3 ms·

I would love to have a book about brain that separates the abstract guiding principles from the random details of implementation. Every book I have tried quickl

by newby 5y ago

I would love to have a book about brain that separates the abstract guiding principles from the random details of implementation. Every book I have tried quickly devolved into "calcium pumps" and similar stuff but I feel these are just one specific evolutionary implementation of some "principle" on higher level of abstraction. Sure, it is important to understand the details if you want to be an expert. But as a curious layman I would so much enjoy a book that explains (even incompletely, based on our current knowledge) how the brain does thinking, perception, learning... in terms of networking. In terms of strengthening connection between units that fired together and changing connectivity parameters of the whole (sub)network, but without delving into chemistry of synaptic transmission and hormones. The general principles that human brains and artificial neural networks have in common. If anyone knows about such a book, please let me know.

m0zg 5y ago
The reason why we don't have such a book is simply because nobody has the slightest clue as to how things work at the macro level. We got as far as figuring out a few dozen cells at a time, but beyond that it's really anyone's guess. We don't even know what the _questions_ should be in this field, let alone the answers. I suspect it's also strongly discouraging to newcomers because things just start looking very obviously intractable very early on, modeling of large numbers of neurons sufficiently well is mathematically near impossible, readout is mostly destructive to the specimen (and in ghastly ways - the specimen has to be alive and awake for it to even be possible), and completely impossible in humans, though Neuralink might provide a much needed boost there. Speaking of Neuralink, I think this un-developedness of the field is why Musk is pursuing it. This is, in many ways, the _real_ last frontier - understanding ourselves. There won't really be much to understand beyond that, since it is but a small step between full understanding and the ability to replicate, and possible eclipse what we have.
popcube 5y ago
we even do not know how single cell work. if people find text book focus on some molecular mechanisms, also we can presume exist other similar mechanisms, but the real reason is that this poorly knowledge is the only thing we understand.

by newby 5y ago

m0zg 5y ago

The reason why we don't have such a book is simply because nobody has the slightest clue as to how things work at the macro level. We got as far as figuring out a few dozen cells at a time, but beyond that it's really anyone's guess. We don't even know what the _questions_ should be in this field, let alone the answers. I suspect it's also strongly discouraging to newcomers because things just start looking very obviously intractable very early on, modeling of large numbers of neurons sufficiently well is mathematically near impossible, readout is mostly destructive to the specimen (and in ghastly ways - the specimen has to be alive and awake for it to even be possible), and completely impossible in humans, though Neuralink might provide a much needed boost there. Speaking of Neuralink, I think this un-developedness of the field is why Musk is pursuing it. This is, in many ways, the _real_ last frontier - understanding ourselves. There won't really be much to understand beyond that, since it is but a small step between full understanding and the ability to replicate, and possible eclipse what we have.

popcube 5y ago

we even do not know how single cell work. if people find text book focus on some molecular mechanisms, also we can presume exist other similar mechanisms, but the real reason is that this poorly knowledge is the only thing we understand.