2008/6/30 Vladimir Nesov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Linas Vepstas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Why binary? >> >> I once skimmed a biography of Ramanujan, he started >> multiplying numbers in his head as a pre-teen. I suspect >> it was grindingly boring, but given the surroundings, might >> have been the most fun thing he could think of. If you're >> autistic, then focusing obsessively on some task might >> be a great way to pass the time, but if you're more or less >> normal, I doubt you'll get very far with obsessive-compulsive >> self-training -- and that's the problem, isn't it? >> > > If the signals have properties of their own, I'm afraid they will > start interfering with each other, which won't allow the circuit to > execute in real time. Binary signals, on the other hand, can be > encoded by the activation of nodes of the circuit, active/inactive. If > you have an AND gate that leads from symbols S1 and S2 to S3, you > learn to remember S3 only when you see both S1 and S2
What are you trying to accomplish here? I don't see where you are trying to go with this. I don't think a human can consciously train one or two neurons to do something, we train millions at a time. -- I'm guessing savants only employ a few tens of million neurons (give or take a few orders of magnitude) -- to do their stuff. Still, an array of 1K by 1K electrodes is well within current technology, we just don't know where to hook this up to, with the exception of simple motor areas, retina, and bit of the auditory circuits. --linas ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=106510220-47b225 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
