On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at 3:33 AM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote:
> Carver Mead abides. His book "Collective Electrodynamics" has not > received the attention it deserves, IMHO. The ansatz of that book aligns > his interest in analog neural networks with Lester Ingber's > neurophysiological modeling of cortical columnalar vector potential Ca++ > waves as mesoscale communication. If you won't contact Lester Ingbar then > at least contact Carver Mead. > I have it. I know all about his work. I have read literally hundreds of neuromorphic chip papers. It is not relevant. Carver Mead made a model of ion channel currents using subthreshold transistors to do the math. The model is an analog computer that computes a property of brain signalling: the transmembrane potential. It does not replicate brain physics. It is theoretical science. Brain physics gone. Modelling. I explain exactly how this is being mistaken for physics replication. I illustrated this in fine-grained detail in the article. It is not what the neuromimetic chip does. Neuromorphic chips do not do replication of brain physics. They do not impress the natural electromagnetism that the brain uses. See section 2.3 and 3 in the paper. An entire huge computational study demonstrates specifically the difference between the neuromorphic chip and the neuromimetic chip. I will not be bothering these people because their work is irrelevant. They would just be annoyed. cheers Colin ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T2f2a092379e757d2-M98ec8ac15a2111fe53b6ee75 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
