[HN Gopher] Neurons might contain something within them ___________________________________________________________________ Neurons might contain something within them Author : nahuel0x Score : 86 points Date : 2021-04-16 19:22 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (join.substack.com) (TXT) w3m dump (join.substack.com) | andyxor wrote: | "Finding numbers in the brain" by C.R. Gallistel: | https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.201... | | Edit: also see his article on this from 2015 "Here's Why Most | Neuroscientists Are Wrong About the Brain" | https://nautil.us/blog/heres-why-most-neuroscientists-are-wr... | seesawtron wrote: | I am not sure that is the ferret experiment mentioned. However, | this [0] one might be. | | [0] https://www.pnas.org/content/112/45/14060 | nabla9 wrote: | Mainstream neuroscientists don't find it outlandish at all. | Gallistel is 80 years old and that might not explain why he has | not kept up with neuroscience in the last 10-20 years. | | Single neuron is very complex beast. They seem to be more similar | to multi-layer perceptrons with multiple nonlinear steps. When | neuron adapts that's memory single neuron level. | zeeshanqureshi wrote: | Reminds me of The Prometheus Rising | | _William James, father of American psychology, tells of meeting | an old lady who told him the Earth rested on the back of a huge | turtle. | | "But, my dear lady," Professor James asked, as politely as | possible, "what holds up the turtle?""It's no use, Professor," | said the old lady "It's turtles-turtles- turtles, all the way!"_ | dhosek wrote: | The Turtles thing predates James (and was probably originally | rocks): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down | zeeshanqureshi wrote: | I know, the original source is obscure on that one. | | I've also heard that the anecdote (mentioned in PR) didn't | involve William James and that it was Bert Russell talking to | the lady. | bmitc wrote: | I never tire of hearing these apocryphal turtle stories. | They're just hilarious to me. | slver wrote: | Each neuron contains within itself a nanostructure whose | resonance acts as an antenna both for receiving quark vibration | frequencies and transmitting back to them for synchronization, | effectively forming a communication protocol with higher | dimensional string structures. | | In higher dimensions our common thoughts are aggregated into | massive socially-shared hyperbrains, each of which is segregated | from the other based on both cultural and genetic similarity | between specimens (mostly of the same species). Hyperbrains form | a trie predicated on the commonality of our toughts and the | closer you move to its roots, the closer you get to our | biological origins, until eventually all species merge at the | root. | | Our individual biological brains then acts only as secondary | devices similar to how L1/2/3 CPU cache is to the main memory of | a computer. We use our brains to think only when the | communication bridge is unstable, or when our experiences cannot | be matched into compatibly vibrating wavelets in the hyperbrain. | Our brains are also an anchoring devices of the self. While the | hyperbrain encodes the shared memories and experiences of entire | groups of specimens, our brain is a "diff" between the personal | and the communal. | | OK, anyway, I had fun making some stuff up, it's not like I | understand anything this article says. | oldstrangers wrote: | So this is what HN is doing now? I thought this shit was left | for reddit. | meowface wrote: | I think it's not too implausible that something like this could | be real in the distant future. Most would rely on the | collective biological-abiological-hybrid hyperbrain(s) for most | things most of the time, but (biological or otherwise) | individuals or sub-collectives/colonies would also narrowly | specialize and rely on local processing when they believe their | specialized cognition/ideation is more effective/efficient than | deferring to the collective. Or when they just want some | privacy. | | Entities would be able to seamlessly "context switch" between | the different scales of shared memories/knowledge/mental | models, from universal to individual. Hopefully with some | rigorous isolation so that only you can ever access your | individual mind. Maybe also some vandalism mitigations for | those who might want to mess with the universal Neurapedia. | Plus some kind of hardware switch that can fully cut the | connection at a moment's notice, in the event of some neural | 0-day or DoS. | | In practice it might be infeasible to make it both seamless and | safe from adversarial risks, but people said the same of | Wikipedia. Though, the consequences of a manipulated Wikipedia | article are probably a little different from the consequences | of a manipulated neural interface/network. | brahyam wrote: | Wow! I was really into it right until the end. What an amazing | imagination. Thanks for putting that together and sharing your | creativity. | samstave wrote: | Well crap - I thought this was amazing. :-( | | Are you sure (y)our hyperbrain didnt make you write this? | fnord77 wrote: | I was hoping you'd tie this in with some occult/pseudoscience | stuff. Some people would gobble that up. | slver wrote: | Frankly I'm almost gobbling it up myself as I type it. | | I guess I'm gullible. | mmazing wrote: | You channeled Deepak Chopra for a minute there, glad you | recovered though! | teclordphrack2 wrote: | Thanks, now someone is going to take this and start scientology | 2.0. | chmod775 wrote: | I expected to find a reference to some sci-fi book at the end | of this. | slver wrote: | Well, no book, but I might as well write one, why not :P | why_Mr_Anderson wrote: | Beautifully written. Now all you need is to open store on Etsy | with some crystals and similar junk :) | | On serious note: I wonder if there is a generator somewhere for | this kind of BS. I have bookmarks for several (corpo lingo, | resume, progressive newspeak, etc.), but not for this new age | style. | Sporktacular wrote: | That ferret experiment sounds ghastly. Am picturing it in some | quack's garage for some reason. | dcanelhas wrote: | The ethical review board is just a piece of plywood with a | thumbs up drawn on it. | kneel wrote: | People can't fully perceive their own consciousness, stop trying. | choeger wrote: | There was an article here lately that basically stated it would | be surprising if DNA, RNA or some similar mechanism wasn't used | for storing long-term information because it is so well-suited to | the task. Is this more then pseudo science? | plumsempy wrote: | I don't know but sounds likr assassin's creed. | Geee wrote: | The blank slate theory is obviously incorrect, but I'm wondering | if the information in baby brain is genetic or transferred from | mother's brain during pregnancy. | neom wrote: | It doesn't seem outlandish to me that the neuron would contain | information about itself from the time it was | formed/programed/activated// about what it is, how and when it | should fire, etc. given the complexity of the neural networks, it | would be more strange than not that the neuron wouldn't have some | form of metadata? (Mostly thinking about the relationship between | minicolumns and the neuron and the neural network at large) | ajuc wrote: | It was already accepted neurons store numbers (weights on each | input for example). How is this different? | rossdavidh wrote: | If I understand the article correctly, the suggestion is that | it is not primarily the synapse (connection between neurons) | that is storing the "number", but something in the central part | of the neuron. IANAN (I Am Not A Neuroscientist). | ketralnis wrote: | The subtitle is | | > Neurons might contain something incredible within them. | | but the HN title right now is | | > Neurons might contain something within them | | I guess there's some intensifier filter that removes "AMAZING" | and "INCREDIBLE!" and "10 REASONS YOU'LL BE SHOCKED". But I like | to imagine that people previously thought that neurons were | entirely hollow | kazinator wrote: | Obviously, it means "something newly noteworthy in them". | | Not the stuff you already know they contain, like cytoplasm and | a nucleus and other cell materials. | ddevault wrote: | In either case, it's a bad title. It should be rewritten to | avoid clickbait. | | Edit: sigh. To quote the guidelines: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html | | > Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or | linkbait; don't editorialize. | kuroguro wrote: | IIRC the submitter can re-edit the title and it doesn't filter | them the second time. The edit button disappears after a while | tho. | darig wrote: | "Might" means the exact same thing as "Might Not" | bobthechef wrote: | "they're committed to the Aristotelean idea that there is nothing | in the mind that was not first in the senses. [...] The problem | is that there are no sensory receptors for times of day and for | interval-durations. A duration doesn't feel like anything--it's | ineffable." | | Where does Aristotle actually say that time is known as an object | of the senses? I assure you he never says this. For Aristotle, | time is the _measure_ of change with respect to succession. Time | is not a "thing"! | | Tabula rasa doesn't mean that mental faculties don't exist. | That's not what it means for something not to be in the mind that | was not in the senses. | | The interviewee is silly in his hostility toward Aristotle, | especially given the basic lack of understanding. | cabalamat wrote: | The article says: | | >With one caveat: whatever it looks like, it has to be apparent | that its form gives it the functional properties of the | polypeptides (the class of molecules that DNA belongs to). | | But DNA isn't a polypeptide. | zosima wrote: | No, but it's a polymer. From the context, I guess that was the | word aimed at. | guscost wrote: | Uh oh, better upgrade the neural networks, and quit using all the | GPUs to mine Ethereum, otherwise we'll never get the AI overlord | we deserve! | seesawtron wrote: | There are two schools of thoughts as to where "memory" is stored | in neuronal networks. The larger group of neuroscientists believe | it is at the synaptic level, as huge amount of research has shown | how synapses change when they undergo Long Term Potentiation | (LTP) or Long Term Differntiation (LTD) which relate to increase | and decrease in synapse size while undergoing learning. The | former correlates to strengething of a synaptic connection and | the latter to the opposite. | | Gallistel, Hesslow (PI of ferret study, [0]) and colleagues | constitute the second, relatively smaller, group of | neuroscientists who believe synapses are only an "effect" that | one sees as a result of learning. The true mechanisms are either | hidden in the nucleus, cell membrane or somewhere inside the cell | [1]. This group so far has only very few substantially convincing | experiments and more hypotheses. The ferret study [0] is one such | experiment in this direction which was published in 2015. I am | not aware of any more data to prove any of the hypothesis. | | But of course even the inherent mechanisms that guide synapse | formation and alteration are in the end guided by proteins | "inside" the neuron. To me it seems these two groups are looking | at the same idea at different steps of the memory learning | pipeline. | | [0] https://www.pnas.org/content/112/45/14060 [1] | https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2101/2101.09774.pdf | snewman wrote: | In general in biology, when there is long-standing dispute as | to whether a certain system relies on Mechanism X or Mechanism | Y, my impression is that the answer almost invariably turns out | to be that X, Y, and previously-unsuspected Z all play a role. | 1996 wrote: | Good take. | | Here: | | - X=neural network geometric configuration, | | - Y=individual synapses due to the various neurotransmitters, | | - Z=cytoskeleton (already suspected to play a role) | pishpash wrote: | I think it's a bit more than looking at different steps, it's | about what's fundamental architecturally vs. not. The synaptic | side is saying the internals aren't fundamental, in the same | sense that you can have ANN's that are nothing but weights and | connections. Gallistel is saying the weights and connections | aren't fundamental, or at least trivial compared to a state- | storing/state-processing machinery inside. Maybe both exist, | but either one being more fundamental or important than the | other is a salient conceptional difference. | nine_k wrote: | I wonder why both mechanisms could not be in place | simultaneously. | | E.g. brain can run on glucose or on ketones; muscles can run on | oxygen producing CO2 or without it producing lactic acid, etc. | The body has a number of alternative mechanisms, this may be | another such pair. | seesawtron wrote: | Synapses are formed outside the neuron in the extracellular | space (ECS), at the end of axon terminals called "boutons" | which are essentially storehouses for vesciles which are tiny | packages containing neurotransmitters. The internal | mechanisms of the neurons as well as ongoing biochemistry at | the location of a synapses "guides" the transfer of proteins | necessary for strenghening of removal of these synapses. | | So its possible that both mechanisms occur simultaneously, | there's just not enough evidence to clearly understand these | (yet). | kgc wrote: | Why not both? These ideas seem compatible. | andyxor wrote: | as for 'storage of durations' mentioned in the interview there | is a well known paper on "time cells" in the hippocampus [0] by | Howard Eichenbaum et al. which doesn't seem to refer to | Purkinje cells (which only exist in the cerebellum [1]). | | There is significant evidence for temporal memory maintained in | the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex [2], just like grid | cells[3] in the hippocampus used as coordinate system for | spatial and abstract navigation [4] while time cells facilitate | "navigation" in temporal dimension. | | [0] Hippocampal "time cells" bridge the gap in memory for | discontiguous events https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21867888/ | | [1] Basic anatomy of human memory | https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wsu-sandbox/chapter/parts-... | | [2] Time cells in the human hippocampus and entorhinal cortex | support episodic memory | https://www.pnas.org/content/117/45/28463 | | [3] Grid cells: http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Grid_cells | | [4] Time (and space) in the hippocampus | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235215461... | pishpash wrote: | Truly, I believe there are multiple architectures for | information processing in the body, and not only in the | brain/neurons. Think of the computing landscape where you | have a salad bowl of ANN's implemented on TPU's, some GPU's, | some specialized ASIC's, DSP's, some CPU's. There is no | reason to believe efficient information encoding through | evolution ends up with one architecture. It's going to turn | out to be as varied as the differentiated cells in the body, | though there may be some unification in foundational units at | the equivalent level of transistors of something, maybe some | molecular machinery that stores a bit or activates a switch. | Presumably that's what Gallistel is looking for. It does seem | wasteful for a whole neuron to be the basic unit of | information processing, so I agree there should be something | more atomic inside. | seesawtron wrote: | That is an interesting line of thought. Cortex and non- | cortical regions are somewhat different in terms of their | cell types composition which could inherently support | different computation and learning mechanisms. | mikewarot wrote: | Nice story, but actually it is superconductors that lurk | inside, with absurdly high critical temperatures. | | https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.05602 | janniks wrote: | Oops -- now we have to rewrite all those Artificial Neural | Network libraries! | pvarangot wrote: | So this article is saying something like: modern neuroscience | thinks that the "storage" mechanism is based on connections but | maybe there's more like "secondary memory" on each neuron that | can also store "facts"? | | I can see the connection thing. It's like circle | -> ball -> -- -> lightbulb white -> light _/ | | Here circle and white come from a group of neurons firing when | the electrical stimuly from the eye hits them and that particular | group from a lot of lower level "concepts" fires the white and | the circle. | | Is someone saying that maybe a single neuron can "store" | something like "white"? | [deleted] | notanote wrote: | I only see one claim backed by experiment: "The ferret- | experiment shows that the measuring of--and then storage of--a | maximally-simple experiential-fact (the duration of the | interval between two simple events) occurs within a single huge | cell (neuron) in the cerebellum. It also shows that subsequent | single-spike input to this cell triggers the reading-out of | this memory into a simple behavior: an appropriately-timed | blink." | | The huge cell is a Purkinje cell. I don't remember much about | neuroscience, so I hope someone else can elaborate. | | Later on the interview suggests that every single neuron could | store megabytes of information, but this seems more like | conjecture to me. | kazinator wrote: | > _16) Would mainstream neuroscientists raise their eyebrows at | the idea that numbers are somehow stored inside cells and | retrieved from inside cells?_ | | > Most of them would think it's about the craziest, stupidest, | and most implausible idea they ever heard suggested. | | Luckily, there are computer scientists! ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-04-16 22:00 UTC)