This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
human brain data storage
the problem with organic computers is that once data is stored in an organic fashion, it is near-impossible to change the data once it is stored without the data becoming corrupt.
i tried briefly to find the article where ibm developed an organic computer to calculate pi to a certain number of decimals using an organic computer but couldn't find it.
if this technology were to be further developed, i imagine that the only way that data could be over-written without becoming corrupt were if the data were constantly changing, a bit like a real-time constantly changing file.
to explain in further detail, "old dog, new tricks" type of scenario: if you try to teach an old dog to bark when you say "sit" after the dog has been taught to sit after saying "sit" for all of it's life, the dog may learn to bark temporarily when you say "sit" but would soon learn to revert to sitting because the command "sit" has been more hard-wired into the dog's brain.
then to explain the real-time changing file: encryption with synchronised 'random' numbers (two code generators, one that synchronises with the brain's random number generator, and one that synchronises on the file retrieval device) applied to both the processor (thinking) and data, via an encryption.
assuming the data can be fed into the brain, and the data can be retrieved from the brain, the brain would have to constantly change the data. this is because otherwise if you were to over-write the brain's storage with another file, without it being constantly changed, the data would either revert to the original file (like the "sit" dog example,) or, more likely, both files would become corrupt.
if the brain's storage involved constantly changing the data (or thinking, which all brains constantly do) then the data can be kept in tact exactly as like a flash drive via an encryption mechanism that the brain can cope with, without too badly affecting day-to-day tasks (or at all?) and that way files can be removed and replaced.
Sidharth Hariharan
griffin tucker 10+
my apologies if you find this idea disturbing, it wasn't intended to be.
Sidharth Hariharan
griffin tucker 10+
the idea here is to store actual data in a human mind including you or me, or any volunteer, without it affecting their/our day-to-day tasks. i'd like to think of it as taking advantage of what we're not using.
Sidharth Hariharan
Wayne Silverman
griffin tucker 10+
Wayne Silverman
Tim blackburn 30+
griffin tucker 10+
it's a bit like storing a file with 90% of the file being redundancy data.
if you take for example tasks that we usually do every day, we may accomplish the tasks in a different order, or a slightly different way, but the same tasks get accomplished.
this is similar to language.
even if some words are mis-spelled or a typo is made, usually the meaning behind the word can be deciphered quite easily. this is redundancy.
languages often have many ways to explain the same thing, which is also a form of redundancy, but can be also used in a way to communicate the same pieces of core data, the rest is just there to ensure the context of the data remains in tact.
robert richards
of the new "flawless" sensor or data provider, then it may not bypass or ignore the implant. A thought only.
griffin tucker 10+
http://www.healthcanal.com/brain-nerves/19866-Researchers-find-location-Waltzing-Matilda-the-brain.html
robert richards
I really don’t know what I am talking about in this area but just to add my two cents. The human brain and its capacity are extraordinary and more powerful than any computer. Most of today’s computers can only store data and fumble their way through a problem by using yes and no algorithms…binary language. They are given information and tasks, commands by superior organic computers…us.
As a poor example: To get audio into a computer the amount of data had to be cut to a mere 20hz to 20,000 kilohertz. And can only code and decode that small amount of data over a very finite number of paths/tracks. While doing this the modern computer can do almost nothing else...it often freezes, throws its digital hands up and takes it cyber ball home. The human brain on the other hand can: define many sounds at one time, convert those analogue signals into digital/electrical via the ear drum, process it (in extraordinary ways) and store it. While remembering to breathe in out, pump blood yada, yada…think on what happened yesterday, recall thoughts and feelings with-in contexts and I suspect millions of other chores. And that is just sitting and chatting or listening to the radio. I hope you get my point.
I have often thought about memory as I seem to possess a rather bad one. It seems to me that data stored by human brains are never perfect…ever…part of that being it is never original data anyway, just a sensory thing processed by imperfect creatures. It is flawed before it is imprinted. Soon after imprinting it starts to degrade. When for example all the data is lost, and we are required to remember, we do so by what I call Association Threading. A minutia of data relating to some other facet of character is referenced to likewise other minutiae. Hopefully rebuilding a scaffold of a memory, whilst not the original but a logical reconstruction of it (I lifted that from a novel I am writing...it is mine though). Just my two cents.
Mark Haight
Borrah Campbell
The biological brain has two types of memory... "ROM," which is instinct and "RAM" which is knowledge. The "RAM" in our brains is different from that in computers in that it simply doesn't last. All learned data must be used often or it will be forgotten or "corrupted." You will eventually forget your name if you don't use it. In a computer "RAM" can be stored almost forever. The brain devotes very little power to learning or "writing" data, and priority goes to "reading" the data provided by the senses since it is the most important (evolutionairily speaking.) We were animals once & simply didn't need to remember things for long periods. Furthermore, our brains don't remember things exactly as they are. We only remember parts of the identity of any learned data. This may in-fact be the most efficient way of using sensory type data.
It is for this reason that learning new skills takes so much time. Human brains are great for doing things normal animals do, but terrible at running algorithms. In this respect, current computers are far superior.
We can breath, blink, move, and see all without using our "RAM." The brain processes massive amounts of information with ease & without failure. To harvest the true power of the brain we must understand how to encode "ROM" or instinct type memory... However, I'm not sure science has unlocked the mystery of how instincts work or are stored in the brain. I spent quite a bit of time looking into the subject in years past & was not able to find any information.
If we understood the brain's "ROM" or instinct... and find a way to manipulate it, we would be able to create algorithms on conventional computers & run them on brains. Furthermore, once we know how to manipulate that kind of memory, we may find that it isn't "read-only" at all & can be freely rewritten!
However, I doubt a natural brain could match the power of a quantum computer. It seems unlikely
griffin tucker 10+
to explain differently, the 'programming' actually _is_ part of the stored data. any particular event - a certain sound, a certain word, a combination of events, etc. could all be used to make a brain do or think actions or thoughts that would result in the data being safe.
if, however, the data were to be over-written, the solution would be to use the same 'programming' algorithm as with the original piece of data was stored, but slight changes would occur on the order of thoughts, not the thoughts themselves.
only slight changes would have to occur, though, as reminder events in the 'programming' itself can become part of the 'ROM' if data hasn't been changed frequently enough. if data needs to be stored for a long time, and the use of the brain to use the data portion of 'ROM' as over-writable, then the 'RAM' or 'programming mechanism' needs to be changed frequently in order to keep it as 'RAM' and not turn it into 'ROM.'
Borrah Campbell
With the recent discovery of the epigenome, we know that patterns can be inscribed onto the "ROM." Not long ago it was a total mystery. Ants make tunnels & birds build nest on instinct alone. However these are highly sophisticated instincts.
It probably takes hundreds / thousands of years for complex behaviors like that to evolve. Hundreds of generations & possibly thousands of years of repeating an action & making small improvements.
It's not a practical method of manipulating the "ROM." To make things more difficult, instincts may exist solely on the higher (epigenetic) genome and would require intimate knowledge of both (higher & lower) genomes to engineer. It could be another fifty years before we have that sort of capability.
Savants & some geniuses seem to be able to instantly learn anything permanently... but they are still being studied & aren't well understood. Studies show that something causes their brains to devote more power to "writing" information (Up to 30% in geniuses if memory serves.) Sometimes it's a genetic anomaly & sometimes it's a lighting strike.
Nevertheless, if we could use a savant brain, then accessing the "ROM" wouldn't matter. The "RAM" would be just as good. Something is keeping their data from becoming "corrupt" over time... What could it be? Nobody knows...
Apparently it is attributed to an anomaly in the right hemisphere of the brain?
Once that mystery is solved, the problem of "data being corrupted" is also solved.
griffin tucker 10+
when driving a car, you're in the seated position. because of the reminders (visual, mostly) you suddenly know where the hand-brake is, because it's been learnt. when you sit in an armchair, you're not thinking of where the hand-brake is.
i understand what you mean about genetic data, but this isn't what i'm going for. what i'm going for is rather that some 'ROM' data can be manipulated and changed.
for example, when driving a car that was originally designed to be driven on the other side of the road, but the steering column has been moved to the 'correct' side of the car, you will notice that the indicator and the wind-screen wiper controls have _not_ been swapped as they 'should' be.
it can take weeks of getting used to this 'programming mechanism' change, because it's been so hard-wired into the mind that the indicator is on a different side than usual. it's not impossible, though.
in fact, by self-learning reminders of which car you're in at the time (usually visual) then you can adjust your mind to know more instantaneously which side the indicator is on, no matter how often you change from an indicator control being on the left or right.
it's this kind of real-life comparison that proves data can be over-written in the mind. rather, not over-written, but more-so adding to, as the 'old habits never die' but instead the programming mechanism changes slightly as to how the habit is recognised in the mind, which can represent a change of, or new, data.
considering that any movement, or any thought for that matter, can represent a piece of data, including a 'programmed mechanism' such as reaching for the hand-brake or indicator, then the amount of data that a human brain can recognise, store, and send (other than the obvious traditional means) is quite large.
Borrah Campbell
Repetition is indeed how we learn.
If we were to utilize the repetitive method of transferring data to a normal brain, we would have to use extremely low transfer rates.
If ever we were to manipulate brain function, it would be a tricky endeavor.I'm assuming we would have to use electrodes to stimulate the sensory parts of the brain to trick it into learning anything. Too high of a transfer rate would destroy the receptor cells. Conceivably, this could be compensated for by activating as much of the brain as possible at a time. Thereby simulating the brain activity levels seen in savants. Whatever program used to oversee transfer of data would have to re-transmit the data a defined number of times over a span of sixteen hours at the most, allowing time for sleep. It would be a timely & costly process, but ultimately worth it if it were successful.
However, all of this would require the ability to imitate sensory data in such a way as to get the brain to learn it.
That's a lot of guesswork on my part. How to send meaningful information to a brain is a bit beyond my knowledge. That's the territory of a neurobiologist I;m afraid!
Sabin Muntean 30+
Also, thank you for your comparisons, I believe without them I would be lost. :D
However, I still wished to ask - do you happen to know any good links to a page or a video where this type of storage is explained. I'd definitely like some more details on this.
griffin tucker 10+
simply the keywords were "organic" and "computing" and "IBM" but this yields no results when i websearch for it.
the movie 'johnny nmenoic' doesn't really explain in detail what i'm trying to explain, but i must admit, it gave me some ideas for the premise. it's also an entertaining sci-fi movie.
from what i can remember about the IBM news article is that it was either a plant, or some kind of organic matter. also that further studies were discontinued with the advent of quantum computing.
the best link i can give you is wikipedia's introduction about quantum computing - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer
griffin tucker 10+
suddenly you know the rest of the sentence being "jumps over the lazy dog." this is because it has been seen, heard, or typed so many times that just by being reminded of the beginning of the sentence, the rest of the sentence is known.
"the quick brown fox..." could represent a barcode in the device that references a location of stored data in the brain. but because the human brain is capable of more than just this, the way that the sentence is said could represent more data too.
so, "the quick brown fox..." is just a barcode, it doesn't actually contain any data itself, just a reference point. "jumps over the lazy dog" could reference in ANOTHER table what the actual data represents, ie. each letter and how it is said represents a piece of data in the table, and can then be decrypted into a file through the external decryption device.
the way that data is input into the brain is simply repetition using existing (or non-existing, but would take longer) memory and following on from that, practice every now and then to ensure the data exists in tact.