I was struck that of the “important ethical issues” Henry Markram refers to regarding building a completely simulated human brain in “The Human Brain Project,” the only one he raises is that of a superintelligent nemesis being created. He does not appear to consider the ethical obligations we would have toward the mind we had created. I worry about the precarious humanity of the minds we would create and about the humanity of the researchers who could, with the touch of a button, give a being with memories and an expectation of the future—if this all works as Markram hopes it will—autism, schizophrenia or a progressively degenerative disease. Who will turn off the simulation when the virtual mind begs them not to?
Robert A. Rushing
University of Illinois
Markram glosses over the key potential benefit of the project: understanding the human brain may allow us to augment intelligence and eventually create superintelligent nonbiological humans.
It also raises a key metaphysical question: If the simulation of the human brain is deterministic, how can it have free will? Or is it impossible to fully simulate human cognition on a deterministic machine?
Avishay Gal-Yam's “Super Supernovae” discusses how stars once thought to be too massive to explode have resulted in supernovae more powerful and longer lasting than any previously observed.
Gal-Yam describes how the production of electrons and positrons removed such stars' supporting pressure of gamma rays, leading to their sudden collapse. But he didn't say what happens to the positrons. Wouldn't they collide with the electrons, be converted back to gamma rays and thus restore support for the star?
Also, do gamma rays from a positron-electron reaction have a characteristic wavelength that can be observed?
GAL-YAM REPLIES: Indeed, positrons produced in the hot core of the star will eventually annihilate with electrons and produce pairs of gamma rays with a particular energy equal approximately to the rest mass of the electrons. This process takes time, however, which means that at any given point, the energy (that was previously completely carried by photons) will now be distributed between photons (which provide pressure) and electrons and positrons with energy dominated by rest mass (which do not). Thus, the overall pressure drops, the core contracts, and so on.
The gamma rays produced by electron-positron annihilation do have a characteristic energy (511,000 electron volts, or 511 KeV), but they are unobservable because the envelope of the expanding star is not transparent; the gamma rays interact with electrons and ions in the outer layers of the expanding, exploding star and are converted to lower-energy photons, which we eventually can observe as light.
PUBLISH AND PERISH?
“Waiting to Explode,” by Fred Guterl, addresses the controversy over publishing two recent studies on the development of H5N1 flu strains that are transmissible among mammals (both studies have since been released). As a scientist, I initially felt it was necessary for all the H5N1 bird flu results to be released: publications allow other scientists to continue projects, and researchers have a responsibility to communicate their data to other scientists. After careful consideration, however, I now feel that submitting all the data was a mistake. The results from this project could help terrorists perfect an airborne delivery system to infect humans.
The solution to this problem would have been to publish some of the scientific findings but restrict the key elements—namely, precisely how to make changes to the viruses that would create an airborne entity. These undisclosed methods could have been shared on a case-by-case basis among researchers, which would have allowed for the continued examination of data among responsible parties trying to enhance public health.[break]
Publishing a redacted form of the manuscript would have satisfied the need for scientists to exchange general data to fight any future pandemic and yet protect security needs. Unfortunately, these changing times will force us to reevaluate and redesign our traditional approach to sharing scientific discoveries in favor of the greater good.
Claude E. Gagna
New York Institute of Technology
In “The Ultimate Social Network,” Jennifer Ackerman writes about the “benefits” of the bacterium Helicobacter pylori on the digestive system and its possible role in controlling obesity. She describes H. pylori's maligned status in the medical world as a “nasty rap” because of its role in causing peptic ulcers.
Ackerman neglected to mention H. pylori's role in stomach cancer. Whereas only 1 to around 2 percent of H. pylori patients develop gastric cancer, H. pylori infection makes you nearly six times more likely to develop the disease.
This hits close to home for me. My father, brother and I were diagnosed with H. pylori, and I was found to have stage IV gastric cancer. Scientific research into the complex relation between H. pylori and humans is critical. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that this bug is a killer.
Shaker Heights, Ohio
After reading Backyard Brains co-founder Greg Gage's description of his company's SpikerBox kit in “When Cockroach Legs Dance” [Advances], I immediately found a YouTube video of Gage hooking it up to his iPhone. His device allows you to hear the neural activity in a cockroach leg that is made to dance. I was amazed and thought how much I would have liked to use it in my classroom.
I taught seventh grade life science for 40 years and always believed it was essential to provide memorable interactive experiences. Our schedule included an 80-minute lab period each week, and it was my pleasure to fill that time with highly motivating hands-on activities. Frequently, when students from previous years came to visit, the conversation would turn to experiences they remembered from those activities. Often these students had gone on to careers related to biology.
I have been retired for a year now. The school administrators have done away with the weekly lab because of schedule changes. I am devastated that after all those years, they never understood the tremendous importance of all those hands-on lab experiences. They really need to see a dancing cockroach leg hooked up to an iPhone!
In “The Right Way to Get It Wrong,” by David Kaiser and Angela N. H. Creager, Phycomyces is described as an alga. It is a fungus.