Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 27, 2024, 4:14 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Theory number 3.
RE: Theory number 3.
It'll be fun reading for me as well. Where to start with neurons. I suppose their structure maybe? We have dendrites, essentially a number of antennas that receive signals from other neurons that all lead to the soma, where the different "lines" established by the dendrites are condensed to a single axon. Now, when the dendrites receive a signal from other neurons the electrical polarity of the soma shifts, it could "fire" (along the single axon which itself may be "connected" to yet more dendrites via a synapse).

The comparison to logic gates is impossible to avoid. Specifically transistors. The structure of a neuron is such that any imaginable circuit we might care to take as an example is easily realized within the framework of what neurons are capable of doing and how they are structured. Also take into account that these neurons are stupendously small (though the axons can be very long.....) and so you can cram quite a few in a tiny space (like that spot between our ears). A very beefy modern CPU has 2.5 billion transistors. Our brains have 100 billion, give or take a few billion. Consider the advanced functions our computers can execute. They can play chess against you, they provide the NPC's in video games, and yes, there are some things they appear to be even better than us at. As we have found ways to increase the number of transistors (and clock speed of the assembly) our little machines have become capable of ever increasing complexity. They are capable of more, and more greatly pronounced "effects".

As others have mentioned, imagine a computer which was so complex (had so many transistors and such a high clock rate- for example) that it's simulation was indistinguishable from "the real deal". If you can imagine that you can at least conceptualize a consciousness sans magic.

Anything objectionable thusfar?

(I took some liberties...transistors are simpler than neurons - which are much more elaborate logic gates if we extend the analogy, but even by a 1 for 1 comparison you can see the gulf between the two.)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 3:28 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 3:38 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 3:50 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Annik - October 25, 2012 at 9:07 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 10:38 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:26 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 10:42 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 10:57 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:12 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 12:29 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:34 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 12:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:48 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 1:40 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 2:00 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 2:13 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 3:30 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 7:20 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 7:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Faith No More - October 25, 2012 at 11:18 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:25 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Faith No More - October 25, 2012 at 11:39 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:43 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by pocaracas - October 25, 2012 at 11:41 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Tea Earl Grey Hot - October 25, 2012 at 11:53 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Simon Moon - October 25, 2012 at 12:16 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Faith No More - October 25, 2012 at 11:56 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:02 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Minimalist - October 25, 2012 at 12:00 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:21 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 25, 2012 at 12:23 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:29 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 12:36 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 12:38 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 25, 2012 at 1:21 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 25, 2012 at 4:32 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 25, 2012 at 8:10 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 25, 2012 at 11:12 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 26, 2012 at 12:03 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 26, 2012 at 6:28 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 26, 2012 at 10:03 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 26, 2012 at 11:17 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 26, 2012 at 11:31 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 26, 2012 at 11:37 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 26, 2012 at 11:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 1:05 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 27, 2012 at 4:49 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Whateverist - October 27, 2012 at 9:31 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 10:50 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 29, 2012 at 3:08 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 27, 2012 at 1:11 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 1:18 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 27, 2012 at 1:21 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 27, 2012 at 1:30 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 8:46 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 10:57 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 11:12 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:17 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 12:31 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:34 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by genkaus - October 29, 2012 at 12:15 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:06 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:28 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:31 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:33 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:35 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:45 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 28, 2012 at 12:46 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:47 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:48 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 12:52 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 12:50 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:50 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Cyberman - October 28, 2012 at 12:52 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 12:59 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:08 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 3:02 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 12:57 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:03 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by pocaracas - October 28, 2012 at 12:59 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:05 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:09 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:16 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:22 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:25 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:28 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 1:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 1:47 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 2:01 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 2:09 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 3:38 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 3:45 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 3:58 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:15 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 4:16 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:10 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:20 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:19 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:32 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 4:40 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:31 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 4:33 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 5:00 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 6:12 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 6:17 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 6:23 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:41 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:43 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 4:49 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:52 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:45 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:46 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:46 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 4:48 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 4:57 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 28, 2012 at 6:25 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Darkstar - October 28, 2012 at 6:27 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 7:39 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 28, 2012 at 7:53 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 28, 2012 at 8:37 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 12:43 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by genkaus - October 29, 2012 at 2:11 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by MysticKnight - October 29, 2012 at 1:10 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 2:58 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 29, 2012 at 8:59 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by genkaus - October 29, 2012 at 9:04 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 9:40 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by The Grand Nudger - October 29, 2012 at 9:43 am
RE: Theory number 3. - by Edwardo Piet - October 29, 2012 at 3:30 pm
RE: Theory number 3. - by Angrboda - October 29, 2012 at 3:42 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How many of you atheists believe in the Big Bang Theory? Authari 95 5267 January 8, 2024 at 3:21 pm
Last Post: h4ym4n
  First order logic, set theory and God dr0n3 293 27086 December 11, 2018 at 11:35 am
Last Post: T0 Th3 M4X
  A loose “theory” of the dynamics of religious belief Bunburryist 6 1667 August 14, 2016 at 2:14 pm
Last Post: Bunburryist
  Top misconceptions of Theory of Evolution you had to deal with ErGingerbreadMandude 76 12690 March 7, 2016 at 6:08 pm
Last Post: Alex K
  A crazy theory Ruprick 11 2695 February 18, 2016 at 10:51 pm
Last Post: ignoramus
  Hindu Perspective: Counter to God of Gaps Theory Krishna Jaganath 26 5798 November 19, 2015 at 6:49 pm
Last Post: Simon Moon
Thumbs Up Number of male vs female atheists? MentalGiant 36 6097 October 10, 2015 at 9:40 am
Last Post: houseofcantor
  So here's my theory RobBlaze 28 8955 August 12, 2015 at 4:10 am
Last Post: robvalue
Video Dr Zakir Naik Vs the Theory of Evolution Mental Outlaw 4 2493 July 23, 2015 at 10:27 pm
Last Post: Mental Outlaw
  my new theory about christians Jextin 49 8035 October 4, 2014 at 7:21 pm
Last Post: Lek



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)