Brain prosthesis

S

spacemanspiff

czar of things
Registered Senior Member
this sounded interesting, so i thought i'd post it.
At first i thought they were doing this on humans and i was a bit skeptical, but it seems that this is preliminary stuff with rats and what not.

basicly they are trying to replace a certain brain structure(the hippocampus). I personally think it is very farfetched that it will work perfectly, though there may be some interesting results. neuroscientist aren't even 100% sure about what the hippocampus even does, so it would be tough to replace if you don't fully understand its function.

enjoy!

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993488
 
Vey nice! some things I disagree with though:
- Nothing works perfectly off the bat but considering the 7 years min before this goes on the human trial we can assume all kinks will be worked out.

- I don't think there will be a problem with remembering things we don't want to... In fact I think we will see the opposite: with proper internal or external control, implanties could remember only what they want in a way normal people could not. Though this might not be a good thing for others, to the implanty it would be a godsend. Imagine being able to totally forget everything that you did not want to remember such as embarrassing moments, tragic events, High School…

Anyways I see cybernetics as revolutionary technology and the next stage in human evolution.
 
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus

Anyways I see cybernetics as revolutionary technology and the next stage in human evolution.
Click to expand...

paradoxically technology is a cultural phenomenom and therefore does not follow the rules of evolution and therefore human evolution wouldn't be affected by the next step in human evolution. isn't that weird.
 
I don't think I understand that view at all. Just because its not natural evolution means we don't need to considerate as???
 
no fetus...it was just a philosophical observation.

what you said would still be very important for human society, but not nessecarily for human evolution.
 
Oh and what if we don't evolve naturally anymore... what if this is the last line of natural humans before the soon and thankful coming of the extinction of Homo sapiens?
 
i think the theory of evolution reflects only on natural evolution, hence my statement.

if you just use the general definition of evolution then my statement makes no sense.

hence it was just an observation resulting from applying a specific definition, not a critique
 
I was referring to Lamarckian evolution... which is a viable and accurate interpretation of social and technological development... Darwinian evolution is natural, Lamarckian is not.
 
Why? Yes it does not fit natural evolution... but the concept it self is not useless: it may be debunk theory of biological evolution buts its laws describe social and technological development accurately. Technology evolves not by random mutation and unconscious selection, but by people's will to change and improve it, by need to change and the ability to change… this is Lamarckian evolution.
 
The idea of Lamarckian evolution is such as to say that muscle builders would have buffed up children or that giraffes necks grow long because they stretch them to much or how computer get better from constant development because of demand for more speed and power... The concept of will or need to change rather then change by natural selection.
 
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
The idea of Lamarckian evolution is such as to say that muscle builders would have buffed up children or that giraffes necks grow long because they stretch them to much or how computer get better from constant development because of demand for more speed and power... The concept of will or need to change rather then change by natural selection.
Click to expand...

Lamarck: gradual evolution caused by

1. 'mature, in successively producing all species of animals, beginning with the most imperfect or the simplest, and ending her work with the most perfect, has caused their organization gradually to become more complex-'
2-a capacity to react to special conditions in the environment. If the intrinsic drive toward perfection were the only cause of evolution then there would be a undeviating single linear sequence toward perfection. however, we see all sorts of special adaptations in species and genera. This is because animals must always be in perfect harmony with their environment, and it is the behavior of animals which reestablishes this harmony when disturbed.'

first law:'in every animal which has not yet passed beyond the limit of its development, the more frequent ans sustained use of any organ gradually strengthens, develops, and enlarges that organ. disuse has the opposite effect
second law:the inheritance of acquired characters.
 
Maybe your not understanding me: I am NOT using Lamarkian evolution to define life's evolutions... that’s been proven Darwinian! If you wish to question Lamarkian evolution in social change and development take up the issue with Richard Dawkins in “The Selfish Gene”
 
darpa

darpa has a very aggressive computer-mind link program going on, you should check it out if your interested in such things.
 
I played this really cool game a few years ago, where you brain wave patters controled the little plane. more beta waves, the plane went down. More alpha waves, the plane goes up. Colol thing is, you really coujld learn to control your brain wave patterns, and actually control the plane by zoning out/in...one step toward actually reading the thoughts of a person based on EM radiation.
 
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
To read thoughts exactly your going to need implants (Direct link)
Click to expand...

why do you think? are EM waves not stable enough to be deciphered? Or are you thinking that interference from all the different areas of the brain would be too much to disassemble into meaningful patterns?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top