10th September 2014, 2:00 PM
Projects like these are an interesting start, but a few things should be clear. First, this is not a part of a project to digitize any specific brain. We'd need something a bit less destructive than the way they get these smaller modules analyzed. There's also one very basic notion, which is that a simulation is only as good as the information we've got.
Basically, simulating small parts of a rat's brain is, at best, a test to see just how accurately we've modeled how those sections function. We need to match it against the behavior of those sections of a rat's brain to see if they match. If they don't, our picture is incomplete, and adding computing power alone can't solve that.
Now don't misunderstand, I think that at some point in the distant future, such research may in fact succeed (should humanity in general not just blow itself up first). However, I'm pretty much certain it won't help us. The best we've got is to make sure that future can come to pass. Not to worry, it's really too much to ask that WE get to be the first generation that gets immortality. We'll be in good company.
Another suggestion is that a future brain simulator might recreate us by simulating all possible brain configurations. Frankly, I think that's a nightmarish scenario. How would any of us find our loved ones in that chaos? There would be such an incredible multitude of possible "us" out there, and none of "us" would even know which one actually existed. There'd be variations with "broken" minds, variations with flawed memories, and psychopathic variations that know how to pretend to be the friendlier real versions but would murder someone the first chance they got. Further, the barrier between "us" and "not us" would vanish. Just as in evolution, where if you look at a small scale you can't tell the difference between one generation and the ones before and after, and continue to never be able to tell the difference, all the way from human, back to proto-mammal, and then back up another chain to tiger (but could still easily tell the difference between much larger generational jumps), we'd never even know where "we" end and "aunt Gertrude" begins.
Frankly the "emulate them all and let god sort 'em out" approach to reincarnating the past seems destined for the worst form of "Hell is other people" imaginable. No, I don't think that'd be a good idea. Freezing my brain isn't too good an approach either, as frost damage shreds brain cells at the molecular level so thoroughly that there's no chance of reconstituting the original brain state from that mess. No, our very best hope of living long enough to reach that distant goal would be to keep up with a steady progression of life extension, just BARELY eking out our own survival longer than intended until such a day might arrive. On that count, well, for you and I the world might just not care enough. We're not rich, and we won't be able to afford the cutting edge (not to mention that the cutting edge can be dangerous and end up killing us instead before it's become "proven").
Basically, simulating small parts of a rat's brain is, at best, a test to see just how accurately we've modeled how those sections function. We need to match it against the behavior of those sections of a rat's brain to see if they match. If they don't, our picture is incomplete, and adding computing power alone can't solve that.
Now don't misunderstand, I think that at some point in the distant future, such research may in fact succeed (should humanity in general not just blow itself up first). However, I'm pretty much certain it won't help us. The best we've got is to make sure that future can come to pass. Not to worry, it's really too much to ask that WE get to be the first generation that gets immortality. We'll be in good company.
Another suggestion is that a future brain simulator might recreate us by simulating all possible brain configurations. Frankly, I think that's a nightmarish scenario. How would any of us find our loved ones in that chaos? There would be such an incredible multitude of possible "us" out there, and none of "us" would even know which one actually existed. There'd be variations with "broken" minds, variations with flawed memories, and psychopathic variations that know how to pretend to be the friendlier real versions but would murder someone the first chance they got. Further, the barrier between "us" and "not us" would vanish. Just as in evolution, where if you look at a small scale you can't tell the difference between one generation and the ones before and after, and continue to never be able to tell the difference, all the way from human, back to proto-mammal, and then back up another chain to tiger (but could still easily tell the difference between much larger generational jumps), we'd never even know where "we" end and "aunt Gertrude" begins.
Frankly the "emulate them all and let god sort 'em out" approach to reincarnating the past seems destined for the worst form of "Hell is other people" imaginable. No, I don't think that'd be a good idea. Freezing my brain isn't too good an approach either, as frost damage shreds brain cells at the molecular level so thoroughly that there's no chance of reconstituting the original brain state from that mess. No, our very best hope of living long enough to reach that distant goal would be to keep up with a steady progression of life extension, just BARELY eking out our own survival longer than intended until such a day might arrive. On that count, well, for you and I the world might just not care enough. We're not rich, and we won't be able to afford the cutting edge (not to mention that the cutting edge can be dangerous and end up killing us instead before it's become "proven").
"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)