It's theorized by the year 2030, computers will have enough raw processing power to match that of the human brain. Does this mean that we will be able to eventually replicate a human brain on a computer?

I guess I'd just like to have a discussion with people about what actually defines intelligence as opposed to just having knowledge, and if you believe that a computer, which is running on a set of predetermined instructions, can have the same problem solving and reasoning skills as that of a human being.

On the technical side of it, it seems plausible if you feel that as humans, our current mind is a product of our past. When we solve problems or react to current situations, we are really accessing parts of our brains, and we make a decision based on past events, or by subconscious feelings(or possibly both). Does this mean that our actions are always predetermined based on our subconscious, previous events, and the current stimuli? If so, then a human brain could easily be replicated by a computer.

If you feel that as humans we are different than other animals, as well as predetermined computer logic, tell me your reasons for believing so? Here is a decent counter argument to the previous view:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese%5Froom

Let's try to keep this civil and on point.

This post was edited by BlackKnightsOfFistingPower on Apr 20 2011 05:28pm

alot of what we do is also based on social, cultural and emotional levels. which a computer most likely will not have. they may be able to store and retrieve data as fast as the human brain, but i doubt will have the same way of thinking.

I would first say i have no idea and am not an expert on the subject, this is just my own opinion based on what i know

from what i understand, we cannot even fathom the depths of the human brain. I think 2030 is a far too liberal estimate for that kind of computing power if you ask me.
I think we are still very far off from understanding our own brains let alone being able to replicate the sophisication involved.

computer are impressive but from what they understand, a neuron is able to process information far more complexly than a byte, though the principal between the two are very similar. Infact i believe the invention of the computer byte was from our understanding of neural polarization.

The problems with replicating a brain is that we would have to introduce socialality into the computer. Our culture no doubt shapes the way we all think and our own thought processes. Its also emegernt of our expirences, where we would have to construct the computer to be able to learn and expience things as a human would. And that alone is a monumental task and i dont believe we have the means or understanding of how to do that.

But hey it'd be cool wouldnt it

I'm no expert either (well maybe I could be construed as an expert on the computer portion as that is my area of study for my degree, but I am by no means an expert on the inner workings of the human brain, which is where I fall short on explaining how this would be possible), and I definitely understand that there is much to be learned about how the human brain actually operates.

When you say that a neuron has more complexity than a byte, do you mean that neurons can be specilized to respond to different types of stimuli(electric pulses and different chemicals)? If this is what you mean, then yes a neuron is more complex than a simple transistor used to store a bit, but could you not still use multiple transistors to represent a single neuron? From what I know, although a Neuron is more complex, the transistor is acutally much much faster, but our brains are so powerful because they run in parallel, where computers are forced to run serially in some places. I forgot where I got the 2030 figure, but it was more just a point that sometime in the new future there will be a computer than can match the raw processing power of the human brain. In fact a group in conjuction with IBM had a successful model of a small part of the rat brain which is somwhere on the order of 200 Million Neurons, now the entire human brain is surmised to be around 150 Billion Neurons, so that's quite a big jump to make, but they are showing that it's possible, and that was over 3 years ago. The main point of my discussion was not whether or not we could have the raw processing power to match the brain's "calculations" in real time, but moreso given the raw processing power if we could create something that would match our own brain in terms of intellect, problem solving, etc.

As for social grounds, this is another tough area to fathom. In reality the social aspect of our minds are really just memories of things that we've been taught. If a computer were given somebody elses memory, technically they would be socialized to their way of life, or if they were given a "fresh" human brain, they could learn the ways of a society the same way that a baby does when they are growing up and taught things by their parents and peers. Emotion is another whole beast though. Defining emotions is a very difficult thing to do, but from what I know, our emotions are triggered by certain external stimuli, compunded with past events or subconcious ideas retreived from our brain, and then certain chemicals are released into the brain making us "feel" a certain way. For example, when you smell a certain kind of food, the sensory organs in your nose release a chemical to the brain, which then tries to find that smell. If it's a food which you like, a chemical is released to your brain telling you that you like that smell. Otherwise a chemical is released into your brain telling you that you don't like it, giving you a "feeling" of disgust.

If we look at reactions to external stimuli in this cut and dry manner, it would be fairly easy to give computers a sensor, and then based on certain things that they record on that sensor make them "feel" a certain way based on past events and things that were already programmed into them.

My views might be kind of a cold way to look at it, but I also want this to be kind of an inquiry into how and why we do the things we do. And whether or not the brain's processes are somewhat random, or if everything we do is cut and dry similar to how a computer operates, but on a much much much more complex scale.

TL;DR: Wall of text crits you for 9999 damage.

You die.

This post was edited by BlackKnightsOfFistingPower on Apr 20 2011 08:12pm

The human brain was created in nature by accident, and we still have no idea how most of it works. It was created by a process of trial and error, one by natural selection without purpose or an intended goal.

If computers become sentient, it will probably also be by accident, with the requirement that computers have the strength to match the some 100 trillion connections in our mind.

This post was edited by EndlessSky on Apr 21 2011 04:55pm

well i think that on a social basis, that would be very difficult to replicate because you're right, emotions are a whole nother ball park. but our brain is not without emtional ties to everything we think and do. there is a host of chemical and hormonal reactions that occur in the human brain that is far fetched to be achieved in computers; at least in the near future. i would think that 2030 is a far too liberal estimate, though i think by 2100, this could certianly be accomplished. 2030 just sounds a little to close ya know?

replicating a human brain its as easy as having sex/10