Firstly, the device would have to be compatible with brain waves. The desire to want some knowledge starts at the brain, and therefore, that device would have to be connected to the neurons that deal with reasoning. So, once that that part of the brain has been alerted of the desire for knowledge, there would need to be a way to communicate that to the Google device.
Now, as for the way that would be communicated. I think an action potential could be a way to do it. My reasoning is this: an action potential is known as the all-or-none reaction. Binary code, the code used to program computers, is made up of 1s and 0s, a sequence of "yes"s and "no"s. Therefore, a sequence of action potentials could be the biological equivalent of binary code. Once the action potentials are received, the device would use binary code to translate it into a word search (imagine it as a search bar and the action potentials are the keyboard).
You could also develop this further. In fact, that is my challenge to you guys. All of the other logistics (size, the device's information storage facility, privacy, etc.), I challenge you to find solutions to them. For example, for the device's information facility: I would I say that it doesn't need one, if it uses the brain's memory as it's hard-drive.
As I think about it, one could easily solve the energy problem. Cell membranes use ion pumps to change voltage and membrane potential. The device could have artificial ion pumps so as to use the voltage and membrane potential to generate actual electricity. And also, to solve the insulation problem that would arise, we could use myelin sheaths, as they are used to insulate the nerve cells. By doing these things, one is incorporating many biological elements into this device, but really that is a good thing, as the device can be more easily integrated into the body with less mechanical parts. It would be less foreign
ReplyDeleteWould the use of cell membranes for this purpose have any effects on normal cell function?
ReplyDeleteWhat happens when you take a shower...
ReplyDeleteIf you are implanting a device in the beginning of ones nerves how exactly would that work. It is not like you are creating something that would act as an inhibitor to create a response but rather you are wanting a response to occur to this artificial device. Also our bodies would reject this device forcing people to take numerous amounts of medication which is never healthy and this could result in the death of brain cells which can never be replaced.
ReplyDeleteYou provided no evidence for your statement.
ReplyDelete"numerous amounts of medication"-no evidence.
"which is never healthy"-right because people who have aids take a bunch of medications to let themselves die faster.
"could result in death of brain cells"-no evidence
"If you are implanting a device in the beginning of ones nerves how exactly would that work."-good question, but he's not a biomed engineer.
" It is not like you are creating something that would act as an inhibitor "-who says you cant?
When you get an organ transplant you take several medications so that your body does not reject the new substance. Why would you not do the same thing if something is getting implanted to your brain. YEs technology will develop but right now we are not 100% sure on how nerve impulses begin and correct me if i am wrong but ralph said that this device would be implanted at the beginning of our nerves for reasoning. Yes you can rewire nerves but I do not fully understand what ralph is trying to say
ReplyDeletePlease elaborate Ralph on your hypothesis before we continue
ReplyDeleteThanks Odunayo. And we already use pacemakers on people, which is a foreign device just like this one, and while you might have to take medication, it still works,and I've never heard of one's body rejecting a pacemaker (something with no biological markers). Although, I did say that increasing the amount of biological traits would help it become more integrated into the body. So, maybe one could synthesize it in a way that it can still be well integrated, but not the point that it would have a biological marker that would identify it as a foreign living entity.
ReplyDeleteWhat I'm saying is that, let's say we rewire the nerves so that the axons end at the point where it would connect to the device. Now that action potential coming from the nerve would be read as binary code by the device and it would use that to make a word search on the Internet. I don't know if that helped you, Usman, but are you asking me to be more specific in the way that the nerve and device would be connected?
ReplyDeleteNow, as for Hammer's question. I don't know that it would interfere with any of the brain's normal functions. Keep in mind that this is speculation about how this device could work, but one of the problems that would have to be solved is how it would not affect any brain activity. I've heard of stories in which people have inserted foreign objects into their heads (i.e. bullets) and not having them affect their brains. So I'll try and look some of that up
ReplyDeleteBut also Odunayo taking too much antibiotics are bad so why would this not be the case. Also people get hooked on certain medications and they begin taking it when they do not have to thus creating a world of health issues. You only begin to take a medicine when natural remedies no longer work. It is always best to stay natural
ReplyDeleteSo it will go nerve cell nerve cell nerve cell and ultimately the device which will respond?
ReplyDelete@USafdar - "We are not 100% sure how nerve impulses begin" might need some clarification...
ReplyDelete@Ralph - Suppose you can rewire the neurons as suggested. How exactly is the device connecting to the Internet to perform the Google search? WiFi?
Some studies have suggested (though it has never been confirmed) a possible link between the radiation emitted from cell phones and brain cancer (and that's with a whole lot of skull and flesh separating the source from the affected cells!)... so how eager are you to put a WiFi hotspot inside a human brain?
I was going off of something you once stated in class. I believe Odunayo asked what in our brain begins the whole process of nerve impulses traveling through the axon. For example I want to contract a muscle so what impulse does my brain send off that causes depolarization of the nerve cell membrane. And your response was something the nature of we do not fully understand. Also when learning about the nervous system the book did not fully mention the initial impulse in our brain it just began with depolarization. If i missed that section in the chapter please let me know.
ReplyDelete@USafdar To clarify, we know a great deal about how nerve impulses begin. If you're interested in how they begin with many of the sensory systems (touch, vision, hearing, etc.), check out the rest of Ch. 48 (we'll cover it in the spring). Cliff Notes version -- physical disturbance opens up some Na+ channels, and at sufficient stimulus level, threshold is reached.
ReplyDeleteUsing fMRI studies among other methods, neuroscientists have done a decent job of mapping which areas of the brain are active (i.e. which neurons are firing) during certain mental and physical processes. While we know something about which regions are using the most glucose (and therefore probably firing the most action potentials), pinpointing the exact neuron(s) where a thought/idea/cognition begins is something I do not think we've done yet (or if we have, I am simply ill-informed).
Yes, it would have to connect through WiFi. As for the likelihood of this causing cancer, I will read up on that and get back to you. For now, all I can say is taht I believe the radiation from cell phones are due to radio waves. I don't think this is what is used for the Internet.
ReplyDelete@Ralph http://web.princeton.edu/sites/ehs/radiation/nirad.htm
ReplyDelete@Hammer Thank you for the site. In this case, cancer would become a very valid concern. At this time, I can't really find a way around this problem. However, as kind of a primitive version of a permanent solution: This device, if permanent, would probably have to be serviced. As part of this service, one could check up on the brain cells of the user of the device and use pinpoint radiation treatments to kill any abnormal cells. Over time, this would take quite a toll on the user, not to mention the fact that these "service" visits may have to occur quite often. But, again, this is only the first thought that came into my mind.
ReplyDeleteThis would be pretty interesting, however it may not be allowed because then we could cheat on things like the SATs and tests in school by just looking up things on Google. Also about the whole thing with it being attacked, the antibodies would have no effect on it,for example my dad has a fake aortic valve but the antibodies do not harm it. I also wonder if the chip would have to be plugged into different areas of our brain not just one..the Forebrain is where thoughts begin so the thought to research something would begiin there, but where the information is then sent to your brain that might have to be a different area or a number of different areas. This blog also reminded me of something I saw, its not a part of Google and its not implanted in the brain but it kind of has the same idea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUy8j4TMH2M
ReplyDeleteWhile the physical aspect of this idea is interesting, I find it interesting that no one has mentioned this idea from a slightly more social aspect. I understand this is a biology blog, but this was what first came to mind for me when I read the article. If there wasn't a storage facility in the device itself, the memory sector of the mind would act as the "hard drive" and store the sought information from this system, I began to wonder that such an implant would have to also be able to erase stored data. I mean, everything does fill up at some point, and with whatever we would want to know just a thought away, I could only imagine how quickly our little minds would become saturated with ideas and such. Just as one can go into files on their own computer and delete data that is no longer desired, we could potentially go into our minds and erase whatever procured knowledge we so choose, or just have the device dump whatever it considered useless for more space (which I view as the most dangerous threat about this). Imagine losing life morals, or erasing a years worth of knowledge in seconds. That's just what I kinda thought about...
ReplyDelete@verager It will be interesting to see what happens to the SAT (and testing in general) as we continue towards an age where information is abundant and omnipresent. Suppose you could instantly perform a Google search for every fact you could possibly want to know -- wouldn't there still be things worth testing? If factual recall is essentially becoming an irrelevant skill (and it looks like we might be headed down that path anyways -- quick, how many people's cell phone numbers can you recite without looking at your phone?), what skills should be emphasized? If we think of facts and information as pieces of data, I think the emphasis needs to be on data selection ("How do you choose which facts to consider?") and data analysis/synthesis ("What do all of these pieces of information tell me about X?"). If you track the recent changes to the SAT and AP programs, you get the sense that this revolution is already underway.
ReplyDelete@SmellsLikeSteph All valid points. The storage issue is an interesting one -- what happens when you decide later on that you need a piece of information you previously deleted? Is there a file recovery system? Can you download thoughts to an external device to cope with the finite capacity of your memory as the hard drive (like in Minority Report)? And what effect would drugs that normally affect the brain have on such a system?
@hammer...very true I can barely remember any numbers in my phone :( And I do think it is true that factual recall is not as important as analyzation and understanding and that the SAT and AP tests are moving away from questions that are just factual recall, but at the same time the SAT and AP tests are still paranoid about kids having cell phones and even ipods on them while testing.
ReplyDelete@Smellslikesteph..I do not think storage data would be much of a problem because essentially the chip works the same way as Google on your computer except you can look it up whenever and not worrying about carrying around the device(such as cell phones and computers). For example, I am always questioning things and often look up things on Google, but this does not mean important stuff I already know is getting erased, so essentially I do not think the chip would affect our memory too much. Also, some people have better memory and capacity than others.I do like the idea of an external hard drive though. Maybe all of the things learned from Google, being that those random facts will prob be forgotten more often than important things, can be stored on a "flash drive" that we could connect and disconnect to our brain.
I miss the days where if we had a question, the response was to look it up in an encyclopedia
ReplyDelete:(.