29th January 2006, 5:09 PM
Yes Weltall, you are right. They are attempting to construct a brain without knowing how it works. It's called reverse engineering. It is actually done pretty often in other fields of science. For example, particle accelerators do the same things. If they actually knew what the results of those reactions would be, there would be no point in engaging in the experiment. Rather, they attempt to recreate certain situations based on their current predictions, measure the results, and see what they have learned. If the results support the observations they made before on how the universe works, they have succesfully made a model of something. Otherwise, they adjust and try again with a new experiment.
It's the same here. We have an understanding of the chemical reactions that take place in the brain, but want to know a lot more about the actual programming of the brain. Create a brain, study it, and you get some answers. For example, you can get an answer as to whether or not the understanding of the physical nature of the brain is accurate. An experiment may not reach the hypothesized result, but you still learn something, so it is always of value.
The real question is simply this. How feasible is it to actually do what they intend to do?
It's the same here. We have an understanding of the chemical reactions that take place in the brain, but want to know a lot more about the actual programming of the brain. Create a brain, study it, and you get some answers. For example, you can get an answer as to whether or not the understanding of the physical nature of the brain is accurate. An experiment may not reach the hypothesized result, but you still learn something, so it is always of value.
The real question is simply this. How feasible is it to actually do what they intend to do?
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)