X-Message-Number: 26075
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 04:14:57 EDT
Subject: Re: CryoNet #26034 To Donaldson 

Sorry to be late, you said:

> You may argue, with a bit of reason, that if the processors involved
> are much faster than neurons then time sharing once more becomes
> an option. The problem is that simultaneous means SIMULTANEOUS. PERHAPS
> a computer using time-sharing might be fast enough to deal with 
> some simultaneous events, but sooner or later it will not deal
> with all.

I have not said that all brain computation will be solved by time sharing, 

only that on FPGA time sharing can reduce the hardware part number by may be one
thousand. One brain on one chip is not the objective.

> Second, you claim that growth is quite possible IN SOFTWARE. This
> statement verges on the ridiculous. Yes, you can simulate growth
> in software. Yet suppose that the growth of new synapses and even
> new neurons, in our dentate gyrus and elsewhere, turns out to be
> essential for long term memory. (Many but not all neuroscientists
> think that). Exactly how does your computer version of a brain
> do that growth in software if it needs new neurons even to 
> remember long term? 

Neurons , for the part of them worked out by the computer, would be indexed 
in a table. to be sure, the table itself is memorized in the "computer way", 
that is on hard disk, SDRAM, and so on.

Yvan Bozzonetti.

 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26075