4 ms·

million? There are over 100 trillion neural connections in the human brain. And look up artificial vs biological neuron. With sheer number and added complexity

by slacka 7y ago

million? There are over 100 trillion neural connections in the human brain. And look up artificial vs biological neuron. With sheer number and added complexity of biological neurons, there's likely not enough atoms in the Universe to provide enough ink and paper to run this simulation. Also, you run into the problem of time slices. One step in a simulation of my brain is not conscious. There must be some self-reference going on in there that give us this illusion over time that I doubt a pen and paper model could capture. I'm of the school of thought that a turing machine, let alone pen and paper, might not even be capable of this simulation. For example, it's possible that there are quantum effects going on in biological neurons that touring machines are not equipped to simulate.

turk73 7y ago
I was working on a response same as yours. Only thing I can offer is that maybe we can create consciousness without having to "simulate" all those neurons, as in, there is some more reasonable sampling that will give a reasonable approximation. I do think it is self-referential and that is how consciousness emerges. I disagree that there are quantum mechanical effects, but what do I know? I do kind of feel like I'm in more than one place at the same time right now. It's "Turing" not Touring, btw. And no, the brain is not a Turing machine.
simiones 7y ago
Quantum computers can be perfectly simulated by classical computers (but only inefficiently, as far as we know). So at best, you could claim that computation in the brain may involve quantum effects and therefore it would not be tractable to simulate it on a classical computer. But a quantum computer is still a Turing machine. Of course, we can not yet rule out the possibility that there exist more powerful models of computation than Turing machines. We just know quantum effects don't lead there.

by slacka 7y ago

turk73 7y ago

I was working on a response same as yours. Only thing I can offer is that maybe we can create consciousness without having to "simulate" all those neurons, as in, there is some more reasonable sampling that will give a reasonable approximation. I do think it is self-referential and that is how consciousness emerges. I disagree that there are quantum mechanical effects, but what do I know? I do kind of feel like I'm in more than one place at the same time right now. It's "Turing" not Touring, btw. And no, the brain is not a Turing machine.

simiones 7y ago

Quantum computers can be perfectly simulated by classical computers (but only inefficiently, as far as we know). So at best, you could claim that computation in the brain may involve quantum effects and therefore it would not be tractable to simulate it on a classical computer. But a quantum computer is still a Turing machine. Of course, we can not yet rule out the possibility that there exist more powerful models of computation than Turing machines. We just know quantum effects don't lead there.