Sat 23 Jan 2010
Path to Brain Augmentation
Posted by John Burch under Augmentation , Medical , nanoFactory[10] Comments
I was asked if I knew anyone working on brain augmentation. I don’t. We are too early in the development phase of true nanotechnology. You could say that all work and research going on now is part of the foundation of brain augmentation as well as life extension.
We are our brains. You can replace anything else in our body from some other body and we keep going. Replace your brain with a brain from someone else and you don’t even exist anymore.
I’m aware that some people with a different perspective would consider this crazy because they consider the mind and body to be one. They can’t consider the mind apart from the body. I agree that the two are so well integrated that it is hard to consider the mind apart from the body. Tell that to the poor souls trapped in a body they can’t feel or move in hospitals today. The mind goes on, no matter what the body, outside of the skull, is able to contribute.
So, if the brain is the essence of who we are, we only need to keep that brain working in good order to live forever. Of course, we like our bodies and the experience we get from our bodies and we don’t want to be a brain in a box. But don’t get confused about what is important. Once you have the technology to build and repair things at the molecular level, you can build any body you want or keep the one you have in good repair. But if the brain degrades or fails, you die.
So, the brain should be the focus of our efforts to improve our health and life experience. And along the way, we learn how to augment our brains very easily since it’s just another piece of hardware that needs an interface. If we try to understand the entire body and repair it first so as to support the aging brain, we waste time and people.
The sequence of events should run like this:
1) Fully understand the brain at the biological cell level of a pig and a human.
( That should take another 10 to 20 years).
2) Develop brain cell replacement cells made of inorganic materials such as silicon and ceramic, that exactly duplicate the functions of all types of cells in the brain of a pig and a human. (a good 10 years of research after you have a full function nanofactory available in many labs).
3) Test limited cell replacement in pigs and prove the replacement cells are equivalent to the original.
4) Test interface modules to the pig brain to bring in extra memory, audio and video input and internet connections.
5) (Finally we get to Human Brain Augmentation) Test limited cell replacements in human brains to form an interface for extra memory, audio and video input and internet connections. Once you have an interface you can add any function to the brain.
6) Test limited cell replacement in humans to repair brain injury. Prove the additions are equivalent to the original brain material.
7) Test full brain replacement in pigs and prove the repair and replacement of the modules can extend the life of the pig brain indefinitely.
8 ) Test full brain replacement in humans who are dying and willing to take the risk. Show, to the extent possible, that the person is the same as the original.
After this, anyone can have their organic brain replaced slowly over time ( six months) while retaining consciousness and full function and they will then gain potentially eternal life, full download/upload ability to backup their minds to local memory, ability to change bodies to alternative biological versions or to fully inorganic bodies that duplicate the function and appearance of biological bodies. In other words, replace your organic brain with an inorganic version and you gain tremendous value.
Do we retain the soul in such a replacement? I don’t know because I don’t know what a soul is. Provide me with a technical description of the soul and I’ll be happy to incorporate it into the mix.
February 7th, 2010 at 2:58 pm
Bravo John! I am glad to see you writing again. The soul can’t be explained technically. I think a soul just a word to describe “who you really are”. I hope that helps.
February 7th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Hey David,
Thanks, I’ll try to be more focused. Survival issues sometime take time away from what we love.
That comment about a soul was more of a challenge for anyone who wants to argue.
John
March 15th, 2010 at 5:45 am
[...] Path to Brain Aumentation (nanofuture2030.com) Enjoy!! [...]
March 18th, 2010 at 8:09 am
Although I agree with you on the need to address the issue of our brain first, I tend to disagree with your all-inclusive statement: “we are our brain”. Our brain was fashioned by evolution to fit into its body, our “survival” instinct notwithstanding. Have you given any thought to the impact of severing a connection that took Nature eons to devise? What will happen to all our bodily response to threat, the face of a baby, the horrors of criminal actions etc? I don’t think it’ll be enough to show that pigs can go on living with their brains outside their body, but that human traits can do the same thing (the good as well as the bad ones – that’s the Nature of the Beast).
Hope I’ve made sense, and hope also to hear your response.
Yahuda.
March 18th, 2010 at 9:35 am
Yahuda,
Great response, I appreciate the thought and time you contributed.
As in most cases, my all-inclusive statement was more to make a statement than to state something precisely.
I agree that we are biological creatures who would be lost without a body. Those sense deprivation experiments where anyone eventually goes crazy are good evidence that our mental functioning depends on a body. So much of who we are mentally is derived from a biological body. However, my point was that the brain is the essential part of us and any other part of the body is disposable, modifiable or able to be contributed to another body without harming the core of who we are.
And I never meant to imply the pig would be without his body either. I meant that our brains would continue to exist in our body as the brain and the body both evolved to a higher state. Adding stuff as our needs changed and deleting stuff as we ceased to need it.
It’s really hard to imagine all the changes that would happen if the individual could control his/her body. Many would try to stay human and others would diffuse out into the possibility space and would appear to be leaving their humanity behind. And that would disturb a lot of people.
I prefer to remain human just because I need and enjoy having a familiar reference point. If you live a thousand years, I think it would become common to explore alternatives.
April 17th, 2010 at 3:24 am
excellent post! this is seriosly important stuff here!
i recently read an article concerning the attachment of rat neurons to carbon nanotubes (http://www.aftau.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=11915). i’m no scientist, but couldn’t the implictions of this be huge? apparently the CNTs can sustain the living neurons, as well as read signals coming from the cells and even input signals into them. to me this brings to mind the idea from Ian. M. Banks’ Culture novels, of a localised battery able to sustain the brain when the bodily functions fail, not to mention a very plausible method of direct Brain-Computer Interface.
just thought this might be relevant,
Dayerst
April 17th, 2010 at 9:21 am
Hey Dayerst,
I remember that nanotube article. Cool, those nanotubes keep appearing in new places. Anything that makes it easier to interface to the brain is a good thing. Thanks for the comments. John
May 17th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
Thank you for the thought-provoking article!
In reference to the problem of body/sensory deprivation: I think that by the time we have the tech to do what you are describing with the human brain, it will seem the simplest of matters to equip a robotic body with a full range of sensors to replicate the experiential set of a natural human body. It will be equally simple to add sensory functions beyond the bio-human set, e.g. electromagnetic (shark, homing pigeon); expanded EM frequency (ultraviolet, infrared color perception).
Personally I believe that the brain is only an interface between the body and the consciousness/soul – and a limited interface at that – but of course that is a metaphysical discussion!
Cheers!
August 3rd, 2010 at 11:48 pm
Hi there,
Just stumbled upon your blog and I really enjoy the thought provoking articles. I just wanted to add another thought into the mix. So much of our personality is tied to our emotions and i just wonder what your thoughts are on how brain augmentation would effect our emotional state. I’m not the most eloquent person but basically, would a person with an augmented brain as you describe still be subject to his or her emotions, since those are largly caused by chemicals in the brain. I have visions of a person acting as though they have had a lobotomy, lacking the ability to understand things from an emotional standpoint. Maybe still having all the memories but not the filters to understand them properly. I suppose by the time you could pull this kind of technological feat off they would have an answer for that but it is still a pressing concern. I only toss this out there to play devil’s advocate, I love a good argument, everybody learns from them. Honestly I support this kind of research, improving ourselves is only a natural step after all, and lets be honest, somebody is going to do it first….
August 4th, 2010 at 4:59 am
Tyler, Thanks for the comment. It’s really good to get your input.
Short answer: I don’t think augmentation will affect us by interfering with our emotions. Longer answer: Anytime you do anything to the brain (drink, drugs, stress, nutrition) you are affected. But we can’t really screw around with the fundamental operation of a brain until we understand a heck of a lot more than we do now. I can’t see any reason to try such a thing. What I’m talking about as augmentation is basically adding an interface to the brain. Thought level access to the same things you have access to now. Internet, video, music, cellphones, etc ). That would not affect your brain anymore than they do now. To start screwing with how we actually operate (affect emotions or fundamental data flows ) is a totally new goal and not one we are ready to even try unless you are trying to cure mental illness in an individual. Shock therapy certainly tried to change how we think and feel – with a brutal disregard for the person. I hope they understand a lot more about how we operate before they try something of that nature. Results don’t always justify the means in this case.
So a brain would not be lobotomized by augmentation. It would just have access to more data input/output. Now if you want more memory or more computation, I think it would still be an interface to that function rather than a rework of existing biological functions. We just don’t know how to do that and it’s damn hard to do with a holographic brain, whereas an interface is drop dead simple by comparison.
An interface to more memory would be a thought level interface to a recorder of video, sounds, and at a higher level, a recording of brain signals and the playback of translated signals to stimulate your own bio memory. Seems awkward. I’ll vote to keep them as simple interfaces for a long time to come. It makes no sense to me to change who I am by screwing with my brain. I’m sort of invested in this present configuration. Enough change of that sort and you are no longer the same person. Why do that? This person wants to have more toys, not to be morphed into someone else. If I change into a different person by fundamental brain organization changes, then I become some other person and there are already plenty of other persons, why make another at the expense of this existing person?
I love a good argument too.
John