Welcome everyone to my new article about a new discovery on our human brain structure made by EPFL a Swiss institute.
The Blue Brain Project
EPFL institute's Blue Brain Project is researching ways on building super computers, more accurately they aim to create a super computer based on the neuron network of the human brain, which will enable them to power up the capabilities of their machine many many times. By studying the human brain in order to reconstruct its structure for the computer, they discovered something totally bizarre. Using complex mathematics, called algebraic topology the neuron scientists have created a detailed model of a human neo-cortex. When they did so they discovered that is neurons form into cliques. Moreover when high amounts of the neurons are present the connections between them work as a multi-dimensional geometric object, getting as high as 11 dimensions.
Here is a Simulation of the neuron network
So since i am not a neuron scientist or a computer scientist i can only speculate to where this will discovery will get us.
Speculating Consciousness
Up until now our understanding is that consciousness is an ability, we humans have and we do not really control, being conscious is being able to control your actions but consciousness as a whole is something we train our selves to unlock. The problem by my perspective is that we do not fully understand what it means to be an intelligent creature to begin with, since we have little understanding on intelligence too, which could be counted as a part of consciousness too. Realizing for the first time that our brain is multi-dimensional to the level of 11 separate dimensions which is the max dimensions we speculate for our string theory is by default creating questions on our capabilities, questions on the holographic universe, questions on life and death even questions on the existence of God. I might have understood the situation in a totally wrong way. But if i didn't we might have created for the first time a breakthrough in the research of consciousness.
Speculating on Independent thought
So up until now independent thought is something that humans are supposed to have by default but we speculate it to be an illusion. Science tried to observe human thoughts in the past and the outcome about independence was not clear. So here i am speculating that if our brains work in 11 dimensional spectrum it could seem to as that independent thought is not real or is to be questioned since our understanding is 4 dimensional yet. In the real world the one that we can not see because our senses are not so capable(yet) things might be very different. An 11 dimensional entity should be independent and dependent at the same time. Maybe even the word independent has no actual meaning in 11 dimensions since everything is connected in the universe since everything is energy or so we believe. I am starting to believe that our Brains are by far more connected to the quantum world than we ever believed. For example i was referring to the human brain when i was talking about quantum computing in a previous article but now i am starting to believe that it is more complex than that.
Below you can watch a video of Blue Brain Project explaining the neuron network of the brain.
Source links:
http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page-56882-en.html
Thanks for reading feel free to follow, vote and Re-esteem if you find it useful.
You can find more articles of mine here: https://steemit.com/@diasdr
@diasdr, thanks for posting this article. I'm delighted to have run across another Steemian interested in the actual circumstances of our respective and collective minds.
Your comment that "consciousness is an ability we humans have and we do not really control" opens onto an intriguing set of experiences we all share. Over the years I have come to the notion that the best route into understanding consciousness is in terms of attentiveness.
It has longed seemed to me that a person's reality has more to do with how they pay attention to things than anything else. It's the old notion that a generous priest and a con man encounter entirely different people because they see them very differently.
As Reggie Watts says, "If you pay attention to the world, it's an amazing place. If you don't, then it's whatever you think it is." I cannot think of a more apt way of putting it
I feel that instead of consciousness, per se, we really should be talking about the different states of individual attentiveness and the collective sociocultural patterns that are derived from them. Many of our various quandaries about the nature of consciousness arise from dependence on ideas and assumptions rooted in a general tendency of language to accent objects at the expense of actions.
For some time now I have worked on a project Manifest Orders: Dimensions of Attentiveness . Working from observations of people in very different circumstances, including my own subjective awarenesses, I arrived at the proposition at the center of Manifest Orders: that our attentiveness constantly shifts states of complexity. My most recent Steemit post Taking care of things considers how computing has brought into existence an organic kind of reality that is rapidly displacing the recent mechanical industrial world. It also points out that advent of virtual reality and augmented VR will challenge our ordinary common sense.
The orders of attentiveness range from the very simplest, M0 and M1, that we share with other animals. The first seven active orders, M1..M7, are typical of human everyday life and so are very common. Just as the EPFL researchers discovered, M8..M10 are rarer. I anticipate that they will find those to be the most complex of the orders. I link them, respectively, to M8: "creative collaboration", M9: "metaphysical construction" and M10: "pluripotent wisdom".
The reported observations by EPFL researchers of actively shifting states of dimensional complexity, especially the noting of the commonness of the orders M1..M7, along with the rarefication of M8..M10, found in the EPFL research, I take as largely supporting and tending to confirm my ideas. (By the way, I published the first draft of what has become Manifest Orders in the MIT Journal, Leonardo in 1993, in an article entitled Evolution of the Pragmatic Paradigm: The Agency of Graphic Media in Cognitive Development), Sentient awareness and the eleven orders of complexity that I call M0..M10 describe different states of attentiveness that we begin to acquire in childhood and gradually master as we become fully adult. I think it is necessary to regard consciousness as both sentient context and active att/in-tentive states of shifting focus within all experience.
The celebrated mathematician and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead published, in 1929, the first theorems of a new, more organic, philosophy and metaphysics. It takes issue with traditional Enlightenment-bound philosophers (Kant, Locke, Hume, etc.). To my way of thinking, his thought more adequately deals with factors that heretofore have made consciousness seem empirically so elusive. It takes a while to absorb implications of Whitehead's process-relational philosophy. An excellent introduction for non-philosopher's is C. Robert Mesle's Process-Relational Philosophy. To get a handle on the larger metaphysical implications of his "philosophy of organism", I especially like Charles Hartshorne's Creative Experiencing. The crux of their assertions lies in the notion that everything is event, every entity is an occurrence, and that all are dynamic organizations of experiences.
For a look at my own personal journey toward these notions, I invite you to look at my first post on Steemit.
Again, I invite your participation in an ongoing dialog about these matters. I came to Steemit mostly to air out the ideas I have so long worked with privately. I welcome comment, critiques, and suggestions in furtherance of the ongoing project Manifest Orders.
I both upvote and follow you. I hope to meet you again.
To be able to understand... You are speculating that this is the way things work right? When you call M8 to M10 rarer you do that because they are more complex and their dimensional-geometrical order is by far more difficult to form?
Oh, yes, M8, for instance, requires more sets of information than say, M7, which is the order of social cooperation (or its contrary, opposition). At M7, one is handling information about some current circumstance, the joint goals of whatever the cooperation is about (maybe building a house from blueprints, for example), checking out whether one's self is properly interpreting joint goals and progress, or if something may have changed, and evaluating current and recent changes (along with the content of all lower orders that are also part of M7). M8, collaborative creation, imports all the lesser dimensions of information handled at M7 and adds awareness of a diverse set of options and implications "in terms of how other people may receive or respond" to some unfamiliar outcome. Will it be better? Will they like it? Will it work? Does it make sense? The M8 greater dimension of information-handling is that of M7 plus it focuses in terms of "possibilities of the Other". It is a context of discovery and innovation, whether by technologist, theoretical scientist, playwright, musical composer -- anyone working through explorations of alternative systems in terms of some real or imagined collaborators, audience or peers. Much of its processing occurs, not just along linguistic channels of the mind, but even more importantly, among the often ignored "right brain" heavily parallel processing of patterns and paradigms.