Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by spacebacon | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

spacebacon

How does 3 regions of the brain translate to 3 copies of the same memory?

With entanglement they all work together to form the one memory no?

I’m not convinced the same memory is even isolated to one brain.

View on HN

I had the same question as your first sentence.

I'm not sure I understand your second sentence, as I don't follow "entanglement news." Is entanglement currently being seen as taking part in everything, everywhere? Specifically in brain processes?

I'm intrigued by your third sentence.

I look forward to more sentences.

There is a (decidedly non-mainstream) idea that brain processes involve large-scale quantum effects, that quantum effects beyond just the normally expected biochemistry are essential to the functioning of the brain. There's not really much empirical evidence for it, and about the only theoretical argument is that the brain is much more efficient than a computer. I think people tend to like it because it makes brains (or more specifically human minds) feel more special.

Quantum mechanics and consciousness are both weird and therefore are equivalent

I saw that movie. It also tried to put water memory across as fact.

There's a guy in Twitter who thinks that the brain is an antenna that receives consciousness, or something like that. I'll see if I can find it, but it's kind of hard to navigate Twitter since I got banned.

Edit: I couldn't find it. Something about microtubules

Are these microtubules located in the Pineal gland?

Everywhere

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-30453-2

One of "those guys" is Sir Roger Penrose.

A quick search on "microtubule consciousness" brings forth an enormous amount of spilled digital ink on the subject.

Sabine Hossenfelder had a "science daily" video about it recently on Youtube. Worth a watch/listen.

https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2024/05/brain-really-uses-...

> Is entanglement currently being seen as taking part in everything, everywhere?

Not necessarily what they're saying here (I couldn't grok it either), but there's a bunch of woo being purveyed about "quantum consciousness" by Deepak Chopra recently. Some debates with Sam Harris are fun to watch.

I think they used to be called morphogenic fields by Rupert Sheldrake.

> How does 3 regions of the brain translate to 3 copies of the same memory?

The actual paper goes into more detail: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adk0997

Here's a blurb from the paper that partially answers your question:

> Late-born neurons were preferentially recruited for retrieval at short latency after acquisition, whereas early-born neurons were preferentially recruited at later times. These divergent trajectories recapitulated reactivation dynamics recorded through longitudinal calcium imaging experiments, which further revealed distinct network-wide responses between subpopulations.

I see what you are saying. It may take three regions of the brain to activate to form a memory.

Should be easy to test by selective lobotomy.

Are you talking about neuronal clusters in other parts of the body

I theorize Information may simultaneously entangle neurons around the world. Not just a humans brains.

Please elaborate, this sounds fascinating

I sincerely appreciate your interest.

Let’s start with familiarizing with a large collection of sign systems we know about…

https://github.com/space-bacon/SignSystems/blob/main/Codex-o...

Each of these systems contribute to information. They may be closely entangled (compared to say a rock on mars) or have more entanglement due to proximity. This “entanglement” may relay universal truths or even advanced theories on itself at the speed of information.

Intrigued by the project, love the idea of exhaustively exploring significance for arbitrary input.

Think you need to provide a few example inputs and outputs on the github for the program.

Also not sure a project focused on decoding meaning and signals benefits from having AI generated interpretations divorced from the inherently human act of sign interpretation. Can be seen in the md file, such a rigidly enforced structured output has forced it to give some averaged amount of weight to different categories and examples, when many are facets of each-other, or purely just expressions of something mentioned earlier. I can see free-form high-temperature llm outputs fed to another model, which serves only to aggregate their core interpretations, providing more insight than what's within the document currently.

Thanks, I agree with that input.

What are your thoughts on this from a conceptual lens?

https://github.com/space-bacon/Semiotic-Analysis-Tool

Reply on news.ycombinator.com