This is not true. The brain is no longer viewed as a static organ in adulthood, and new neurons are even formed in certain parts of the brain during adulthood. Are there limitations? Definitely, but we're still working out the details.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
New Scientist: "String theory may limit space brain threat"
- Thread starter twobear
- Start date
- Status
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Philosophy isn't dead, it just got absorbed by Physics.
The concept is not limited to brains alone. It can be an infinite number of objects or entities, including an identical replica of you WITH all your memories.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain
I guess my complex analysis professor was right about physicist, they don't know what they are doing anymore.
Darkmakaimura
Can You Imagine What SureAI Is Going To Do With Garfield?
Sorcery!
Why does Boltzmann get credit for this? This is just common sense if we consider that the universe is infinite.
Also, we can assume that this precise moment in time on Earth and everything that is encompassed in it (all of the land, species, objects, temperatures... even your exact family tree with the exact same names) will be replicated at some point again in the future in some other location... an infinite amount of times.
We can also assume that there will be a slightly altered version of the above with the only differences being that everybody looks like a banana and your name is Bob.
No joke. This actually happens all the time if the universe truly is infinite.
Tesseract
Banned
you're too nice.
Darkmakaimura
Can You Imagine What SureAI Is Going To Do With Garfield?
If the Big Bang really did occur, then the universe wouldn't actually be infinite, right? It's still expanding or has expanded far enough until the "Big Crunch". I mean, there may be an infinite void or whatever it is that existed before the Big Bang that the Bang is still expanding into, but there would be no matter or energy in that void, right?
So I'm guessing the universe will keep expanding until the possible Crunch but it's not really infinite.
Of course, maybe our universe is like a bubble in a larger "hyperspace" with other bubbles (universes) if String Theory is correct. I recall Michio Kaku describing it in such a manner.
Sometimes I think science is putting the paranormal to shame in the strangeness department.
So I'm guessing the universe will keep expanding until the possible Crunch but it's not really infinite.
Of course, maybe our universe is like a bubble in a larger "hyperspace" with other bubbles (universes) if String Theory is correct. I recall Michio Kaku describing it in such a manner.
Sometimes I think science is putting the paranormal to shame in the strangeness department.
The idea is that as you approach infinite time the volume also becomes infinite, but yes, the volume of the universe at any bounded value of time is finite.
GungHo
Single-handedly caused Exxon-Mobil to sue FOX, start World War 3
This sounds like some crazy shit they put in the science segment on CBS this Morning so that Michio Kaku can confuse the shit out of Charlie Rose for an hour after they get tired of talking to that former FBI director fathead.
Fusion Pizza
Member
So this is what happens when you get the scientists high.
Darkmakaimura
Can You Imagine What SureAI Is Going To Do With Garfield?
I'd love to hear Michio Kaku talks about this.
See You Next Wednesday
Banned
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
I want one.
Boltzmann brains don't have to disappear.
The more complex a bbrain is the less likely it is to disappear. (Even the simplest bbrain would be extremely unlikely to disappear at any given moment.)
It's like taking a bucket of sand, tossing it in the air, and having a sand castle form when the sand lands. The sand castle isn't going to disappear for no reason.
Mgoblue201
Won't stop picking the right nation
The point of the exercise, however, is to posit the smallest fluctuation needed to create an intelligent being in the universe. A fluctuation that creates a brain with specific memories would obviously be much, much rarer than a general brain with no specific memories. Therefore, a "typical observer" would be the latter, not the former.
Monocle
Member
Philosophy wishes it could be science. I don't actually hate it though. I've just grown impatient with all of the nonsense generated by a priori reasoning. The problem lies in the fact that language doesn't have a 1:1 correspondence with reality. In other words, it's possible and indeed common to reason one's way to absurd conclusions. See most theological arguments and the intellectual impostures of postmodernism.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
It's not really a problem.
I think they're referring to the fact that we're creating the foundations of an objective understanding of reality through our subjective human-centric observations. If there are more non-human observers, wouldn't their observations be more in line with the "objective" reality?
That's not really a problem though, as our own observations are still true when it comes to ourselves.
*highfive
If the idea is that smashing matter and energy together in an infinite number of combinations over an infinite period of time would yield a lot of random combinations but also occasionally (in cosmic terms) a consciousness floating around...why could not also yield...a human being? A book? A car?
Or maybe it doesn't extend like so.
Or maybe it doesn't extend like so.
This is not true at all. From a non-subjective standpoint, a brain with a "clear slate" is not really different or less complex than a brain full of memories and neuron links. If one is able to happen randomly, the other can as well. In fact, if we consider all the possible "states" a brian can have, the clear one is the least likely to happen, as opposed to "having some bias/memory/whatever" already in.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Not really?
A clean slate brain would presumably not need the increased number of neurons (or whatever the analogue is) required to form the patterns required for memories/personality. Therefore as it is less complex, it's more likely to pop up compared to a more complex one - which over an infinite period would result in infinitely more non-complex brains.
There's no such thing as more likely under an infinite scenario. All probabilities are reduced to one.
Always-honest
Banned
Is this one of those everything-is-possible-so-we-just-thought-of-something-that-can't-be-disproven thingies?
It's not that anything will happen. It's anything that can happen, will happen an infinite amount of times.
We don't know if banana looking humanoids could form a society much like our own or if they could even form as humanoids at all within the physical universe we reside in.
For every proposed brain of yours, it is not about the complexity, but this:
- There is only ONE clean slate for every specific brain configuration
- But there is almost an INFINITE number of other states where the configuration might be more or less more complex, yet not as much that it makes a difference in the long run.
(chance of complexity of 1.0 vs chance of n*(1.0+whatever) where n is an insanely big number
)Take 100 billion neurons and connect them randomly together. For every configuration that gives you a functioning human-like brain, there are vastly more that give you the equivalent of neural white noise.
Take a functioning human brain and give it random memories. For every configuration of memories that gives you a lifetime of coherent human experience, there are vastly more that give you a set of memories equivalent to white noise. And the same for ongoing inputs.
Point is, functioning human-like brains with coherent experiences and memories are a tiny part of the full configuration-space of brains.
Its a thought experiment. By our understanding of the universe this should be possible, but seems absurd, so is there anything we can learn about reality which would eliminate this possibility?
Mgoblue201
Won't stop picking the right nation
Even if we follow that specific line of thought, I don't think that's correct. The smallest possible fluctuation would portend that the memories within the brain are random, incoherent, and scattered, because a confection of random memories is a lot easier to produce statistically than something that would make sense to the observer. So it's still unlikely that a typical observer would resemble a human from an experiential standpoint. Anyway, I had considered all this when I made the post, but this is something only a neuroscientist can probably answer; I don't think any of us really know what would happen if a working brain appeared at random in the inky void, especially if it would or would not have memories.
Mgoblue201
Won't stop picking the right nation
Quantum field theory, I believe, already states that particles can be created "out of nothing". The point of this exercise is to show that, if you wait long enough, eventually entropy will reverse itself. Normally, entropy increases, but there is a chance that it will spontaneously decrease. In our experience, hot water will eventually reach equilibrium with the outside temperature. But cold water will not spontaneously become warmer without some sort of energy being applied to it, even though there is a statistically nonzero chance that this can occur. Once the universe experiences its "heat death" in the far future, there will be almost no more energy to make that cold water hot again. Everything will exist at an equilibrium near absolute zero.
However, given that there is a statistically nonzero chance entropy will randomly decrease, eventually something will appear in this void, assuming that you have a very long time to wait. If you have an infinite amount of time, then yes, you'll likely to see every possible configuration of molecules appear. The point of the brain is to simply imagine some kind of intelligence randomly appearing within this high entropy state. After all, a brain appearing would be more likely than an individual, or an entire planet, or a galaxy, or the entire universe reverting to a low entropy state.
- Status