I believe Alain's work is revolutionary as it will give many insights into the diseases of the brain, and how different regions effect cognition. Worthy of a Nobel.
It's been established for several years that the number of neurons in the brain is predictive for both primates and maritime mammals. He needs to look at the size of primate neurons compared to maritime mammals.
This video doesn't seem to be about how the brain works so much as it is about the size and shape of brains. It doesn't have much in the way of pertinent information about machine or human intelligence, IMO, and is largely peripheral to the actual functioning of the brain. Maybe there's something here for someone who doesn't know anything about brains, I suppose.
Yes, this may be true. But from my point of view, in order to make something resembling natural intuition and capable of some logical inference, we need to be able to just appropriately measure relations between different ideas, or something that represents those ideas. Different ideas can be represented as vectors. In Natural Language Processing, there are some methods to construct such vectors, but these methods are quite primitive now.
If we humans had flippers and a tail instead of hands and feet and were confined to the ocean, it seems there would be far less distinction between us and dolphins. Our brain power is extended through our body to explore and create in ways dolphins cannot, even if they possess the same cognitive capacities, with equally developed language etc.
So! "Can mathematics understand the brain"? I suspect it can. However, understanding the mind requires so much preparatory work, that any mathematical application to answering that question at this time is, to say the least, overambitious.
Andew Tarjanyi , I believe one of the preparary tasks is providing a mathematics definition on "understanding" , does machine has the capabilities to understand the world? If the answer is "no" according to our definition, then we could not succeed on AGI.
Is that an expression of hope or certainty? "AGI" without mind will always result in disaster. The preparatory task or work I was eluding to was with respect to constructing a workable definition and model of mind. Only this step will produce the dataset mathematicians require and without which mathematics will be unable to make any contribution because ultimately there will be nothing to quantify. The very concept of mind isn't even a technical problem. Problems always occur when academics, scientists and technicians try to theorize outside their area of expertise, which occurs all too frequently.
Andew Tarjanyi : the concept of mind is not trivial at all. Whenever anyone tries to nail it down with a technical i.e. concrete/useable (to Tell if something has a mind) definition, it disappears. We all feel we know. But we dont.
chf ghp : Although I am not sure how you thought I was trivializing "mind" in my comment, as I agree with both your sentiment and your response in general. I also agree that defining mind was extremely difficult, but not, as I have experienced, insurmountable. Understanding brain, as I concluded a long time ago, is very different to understanding mind, the latter of which I understand more than the average professor. As such, I, unfortunately, by default stand as the only existing authority on the subject. Not a position that fills me with great joy, I must add.
When you use the term "mind" What are you referring to, the origin of behavior or brain function? Because I do not link the two and understand both to be mutually exclusive, as brain does not require mind in order to perform either biological or social imperatives. I think mathematics is a useful system for efficiently organizing and communicating ideas, especially across language boundaries. I wouldn't describe mathematics as being the manifestation of chemistry but a general language with an intrinsic stability. However, this doesn't always hold true, particularly in the hands of theoretical physicists. The proposition that "our" minds understand mathematics is not entirely true because the brain can understand mathematics without mind being present. I have no reason to believe that human physiology is made in the image of God. In fact, all the evidence indicates to me that the opposite is true. I have good reason to suspect that our divided state of consciousness is existentially unnatural, and I have not yet seen any evidencxe to the contrary.
I believe Alain's work is revolutionary as it will give many insights into the diseases of the brain, and how different regions effect cognition. Worthy of a Nobel.
The swelling simulation model was fantastic
Wish he talked about the mathmetics of cognition
It's been established for several years that the number of neurons in the brain is predictive for both primates and maritime mammals. He needs to look at the size of primate neurons compared to maritime mammals.
Hameroff had many answers about consciousness, memory etc., some of his findings cannot be ignored.
brain development is same as tesla energy flow 3,6,9. A+B=C
This video doesn't seem to be about how the brain works so much as it is about the size and shape of brains. It doesn't have much in the way of pertinent information about machine or human intelligence, IMO, and is largely peripheral to the actual functioning of the brain. Maybe there's something here for someone who doesn't know anything about brains, I suppose.
Fuzzy logic with deep learning might give us a model for intuition which would lead to logical inference.
Yes, this may be true. But from my point of view, in order to make something resembling natural intuition and capable of some logical inference, we need to be able to just appropriately measure relations between different ideas, or something that represents those ideas. Different ideas can be represented as vectors. In Natural Language Processing, there are some methods to construct such vectors, but these methods are quite primitive now.
If we humans had flippers and a tail instead of hands and feet and were confined to the ocean, it seems there would be far less distinction between us and dolphins. Our brain power is extended through our body to explore and create in ways dolphins cannot, even if they possess the same cognitive capacities, with equally developed language etc.
So! "Can mathematics understand the brain"? I suspect it can. However, understanding the mind requires so much preparatory work, that any mathematical application to answering that question at this time is, to say the least, overambitious.
Andew Tarjanyi , I believe one of the preparary tasks is providing a mathematics definition on "understanding" , does machine has the capabilities to understand the world? If the answer is "no" according to our definition, then we could not succeed on AGI.
Is that an expression of hope or certainty? "AGI" without mind will always result in disaster. The preparatory task or work I was eluding to was with respect to constructing a workable definition and model of mind. Only this step will produce the dataset mathematicians require and without which mathematics will be unable to make any contribution because ultimately there will be nothing to quantify. The very concept of mind isn't even a technical problem. Problems always occur when academics, scientists and technicians try to theorize outside their area of expertise, which occurs all too frequently.
Andew Tarjanyi : the concept of mind is not trivial at all. Whenever anyone tries to nail it down with a technical i.e. concrete/useable (to Tell if something has a mind) definition, it disappears. We all feel we know. But we dont.
chf ghp : Although I am not sure how you thought I was trivializing "mind" in my comment, as I agree with both your sentiment and your response in general. I also agree that defining mind was extremely difficult, but not, as I have experienced, insurmountable. Understanding brain, as I concluded a long time ago, is very different to understanding mind, the latter of which I understand more than the average professor. As such, I, unfortunately, by default stand as the only existing authority on the subject. Not a position that fills me with great joy, I must add.
When you use the term "mind" What are you referring to, the origin of behavior or brain function? Because I do not link the two and understand both to be mutually exclusive, as brain does not require mind in order to perform either biological or social imperatives.
I think mathematics is a useful system for efficiently organizing and communicating ideas, especially across language boundaries. I wouldn't describe mathematics as being the manifestation of chemistry but a general language with an intrinsic stability. However, this doesn't always hold true, particularly in the hands of theoretical physicists.
The proposition that "our" minds understand mathematics is not entirely true because the brain can understand mathematics without mind being present. I have no reason to believe that human physiology is made in the image of God. In fact, all the evidence indicates to me that the opposite is true. I have good reason to suspect that our divided state of consciousness is existentially unnatural, and I have not yet seen any evidencxe to the contrary.
Video should be renamed to 'Modelling the morphology and development of Animal Brains'.