On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:30:58 EST, Dude VanWinkle said: > > They may have to update this because I will take the route of saying > > that our brains run at 10 efficiency or that 10 percent of its > > potential. > > <and goes on to cite several examples that don't prove much of anything > other than (a) there's a bell curve and (b) much of the cited behavior is > actually trainable, and *has* been for most of known history (hint - > how do you think all of Homer's works were preserved?)> > > Note that it's also unclear what "100% efficiency" would *mean* - if all > neurons are firing all the time, you can't distinguish as many distinct neural > states. Also, most of the time, not much is going on, and you really *don't* > need to be using 100% of the capacity. But sometimes you need a *lot* of > capacity *right now* (for instance, I'm sure that Saturday when I startled > a bobcat in his lair when only 2 foot or so from the opening, I went through > a *lot* of neurons comparing the snarl to every sound I ever heard, and coming > up with a good response...) > > Consider it the cognitive equivalent of trying to pass at Talledega with a big > honking restrictor plate.... > > Also, firing the neurons more often means you burn more glucose, which means > both more cooling issues, and the need to eat more. > > > This is why, even though its listed on snopes.com as being untrue, > > that I will still continue to quote that fallacy. > > Ya know, Dude, if you *used* the other 90% of the neurons, you could do > amazing stuff.... like change your mind when confronted by evidence. :) You shouldn't usually do that.
_______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
