Could you make two brains- for example, a mouse's- compatible with each other, via genetic engineering or something?
Minds are expressions of brain functioning. You cannot separate minds from the physical reality of cells => neurons/glia cellsI wanted to know about making two MINDS (Not necessarily brains)
similar perhaps in 3/5 decades, identical, never!Could you make the physical reality of cells- neurons/glia cells- identical to each other in two or more different brains then?
This could topic could fill a whole other thread, but the above isn't necessarily true. To the extent that minds are characterized by abstract computational processes, we could build certain kinds of non-biological computers that could plausibly be said to have minds. For instance, in theory we could build a silicon-based robot with a complex CPU taking in lots of information from the environment, processing that information with high-level cognitive functions analogous to memory, attention, decision making, and so on, and then behaving coherently and intelligently in the world on the basis of that data processing. That would inarguably constitute a mind qua complex, computational, cognitive processing unit without needing biological cells. Of course, if by "mind" we mean to include consciousness, the picture gets muddier and it's no longer clear (at least, given what we know now) whether our robot has a mind qua conscious entity.somasimple said:Minds are expressions of brain functioning. You cannot separate minds from the physical reality of cells => neurons/glia cells
I've learned two important things in science . First, never say never. Second, don't try to estimate a time frame for something you just don't know how to do. But, that said...somasimple said:similar perhaps in 3/5 decades, identical, never!
The natural complexity of brain (number of cells) and the natural number of changing connections every second brought this affirmation! Twins are similar but not identical.I've learned two important things in science . First, never say never.
This statement is valid for human beings (and certainly all conscious living things?) Mind is the result of cells which are functionning so mind exists only if cells exist.Minds are expressions of brain functioning. You cannot separate minds from the physical reality of cells => neurons/glia cells
That's a large leap in logic there. Just because it doesn't naturally occur in twins doesn't mean it's impossible, unless you're talking about the current state of technology. It is impossible NOW, but will it ever become possible? I don't know. I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I wouldn't be a complete naysayer either. There's simply no way to know where technology could lead in the future. Yes, there are a HUGE numbers of variables that would need to be controlled for, but many things have been said to be impossible that became possible.somasimple said:Hi,
The natural complexity of brain (number of cells) and the natural number of changing connections every second brought this affirmation! Twins are similar but not identical.
Exact brain cloning is thus impossible.
I shall stay at my position because:
1/ the number of cells involved.
2/ the number of connection that exist between these cells.
You'll get a divergent solution.
But Man do not fly (by himself) sorry!you might have argued that man will never fly.
The question didn't specify a species. In mice, that number would be considerably lower, around 100 million cells and only 75 million of those are neurons. If instead we tried this with Drosophila, it would get even simpler.somasimple said:Well it is just a mathematic/probability/physics explanation
A brain consists appproximately of 50,000,000,000 cells
And there is ongoing research to understand what determines this synaptic plasticity. All that number of combinations suggests is that it's improbable, not impossible.Each cell has 1,000 to 30,000 connections and some of these ones are changing every second. (# combinations! )
Every signal may change because a neuron is able to add/subbstract ions channels changing the speed/intensity of signal.
But it remains only your view or opinion. What if identical twins, or clones, were to be raised in a highly controlled environment in order to prevent anything different being experienced between the two? Technically, incredibly difficult, and not possible now. And if you claim they will diverge in the first second, then there would be one second in which they are identical. The question didn't require we manage to maintain it for long. Realistically, is anyone going to bother trying? No. And I highly doubt it will ever be done or happen, but that doesn't mean it would be impossible. "Impossible" is a dangerous word to use, and should be avoided, simply because you cannot know the answer with that much certainty.If a single cell over 50,000,000,000 changes one connection thus the system diverges.
If only a little breeze/touch/event is perceived differently by two identical brains that is the end of your exact/identical brains.
they will diverge at the first second in my view!
Why do you think it's random? I think it just means we don't understand enough yet to know what reason there is for the variation. For example, I know of a group that is working on ion channels in olfactory cilia, and are already developing models predicting the numbers of ion channels AND their position. The experimental results are fitting the predictions pretty well, so that would indicate ion channel numbers and gradients are not a random process if you can develop models that work.somasimple said:MoonBear,
Even with 100 cells, it would be impossible because the underlying processes that regulate a cell have to be exactly the same in the clones. It is actually impossible to have two exact/identical cells that function excactlly in the same way.
A neuron "fires" with ions channels and they work with probabilities. An axon have 300/3000 ions channels/µm². Trying to say that an indentic behaviour may happens when its basic functionning is based upon random things is weird.