Dear All, I think I am with Doug on this one. Isn't it the case that through the interweaving of dendrites neurons can effect their probabilities of firing over substantial distance? So the "powers" of a neuron include not only firing or not firing, but influencing analogically the firing of other neurons through dendritic potentials.
Or is this just old-fangled neurology? N Nicholas Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson > [Original Message] > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Date: 7/9/2006 12:00:16 PM > Subject: Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9 > > Send Friam mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Google Trends - plus an unexpected(?) result (Bill Eldridge) > 2. 100 billion neurons (Jochen Fromm) > 3. Re: 100 billion neurons (doug) > 4. Re: 100 billion neurons (Jochen Fromm) > 5. Re: 100 billion neurons (Martin C. Martin) > 6. Re: 100 billion neurons (Robert Cordingley) > 7. Mexican Elections fraud (Carlos Gershenson) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 23:29:19 +0200 > From: Bill Eldridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Google Trends - plus an unexpected(?) result > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > Robert Holmes wrote: > > Google now offer a product called Google Trends > > (http://www.google.com/trends) which aggregates peoples' searches by > > city, region etc. It's been described as "a place holder for the > > intentions of humankind ? a massive database of desires, needs, wants, > > and likes that can be discovered, subpoenaed, archived, tracked, and > > exploited to all sorts of ends." (From the New York Times > > http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/business/05leonhardt.html?ex=1152763200&en =94404589c34afe7e&ei=5070&emc=eta1 > > <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/business/05leonhardt.html?ex=1152763200&e n=94404589c34afe7e&ei=5070&emc=eta1>) > > > > Anyway, just for fun I type in LANL. The "Cities" tab gives the > > expected results: > > 1. *Los Alamos*, NM, USA > > > > > > 2. *Livermore*, CA, USA > > > > > > 3. *Santa Fe*, NM, USA > > > > > > 4. *Oak Ridge*, TN, USA > > > > > > 5. *Albuquerque*, NM, USA > > > > > > > > The "Regions" tab is altogether more intriguing. > > 1. *Iran* > > > > > > 2. *United States* > > > > > > 3. *India* > > > > > > > > > > > > Time to call our friends at Homeland Security? > > > Not until you make sure that "lanl" doesn't mean "holiday spice cake" in > Persian ;-) > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060708/0b8ae453/attachment-0001.h tml > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 02:03:10 +0200 > From: "Jochen Fromm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > A typical human brain has about 100 billion (10^11=100.000.000.000) neurons, > > but each neuron follows only very simple integrate-and-fire rules. If we > distribute a comparatively simple program on 1.000.000 machines (which is > only a small fraction of the Internet, Google alone has between 50.000 and > 100.000 machines, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] has over five million volunteers), and each > is responsible for the simulation of 100.000 neurons, then we come close > to the capacity of the human brain. How long will it take until we can > build such a system and connect it successfully to the real world > (through a robot) or a realistic virtual world (through an agent) ? > I guess it won't be long. As Greg Egan describes in his novel > "Permutation City", at first the simulation may be much slower than > reality, but enough computers are already there. What do you think ? > > -J. > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 17:23:37 -0700 > From: "doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > "A typical human brain has about 100 billion (10^11=100.000.000.000) > neurons, > > but each neuron follows only very simple integrate-and-fire rules.' > > Comment: this implies a discrete ensemble of discrete events. But isn't each > neuron's likelihood of firing dependent on the solution in which it sits, > the gradients of ions, and proximities to tier multiple firing neurons? > > In which case the brain is an infinite ensemble of an infinity of analog > events. > > doug > > > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, > unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 02:53:31 +0200 > From: "Jochen Fromm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > Interesting remark, but I don't think it really works this way. > It is not an infinite ensemble of an infinite number of analog events. > A neuron fires or not - a boolean event - and spikes are certainly > discrete events. The ion channels, the gradients of ions, and all > the chemical substances are only the "hardware" of the brain. One > could compare it to transistors, wires, etc. If the genes could > produce transistors instead of proteins, they would perhaps use > digital circuits. However, the interesting part seems to be the > software, esp. the code which is used (if there is any). There > are of course at least four different levels of modelling, > from boolean networks and sigmoid networks to spiking networks, > see Fig. 3 in http://www.vs.uni-kassel.de/~fromm/Articles/LI.pdf > > -J. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of doug > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 2:24 AM > To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > Comment: this implies a discrete ensemble of discrete events. But isn't each > neuron's likelihood of firing dependent on the solution in which it sits, > the gradients of ions, and proximities to tier multiple firing neurons? > > In which case the brain is an infinite ensemble of an infinity of analog > events. > > doug > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 21:15:48 -0400 > From: "Martin C. Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I suspect you'd like Hans Moravec's books: > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674576187 > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195136306 > > He uses Moore's law and estimates of the brain's computing power to > calculate when we'll have human equivalence in "a computer." I forget > the date, but it's not far. He also talks about a number of very > interesting consequences of this. > > - Martin > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 23:56:08 -0500 > From: Robert Cordingley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I recollect that some years ago the AI community (at a AAAI conference I > attended) claimed that each of the 10^11 neurons also had on average > 10^4 connections resulting in a 10^15 computational 'size' for the > brain. They also predicted we'd have a computer of similar power by > 2015. Furrthermore it also stuck in my mind that 40% of the brain was > claimed to be involved in vision (including reading). So these > estimates lead one to think that it's going to be quite close to 2015 > before we have a system with just the power of human vision. Being able > to program such a machine was not part of the discussion at the time, > which is a big question to me. > > Thanks > Robert Cordingley > www.cirrillian.com > > Martin C. Martin wrote: > > >I suspect you'd like Hans Moravec's books: > > > >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674576187 > >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195136306 > > > >He uses Moore's law and estimates of the brain's computing power to > >calculate when we'll have human equivalence in "a computer." I forget > >the date, but it's not far. He also talks about a number of very > >interesting consequences of this. > > > >- Martin > > > >============================================================ > >FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > >Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > >lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 15:51:21 +0200 > From: Carlos Gershenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [FRIAM] Mexican Elections fraud > To: ECCO ECCO <[email protected]>, The Friday Morning > Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes; > format=flowed > > Hi all, > > This has not much to do with research, but I feel everybody should > know... > http://complexes.blogspot.com/2006/07/mexican-presidential-election- > fraud.html > http://complexes.blogspot.com/2006/07/more-on-mexican-elections- > fraud.html > > And also > http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/world/americas/09mexico.html > > Best regards, > > Carlos Gershenson... > Centrum Leo Apostel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel > Krijgskundestraat 33. B-1160 Brussels, Belgium > http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~cgershen/ > > ?Tendencies tend to change...? > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Friam mailing list > [email protected] > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > End of Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 9 > ************************************ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
