Electical Brain Activity

[10ClarionSt]

Is it true that because the brain emits very tiny amounts of electricity, it would be possible in the future to harness these tiny currents and read peoples' thoughts?

[Calvesy]

The brain consists of a hundred billion neurons with an average of six hundred connections, each one firing off over a dozen pulses per second in active regions. No two brains are the same because life's experiences reinforce some synaptic pathways and atrophy others.

The experience of consciousness is an illusion interpreted from this maestrom. It's obviously possible because the mind does it, maybe machines could decypher this vast amount of data one day.

[jake-the-peg]

Basically everybody's brain speaks a different language - the bit that holds the concept of "bread" is different in mine to yours.

You'd have to learn everybody's brain which would be quite a trick.

On a coarse scale, many experiments are done with volunteers in MR scanners showing them pictures designed to evoke emotional responses and analysing the results.

But reading minds is one of those long lived fantasies like levitation or raising the dead - ooops shouldn't say that on Easter Week ;c) 

[JOEYSHABADO]

Yes, it is possible to read people's thoughts by measuring brain electrical activity, this is being done at the moment, but only at a very rudimentary level. Think LEFT. Think RIGHT. These are different, and they are 'thoughts'. They produce a different electrical pattern, and this can be detected and measured. So it is possible to 'launch a missile' from a plane, just by thinking about it.

It is also possible to measure recordings from single neurons, as well as groups of neurons, and this is done all the time.

As said, ascribing particular electrical patterns to specific 'thoughts' (even if you find a neural correlate for a 'concept') is extremely difficult. I think it is possible that even if all computing and measurement difficulties were overcome, it would still be impossible. This is because, for reasons that we don't understand, actual psychological processes (such as reason, syllogism, calculation, grouping, potentiation) have turned out to be greater than the actual output of the neurons involved. If this does not make you squirm a little, it should. Thought turns out not in fact to be reducible to the neurons that do the 'thinking'. At least, according to the scope of the TYPE of knowledge we have now.

I would highly recommend a look at "A conversation with Einstein's brain" by Douglas R. Hofstadter.

Good question.

[JOEYSHABADO]

By the way, I do not believe that consciousness is an illusion, as someone said above. The actual NATURE of consciousness is different from the way in which most people imagine it to be (cf Rensink, Noe), but it certainly exists. The distinction between conscious and sub-conscious processing is KNOWN by the brain, and it organizes filtering, learning, memory, and output differently for the different processes. Consciousness is 'real'.

[magicdice]

sorry to gatecrash your question here (i'm a complete sceptic so i'll let you fill in my answer)

are you the same joey as the other joey?

[JOEYSHABADO]

I am that Joey, changed the spelling of my name.

[stevie21]

"It is also possible to measure recordings from single neurons and this is done all the time."

The only time I've heard of this is by drilling a hole in someone's head and inserting something into the brain which measures the activity of one neuron. This is quite invasive just to start a mind-reading attempt that's doomed to failure.

I agree that people can guide flight simulators left and right etc. using thoughts alone although I don't think that this method will ever be as dextrous as ye olde fashioned method of using your limbs. Maybe there'll be some great use for it though - I've just not thought much about it other than being impressed by the novelty value.

[JOEYSHABADO]

Single-neuron recordings are normally not performed on humans, I was just giving it as an example of how electrical signal measurement is being used in cognitive neuroscience, in an attempt to correlate cognitive 'elements' with underlying neural processes.

Single neuron recordings are performed on hundreds of monkeys and rats, however, every day.I have a few friends who fill their days with it.It does tell us a great deal. However, the physical process of inserting the measuring instrument does cause significant neural damage, except on the the extreme edge of the cortex, and normally the subject needs to be put down post-experiment.

As far as aviation is concerned, I'm no expert, but my understanding of military warfare is that it is now so advanced that the winner in an air to air situation is the one who gets to the AAM missile trigger first. If you just need to think 'shoot' rather than having to use your finger, I guess that's a significant advantage.

[JOEYSHABADO]

If you're feeling really brave, try this: http://tinyurl.com/5xzc4

[slimfandango]

What happened to Joey's posts?

Does anyone have the reference that

he left?