From: John K Clark (johnkc@well.com)
Date: Mon Jan 06 1997 - 11:20:40 MST
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 6 Jan 1997 Eugene Leitl <Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> Wrote:
>50 bit/synapse (weight, delay, connected-to-ID, just the
>basics)
Too high! .001 bit/synapse would be closer to the mark, LOTS of redundancy.
See Science January 28 1994 page 466.
>0.5 Mbit/neuron, let's say 1 MBit/neuron (10^ 6 bit/neuron)
I would say 5 bits/neuron or less, that's bits not megabits.
>10^17 bits in toto, human brain representation storage
>equivalent
10^11 or 10^12 bits.
>nanotech (here comes Dr. D. to save the daaay) is uncertain
>at best, as no physical feasibility proof exists.
Life is a feasibility proof, but as long as something does not violate the
laws of Physics I don't see why we need one, it's your responsibility to
prove it's impossible not mine to prove it's possible. Nobody has made an
airplane that weighs 1000 tons, the biggest is about 300. Would I have to
physically present you with the finished airplane to convince you it was
possible?
>Anybody just said "cryonics"?
Absolutely, right now it's the only game in town, but if I didn't think
Nanotechnology would work I wouldn't waste my time with it.
John K Clark johnkc@well.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBMtFAeX03wfSpid95AQHfSATve1hU2UNRnAhYcQba2UKHt09VsptxidM4
OpfbBXwlqk1wk1EMhwOx2iSfxjrnxgDAB9rRIcM9QhnPMlYkVYnMgaY/RUNQzxs3
CjerIZvwooihEcjgxlhTjw2DrCGnXMlI5NvXH/VVzCuFCa3nqWLR8KjndJOOoKn+
oHGHewAIofwx/zfJ6xOSw0pzKui78EgiCl4R8IipL22pK+UdNwg=
=kSGF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:43:58 MST