greenw@west44.UUCP (06/22/84)
[The time has come, the Walrus said, to talk of many things...]
Consider...
With present computer technology, it is possible to build
(simple) molecular models, and get the machine to emulate exactly
what the atoms in the `real` molecule will do in any situation.
Consider also...
Software and hardware are getting more powerful; larger models
can be built all the time.
[...Of shoes and Ships...]
One day someone may be able to build a model will be an exact
duplicate of a human brain.
Since it will be perfect down to the last atom, it will also be
able to act just like a human brain.
i.e. It will be capable of thought.
[...And Sealing Wax...]
Would such an entity be considered `human`, for, though it would
not be `alive` in the biological sense, someone talking on the telephone
to its very sophisticated speech synthesiser, or reading a letter typed from
it would consider it to be a perfectly normal, if not rather intelligent
person.
Hmmmmmm.
One last thought...
Even if all the correct education could be given it, might it still
suffer from the HAL9000 syndrome [2001]; fear of being turned off if it
did something wrong?
[...of Cabbages and Kings.]
Jules Greenwall,
Westfield College, London, England.
from...
vax135 greenw (UNIX)
\ /
mcvax- !ukc!west44!
/ \
hou3b westf!greenw (PR1ME)
The MCP is watching you...
End of Line.ech@spuxll.UUCP (06/27/84)
Jules Greenwall's suggestion is an extreme example of what researchers in the area refer to as a "meat machine." Traditionally, such experiments contain a neuron model and attempt to simulate a brain at THAT level of detail. His suggestion suffers from a similar problem, also: assuming that one has a complete quantum-mechanical model of a human brain, how is one to model the behavior of molecules, in real time, with a computer made of molecules? I thank him for the suggestion, of course, because it drives home an important point: you simply can't build a real-time emulation of a brain by modelling it at the quantum-mechanical level; you MUST use some "higher level" model. Note that, except for rather simple neuron nets, traditional meat machines are also many orders of magnitude removed from a real-time simulation of a brain of human-class complexity. Finally, I will note that we are on the verge of opening yet another round of the reductionist/wholist debate; yet again, I will recommend that you go devour a copy of "The Mind's I". =Ned=
simon@psuvax1.UUCP (Janos Simon) (06/29/84)
Incorrect argument: "You cannot model the brain at a quantum-mechanical level, you must use a higher order (deterministic, non-molecular) one". Why? You cannot make a simulator that is an exact replica, and expect it to be fasterBut there's no reason why there couldn't be a quark computer, working at incredible speeds (and probably getting the answers). In fact the reverse question is more interesting: how fast can you simulate the real world? js