Mathematical Neuroscience and The Spirit

[oanghelidi]

You claim to have built the world's largest simulated brain - something that you hold the world record for - but I can't find that record anywhere.

Here is the Discovery Channel article on their web site:
http://news.discovery.com/tech/cat-brain...-hype.html

Now if anyone would like to check the source I strongly invite them to do so. Writing to Markram won't gurantee you a response, but writing to the author / guy that interviewed Markram can get you a response. A researcher from England did that a couple of weeks ago.

All my searches for "World's largest brain simulation" lead me Spaun, developed by University of Waterloo.

Spaun is developed by Eliasmith. I have got nothing to do with that. It is a considerable smaller simulation in terms of size, details and theoretical models employed.

Even more interesting is the fact that you claim to have simulated 700 billion neurons by Dec 2009 (date of the article), while by all accounts, Spaun's record is held at a meagre 2.5 million neurons by Dec 2012. Something doesn't add up here.

It doesn't add. There are two different simulations.

There does seem to be the mention of your name and your claim to fame in the very link you provided.

I am not doing this for fame. You got me wrong.

Now this is where it gets interesting. Of the entire interview, only that portion is in blue text. Further, here's the link to what appears to be, judging by the answers, pretty much the same interview:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/11/henry-m...brain.html

None of your claims are validated by the second source.

I did change the color of the article. See the link to the Discovery Channel web site above.

Also, I did search you by your name. I even didn't find your claim of "largest brain simulator" anywhere - except for a a forum where you have obviously copy-pasted the OP. I did find an interview, in which you talk about simulating the brain, but say nothing about consciousness or anything else. What you do say, however, is that you did submit some papers to journals and they were sent back to you - with suggestions to look to other journals.

Google is interesting, but their large statistical models are quite simple.

Yes, that is correct. I did submit to some journals but was refused. Obviously science needs to be done by researchers in Universities. Maybe someone may want to check what Grigori Perelman had to say about that.

Now, given all these questions regarding your credibility, tell me why anyone should give any credence to your claims of having "proven consciousness is external" - especially when you refuse to provide an iota of evidence for it.

Like I said in the previous post. I do not care about credibility. I am strying to determine the social impact of my findings. I have posted on other web sites, and I can see that the religious folk has no problem with that. On the other hand the atheists got riled up.

I am a compassionate soul and I am trying to determine the best course of action.

---

well, I suppose if you managed to prove god, we wouldn't be atheists any more, would we?

I haven't prove God. But the results strongly point in that direction.

And once again, disproving one thing does not make another thing true. All it means is that the one thing you disproved is not true.

In math it does. The brain can be formalized with mathematical models so...