Not being a biologist, I had to check out what a synaptic cleft is!
Turns out it is a space between two neurons, connecting them to one another forming a synapse. A picture is worth a thousand words (see attachment).
Gonna need some Biology notes!: http://www.cathkin.s-lanark.sch.uk/... Cells of NS and neurotransmitters Notes.pdf:)
The notes say that the neurotransmitters are chemicals (molecules), but obviously say nothing about quantum entanglement.
Is there a brain surgeon in the house? 🙂
Attachments
There have been a few attempts to explain consciousness as a product of QE. A few years ago, there was a paper put out about the sense of smell being QE based.
I remain to be convinced.
I remain to be convinced.
A brain surgeon or better a neurosurgeon, would know far more than me: I am not trying to impress; that would be childish and out of place. If am being a nuisance to the forum, get support from other members, and request my permanent banishment. I do not want to be a nuisance, yet, I think, I should be able to express myself freely, provided, what I write is within the forum rules.Galu said:
Nevertheless, the brain, especially human brains, are extremely interesting to delve into. Their macroscopic structure is very indicative of dense connections, dendrites and axons, going between cortical columns and deep into the thalami. This allows all parts to communicate with each other and share information.
In a human brain, cortical columns amount to about 2000000 and measure about 0.5mm x 2mm deep. They can be seen as general purpose brains. The number of distinguishable layers in a typical cortical column is seven with the primary visual area having nine.
In the cerebellum, the brain part reponsible for fine movement, purkinje cells have around 200000 synapses each. They form the basis of circuits there. The cerebellum is a huge non-conscious memory which stores nerve excitation patterns that control muscles.
The primary visual area is responsible for visual perception. The positioning of cortical columns in this area correspond to how sensitive cells in the retina are arranged. So, adjacent retinal cells send their signals to adjacent cortical columns. Besides the primary visual area there are another two visual areas which contain circuits which elicit information from the visual scene. This processing is non-conscious. There are four colour processing channels but only three are used. The fourth one is used whenever a person has a cataract opreration performed, as this can allow more UV to enter the eye.
edbarx, you are not being a nuisance, you have got a hold of entirely the wrong end of the stick!
Your contributions are most welcome, I am simply embarrassed by my poor knowledge of neuroscience. Pray continue! 😱
Your contributions are most welcome, I am simply embarrassed by my poor knowledge of neuroscience. Pray continue! 😱
There seems no reason to think that a brain is anything more than a mushy bio-electro-chemical reactor grounded solidly in ordinary physics, unfathomably complex and perhaps the prime example of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts but nonetheless ordinary.
By considering the mind as not a separate entity, simply a consequence to the person whose body it resides in of a sufficiently complex organic computer, We're less than a century into electronic computers and it seems we are near to crossing the Turing threshold...biology has been at this for hundreds of millions of years.
I read Roger Penrose' book "The Emperor's New Mind" so many decades ago and was unconvinced. Many reviewers agreed with me.
I am not referring to the idea of Quantum Consciousness which postulates that the micro-tubuli of neurons have resonating electrons which form a Quantum Entanglement over entire neural networks in brains.[/quote]
I hadn't heard of that one.
The brain and mind are indeed a mystery, but I'm doubtful that a quantum entanglement or other "special" quantum action is involved in the brain/mind.
I'm even more doubtful in recent years due to the recent successes of artificial neural networks and machine learning, the basis of much recent AI advances. We don't have a "mind" yet, but machines are doing a lot of things they couldn't do before, and it's not just from advances in Moore's Law.
Entity or not, the consequence is the product regardless and has it's own defiition
Everyone is entitled to listen to what they want to. Don't be ridiculous please, and have some self respect.No need to ask for permission to speak here. What you need permission for is to be heard
benb said:
Artificial Intelligence is nothing more than computer algorithms designed to analyse data/input and make conclusions and create more data. It has nothing to do with consciousness and its generation. Consciousness is entirely different than data analysis and synthesis. Consciousness may be a quality of matter that is still not understood. Observation of living things of sufficient complexity, clearly show that consciousness is used extensively.
Consciousness involves different aspects of perception like the perception of vision, sound, warmth, cold, pain, fear, happiness, anger, etc. This is why it is difficult to logically attribute consciousness with the processing of data.
For a human mind to be concious, the largest part of the brain, the brain hemispheres, must receive a continuous stream of nerve impulses from the brain stem. This is known from medicine from observation of brain injured patients. Other conscious patients may have more damage to their brains but with these areas remaining intact.
Last edited:
Self consciousness is when an organism begins to think about how it thinks and is aware of its own mortality. Psychologists also generally define it as the awareness of ones own agency and any subsequent impact on those around you or the environment.
I think AI has a way to go
But what has this to do with the expanding universe?
I think AI has a way to go
But what has this to do with the expanding universe?
Last edited:
The person who started this thread, M. Gregg, is no longer involved here,
And the second link is broken. Turns out is Professor Sean Carroll. Possibly on Dark Energy.
I have one of his new Higgs Boson books in my backlog, along with Lenny Susskind's primer on Relativity and Field theory.
Both are in evidence in these (downloadable) podcasts:
Physics – Sean Carroll
I was just listening to Anthony Agurre. Seems Gravitational Energy can decrease while Dark Energy increases with the expansion of Space. So the books balance. Or something...
Oh Lor, the backlog is getting worse! 😱
And the second link is broken. Turns out is Professor Sean Carroll. Possibly on Dark Energy.
I have one of his new Higgs Boson books in my backlog, along with Lenny Susskind's primer on Relativity and Field theory.
Both are in evidence in these (downloadable) podcasts:
Physics – Sean Carroll
I was just listening to Anthony Agurre. Seems Gravitational Energy can decrease while Dark Energy increases with the expansion of Space. So the books balance. Or something...
Oh Lor, the backlog is getting worse! 😱
The link is time. For some 14 billion years the Universe has been expanding from the singularity to the structure we observe today. For perhaps a billion years organic chemistry has been building ever more intricate living structures including the ones in our heads capable of self reflection and able to contemplate past and future outside of the immediacy of now.
I think one of the fundamental problems we face as humans with lifespans under a century and recorded histories of a few thousand years is the absolute lack of an intuitive grasp of how long a billion or 14 billion years is and how much things can evolve and develop in those enormous timespans.
During our individual lifetimes and the written history of our species about all that has changed is the layering of our technical world over the natural one. The evolution of us and the Universe continues but it isn't obvious to casual observation.
In our search for understanding and explaining how the Universe and the human brain/mind came to be as we see them today, our inability to relate to what natural processes can accomplish with unfathomable amounts of time leads down the path of invoking the magic and mystical.
Consciousness is self evident but your mind determines the direction you take. So philosophy plays a key role in those decisions. Would we even be contemplating this topic had the great philosophers of the past not aimed us in this direction?
Recent studies of the UV and X-ray emissions from distant quasars have tracked the expansion of the universe from around 13 billion years ago to today.
One interpretation of the new data is that dark energy may be getting denser over time, which would mean it’s growing in strength.
However, let's not forget that the actual existence of dark energy has not yet been confirmed and that is why we are carefully studying the expansion of the universe.
The expansion of the universe may not be accelerating after all, in which case there would be no need to postulate the existence of dark energy.
We appear to have been working with incorrect or insufficient data regarding the measurement of cosmic distances. New 'cosmic candles' are providing more accurate data upon which to base our hypotheses regarding the expansion of universe.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.