Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Brain vs. Computer

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    2,851
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    2 Post(s)

    Default Brain vs. Computer

    A neuron can send a message ~1000 times in a second, that means 1000 Hz.
    There are ~100 billion neurons in your brains.

    That's 1000Hz*100*10^9 = (10^3 * 10^9)Hz = 10^12 Hz = 1000 GHz

    1000 GHz versus my 3GHz double-core... And they say computers are faster than brains? Get your facts straight people

    EDIT: I expect Brain will say something very clever...
    Last edited by marpis; 04-02-2010 at 12:05 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,152
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    360 teraflops is the fastest computer. Not faster than the brain...just saying that maybe using a generic computer might not be the best comparison, (unless the source from which you are complaining about is saying PC's are faster).
    Last edited by Dan Cardin; 04-02-2010 at 03:35 PM.
    SCAR Tutorials: The Form Tutorial | Types, Arrays, and Classes
    Programming Projects: NotePad | Tetris | Chess


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,876
    Mentioned
    123 Post(s)
    Quoted
    327 Post(s)

    Default

    You can't really compare the brain to a CPU like that though.. Computers are faster at some math operations like 8 times 7 (try doing it... it will take you longer time than it would for a computer) but the brain is extremely good at calculating (example) the trajectory of an object flying through the air.

    Who said computers were faster than the brain anyways?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,219
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Raw power and actual performance are very different, as the brain is almost as inefficient at using resources as windows.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A
    Posts
    586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    lol, the human brain IS much faster than even super computers. the reason it doesnt seem that way is because our brain doesnt focus on one thing at a time. so where you have so many total nuerons, you may really only be using like 100 to calculate your math homework.

    i heard last yeasr that in 5-7 years computers will be faster than the human brain

    maybe it was 10 to 20, i cant really remember. i would google if i wasnt sending this from my phone
    Sell botted goods at mid to high prices!!! Else we lose our profit AND ruin the game!!!!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    7,805
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3 Post(s)

    Default

    The brain multitasks too much, you can not focus on one thing. Its hard to fully disect the idea, but when a computer is asked to preform a task, all it does is that. The brain focuses on other things.

    The benefit is it allows us to do things in different ways as we create.

    For example:
    Consider the polynomial
    P(x) = 4x4 + 7x3 – 2x2 + 3x1 + 6
    Suppose that exponentiation is carried out using multiplications. Two ways to evaluate this polynomial are:
    • Brute force method:
      P(x) = 4*x*x*x*x + 7*x*x*x – 2*x*x + 3*x + 6
    • Horner’s method:
      P(x) = (((4*x + 7) * x – 2) * x + 3) * x + 6

    Would a computer have figured out Horner's method? No, the computer would have done the brute force, but the brain saw the option for Horner's method and completed it.

    But another advantage is that computers focus more and would complete either computation faster than the human brain. How often can you focus on doing 1500/234 without realizing you didn't eat lunch? (Example :P)

    Just my 0.02.

    Source: http://www.csd.uwo.ca/faculty/beau/C...alysis-W10.pdf
    Last edited by Nava2; 04-02-2010 at 05:02 PM.
    Writing an SRL Member Application | [Updated] Pascal Scripting Statements
    My GitHub

    Progress Report:
    13:46 <@BenLand100> <SourceCode> @BenLand100: what you have just said shows you 
                        have serious physchological problems
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE GETS IT!
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE FINALLY GETS IT!!!!1

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Williston, ND
    Posts
    3,106
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3 Post(s)

    Default

    Where is this computer?! I'll take it on anytime, anywhere!
    Proud owner of "Efferator" my totally boted main account!
    "You see, sometimes, science is not a guess" -Xiaobing Zhou (my past physics professor, with heavy Chinese accent)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A
    Posts
    586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brain View Post
    Where is this computer?! I'll take it on anytime, anywhere!
    lol, he couldnt resist this thread, lol he had to post

    anyways, nava is very correct, our brain uses alot of proccessing to find patterns in life, and when it does it can use the patterns as a shortcut, so instead of 4*4 it may get a "feel" for the pattern/speed of the slope. my examples are horrible, sorry

    basically our brains have the ability to constantly change or 'self-evolve', which computers cannot yet do. this adds a whole ne dimension to this thread. lol. if you are thinking of which can compute faster, the brain or computer, then currently computers are quickly catching up to the brain, if you are thinking of which is smarter, compuer or brain, then brains will own computers until we can create fully functional learning/smart AI's
    Sell botted goods at mid to high prices!!! Else we lose our profit AND ruin the game!!!!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,219
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    As well as using a fraction of neurons, the brain is divided.

    http://xkcd.com/604/

    This happens because listening to words and typing words (reading/writing/talking too) are both handled by the same part of the brain. While it appears the brain is multitasking a lot, in cases where the same area of the brain is needed, it is really switching from one task to another very rapidly, usually at the cost of speed/accuracy/etc. For example, try reading while listening to classical music, (or anything without lyrics) which is actual multitasking, compared to reading while listening to something with lyrics, which is task switching. (Technically both are actual multitasking if you count breathing etc as a task.)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    http://ushort.us/oqmd65
    Posts
    2,605
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    The computer wouldn't know the bruteforce method, it would have to have been *programmed* for it... If it would find out methods on its own (self-evolve like g0tp0t said). It would most likely come up with a faster easier way to do it then horners method.
    I do visit every 2-6 months

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    4,791
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    The problem is computers can't really teach themselves like humans do.... yet O_o.

    When we see computers telling humans to do tasks for them then we'll know who the winner is.

    Until then, Brain stomps.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wednesday
    Posts
    2,446
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Brains are merely biological computers. Iirc, some people are even trying to use DNA as a biological computer, which is pretty awesome!
    By reading this signature you agree that mixster is superior to you in each and every way except the bad ways but including the really bad ways.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    7,805
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3 Post(s)

    Default

    DNA computing is being worked on, it will probably be around before Quantum Computing. But I would say that graphene computing is more likely.
    Writing an SRL Member Application | [Updated] Pascal Scripting Statements
    My GitHub

    Progress Report:
    13:46 <@BenLand100> <SourceCode> @BenLand100: what you have just said shows you 
                        have serious physchological problems
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE GETS IT!
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE FINALLY GETS IT!!!!1

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    New Hampshire, U.S.A
    Posts
    586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    ill google and then edit this post saying what dna and quantum compting are, just to make navas post a little clearer. lol i cant be the only one that doesnt already understand.

    also when i said that your brain gets a feel for 4*4, i meant you get a feel for the slope of the squares of numbers. for example, if you see 4*4 = 16 and 6*6 = 36 and 9*9 = 81 etc. then your brain sees the pattern and estimates what the square of some numbrer is, instead of doing it the hard way(i dont know how to say that so ill give an example).

    if you want the squared of 3 then your brain would do 3^2 or 3^3 whereas without the pattern(the way a computer would have to do it) the calculation would be 3+3+3, which would take longer. remember im talking about estimating. because computers dont estimate/use patterns(until we give them patterns) they get the exact answers.

    post if i dont make sense and tell me what could be explained better, i will try to fix it

    SPAM: i love this thread, philosophy owns
    Last edited by g0tp0t; 04-03-2010 at 06:34 PM.
    Sell botted goods at mid to high prices!!! Else we lose our profit AND ruin the game!!!!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wednesday
    Posts
    2,446
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Actually computers can estimate and one of the greatest things about them is they can give fairly intelligent estimates given the correct programming by making use of game theory and the like as well as make these estimates a lot quicker than humans could in many cases (such as weather forecasting).
    By reading this signature you agree that mixster is superior to you in each and every way except the bad ways but including the really bad ways.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    2,851
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    2 Post(s)

    Default

    The DNA computer would be awesome. Now one bit (a quarter of a byte) stores a 0 or 1, with DNA it would store an A, T, G, or C. If we made it of RNA (which would probably be much more complicated and unstable) we would have combinations A, U, G, C, I, +++ many more :P not all of them are actually data-containing stuff like they always are in DNA, but if they could be read as such... That'd be uber.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,240
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    11 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marpis View Post
    The DNA computer would be awesome. Now one bit (a quarter of a byte) stores a 0 or 1, with DNA it would store an A, T, G, or C. If we made it of RNA (which would probably be much more complicated and unstable) we would have combinations A, U, G, C, I, +++ many more :P not all of them are actually data-containing stuff like they always are in DNA, but if they could be read as such... That'd be uber.
    Don't forget RNA, that has A, C, G, U
    Click here to find out how to get full screen without members! | Click here to check out my Ultimate Bitmap Tutorial! Edited to work with Simba! |

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    46696E6C616E64
    Posts
    3,069
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Quoted
    302 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cycrosism View Post
    Don't forget RNA, that has A, C, G, U
    Did you even read the whole post?
    There used to be something meaningful here.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    7,805
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3 Post(s)

    Default

    marpis, where are you getting the other bases for RNA? I could have sworn it was made up of A, U, G, and C.
    Writing an SRL Member Application | [Updated] Pascal Scripting Statements
    My GitHub

    Progress Report:
    13:46 <@BenLand100> <SourceCode> @BenLand100: what you have just said shows you 
                        have serious physchological problems
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE GETS IT!
    13:46 <@BenLand100> HE FINALLY GETS IT!!!!1

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,227
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quoted
    60 Post(s)

    Default

    Yeah, where's the I from? Or the "many more?"

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    2,851
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    2 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nava2 View Post
    marpis, where are you getting the other bases for RNA? I could have sworn it was made up of A, U, G, and C.
    Quote Originally Posted by i luffs yeww View Post
    Yeah, where's the I from? Or the "many more?"
    I is for Inosine, which's base is hypoksantine. And there are parts like mi-RNA and several others with some greek letters I don't know about.
    Inosine can attach to A, C, and U and is found in the messenger-RNA.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •