X-Message-Number: 421
From att!uunet.UU.NET!ghsvax!hal Mon Sep  2 11:38:37 PDT 1991
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 91 11:38:37 PDT
From: ghsvax! (Hal Finney)
To: 
Subject: Re:  cryonics #415 - Re: Nano-neurons?

I'd like to hear more about these theories of James Gibson that Simon
Levy mentioed.  Maybe Simon could provide some references.

It seems to me that much of the hope for uploading comes not from
linguistic theory, but from investigations of how the brain works.
The brain is apparently composed of neurons, which send signals to one
another in the form of trains of action potentials (neural impulses).

Neurons in the brain don't perceive the outside world directly.
Instead, they receive a series of nerve impulses from various other
neurons, and produce nerve impulses of their own that then travel to
still other neurons.  All these neurons are hooked together in a
complicated network that eventually leads to and controls the motor
neurons that then cause muscles to move to produce speech, motion, or
any other behavior.

Now, this analysis doesn't give any special place to linguistic
behavior at all.  Actually, it just treats linguistic behavior as a
special case of muscle motion, which is if anything underestimating
its importance, if you ask me!

Based on this analysis, a neuron is primarily an information-
processing system.  It doesn't need to know whether the impulses
it is receiving represent visual, auditory, or some other form of
perception, or whether they represent some other brain activity.  The
neuron works in a relatively mindless way.

If this model of brain behavior is correct, it should be possible to
replace some or all of the neurons by computerized systems which work
the same way.  In the extreme, all of the neurons in the brain could be
modelled by a computer, and if given the same inputs in the form of
sense perceptions, should produce the same outputs in the form of
motor control signals to muscles.


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=421