Thanks for the link Pei.

The thing is that they are talking about the number of BITS not the
number of POSSIBLE STATES.  Given x bits the number of possible
states is 2^x.  For example with 32 bits you can have 2^32 different
states... or about 4,000,000,000 possible states.  

Thus, if the brain has 10^8432 bits of storage as they claim, then
the number of possible states is 2^(10^8432). 

To make things even worse, even if they realise their error and
decided that they didn't understand what a bit is and that they
actually meant "possible states", the number of bits in this case
then becomes just log_2 (10^8432) = 8432 * log_2 (10) = 28,010 bits
or about 3.5 kilo bytes of storage.  I'd like to think that I have
more than a 3.5 Kb brain!!

They really should have "sanity checked" their results.

Shane


 --- Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The paper can be accessed at
> http://www.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/wangyx/Publications/Papers/B&M-Vol4.2-HMC.pdf
> 
> Their conclusion is based on the assumptions that there are 10^11 neurons
> and their average synapses number is 10^3. Therefore the total potential
> relational combinations is
> (10^11)! / (10^3)! ((10^11)! - (10^3)!), which is approximately 10^8432.
> 
> The model is obviously an oversimplification, and the number is way too big.
> 
> Pei
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "shane legg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 6:24 AM
> Subject: RE: [agi] Discovering the Capacity of Human Memory
> 
> 
> >
> > The total number of particles in the whole universe is usually
> > estimated to be around 10^80.  These guys claim that the storage
> > of the brain is 10^8432 bits.  That means that my brain has around
> > 10^8352 bits of storage for every particle in the whole universe.
> >
> > I thought I was feeling smarter than usual this morning!
> >
> > Possible explanations:
> >
> > 1) The quote to totally wrong the the "^" should be a "," ?
> >
> > 2) They got confused and thought it was 1 April
> >
> > 3) They are actually doing research into just how flaky AI
> >    researchers really are and how easy it is to publish
> >    mathematical nonsense in "Mind and Brain" Journal
> >
> > 4) The "scientists" somehow managed to get their PhDs without
> >    understanding how numbers work
> >
> > 5) They concluded that the brain is really analogue and so they
> >    worked out the volume of the skull at the Planck scale (actually
> >    that doesn't work either as the Planck length is far far far to
> >    large at 1.6 x 10^-35 m)
> >
> > and so on...
> >
> > Does anybody have a better explanation?
> >
> > Shane
> >
> >
> > --- "Amara D. Angelica" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> > http://www.kurzweilai.net/news/news_printable.html?id=2417
> > >
> > > Discovering the Capacity of Human Memory
> > >
> > > Brain and Mind, August 2003
> > >
> > >
> > > The memory capacity of the human brain is on the order of 10^8432 bits,
> > > three scientists have estimated.
> > >
> > > Writing in the August issue of Brain and Mind, their "OAR" cognitive
> > > model asserts that human memory and knowledge are represented by a
> > > network of relations, i.e., connections of synapses between neurons,
> > > rather than by the neurons themselves as in the traditional
> > > information-container model (1 neuron = 1 bit).
> > >
> > > This explains why "the magnitude of neurons in an adult brain seems
> > > stable; however, huge amount of information can be remembered throughout
> > > the entire life of a person," they point out.
> > >
> > > Based on the projected computer memory capacity of 8 x 10^12 bits in the
> > > next ten years, Yingxu Wang et al. conclude that the memory capacity of
> > > a human brain is equivalent to at least "10^8419 modern
> > > computers....This tremendous difference of memory magnitudes between
> > > human beings and computers demonstrates the efficiency of information
> > > representation, storage, and processing in the human brains."
> > >
> > > They also conclude that "this new factor has revealed the tremendous
> > > quantitative gap between the natural and machine intelligence" and that
> > > "next-generation computer memory systems may be built according to their
> > > relational model rather than the traditional container metaphor" because
> > > "the former is more powerful, flexible, and efficient, and is capable of
> > > generating a mathematically unlimited memory capacity by using limited
> > > number of neurons in the brain or hardware cells in the next generation
> > > computers."
> > >
> > > Brain and Mind 4 (2): 189-198, August 2003
> > >
> > > -------
> > > To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
> subscription,
> > > please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
> > Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
> >
> > -------
> > To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
> subscription,
> > please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> 
> 
> -------
> To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
> please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to