How to Live Forever By Turning Your Brain Into Plastic Brad, I am not unnecessarily defining anything. I am certain that if you have a clone made of you, whether physically or in some sort of computer rendering, that clone will live on. But, you will die when our time comes, and go into the "big black" wherever that leads to. Meanwhile (or even while you live), the clone will be "born" and awake into it's own existence, but you must have a continuity of your consciousness for it to BE you. Your mind doesn't just teleport when a copy or rendering of you is made, any more than a copy of a computer file, or a photocopy is where the original moves to! Now, if you want to have your "essence" live on, and in a sense, elements of yourself, then clone away! What illustrates this clearly is to imagine a physical clone being made with your full memory implanted in it, while you are alive. So, how the hell are you still "alive" and experiencing "life" just because that clone of you is walking around? Do you get it now?
One Step Closer to Building a Simulated Human Brain "So, I'm not sure that mapping a brain to software is going to yield a brain - the simulation will be statically wired and a real brain is not." This isn't really a good objection because obviously the software neurons will grow, prune or change over time as well. You're assuming a snapshot when it could easily be a movie. Just apply more computer power. "A bigger question for me is if the brain is wired pretty much by chance, how are basic human behaviors wired in the same for everyone (generally the same, i.e. jealousy, anger, happiness, etc.)." Because here Markram gets it wrong or oversimplifies. The brain is not wired entirely by chance, certainly not globally over the entire brain. To correct Markram, I think he really means that the connections happen by chance only on the cellular level, in small groups of neurons—and by "small" I mean groups of a 100 or 1000 neurons. "And lastly, if the thing ever becomes conscious, I feel sorry for it - it will be completely sensory deprived."
The Drug That Never Lets Go Photo By @FatTonyBMX Dickie Sanders was not naturally prone to depression. The 21-year-old BMX rider was known for being sweet spirited and warm -- a hugger not a hand-shaker. The kind of guy who called on holidays. Who helped his father on the family farm. Who spent countless hours perfecting complicated tricks on his bike. Yet on Nov. 12, 2010, Sanders was found dead on the floor of his childhood bedroom. PBS NewsHour Science Support Provided By The National Science Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the S.D. The suicide was the culmination of five days of strange behavior that began shortly after Sanders snorted a powdery substance he bought from a friend. “I don't like the way this is making me feel," Sanders told his stepmother, Julie, as the two awaited his release from the hospital. An autopsy revealed a powerful stimulant in his system: methylenedioxypyrovalerone, also known as MDPV. What Do Bath Salts Packages Look Like?
Scientists Discover How Brains Keep Clean | Wired Science Two-photon imaging shows how the brain flushes out wastes via a system of water channels (purple) in cells (green) wrapped tightly around blood vessels. Image: J. Iliff and M. Nedergaard We all need to clear our heads, sometimes literally — and now scientists have learned how our neurological plumbing system works. Every organ produces waste, and the brain is no exception. “If you look at a body-wide map of the lymphatic system, you see a great big void in the brain,” said neuroscientist Jeffrey Iliff of the University of Rochester Medical Center. Scientists long suspected that the brain’s refuse ended up in the cerebrospinal fluid, which cushions the brain inside the skull. Thanks to new imaging techniques that made it possible to peer inside the brain of a living mouse, Iliff’s team saw the process in action. Fluid circulation in brain tissue as imaged with traditional methods. Healthy brains produce amyloid normally, but this system clears it out frequently, the researchers suspect.
Science says underpaid people enjoy their jobs more! Kinda have to agree—making a "journalistic" headline sexy seems to be par for the course on Gizmodo related websites these days. Yeah, this isn't what the study says. Though it would be interesting to do an actual study on job satisfaction versus underpayment/overpayment. There are definitely underpaid people who are willing to be underpaid *because* they have fantastic jobs, though I would guess most knowingly underpaid people hate their jobs but cannot find anything better. Yes, thank you. As an Industrial/Organizational Psychologist—and a former journalist—this article's title is bullshit and completely misleading. For the Festinger study in particular, the two thoughts at odds were: 1) that was really boring, and I hated it, VS 2) I got paid only a dollar to say it wasn't. The theory alone cannot be directly translated to job satisfaction. Please be better than this, Gizmodo.
The crayola-fication of the world: How we gave colors names, and it messed with our brains (part II) | Empirical Zeal Untitled (Cubes) by Scott Taylor Update: This post was an Editor’s pick by Cristy Gelling at Science Seeker, and was included in Bora Zivkovic‘s top 10 science blog posts of the week. Lately, I’ve got colors on the brain. In part I of this post I talked about the common roads that different cultures travel down as they name the colors in their world. And I came across the idea that color names are, in some sense, culturally universal. The way that languages carve up the visual spectrum isn’t arbitrary. So what? Rose coloured glasses by jan_clickr This question goes back to an idea by the American linguist Benjamin Whorf, who suggested that our language determines how we perceive the world. This idea is known as linguistic relativity, and is commonly described by the blatantly false adage that Eskimos have a truckload of words to describe snow. Hyperbole aside, color actually provides a neat way to test Whorf’s hypothesis. Do you see what I see? That was 1984. That’s easy enough. Footnote:
The Two-Headed Boy of Bengal | Articles In early February 2004, the press reported the birth of a ‘Two-Headed Baby’ in the Dominican Republic. Eight weeks earlier, on 10 December 2003, Rebeca Martinez (below, with her family) had been born with a second head joined to her own, crown to crown, but without any other obvious developmental defect. The second head had partially developed eyes, ears and lips and grew quicker than the lower one, probably due to hydrocephalus caused by defective venous drainage. Leading American surgeons with considerable experience of separating conjoined twins were consulted, a charity paying for all expenses, and they planned to operate before the weight of the second head made it impossible for Rebeca to lift her own. The sad story of the ‘Two-Headed Baby’ was a five-day wonder all over the world. In 1790, the Two-Headed Boy of Bengal was described by the surgeon Everard Home. Everard Home much regretted that medical scientists never got the opportunity to examine the boy.
Rare neurological patient shows that self-awareness does not require a complex brain 'I just don't want to eat an animal that's standing there inviting me to,' said Arthur, 'It's heartless.' 'Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten,' said Zaphod. 'That's not the point,' Arthur protested. Then he thought about it for a moment. 'Alright,' he said, 'maybe it is the point. think I'll just have a green salad,' he muttered. 'May I urge you to consider my liver?' 'A green salad,' said Arthur emphatically. 'A green salad?' 'Are you going to tell me,' said Arthur, 'that I shouldn't have green salad?' 'Well,' said the animal, 'I know many vegetables that are very clear on that point. It managed a very slight bow. 'Glass of water please,' said Arthur. 'Look,' said Zaphod, 'we want to eat, we don't want to make a meal of the issues. The animal staggered to its feet. He turned and gave a friendly wink to Arthur. It waddled unhurriedly off to the kitchen.
The Strange Neuroscience of Immortality - The Chronicle Review By Evan R. Goldstein Cambridge, Mass. Illustrations by Harry Campbell for The Chronicle Review In the basement of the Northwest Science Building here at Harvard University, a locked door is marked with a pink and yellow sign: "Caution: Radioactive Material." Hayworth has spent much of the past few years in a windowless room carving brains into very thin slices. Why? But first he has to die. "If your body stops functioning, it starts to eat itself," he explains to me one drab morning this spring, "so you have to shut down the enzymes that destroy the tissue." It's the kind of scheme you expect to encounter in science fiction, not an Ivy League laboratory. To understand why Hayworth wants to plastinate his own brain you have to understand his field—connectomics, a new branch of neuroscience. Among some connectomics scholars, there is a grand theory: We are our connectomes. Hayworth takes this theory a few steps further. That is not a prevailing view. Hayworth knows he's courting ridicule.
With nearly 1 in 12 teens diagnosed, is 'Anger Disorder' the next big thing? It seems to me "intermittent explosive disorder" is a cheap, easy diagnosis when the "doctor" is at her wits end about what's happening emotionally/cognitively/psychologically, and I do not think "Anger disorder" contributes much to the discussion regarding mood and developmental disorders. And like the article briefly says, what's the use in pathologizing a reaction that might very well be a symptom to a real underlying cause (e.g. bipolar, schizophrenia, brain tumor, brain damage) considering that reaction, i.e. anger, is itself a relatively common and basic human emotion. Further, there is much ambiguity: what does "explosive" mean and when does it happen? However, blatantly dismissing "explosive anger" and attributing it to moody teens, many of whom are not moody but are emotionally compromised by a mental illness, disorder, abuse, or trauma, seems to be equally disingenuous.
Another Perspective on Massive Brain Simulations Henry Markram has become famous as the creator of the world's most expensive brain simulation, but neuroscientists know him best for his pioneering experiments on synapses. Markram was one of the first to investigate the sequential version of Hebb's rule in a systematic way, by varying the time delay between the spiking of the two neurons when inducing synaptic plasticity. (Changes in the synapses, the connection points between cells. In a 2009 lecture Markram promised a computer simulation of a human brain within ten years, a sound bite that traveled around the world. Dear Bernie, You told me you would string this guy up by the toes the last time Mohda [sic] made his stupid statement about simulating the mouse's brain. Markram didn't keep his indignation secret. The letter marked a new low point in Markram's relationship with IBM. Markram tried to defend his own work by accusing his competitor of fakery. Are these researchers really making progress?
What Multitasking Does To Our Brains I can definitely understand how focusing on one task at a time allows you to be more productive. However, I also believe that you can benefit from taking a break after ~an hour of working on something, and then doing something else. Making progress on multiple different tasks in this way provides a similar feeling of high productivity, but also allows you to get a feel for exactly how much work you have on your plate. Obviously, not every task can be broken up into hour-long work sessions, but if I can diversify what I'm working on, I won't get bored of my work.In terms of making to-do lists, I've found that just making the old-fashioned, linear lists don't quite cut it for me anymore. One method I've found quite useful is the Eisenhower method, which is a 2x2 matrix that organizes your tasks by urgency v.s. importance.
Phantom Finger Points To Secrets In The Human Brain : Krulwich Wonders... When she was born, her right hand wasn't right. Instead of looking like this ... Robert Krulwich/NPR hand 1 ... her thumb was stunted, she had no index finger. hand 2 Her name doesn't matter. Its truncated shape is often associated with thalidomide, a drug used during pregnancies in the 1950s and 1960s; RN, now in her late 50s, may have been a thalidomide baby. Born unlucky, she got unluckier. It gets worse. But in her case, this phantom was different from the one she lost. She told her doctors, V.S. hand 3 Which is very strange. In RN's case, her phantom grew a finger that wasn't there. What doctors Ramachandran and McGeoch wanted to know was: How did this happen? But first, let's finish RN's story, because her bad luck stayed bad. hand 4 She asked the doctors for help. They had a plan. So now back to that mysterious finger. hand 5 Maybe, the doctors write, all of us are born with an innate, hard-wired "body plan," an inherited map of how we are supposed to look. Sorry, You Can't Do That ...
Scientists capture the first image of memories being made The ability to learn and to establish new memories is essential to our daily existence and identity; enabling us to navigate through the world. A new study by researchers at the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (The Neuro), McGill University and University of California, Los Angeles has captured an image for the first time of a mechanism, specifically protein translation, which underlies long-term memory formation. The finding provides the first visual evidence that when a new memory is formed new proteins are made locally at the synapse - the connection between nerve cells - increasing the strength of the synaptic connection and reinforcing the memory. The study published in Science, is important for understanding how memory traces are created and the ability to monitor it in real time will allow a detailed understanding of how memories are formed. (Photo Credit: Science)