From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wupost!darwin.sura.net!dtix!mimsy!waander Thu Oct  8 10:11:07 EDT 1992
Article 7105 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wupost!darwin.sura.net!dtix!mimsy!waander
>From: waander@cs.umd.edu (Bill Andersen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Simulated Brain
Message-ID: <60864@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 3 Oct 92 03:12:25 GMT
References: <1992Sep29.151801.8240@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE> <1992Sep29.225005.4267@usl.edu>
Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 46

In article <1992Sep29.225005.4267@usl.edu> mhf4421@usl.edu (Flynn Matthew H) writes:
>erlebach@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Thomas Erlebach) states in
>Message-ID: <1992Sep29.151801.8240@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>
>  
>> Of course both of them are not available now, but I don't think
>> there is any reason why it should be impossible to have them in
>> the future. Anyway, this is just a thought experiment for now.
>> With computer I mean something like a super-PC: just one CPU and
>> memory and I/O-stuff, no fancy new brain-like architecture, only
>> a hyper-fast version of an 80486 CPU and a hyper-large memory.
>> All you have to do is: Get a model of the brain into the computer
>> (which will be rather difficult, too, but not impossible I think)
>
>
>What on earth makes you think that any algorhythm througha single processor
>is  capable of simulating a brain.   I find there's very little reason that 
>the brain would rely on a single processor, and I think the evidence would 
>show that there is  multiple processing going on all the time in our skulls.
>The concept of a super pc just seems like a romantic notion somehow.


   That is a silly point to make.  Just because the brain doesn't have
a "single" processor doesn't mean that, assuming it is possible at all
to simulate a brain on a digital computer, that you can't do it on a
sufficiently powerful von Neumann machine with enough memory.  The 
reason for this is simple: one can simulate any parallel digital 
computer on any scalar digital computer; parallelism buys nothing
additional in this sense.

   The real point to make is that, again assuming brain simulation is
possible on a digital computer, parallel architectures are the only
viable contenders to produce the necessary horsepower for such a
simulation, at least with technology likely to be available in the
forseeable future.  I realize this point is not as high-browed as
most made in this newsgroup, but at least we should get our computer
science straight since when we are talking about computers...

   ...bill



-- 
   / Bill Andersen (waander@cs.umd.edu) /
  / University of Maryland             /
 / Department of Computer Science     /
/ College Park, Maryland  20742      /


