Do you think the human brain work from a sort of binary code?
99943
>>>>Do you think the human brain work from a sort of binary code?\n\nDepends what you mean by binary. The individuals neurons themselves are binary, but the connections work on a kind fuzzy logic. So no, the brain isn’t strictly binary \n\n>>>>> If so, do you think it will be possible to someday \n>>>>> take a snapshot of it, make some sort of ISO file of\n>>>>> it to achieve a sort of "virtual immortality"?\n\nIt is possible that one day we will al grow wings and fly up into the heavens. But in terms of modern technology no, it’s not even theoretically possible.\n\nEven if we could store the information pattern of the brain at one point in time that would achieve nothing. Immortality requires that the personality and memories be duplicated.  Those things are dynamic processes, not a static information store. A stored brain would no more be you than a dead boy is you.
642090
Intresting point, but you would have to construct a panatropic net with which to store a Matrix of all the dead minds. However, we're not far off making that discovery! ;0)
761779
It isn't true that we only use 10% our brains.  That is a very common myth that was started because of misinterpretation of scientific data.  The fact is that only 10% of our brains is made of up actual neurons that transmit signals, while the rest are glial cells that provide structural support and nutrition to the neurons and clear waste products and excess neurotransmitters.   However, these cells are all used most of the time.\nTo answer your actual question though, the brain is sort of designed to forget things for two reasons.  There is so much going on around us that we experience, if we paid attention to and remembered everything we would be overloaded by all this information pretty quickly.  Secondly, new connections need to be made all the time to incorporate new things that we learn, so in the midst of that some other connections are weakened or lost.  Sometimes things we mean to remember are lost in this process.  Of course, our brain doesn't always work how we would like it to, but like you said generally the things that are most important are the things that we remember, which is exactly how it should be.  Why store unnecessary information?
1098087
Binary code is just 1's and 0's. Reading it is totally arbitrary unless you know what is being coded. The same byte of 8 bits of 1 and zeros could be an ascii character, machine code, or color definition.. ... and on and on. So in actuality your friend is full of poopy.
705980
Ichi THAT is BRILLIANT......I know that in the tangential thinking that often bests me 'thinkos are the weakest links, perhaps the 'savants' of my mind and truly the innocents. Perhaps they are what saves my butt altogether.\nAbsolutely Brill!!!! I am going to ask if I may have permission to use this in my writing for in my speaking & writing i have for the first time just spoken it aloud...thank for the new concept on somethng I have been doing, another thing to obssess on, fair play to you mate, brain food doesnt often ome through the screen like this. and it just did.\nNow does this include the frontal and temporal lobes? Will Kirlean Photograhy show this in action? Or is it a different part of the brain where the lost socks of our lives go to?\nTHIS is a cool quesion. I now possess a new word..and it is awesome..."THINKOS"..now THAT is HOT!!!
329002
Interesting puzzle:\nfMRI studies have shown that neurons in the brain associated with a task begin to fire about 800 milliseconds before the person is even aware that they want to perform an action.\n\nIs this God? Do we have no free will? Is this our soul?\n\n\n                     Med Hypotheses. 2001 Mar;56(3):364-6. \n    If there were no free will: Fisher CM.\n\n\n    Electrophysiological findings in humans who are performing voluntary acts, indicate that the intention to act, follows brain activity rather than preceding it. This has implications for voluntary behavior and the doctrine of free will. This essay reviews the fields of human behavior, including medicine, in which this new thesis might have far-reaching significance. Copyright 2001 Harcourt Publishers Ltd.\n\nAn extract:\n\n...it should be pointed out\nthat somewhat the same conclusion may be reached on\nthe basis of rather elementary observation. Every thought,\nfeeling, inclination, intention, desire, every mental\nimpression no matter how brief or faint, must be created\nby nervous system activity. How else could they arise? Ideas would have to arise without a physical basis.\nNervous system activity must always precede. Every\nnuance of thought and feeling arises in and must be preceded\nby its own specific electrical configuration in the\nbrain. If one has the experience of ‘willing’ the nervous\nsystem to do something, the impression of ‘willing’ must\nhave been preceded by nervous system activity.\nOtherwise there would be no source and we are in the\nrealm of the supernatural. Before I think of anything, it\nmust first have taken form in my nervous system.\n\nAh yes, the nervous system... some may just call this the soul...\n\n\nEdit: in reference to the below answer, I've pulled out a (scientific) study that does not suggest that there is no soul.\n\n Hist Philos Life Sci. 2004;26(3-4):377-94. \n\n    'Show me your original face before you were born': the convergence of public fetuses and sacred DNA.\n\n    Gilbert SF, Howes-Mischel R.\n\n    Department of Biology, Swarthmore College, 500 College Avenue, Swarthmore, PA 19081, USA.\n\n    Embryology is an intensely visual field, and it has provided the public with images of human embryos and fetuses. The responses to these images can be extremely powerful and personal, and the images (as well as our reactions to them) are conditioned by social and political agendas. The image of the 'autonomous fetus' abstracts the fetus from the mother, the womb, and from all social contexts, thereby emphasizing 'individuality'. The image of 'sacred DNA' emphasizes DNA as the unmoved mover, the eidos, the soul of the human being. Since fertilization involves the forming of a new constellation of DNA in the zygote, the act of fertilization is being perceived as the secular and technical equivalent of ensoulment. This privileges fertilization above the other possible scientifically valued times when 'human life' begins.
55121
No.\n\nNo one can "read" another person's mind in some sort of telepathic sense. There is no physical mechanism for carrying information from one brain to another in such a fashion. (And while there are certainly unknown phenomena, this one would have to impart essentially zero energy in order to remain undetected. Which means there is no energy to create an effect.)\n\nSometimes people, not just twins, can appear to answer each other's questions or guess what the other person is supposed to do. But this just comes from living with the person and knowing their behavior.\n\nStories of one twin knowing what happened to another 2,000 miles away are a combination of coincidence and urban legend.
215211
It's impossible to be all-knowing. The more you know, the more complex your brain would need to be. And that increases the amount of information there is to know. Can a computer be aware of every atom it is composed of? And to know the future is even more impossible.
1130573
not necessarily...it is simulating intelligence in general. It means the Artificial entity is able to learn, reason, gain cognitive abilities, adapt, and so on. Humans have all of these abilities, but a machine could possibly do all of these things (providing they have A.I.) faster and more efficient, surpassing human intelligence quickly.
1146250
Lmao.  It's in our nature.  Since the creation of metaphors/analogs in our language, our brains were capable of thinking of how things  are related to each other.  Even at this particular moment, you are digesting each of these words, and their meaning (in relation).  That is the dividing aspect that makes us a bit more complicated than the rest of the animals out there; and has a great deal with how we survived and how our relatives in the human chain did not.\n\nIt's a complex process of a once operating bicameral mind ie operating right brain and left brain processes with not as complex intergrations.  The theory is once man was more or less instinctual, and that he first heard god's voices from the right side of his brain.\n\nhttp://www.julianjaynes.org/bicameralmind.php\n\nThis is a theory of Julian Jaynes (link ^^^).  He historically documents the change from a bicameral minded individual, to the people we know today, whom assumed a more fully concious level of brain use.  He demonstrates how men behaved in those times, and how they lost the voices of god(s)....roughly around the time they gained a more advanced language systems and brain processes.  \n\nIt's this process that you use today, and it's a paradigm of difference hard for most common people to comphrend.  Perhaps you could think of the days when you didn't understand the bulk of the english language (as a child)...do you recall a lot of thoughts or memories before you had a language to think of it?  That would be close to what I'm discussing.\n\nThe human brain is a complex thing, and still yet to be throughly resolved, but we are curious because we no-longer have many of  the automatic instinct that other creatures do.  We exist and and dominate because of our level conciouness, and perhaps I think that's an instinct in itself.
957093
Our thought are information and dependent on the physical reality of brain. You can not project your thoughts beyond the confines of your brain, unless they are piggy-backed on a transfer wave, such as the intelligence of radio waves is piggy-backed on carrier waves; all physical. You are confused, because instead of getting a proper education in these matters, you wish to believe some form of " alternative " explanation to reality.
130539
I think that we could effectively be multidimensional beings simultaneously living on many planes of reality, but actually stuck in a very limited dimensional spot (for divine choice or cosmic accident). Our actual science knows only a very little part of our life code**, and the reactivation of some dull parts of what many see as a 12-strand code could enlarge our consciousness to other aspects of reality.\n\n*P.S. Principally scientists doesn't yet understand the meaning of the so called "Junk DNA" which could have magnetical and interdimensional attributes.
1068562
Theoretically Yes.\nBut then everything doesn't go in order according to numbers in life.\nIf it did however, then we wouldn't have enough processing power to predict it (if there was such a computer big enough it would in turn need a bigger computer to predict its actions and so on ad infinitum).\nSo practically No.
345288
yes our brain is programmed in a natural way so in all things that we do we may find a preset procedure that our brain follows
651111
EDIT: Half of my answer didn't post for some reason.\n\nScientists have been studying this for years, but never have found an answer.\n\nWhen I spoke to a deaf woman about this idea, this is what she said: "When I think about what I am going to say, I think about it in sign and I sometimes sign in my sleep.  However, when I read something (because there is no written version of sign language) I think about it in English.  Concepts are created visually more often than in English."\n\nFor an actual study, when presented with a stimulus, the visual and language areas of the brain become active, whereas in a hearing person, the auditory and language areas of the brain become active.  While they are processed differently, the language area of the brain is used at all times.\n\nThe only other help I can offer is a study on Genie, a girl who was locked up and unsocialized until about the age of twelve.  While she was able to be somewhat rehabilitated and learn some basic vocabulary, she never figured out how to put complex sentences together, which was thought to show she was not capable of complex thought.  However, the data was compromised because it was thought that she may be mentally challenged.
1020126
It is hard to compare. An interesting analysis of the human brain is to figure out how many possible ways it can wire itself. The math behind this is called factorial math. It is denote by n! 1! = 1, 2!=2, 3!=6, 4!=24, 5!=120, 6!=720, from there it starts going up rapidly 20!=2.4*10^18. This means that if you had a brain with 20 neurons it could be wired a total of 2.4*10^18 different ways. 20,000 neurons would have 1.8192 E 77337 possibilities. 20,000,000 neurons 2.1126 E 137334714 possibilities. 1 billion neurons 9.9045 E 8565705522 possibilities. We have somewhere in the range of 100 billion neurons and I have not found a calculator to calculate 100,000,000,000!, but it would be indeed a very large number. Certainly there is more possible ways to wire a human brain, in theory, than there are atoms in the observable Universe. Now how does that correlate to memory, I don't know. It does give an idea of just how complicated the human brain's wiring schematic might look,and how much different one brains wiring diagram might look than someone else.\n\n I personally think that the biological brain is not very efficient at remembering details. Humans do have some ability to remember and manipulate details as do some other animals, but all of us animals are bad at it, but computers are very good at it. It is very neurologically expensive, I think, to remember a specific detail. A brain is very good at seeing patterns and remembering relationships and generalities.
304826
Your dog is way more intelligent than your computer. even if you look at only the bare computing power.\nA brain cell can work at a huge speed were as even a large computer can only work relitivly slow.\nHowever computers can get faster the more you link, just like brain cells.\nBrain cells have sveral states of being, a computer (cell) has two on and off or 1 and 0 as in binery using things we call logic gates. we can programme a computer to have a third state and this is the basis of fuzy logic, this is as close as we can come to how the brain works.\n\nwe use fuzy logic every day, thats why we are able to say Yes (1 or on) No (0 or off) and maby (fuzy)\neven a small insect can do that. \n\nhowever a dog is a lot smarter because it has a lot more small computers (brain cells) able to communicate a lot faster as its brain, if we tryed to build a network of computers able to make even 10% of that it would slow down as we reached the limit the amout of computers you can fit on a network. we could maby make 10000 computers but our dog has 10000000000 brain cells.\n\nThen you have the problem of memory retrival systems, power delivery ect. a computer is a very very very dumb beast.\nMind you it can spell so in one respect its better than me :)