This article seems quite silly, or at least, can easily lead to silly conclusions. There was a brief paragraph at the end that half-heartedly admitted that the

This article seems quite silly, or at least, can easily lead to silly conclusions. There was a brief paragraph at the end that half-heartedly admitted that the evidence wasn't conclusive, but it seems most people didn't read it. Further, only one paper was referenced - and it was written by the author of the article! Guess what? It has 1 (one) citation. >Is the apparent similarity just the human tendency to perceive meaningful patterns in random data (apophenia)? Remarkably enough, the answer seems to be no: Statistical analysis shows these systems do indeed present quantitative similarities. This is not a good argument. The similarity of images is not the similarity of systems. Also, >In other words, it tells us how many high-frequency and low-frequency notes make the peculiar spatial melody of each image. .. come on, man. Come on. >Based on the latest analysis of the connectivity of the brain network, independent studies have concluded that the total memory capacity of the adult human brain should be around 2.5 petabytes, not far from the 1-10 petabyte range estimated for the cosmic web! So if I make a 3-petabyte hard drive, it's self-aware? There are a few things wrong with this passage. The first is that no citations are given. The second is that connectivity is not the only important aspect of brain function. The third is that 2.5 petabytes falls firmly WITHIN the 1-10 pb range given. The fourth is that a 1-10 pb range hardly seems to tell us anything. >Roughly speaking, this similarity in memory capacity means that the entire body of information that is stored in a human brain (for instance, the entire life experience of a person) can also be encoded into the distribution of galaxies in our universe. No. Galaxies don't fire action potentials. The data points could be mapped to each other, perhaps, but this doesn't mean that the information is the same, given that the information depends on the way the data is read. >It is truly a remarkable fact that the cosmic web is more similar to the human brain than it is to the interior of a galaxy; or that the neuronal network is more similar to the cosmic web than it is to the interior of a neuronal body Is it really? Seems like apophenia is taking hold again. Of course we want to recognise ourselves in the universe. God made man in his image blah blah blah blah. People should be wary of this way of thinking.