Deespona-Hawkins brain model brings inmmortality?

Hi, I´m Jonas, I´m from Lisbon (Portugal) and I´m new in this forum.
I have found some information in the Jeff Hawkins forum (www.onintelligence.com) speaking about a model of the brain.
They claims also this model of the brain can drive humankind to immortality, as will means any brain thought can be duplicated in another clone brain using current technology.
The method has some jokes but it looks really accurate on my knowledge. And dangerous.
http://onintelligenc...topic.php?t=192
onintelligence.org forum page

I cut and paste the entire article for your inmediate reading:

..."As I told and explained at "what if we have no memory at all" topic, this deduction has been the result of a paradox appeared in our TUE (Tridimensional Understanding Engine): A "no memory" intelligent device can be designed if we found a method for the TUE for "reading" the environmental properties by itself, obviously using some tricks we can teach to the environment, not to the TUE based machine. Then the TUE really don´t needs to store any input data or pattern from the environment, it´s enough to process these patterns to found an accurate solution for each temporary circumstance.

The content developed in this current topic then is HIGHLY speculative, as is based in a still, non experimentally verified brain´s model I proposed. I put here this topic only like a intellectual exercise about the dramatic consequences of the final verification of some brain model propossals. No moral or legal issues are considered, only the current technical viability and procedure for doing it.

If the named "Deespona-Hawkins" model of the brain is finally verified, that is, if the brain is basicaly a group of physical paths defined in a spatial volume for processing patterns, then I think its perfectly possible, with our current "state of the art" technology, to duplicate it in a DNA based clone brain, without understanding exactly how each brain part works. In a similar remake, the Polymerase Chain Reaction allow us to duplicate DNA without knowing any function implied in the DNA bases, and ignoring totally how in the hell the DNA really works. If possible, this adult brain status duplication in a clone individual can leads us eventually to immortality, with only storing forever a good copy of our DNA and a volumetric copy of our brain´s neuronic path status in a choosen moment.

We will call to this new and promissing procedure of immortality as "Neural Path Duplication" (or, for our personal collection of acronyms, NPD). Now I will explain synoptically the procedure to obtain this brain clone with current technology:

1.We get a volunteer, er..sorry, a client. We lie him in a Magnetic resonance machine with 1 micron resolution. After applying a powerful magnetic field, all the molecules of his brain containing Hidrogen will be aligned in a specific way, returning us a very detailed volumetric model of the client´s brain. For those not familiar with computer graphics terms, we call this output model a VOXEL model, that is, a 3D model done with voxels, billions of 1 micron cubes with a single information: the amount of hidrogen contained in a each cubic micron of the client´s head.

2.We get a good DNA -a mother cell DNA if possible- from the client. After contracting a very famous and recently defeated korean scientist, (then, as a result, contracted at a very good price), we put our client and the contracted korean in a reserved room and then we proceed to close the door of such room. After a reasonable amount of time (around nine months) and some strange sounds inside the room, we will open the door and will extract the client and his just born perfect clone. The eminent korean scientist can remain inside the room for sucessive clients. We have no info at all of the inside process, but the experimental result of this new version of the "Chinesse Room" (ref: John Searle) is a young cloned client.

3. We put the baby in the magnetic resonance machine and repeat the process 1. Then we will obtain a VOXEL model of the clone brain. Using the hidrogen density info of each voxel file, we generate a clean voxel database of the neuron networks of both our client and his clone.

4. With a CG technique we regularly uses for matching laser scanned pieces of a real world object, named "spatial matching process", we correlate the neural correspondences between our client´s voxel model and his clone child voxel model. It´s not necessary at all to resize one model to match the other, only is important to match the most probable correspondences of neurons between both voxel models. As an adult brain have lost some considerable amount of neurons in the course of his life, these probably redundant neurons must be indexed to be eliminated ( or maybe not) in the duplication process.

5. Once an acceptable neuron corresponce between the two voxel models will be done, we will proceed to detect the conection paths between neurons in our client voxel model, and after we will proceed to ellaborate by CG reconstruction with a CG technique named "marching cubes" a similar neuron path grow plan for the clone voxel model. After obtaining a continuous interpolation model between the client´s voxel model and the clone voxel model, we can proceed to induce electromagnetically the grow of the accurate path neural structure in the clone child, to match on it an exact client´s brain path replication.

and 6. With a non-invasive, electromagnetic and X-Ray technique similar to lithotriper machines for eliminating kidney stones, we proceed to inmovilize the clone baby brain and we will start to stimulate electromagnetically each volumetric micron in the head of the clone model, to force the grow of very specific neural paths inside, according to the volumetric simulation grow by interpolation we have obtained at 5. I have explained briefly at my "what if we have no memory at all" topic why I think electromagnetic discharges induces dendrite and axon grow.

and That´s all Folks: If all works ok, then the first remembered issue for the cloned baby will be that he is an ugly old pal lying in a magnetic resonance machine, and the first action to think about is how in the hell he will explain to his wife and sons the situation, or worse, to explain that to your grandsons, lovers, associates and lawyers. And of course, how to elliminate the old pal without legal reactions. If you are interested in seeing a similarly cloned baby in action, please check the Roger Rabbit Warner Bross movie.

As all of you can see, this procedure is SO especulative but SO interesting that I feel forced to register it inmediatelly at my next door european union public notary. "" (signed by deespona)

Amazing, isn´t?

Jonas Talsi

As I told and explained at "what if we have no memory at all" topic, this deduction has been the result of a paradox appeared in our TUE (Tridimensional Understanding Engine): A "no memory" intelligent device can be designed if we found a method for the TUE for "reading" the environmental properties by itself, obviously using some tricks we can teach to the environment, not to the TUE based machine. Then the TUE really don´t needs to store any input data or pattern from the environment, it´s enough to process these patterns to found an accurate solution for each temporary circumstance.

Caution: Philosophical Waste Dump

(more toxic than nuclear)

Welcome Jonas.

Caution: Philosophical Waste Dump

The forums at www.onintelligence.org have some substance. Well worth a browse for those interested in theoretical neuroscience.

Yes, I agree about the speculative side, and I think also the jump from a software AI application that works without memory can´t be translated simply by intuition and as a result telling that the human brain can´t have memory also.
But this guy advise us about, and he request to the neuroscience comunity to try an experimental approach to this point of view. I think this is honest, and these people are the first on saying that their approach to the human brain is "HIGHLY speculative" for this unexperimental issue.

The claimed Deespona-Hawkins model of brain is more clearly explained in other open topic named "What if we have no memory at all", located also at onintelligence.org.
They explain very clearly that this model is an extrapolation from their AI "TUE" to a more "plausible" organic brain model, using their own terms.
I have found a site with a very technical paper, very hard to follow explaining their "TUE" at http://www.inteligencia-artificial.com
These people are very famous in the computer graphics comunity by their 3D models and some old and complex 3D applications. They are based in Madrid, Spain and their site is at http://www.deespona.com
I also cut and paste their model of brain exposed in their other currently active topic:

..."For this reason I think about the question, and I shall try to formulate a compatible model between an hipothetical "no memory at all" model and the Hawkins "memory prediction model". I believe this new reductionist model will satisfy many opinions, and also I will try to no mention my empirical, commercial, and auto-promoted TUE method. I will try to do it in your neurobiologistical language code, on despite I can do monumental errors. We will start with this megalomaniac sentence:

"We call memory to a specific electrical path created across a neuron network, that modulates an input pattern signal and returns at the end of the path a new, modulated pattern"

In this model the input pattern can be related to, by example, a sound, but the output pattern, by its form, can be more related to an image. Here the output new pattern can launch a new wave of electrical signals to obtain sucessive new patterns, in a progressive refinement process. If an used neuron path is revisited, then this path is chemically incited to be phisically reinforced, by example with a bigger diameter at the axon conections, to guarantee a better synapse. Also near, parallelly used paths can influx electromagnetically bettween them, forcing the dendrite grow conections between correlated, used paths.
The Sesamo Street boy can also imagine in his colorful world that this maybe can explain why is necessary to sleep. During our "vigilia" status our brain is under a continuous electrical storm, then we can make associations, electromagnetical discharges between different not connected electrical paths, but these temporal electromagnetical bridges will launch chemicals footprints at dentrite´s ends, to consolidate a new, physical axon based bridge when the electrical storm will be reduced in intensity.
At the top of my delirant fantasy as Sesamo Street official neurobilogist "dilletante", I can adventure that "dreams" are probably new axon-bridge testers, after the biological grow of the connection is finished during our sleeping process . In this model, nightmares can be the result of aberrations in the night bridge construction, creating finally wrong patterns that forces us to awake, ending in this way the physical consolidation of an erroneus synaptic connection.

Here is, a concilliating theory of "memory prediction framework" and "pure processor brain" model. ...""

Wow. As you can see this is still more speculative, but it´s very surprising to see how many classical problems are focused to a simple solution. It´s really intriguing and a total novelty to say that the brain is only a simple amount of neuron paths without memory, then your consciousness is your path´s net in a given moment.
I only can say that this guy comes from other planet or is another crazy guru, but I must admit this point of view match many old topics very convincingly, and I never saw the general problem of the brain in this way. I´m thinking a lot about in the last two days. If it´s demostrated that the brain performance is so simple, it´s clear for me that the group of brain´s paths can be duplicated in another brain with current techniques, as axon growth can be electrostimulated experimentally.
It would be great If someone could give me a more reasoned opinion for a more deep discussion about.
I must say that I´m more interested in immortality that in AI, then I am more interested in the possibility to duplicate adult consciousness in clones as they claims.

Jonas Talsi

I have found some information in the Jeff Hawkins forum (www.onintelligence.com) speaking about a model of the brain.
They claims also this model of the brain can drive humankind to immortality...
http://onintelligenc...topic.php?t=192
onintelligence.org forum page

It's great to see a forum discussing Jeff Hawkins' work, and judging by the number of postings, it's very new. The fact that there are postings there suggesting the applications to preservation of identity are inspiring. As work develops within Hawkins' institute, this should give us increasingly better ideas of how realistic this is likely to be. Even the most rudimentary applications based on Hawkins' book, and experimental verification of his model (from the earliest stages of that), should (in turn) inspire additional effort leading toward goals such as yours.

One story, Travelling, carries this concept into the deep future, although it does not refer to Jeff Hawkins' model (written before that was published). Another story, Nothing's Impossible, is more directly focused on your idea of placing memories into a clone (by way of emulating the neurological system in an "artificial brain", interfaced with the body, that would no doubt be pattered after Hawkins' model).

As Hawkins' model becomes better and better defined, it should give us an excellent way of projecting how much 'equivalent circuit' reductions in complexity should be reasonable, in 'compressing' neurostructure at the same time as it is emulated in a non-biological form. Long term vs. short term memory, timing considerations in terms of the many feedback loops that are sure to be discovered, all of this is on the horizon more than before, due to Hawkins' work. And now, there's a forum to help track these developments! Wow!

Thanks for the links to that forum! I'm on my way over there now!

boundlesslife

Thanks for the links to that forum! I'm on my way over there now!

There are a lot more postings there than I thought there would be! Looks great!

Well, really the Deespona´s brain model and the Hawkins´brain model are totally oppossed, on despite both works with the same pattern based principle.

The Hawkins model is one based in the brain like a exclusivelly memory model, then he claims we thought thanks to his "memory prediction framework", and as a result the brain is a non processor based issue, but a pattern collection inside the brain that solves any given circumstance.

The Deespona model is exactly the contrary: The brain is a pure analogic processor that transform external input patterns and internally rendered patterns in another new patterns in an undefined chain of events, but don´t store any of these patterns inside the brain. Then we have no memory but a lot of neuron paths built in our life experience in an environment.

I think Deespona has call his brain model as "Deespona-Hawkins" because both models use patterns and also Deespona looks the neocortex like a "pattern harbour" very similar to the Hawkins´one, but I think also he does it because he claims he was expelled from the Hawkins forum for expressing such radical theories against the Hawkins model. In this way, Deespona returns to the forum again, with a "concilliatory" model.

Neither Hawkins, nor Deespona or any other brain model in the world have been demostrated experimentally.

But the Hawkins model is not useful for obtaining a way to immortality, as his memory codified patterns can´t be duplicated because we don´t know where the memory is stored and how they are codified.

Only the Deespona model is useful to obtain immortality, as this model explains the brain like a very simple amount of neuron paths that can be duplicated with current technology in a clone (NPD: neuron path duplication method). As a result I´m more interested into the Deespona correction of the Hawkins model.

More impressive, they claim the process can be very cheap because all industrial machines for doing such thing are enoughly developed TODAY, and also the computer graphics technology for doing the control software for the process. No hundreds or thousands of million dollars for the project, but only few tens of millions to be spent in a couple of years. Other thing is their TUE AI method, as the 3D digitizing of the surrounding world can be very expensive and an a never ended mission.

And of course, their immortality process can means a lot of political and legal problems to be solved. Probably the Deespona team will expend more in lawyers than in developing the system.

Maybe the Deespona-Hawkins model of the brain can be speculative, but if it is verified experimentally, then the industrial proceess for doing immortal humans is a non speculative fact. For this reason is so interesting for me.

Jonas Talsi.

It's great to see a forum discussing Jeff Hawkins' work, and judging by the number of postings, it's very new.  The fact that there are postings there suggesting the applications to preservation of identity are inspiring.  As work develops within Hawkins' institute, this should give us increasingly better ideas of how realistic this is likely to be.

As Hawkins' model becomes better and better defined, it should give us an excellent way of projecting how much 'equivalent circuit' reductions in complexity should be reasonable, in 'compressing' neurostructure at the same time as it is emulated in a non-biological form.  Long term vs. short  term memory, timing considerations in terms of the many feedback loops that are sure to be discovered, all of this is on the horizon more than before, due to Hawkins' work.

And now, there's a forum to help track these developments!

Since the above-quoted posting, the "On Intelligence" forum underwent a "crash and rebuild" event, but is now back on line, seemingly with all of the postings prior to last October, many of those since then, and is more secure, less likely to data losses, than before.

The receptivity to diverse thoughts, including those related to immortalism and life extension, seems high. This is, I think, a very positive thing, inasmuch as Jeff Hawkins' ideas may be a good springboard for taking more and more realistic looks at the future possibilities for "uploading".

(Link to current posting on the Forum on Hawkins' book, discussing whether or not the brain has "memories" that are truly analogous to those of current non-biological technology, or not):

Posting URL.

This (above linked forum) is such a rich platform of thinking on the issues that concern transhumanist applications (especially unloading) that cross-postings between it and the Immortalist Institute Forum seem likely to grow, with time.

boundlesslife