Question from a lay-person: Wasn't the original "proposal" that a single neuron would be modeled by a single desktop? And couldn't a desktop achieve something approaching this level of analog variability, if properly programmed?
Or is that word "properly" begging the key question? David dba | David Breecker Associates, Inc. www.BreeckerAssociates.com Abiquiu: 505-685-4891 Santa Fe: 505-690-2335 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Louis Macovsky, Dynamic BioSystems" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 1:52 PM Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Neurons. > Hi, > There is also chemical feedback at the synapse such that the neuron can > influence itself as to when the next transmission of nerotransmitter > packet > can be released. > And > The gap between polarization and depolarization along the neuron > introduces > a temporal importance as to the role a particular neuron will play within > the network for any single set of information transmission. > > Lou > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nicholas Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 11:15 AM > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Neurons. > > >> 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 >> > > > > ============================================================ > 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 > ============================================================ 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
