IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

No subject


Sun Apr 10 21:24:01 EST 2005


              [P L A N E T   S C I E N C E]

         End of the road for brain evolution

         HUMANS are about as smart as they are going to
         get. Researchers at BT Laboratories in Ipswich
         have modelled the information-processing
         capacity of the brain and found that any radical
         improvement is impossible because of the careful
         balance maintained between the size and number
         of neurons and the blood vessels which nourish
         them. They claim that we have reached our
         maximum information-processing capacity, or at
         best are within 20 per cent of it.

This is typical. The notion that size and number has something to do
with brain processing. In one
breath the piece talks about not being able to make the brain better
but the justification is that to
so would make things TOO BIG...... Information-processing capacity is
not a point in the brain. It
is in binary computers. The one thing getting in the way here is the
simple fact that the binary
computer is a square wave process, i.e. 0-1, whereas the brain is a
sine process. In order for a
binary computer to appear to be 'real-time' or not 'jerky' it must be
fast, very fast, to simulate the
sine wave of the brain that will observe its output. Binary computers
function in a 1:1 ratio of input
versus function. In order for the binary computer to reach a level
where the brain will accept the
data just like a cartoon (the illusion of a flow of information
instead of jerky snapshots) the binary
computer has to process very quickly. The brain, on the other hand,
does not function in such a
fashion.

         While brain size is a poor index of
         intelligence, the number of neurons and the
         number of connections between them are thought
         to be crucial. On this basis, the human brain is
         the most complex in the animal kingdom: it
         contains between 1010 and 1011 neurons
         interconnected at 1014 junctions or synapses.
         The only creatures with brains of comparable
         size and complexity are dolphins and whales. In
         proportion to body size, human brains are about
         three times as big as chimpanzee brains. Chimps
         also lack the human brain's deep cortex,
         believed to be the seat of consciousness and the
         centre of higher thought processes such as
         speech and memory.

Here we are with SIZE again. In one breath it is claimed that
intelligence has very little to do with
size but in the next breath the whole argument IS size.

         Peter Cochrane and his colleagues at the
         Advanced Applications and Technologies section
         of BT Laboratories looked at different ways the
         brain could evolve to process more information
         or work more efficiently. A bigger brain is
         theoretically possible, they say, because our
         hearts could evolve to pump more blood at
         greater pressures to meet the increased demand.

Then, the research was into BIGGER.

         However, to produce a significant rise in
         processing power, the axons of nerve cells would
         have to be wider than they are now to speed up
         the rate at which they pass signals. This in
         turn would demand equivalent increases in the
         amount of insulation along the axons and a
         better blood supply, which would take up extra
         space in the brain cavity, leaving less room for
         more axons.

The brain is functioning in a processing RATIO of input to memory.
Intellect is determined by this
ratio of processing. Increase the ratio and one can increase the
intellectual ability of the brain but
that is not the same as increasing the rate of passing signals. The
examination given above is the
same one that would be used if an electronic circuit were to be
discussed as far as increasing its
current flow. This is a deep error of brain evaluation. Nerve cells
would not have to be wider and
insulation would not have to be increased. There is NO current in the
brain. NO Amperage to
speak of. The researches are taking what they know about electronic
circuitry and imposing it on
the brain when in fact there is NO comparison. The Neutronics Dynamic
System models the non-
current operating system of the brain showing that an increase in
voltage does not take an
increase in insulation as the insulation is only isolation. Now
consider this: The same argument I
have made for quite some time: The brain does NOT function in a
typical electronic manner. The
resistance accoomplished by components in the brain are not part of
the processing. The
resistance is a part of the entropy of the signals and is
computational. Components in the brain
are passive. The computation takes part as a matter of the wave
interaction within the
components. Reduction of amplitude is accomplished by the synapse
conversion to chemical
transmission. The synapse isolates computation from conveyance,
thereby continuing the system
confidence and likewise assures one way of wavelet transmission. In a
wave computation process
if a single wave back flows it will corrupt the wave computation
taking place before its order in the
path.

         The researchers also point out that the human
         brain is designed so that the chemical signals
         which pass impulses from one nerve to another
         are transmitted as fast as possible. The larger
         the brain grew, the less efficient it would
         become, thus limiting any improvement in
         processing power.

Chemical signals are designed to pass quickly as a reduction in time
would cause a back up of
pulses of oncoming wavelets and cause the same back up situation as
above.

         "There is no incremental improvement path
         available to the brain, which makes evolution
         difficult," says Chris Winter, another member of
         the BT team. It would be hard to improve on the
         fine balance between neurons and blood vessels
         that has already evolved in the human brain, he
         says.

The human brain can not be improved upon. The design is the most
efficient processor in
existence. Since it is so the design of it which IS the NTC patent can
not be improve upon.
Period!

         Robert Barton, a lecturer in biological
         anthropology at the University of Durham, gave a
         cautious welcome to the new work. But he
         suggested that the researchers were being unfair
         on the brain by treating it as a homogenous
         system. "They assume that processing information
         involves the whole brain, and that is not
         necessarily the case."

They are assuming the processing within the brain is the same protocol
that electronic processing
is and that is NOT the case. It is a useless research campaign.

         Barton also points out that the researchers did
         not consider the possibility of new structures
         evolving in the brain, or a greater degree of
         specialisation of existing structures, both of
         which could improve our ability to process
         information and make intelligent decisions.

The ONLY improvement possible is ratio increase. Since speeds of
memory ratios are controlled
by division of a single biological clock frequency it may be possible
to induce an increase in that
division but not by considering the brain from the perspective of a
result of the brain. Electronics.

         Mark Ward

         From New Scientist, 25 Jan 97 © Copyright IPC Magazines 1997

Lee Kent Hempfling...................|lkh at cei.net
chairman, ceo........................|http://www.aston.ac.uk/~batong/Neutronics/
Neutronics Technologies Corporation..|West Midlands, UK; Arkansas, USA.




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net