Medical Limits of infinity , The simulaion of human brain

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of the human brain as an observer and the implications of this idea, particularly the infinite loop of self-observation. It raises questions about whether such cycles can have limits and what rules might govern them. The conversation contrasts the self-awareness of the human brain with the limitations of computers, which cannot truly know what they are doing due to their finite storage and processing capabilities. This leads to the assertion that while humans can engage in an infinite loop of self-awareness, computers are confined to finite loops, preventing them from achieving true self-awareness. Additionally, the dialogue touches on the observer effect in quantum mechanics and its foundational problems, although some participants express confusion and frustration over the clarity of the original arguments. The thread concludes with a note on its closure due to perceived nonsensical content.
chemistryknight
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Human brain is an observer , and the problem of this idea is observing himself
the brain will observe an observer observe an observer observe an observer ... to infinity.
the real problem appears to people who work in computional simulation of brain ( infinite loop )
can this cycle have any limits ?
and what is the main rule control such cycles ?

and can such observation be represented in number with uncertainty principle ?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
what the hack are you talking about?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A brain knows an object, and a computer behaves as though it knows an object, when a representation of that object exists in its memory (we are used to saying the computer knows, it does not know, etc.) although the computer does not 'really understand' its memory contents.
(However, unlike a computer, it is our experience that we know what we are doing at least when awake. For example, if I am lifting my hand, I know my hand, I also know that I know my hand, and also know that I am lifting my hand throughout the action of lifting.)

A computer cannot know what it is doing, for the
following reason: Suppose a computer knows a particular object A. To be self-aware, the computer must also know that it knows A, it must also know that it knows that it knows A, and so on. It is an infinite loop. According our definition of “computer knows”, to be self-aware, the computer must have a mechanism that can write all the sentences of the "I know that I know" loop into its memory, once a representation of A is entered into the memory. Since the machine has only a finite storage,
and takes a finite time no matter how small, to write each of the sentences, the machine can only complete a finite loop but not an infinite loop. Clearly, by executing the loop a finite number of times, the machine in fact, would not “really know” what it is doing; in other words, the loop has to be infinite and therefore a machine cannot be made to know what it is doing.
Completion of this infinite loop is in my opinion, must be happening in the brain because it necessarily follows from our observation that we know what we are doing unless that observation is wrong.
 
Well, this is an annoying thread to read, mainly due to the second post!

I realize this is a very old thread, but I'm not sure I totally understand what you're saying. There is a problem with the whole "observer" point of quantum mechanics-- what lee smolin describes as the foundational problems of quantum mechanics, in his latest book. However, I'm not sure whether this is what you're talking about or not. From your original post, it seems not.
 
There's really no need to resurrect such an old thread, especially when the original post was so nonsensical. Thread locked.
 
Deadly cattle screwworm parasite found in US patient. What to know. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/08/25/new-world-screwworm-human-case/85813010007/ Exclusive: U.S. confirms nation's first travel-associated human screwworm case connected to Central American outbreak https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-confirms-nations-first-travel-associated-human-screwworm-case-connected-2025-08-25/...
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
8K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Back
Top