https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/22/21076806/google-janelia-f...
https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/22/21076806/google-janelia-f...
First the fruit fry brain is very small. You can image the entire thing at the microscopic level with a single image. The human brain is massive by comparison. Getting a coherent image that traces an axon from the tip of frontal lobe to the back off the occipital lobe is going to be a huge challenge.
Second the fruit-fly brain has 25,000 neurons while the human brain has more than 10,000,000,000. There's 6 orders of magnitude difference there.
Third, it's highly likely that glia (non-neurons) in the brain play a major role in neural computation so we'll have to image those too. Humans have way more glia than most other animals.
Lastly the connectivity of neurons in the human brain is very high. Getting those little connections right is key in all this as we aren't just going for the neurons but the connections between them.
>Lastly the connectivity of neurons in the human brain is very high.
yep, the human brain is 100B neurons and has 10e4 connections per neuron while the fly brain has 10e3 connections/neuron. So we need to emulate 10e15 connections of the human brain. GPT-3 has 175B of weights.
If you turn a computer off, then try to transfer the software it was running, you will get some data. But whatever was in the volatile RAM, won't get transferred. It's very likely the mind has such data.
Even drastic measures like electrical shocks or chemicals (up to a point) tend to have temporary rather than permanent effects. That evidence seems to imply that most of what we consider as 'us' is the more permanent physical neuron connections rather than the transient chemical/electrical states.
It's a challenge for reading the neurons connectivity for sure, but I don't think it is evidence that there is more to 'us' than our physical neuron connectivity graph.
"Ion channel proteins change shape in response to the electric field across the membrane, opening or closing pores; at the synapse shape-changing proteins respond to electrical changes to trigger the bursting open of synaptic vesicles to release the neurotransmitters, which themselves bind to protein receptors to transmit their signal, and complicated sequences of protein shape changes underlie the signalling networks that strengthen and weaken synaptic responses to make memory, remodelling the connections between neurons."
Can the weight of a connection be surmised after oxygen deprivation? Or are the chemical changes that happen under oxygen deprivation irreversible (from an information theoretic viewpoint)?