SYNAPSES: The connection points between neurons regulate information flow throughout the brain.
In Brief
- Three pounds of nerve tissue underneath the skull are capable of perceiving, thinking and acting with a finesse that cannot be matched by any computer.
- The brain achieves this feat of cognition, in part, by carefully timing the signals that flash across the trillions of connections that link billions of brain cells.
- Seeing a flower pot causes groups of neurons to fire in a brief time interval to activate a part of the brain that registers that particular object at just that one moment.
- Understanding how this timing system works will both lead to better understanding of our behavior and enable the building of new computing and electronic equipment that, like the brain, functions more efficiently than conventional digital machines.
More In This Article
-
Overview
The Eye Camera [Video]
Our brains are better than Google or the best robot from iRobot.
We can instantly search through a vast wealth of experiences and emotions. We can immediately recognize the face of a parent, spouse, friend or pet, whether in daylight, darkness, from above or sideways—a task that the computer vision system built into the most sophisticated robots can accomplish only haltingly. We can also multitask effortlessly when we extract a handkerchief from a pocket and mop our brow while striking up a conversation with an acquaintance. Yet designing an electronic brain that would allow a robot to perform this simple combination of behaviors remains a distant prospect.
This article was originally published with the title The Language of the Brain.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
11 Comments
Add CommentI subscribe to the Scientific American. Why do I have to buy a subscription to read one of the articles in your September issue? If I wait I presume it will come in the mail.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlso, if I cannot read any of the articles in new issues, why do you keep sending me these emails announcing new issues with links to articles.
I repeat I am already a subscriber.
What are you trying to accomplish?
Why should I be grateful that you are trying to do whatever it is that you are trying to do.
I am not going to buy a second subscription.
What is the relationship between a bunch of subatomic particles bundled up with certain forces of nature called a pot and its registration in the brain as a bunch of proteins bundled up with some electro-chemical forces?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBy what processes do we start "to know" those bio-informations as a pot, ie, turn into language?
j.wirt - if your complaint is that you should have access to the article above as a paid print subscriber (which I am as well) - then I totally agree with you. It is utter garbage to get a notice about an article for a magazine you and I PAY for to only see that we cannot read it online...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYesterday, I read the full article on line without having any subscription. Now when I was going thru second reading, it directs to buy or subscribe. What sort of editorial confusion in a reputed international magazine like SA?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot sure where else to post this as I could not find a forum for the magazine…
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHaving just read the article in the print magazine I came up with a few observations and questions.
A bit of background: I’m an amateur visual artist: drawing, charcoal, various paints. I have had some limited formal training that taught me much more than I expected. One of the things I noticed most was not in my artistic skills, but in the way that the training and practice of those skills changed how I visually perceived the world around me. You start to notice the smaller components of objects you are looking at, the details rather than the whole. You also start to notice more subtleties of color and tone. It was quite an interesting experience to notice the change in perception, and it increases the more you practice it.
With that in my mind and after reading the article a few questions developed. The article notes that spike timing synchronization is associated with the merging of different perceived aspects of an object into “recognizable images”. The flower pot is given as an example in the article. Is the “image” recognized an iconic representation that the brain has for “flower pot”? As in an iconic object that allows the system to quickly recognize the object as quick as possible regardless of differing details between two slightly different examples. Or is it more the specific details of the currently perceived object? If it is the former, would highly trained visual artists have more spike synchronization as they are consciously processing more “minor” details?
If I am thinking somewhat correctly I wonder if visual artists (trained well above my level) may have differently developed interconnectedness between the thalamus and the visual cortex as they have trained themselves to consciously notice the details that a system using iconic object recognition would overlook as unneeded. (damn that was a long sentence). I hope I’m articulating this understandably.
The wonderful yet poorly understood human brain is neuroscience's holy grail to understand our mental processes, our cognition and our ego-counsciousness. It may take many years before we can fully understand this marvelous but highly complex organ-machine. Neuroscience is making strides but I think it is in its infancy as far as providing a working model of the brain.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe way the human brain handles information is subtle yet complex. I believe the processes that take place in the brain are not purely bio-chemical but require the presence of higher sub-atomic forces that perhaps we have not yet discovered.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI believe that eventually neuroscience and particle physics will converge in order to study and present a working model of the processes that take place inside of the human brain.
The digital subscription version of Scientific American is separate from the physical mail subscription they offer. They could choose to give you both with one subscription fee, but they do not, and that is their choice. They have not wronged you, you just expected to get more than they were offering.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd you had the option to tell them not to send you emails when you signed up on their website.
To mr. Sejnowski: On page 51 you write:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this- if the neuron on the 'other side' fires within 10 ms before the 'first one'.
What does this mean in terms of e.g. the 'signal-feeding' side of the synapse and the 'signal-receiving side' ?
I was expecting from the title of this article a more detailed discourse on what happens at the synapse. Instead the article took a more systems oriented approach - this is not in itself bad, but the title was a bit misleading.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust finished reading the article in the print issue. I enjoyed it overall, I must say though that Max Planck's name deserves correct spelling.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this