[spam] Re: Brain chip reads man's thoughts

[Bj_rn_Simonsen]

[From Bjorn Simonsen (2006.10.22,12:30 EUST)]

[From Bryan Thalhammer (2006.08.21.1850 CDT)] (Let us both come back to the tenth month J )

But the thing I saw when you wrote this is the
control

system(s) that result in hand or finger movements are

bypassed all right, but other control systems that

apparently can vary bioelectrical valences (?) can
be

reorganized to eventually actuate the chip in the same

way as the joystick.

What do you think?

I am not sure I understand what you say in the section
above.

If I wish to turn a wheelchair to the right by turning
a steering wheel to the right, I must tighten my right biceps (and other
muscles). If I have a chip operated in my right biceps I understand that I can
wish to turn a wheelchair to the right and the chip will send signals to the
wheelchair and it will turn to the right, without me turning the steering
wheel. This is what I call biofeedback and I learned about that reading
“Industrial Research” from December 1972.

If I wish to turn the wheelchair to the left, I must
have a chip operated in my left biceps.

If the chip is operated in the dorsal vertebra I can
understand that one chip may operate on both spinal nerves that send signals to
my right arm biceps and my left arm biceps. And I understand that a system on
the wheelchair can make the wheelchair turn both to the right and to the left.
The needles on the chip must contact both spinal nerves going to my right and
my left biceps.

I have problems if the chip is placed in the motor
nuclei in the brain stem (HPCT 2. level). How is it possible to differentiate
between nerves going my right foot and my right arm and my right breast.

I have the same problems if the chip is placed in the
cerebellum (HPCT 3. level). How is it here possible to get contact between the nerve
cell sending signals to the spinal area for the right arm biceps?

I have never read about chips placed in thalamus and
the inner layer of cortex (HPCT 4. level).

I have found another URL describing what I saw on the
TV news; http://www.ivanhoe.com/channels/p_channelstory.cfm?storyid=14670
. I think the Utah Electrode Array described here may be placed in a cortex
area where we know from PET (positron emission tomography) that an area is
active when other people turn a steering wheel to the right. But how is it
possible to know there will be contact between the nerve cell sending signals
to the spinal area for the right arm biceps?

I dunno, this is not momentous. The joystick has
been put inside the brain,

albeit not inside any control system, and can be
controlled in the same way with

the electrical variances as formerly with the
hand.

A joystick handle is turned by hand when we wish
something to turn right. When we wish the wheelchair to turn right we turn the
handle.

If we “put the joystick into cortex”, there is no
hand. We must get contact between a certain cell and one of the needles at the
chip.

Must it also contact the cell just a place where there
is not myelin?

bjorn

[B_Thalhammer]

[From Bryan Thalhammer (2006.10.22.1540 CDT]

Hey, yeah, it is later than I thought! So much for cut and paste.

Ok, well, in my response is I did not know where the chip was, but I do not
think that matters much for my response. But since the nervous system, and hence
the brain, is literally through out the body, I don't much care.

I see two options for a person to move the chair.

1. Joystick: A person sends reference settings down the hierarchy. Those lower
level control systems that are most important are those which involve
neuromuscular pathways (I am not at all clear here, but I go on). So, let's say
that the neuromuscular pathway used to go from frontal lobe (goals, programs) to
the place where the sensations are, to the place where outputs go to the limbs
and fingers. If the person is incapacitated somewhere in the brainstem, then the
signals go that far and get lost, and fingers do not move. So, as I understand,
a chip that can sense bioelectric valences (?) is placed somewhere "above" the
injury, which I read is somewhere in the brain, but not within a control system
of any kind. It is just sitting there with nerve tissues around. I am assuming
that the chip would be able to sense bioelectric waves coming at it in different
directions, different wave forms, or from different contacts on the chip itself.
I am letting that idea go to the specialists, but I would say that we already
know that a blind person can interpret a chip visual array to discern a field of
vision and that project is improving exponentially.

2. Chip: Formerly, a person could visualize the joystick, sense it, and send
outputs down through the hierarchy and down through the brainstem, so that
fingers move the joystick in a way that satisfactorily controls the chair. But
now, no brainstem, no limbs, and no fingers. The chip, however, can sense the
electric signals the person could direct toward it. So, by some biofeedback
training, the person learns to activate the chip, just like a baby, getting a
signal, and then getting the signal refined. In effect, the chip is no different
than the joystick, only the way that perceptions are controlled is that the
outputs are going to the chip instead of the joystick. And while much of the
higher level control systems may be basically unaffected, the hierarchy will be
reorganized so that the outputs that control the desired perceptions are going
physically toward the location of the chip (wherever that might be, I don't
care) rather than down through the brainstem.

So my response was that putting a chip does not present a challenge to HPCT,
other than that a whole lot of reorganization has to be done. But I bet that is
no different substantively than what happens when the brain suffers an injury or
lesion. And in both cases, you see that the brain has an amazing ability to try
to circumvent the problem.

Okay?!

--Bry

···

[Bjorn Simonsen (2006.10.22,12:30 EUST)]

[Bryan Thalhammer (2006.08.21.1850 CDT)] (Let us both come back to the
tenth month )

>But the thing I saw when you wrote this is the control
>system(s) that result in hand or finger movements are
>bypassed all right, but other control systems that
>apparently can vary bioelectrical valences (?) can be
>reorganized to eventually actuate the chip in the same
>way as the joystick.

>What do you think?

I am not sure I understand what you say in the section above.
If I wish to turn a wheelchair to the right by turning a steering wheel to
the right, I must tighten my right biceps (and other muscles). If I have a
chip operated in my right biceps I understand that I can wish to turn a
wheelchair to the right and the chip will send signals to the wheelchair and
it will turn to the right, without me turning the steering wheel. This is
what I call biofeedback and I learned about that reading �Industrial
Research� from December 1972.
If I wish to turn the wheelchair to the left, I must have a chip operated in
my left biceps.

If the chip is operated in the dorsal vertebra I can understand that one
chip may operate on both spinal nerves that send signals to my right arm
biceps and my left arm biceps. And I understand that a system on the
wheelchair can make the wheelchair turn both to the right and to the left.
The needles on the chip must contact both spinal nerves going to my right
and my left biceps.

I have problems if the chip is placed in the motor nuclei in the brain stem
(HPCT 2. level). How is it possible to differentiate between nerves going my
right foot and my right arm and my right breast.

I have the same problems if the chip is placed in the cerebellum (HPCT 3.
level). How is it here possible to get contact between the nerve cell
sending signals to the spinal area for the right arm biceps?
I have never read about chips placed in thalamus and the inner layer of
cortex (HPCT 4. level).

I have found another URL describing what I saw on the TV news;
http://www.ivanhoe.com/channels/p_channelstory.cfm?storyid=14670 . I think
the Utah Electrode Array described here may be placed in a cortex area where
we know from PET (positron emission tomography) that an area is active when
other people turn a steering wheel to the right. But how is it possible to
know there will be contact between the nerve cell sending signals to the
spinal area for the right arm biceps?

>I dunno, this is not momentous. The joystick has been put inside the brain,
>albeit not inside any control system, and can be controlled in the same way
with
>the electrical variances as formerly with the hand.

A joystick handle is turned by hand when we wish something to turn right.
When we wish the wheelchair to turn right we turn the handle.
If we �put the joystick into cortex�, there is no hand. We must get contact
between a certain cell and one of the needles at the chip.
Must it also contact the cell just a place where there is not myelin?

bjorn