7 ms·

Do Brains Operate at a Tipping Point? New Clues and Complications

91 points by jonbaer 7y ago

MeteorMarc 7y ago
The story gives me associations with the superregenerative receiver (https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/radio/radio-receivers/super-regenerative-receiver.php https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/radio/radio-recei...)
andbberger 7y ago
Are articles talking about the brain being poised towards criticality poised towards criticality? Interaction lengths do seem to be diverging.
jimduk 7y ago
Gerald Edelman wrote on this back in the 80s and 90s. To massively oversimplify The books Neural Darwinism and The Remembered Present posited a) how neural action sequences originally for e.g. ballistic throwing, could be repurposed for linear language production and b) How consciousness needed to be a semi-stable chaotic attractor so that different avenues of thought could be pursued but that there was still coherency. Exciting that some of this may have been on the right track
- GuiA 7y ago
  > How consciousness needed to be a semi-stable chaotic attractor so that different avenues of thought could be pursued but that there was still coherency Loose metaphors like this kind of make sense on a verbal/visual level - but then "attractor" has a well defined mathematical meaning, and "consciousness" absolutely doesn't. So the onus is on the person making the comparison to demonstrate why a certain mathematical formalism is called for; otherwise you just end up with "consciousness is quantum!" pseudoscientific statements that might make sense in some fuzzy emotional way, but entirely fail to provide any insight of scientific value. Would you recommend the books on that basis?
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - jimduk 7y ago
    As you point out, the books don't solve consciousness in a formal way (or they would be more famous), and they have a significant amount of analogy. They are more 'grounded' than say Daniel Dennett. I liked the attractor analogy because a) at some level it addresses why we don't ( normally) get stuck in a conscious rut - e.g. we are not like the sphex wasp discussed by Hofstadter who always repeats the same loop b) It resonates with the idea that your conscious mind wanders, but its experience seems linear. However to get insight of scientific value one would have to follow up on the ideas in Edelman's work and see if they were actually neurologically correct. I haven't read either for a while, and I do maths/computer stuff not neurology so have no expert view. I think there's no harm in reading the Remembered Present quickly, it's fairly easy. Edelman worked with Tononi - I haven't followed his work, but the Wikipedia page on Integrated information theory doesn't appeal to me.
  - gerbilly 7y ago
    Not the OP, but have a look at this: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/resonance.html https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/reson...
  - chrisweekly 7y ago
    > "consciousness is quantum!" Amused by this particular choice as an example of ["fuzzily emotional pseudoscience"], given Roger Penrose (Hawking's peer in Nobel-winning black hole astrophysics) wrote a book -- The Emperor's New Mind -- detailing his theory of how consciousness relates to quantum mechanics. Wondering if you had that book in mind, w/ your comment a critique thereof.
    - whatshisface 7y ago
      I'm not sure about the names involved but "quantum consciousness" is not a very good theory or really a theory even.
    - joycian 7y ago
- stevedonovan 7y ago
  Freud somewhere remarked that neurosis gives clues on mental functioning, which is certainly very clear in neurology (his first field). So lack of cognitive coherency in some disorders could be revealing.
Galaxeblaffer 7y ago
It would be really awesome if we figured out exactly how the brain works before we are able to simulate it. But at current rates of new discovery I think we might be able to simulate it before we understand it
- amelius 7y ago
  But we're currently on a different path, since backpropagation is not how nature does it (as far as I know).
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - p1esk 7y ago
    What does backpropagation has to do with this research?
- ozim 7y ago
  The problem is you cannot figure out just how brain works, because it is not kind of system where you can detach something and make it work in separation. For some limited understanding you can get as far as 'limphatic system' does that, 'digestive system' does other stuff. But in simulating it you have to take into account all chemical and physical interactions.
ezconnect 7y ago
I just noticed this on my 1.5 yr old son, when I am drawing a rectangle there’s a certain length of it that it will become a train at all other shorte lengths its a bus

91 points by jonbaer 7y ago

The story gives me associations with the superregenerative receiver (https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/radio/radio-receivers/super-regenerative-receiver.php https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/radio/radio-recei...)

andbberger 7y ago

Are articles talking about the brain being poised towards criticality poised towards criticality? Interaction lengths do seem to be diverging.

jimduk 7y ago

Gerald Edelman wrote on this back in the 80s and 90s. To massively oversimplify The books Neural Darwinism and The Remembered Present posited a) how neural action sequences originally for e.g. ballistic throwing, could be repurposed for linear language production and b) How consciousness needed to be a semi-stable chaotic attractor so that different avenues of thought could be pursued but that there was still coherency. Exciting that some of this may have been on the right track

GuiA 7y ago
> How consciousness needed to be a semi-stable chaotic attractor so that different avenues of thought could be pursued but that there was still coherency Loose metaphors like this kind of make sense on a verbal/visual level - but then "attractor" has a well defined mathematical meaning, and "consciousness" absolutely doesn't. So the onus is on the person making the comparison to demonstrate why a certain mathematical formalism is called for; otherwise you just end up with "consciousness is quantum!" pseudoscientific statements that might make sense in some fuzzy emotional way, but entirely fail to provide any insight of scientific value. Would you recommend the books on that basis?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- jimduk 7y ago
  As you point out, the books don't solve consciousness in a formal way (or they would be more famous), and they have a significant amount of analogy. They are more 'grounded' than say Daniel Dennett. I liked the attractor analogy because a) at some level it addresses why we don't ( normally) get stuck in a conscious rut - e.g. we are not like the sphex wasp discussed by Hofstadter who always repeats the same loop b) It resonates with the idea that your conscious mind wanders, but its experience seems linear. However to get insight of scientific value one would have to follow up on the ideas in Edelman's work and see if they were actually neurologically correct. I haven't read either for a while, and I do maths/computer stuff not neurology so have no expert view. I think there's no harm in reading the Remembered Present quickly, it's fairly easy. Edelman worked with Tononi - I haven't followed his work, but the Wikipedia page on Integrated information theory doesn't appeal to me.
- gerbilly 7y ago
  Not the OP, but have a look at this: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/resonance.html https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/reson...
- chrisweekly 7y ago
  > "consciousness is quantum!" Amused by this particular choice as an example of ["fuzzily emotional pseudoscience"], given Roger Penrose (Hawking's peer in Nobel-winning black hole astrophysics) wrote a book -- The Emperor's New Mind -- detailing his theory of how consciousness relates to quantum mechanics. Wondering if you had that book in mind, w/ your comment a critique thereof.
  - whatshisface 7y ago
    I'm not sure about the names involved but "quantum consciousness" is not a very good theory or really a theory even.
  - joycian 7y ago
stevedonovan 7y ago
Freud somewhere remarked that neurosis gives clues on mental functioning, which is certainly very clear in neurology (his first field). So lack of cognitive coherency in some disorders could be revealing.

Galaxeblaffer 7y ago

It would be really awesome if we figured out exactly how the brain works before we are able to simulate it. But at current rates of new discovery I think we might be able to simulate it before we understand it

amelius 7y ago
But we're currently on a different path, since backpropagation is not how nature does it (as far as I know).
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- p1esk 7y ago
  What does backpropagation has to do with this research?
ozim 7y ago
The problem is you cannot figure out just how brain works, because it is not kind of system where you can detach something and make it work in separation. For some limited understanding you can get as far as 'limphatic system' does that, 'digestive system' does other stuff. But in simulating it you have to take into account all chemical and physical interactions.

ezconnect 7y ago

I just noticed this on my 1.5 yr old son, when I am drawing a rectangle there’s a certain length of it that it will become a train at all other shorte lengths its a bus