passed just fine when she wanted to. But for 5 years she used it as a crutch. Think she will be removed as a statistic?



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
One step closer for Illuminati immortality.

Soon these fookers will live as long as "GODS"



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 

Just another case of human beings becoming too arrogant for their own good.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


I fail to see this arrogance that you refer to.

Its only a matter of time until we as a species begin to master our bodies and minds. Scientist will have an input in developing a human brain, but the grunt work will be done primarily through super computers. By 2025, human brain simulations will most likely be possible. I think people forget that the growth of information technology is exponential, not linear. The Super Computers today will seem like cheap calculators in just a decade's time.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Pigraphia
 


Brains use a catalyst for everything. Nothing is expended. Proximity to chemicals makes the changes.

Create an energy source that works on reactions to catalysts and make it a closed system and you don't need anything to top up the energy and there are no moving parts so to speak.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
This is another case of medical science being obsessed with cure rather than prevention. Perhaps if we didn't live such polluted lifestyles we wouldn't need all these things to help fix our problems.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 05:13 AM
link   
in case some of you have no yet realized it, neuroscience is a junk subject much like astronomy

what has neuroscience achieved other than cutting bits off the brain and seeing the result ? all the major progress in molecular neuroscience has been due to big pharma anyway





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join