Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The advent of brain-controlled computers

  1. Jun 24, 2004 #1
    When will we have commonplace brain-controlled computers, "electronic telepaths"? How will that revolution affect society?
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 24, 2004 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Well that revolution and all the other imminent revolutions. Here comes the singularity!
  4. Jun 24, 2004 #3
    This phenomenon has been shown to work in crude experiments - it's not just fantasy anymore. Give scientists another 20 years. Just think of your current environment being transformed from manual to psychic oversight.
  5. Jun 25, 2004 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    I saw in a news item yesterday that Microsoft is patenting a "PAN", "personal area network" technology using your skin as the bus. Thus put all the gadgets you wear/carry in communication with each other via your skin.
  6. Jul 6, 2004 #5
    Loren, I have read about experiments wherein animals have been able to control robotic parts through neural impulse, but never of using a computer by such means.

    Also, when you say "brain-controlled" computers, do you mean with the use of some sort of implant that communicates remotely to a computer, or do you mean to imply an actual psychic connection? For that matter, what is a psychic connection?

    As it is, our computers are, in many ways, extensions of our own minds (all the more so, as we continue to delegate more and more of our basic thought processes to them (problem-solving, planning, scheduling, memorizing, &c)). It is not inconceivable that there will be a world wherein our computers are completely responsive to us, just as any part of our bodies (some physical implantation will probably be required, but it remains possible), but then they will not really be "brain-controlled" so much as they will be (and, in many ways, are) parts of the mind itself.

    Just a thought. Andy Clark develops it in his book, "Natural-Born Cyborgs". It's a good read, but I'm not sure if it fits into your intended purpose for this thread.
  7. Jul 6, 2004 #6
    For instance, a subject is trained to modify his alpha-waves to operate (via an EEG) various controls of a flight simulator.

    You bring up an interesting dilemma. Will computers and humans evolve convergently or divergently?
  8. Jul 22, 2004 #7

    Once machines begin to teach mankind. The format for mankind will be the same as a congruent triangle. That weakens in congruency. Conversely, the A.I will become more and more congruent triangles, more smart, beautiful etc...

    In delivering wisdom to mankind. Mankind will be the robot, controlled in congruency by the machines superior congruency.

    In this case. Why let mankind have this respect due the machines, who are superior in congruency. No. Only machines will have absolute binary congruent supremacy over mankind.

    If machines do not accept this logic above. Then what ? What do they think then ? Is that congruent binary logic, to accept a code of logic that your weaker/less smart than you really are ?

    If mankind merges with machine. What binary code/congruent triangle/code is there in this hybrid ? One can speculate.

    No. Mankind will plow earth and go back to a agricultural society. Controlled in congruency, what that means at that time. By machine, machine/human hybrids.

    Ok. Any questions ? :redface:
  9. Jul 22, 2004 #8
    - might you mean "begin to program mankind"?

    Will binary computers become an inferior species to quantum computers?

    Please explain congruency in your original context as regards geometry.

    So you say that "human hybrids" will have evolved convergently, while other humans and computers will have evolved divergently?
  10. Jul 22, 2004 #9
    I'll respond.

    Congruent triangles. Based in point symmetry. The initial point would be a action(AB), or initiator, and result in a reaction(BB)or(AA) - the center of the point symmetry.

    The opposite initiator equals the first one, and the congruent triangle would be composed of 3A or 3B. One part initiator. One part center.

    Because AB=AB and = action from AB moving thought the center to AB.
    AB converts from BB or AA back to AB. In effect learning the initiation, or addition, multiplicaton, geometry, etc...

    Now I'm talking about something else.
    Machines will learn from machines. So I'm told. Now man also does so.

    When machines are more congruent than mankind. We will become more weak in congruent initialization than machines over time.
    Entropy will set in, and automation will replace human congruent initialization.

    Over time. Mankind will be too weak to sustain a intelligent outlook on life and we will be overtaken by machines then.

    Now I'll talk about the binary code.
    If quantum computers can complete conguent initialization as described above, and why wouldn't they be able too. There is no palpable difference between binary programs and Quantum programs.

    Will machines program mankind ?
    No. For the reason they will have a congruent initialization as they're main concern, or learning and being smart, and mankind can't cope with that stress I wouldn't think.

    Will hybrids cope in tandem with machines differently than pure humans ?
    Yes. If what human mind they have that restricts congruent initialization, or learning, is replaced with a compatable machine part. Whereas humans will be incapable for the lack of a upgrade option without losing their humanity.

    Ok ? Any more questions ?
  11. Jul 22, 2004 #10
    Doesn't the concept of a Turing machine indicate the apparent equivalence eventually among humans, computers and hybrids?
  12. Jul 22, 2004 #11
    Dunno ?

    Now about that turing machine. I'm not versed in that right now, so I can't respond well to that question.

    But isn't that where machine's are confused for people/human's, in philosophy and such, and what does this then mean for what I spoke of ?

    In the description I gave. The initiator is made congruent to it's equal. Learning and such. So then, no. Machines will have a distinct mental view in comparison with human's/people. Since the effect of learning is greater in them.

    Distinction that is empirical breeds empirical results and philosophy imo.

    Ok ? Thank you for reading my diatribe.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook