This is more a philosophical question on as humans specializing in the computer field. As the human race gets older we are constantly learning new things. To keep these lessons we write them down, as the less we concentrate on a subject the less we learn about it. (This is all theory, my assumptions based on subjects I know very little about.) Will the amount of information we try to store ever be limited to the amount of people we have on earth, requiring us to use tecnology as the modern day information book keeper? Thus passing on every bit of information to computers. Giving them the knowledge to exist?

The human brain has a finite storage capacity, of that there is no doubt, but because we still only use a small fraction of our brains we have a lot of room for improvement. That improvement, I believe, will come from better education, memorisation techniques, and also from better nutrition and lifestyle choices. Certain behaviours and foods help the brain to function while others hinder it.

As far as I understand, this term is controversial. Using 10% or so.(?)

For the intents and purposes of this discussion, I want to assume that everybody has potential, but that potential is limited to the choices they make in life, and the situations we as humans find ourselves in can't be controlled.

That we do use use all our brain power to live and perform basic functions and complicated functions such as computing, processing and memorization.

This power or % used, is defined by potential. So in theory to know.everything we know as humans, must be currently known by at least one person.
This seperates specialities of thought processes, (A writers thinking vs a mathematician vs a sports player vs an accounting to name a few examples. )

How do people acquire information. Through learning ussually being taught be someone, or something the performs functions. Books perform the funtion of storing information people read and learn. Now its all goin with technology, will this be the tool that gives rise to a new mechanical species? Or allow new forms to exist once humans as a race goes extinct

I deliberately didn;t put a figure on it because we do not really know how much we use.

@ SuddenGun, everybody has potential. Not everybody uses it, some people blame everyone else for not having opportunities, while others just squander the opportunities they are given. At our current level of technology I really doubt we could put a number on what we can learn and retain. With regards to computers being the new books I doubt they will ever really replace books totally and I doubt that there will be a new "species" because of the advancement in technology we know today as computers. There hasn't been a new species (of human at least) in at least 50k years, I'd argue longer, and if one does develop they would probably see what a screw up bunch we are and how we have stuffed the planet so they may not even choose to use our technologies or those that are derived from them.

All of this is, of course, hypothetical.

@k3lt01
I think you make an awesome point, regarding the next (sort of evolutionary) species, might really see the the humans species and the tools it has as completely inefficient, and toss out the idea of evening using what we have put into the world. So would we conclude the species we currently know now as humans overall is limited in the way we think, and the mass potential ofthe human species as a whole. Whether it be the brain capacity of holding information, or the way we manipulate the information we have stored.

I think the issue, probably not the best word to use, is that we claim we are so smart yet we cannot fix problems we create and we cannot even begin to see where humanity as a species is going. We have plenty of "evidence" of where we have been and using a logical progression we should be able to make a mud map of where we could be heading but no one has a clue.

I believe this is a misinterpretation of the fact that only a fraction of neurons are firing at a given time. If they were all firing all the time, that would be a constant seizure.

You only have to consider the "capacity" of human memory if you believe that all things that can be recalled are actually "stored." The idea that the human mind is like a computer is a bit outdated, except in traditional AI and CS. One perspective is that ideas are reconstructed upon recall rather than being explicitly stored. You also have to take into account the cues that prompt recall and how they affect what's actually recalled; priming can certainly cause someone to recall a fact, or even an experience, incorrectly. People also have trouble remembering things that don't make sense, so conflicting input is "made sense of" by imposing some explanatory structure that might not actually be true, and the same is probably true regarding the recall process. To summarize: There is a reason we use computers.
Kevin Barry

For sure any information that must be reliable must be written down. Human memory is unreliable, mostly because it cannot be marked read-only. This means that every time you access a memory it is "mounted" (probably not mounted but accessed) read-write and thus can be changed and often is. You can ask any investigator about this, and they will tell you the same thing. People's memories are easily influenced and change with time and number of accesses / accounts.

An extremely common misconception caused by a lack of understanding. Humans use 100% of their brains, just not all at once. At any one instant you will be using less than 100%, and the numbers vary.

This is getting off topic, but from my understanding of human memory from numerous studies that I have read: An index exists in the area of the hippocampus where memory is indexed. Interestingly, the index is triggered by an object, i.e. if the index contains say a certain person or a house it will be activated when it is recognized, from any angle. So, you can view the object from any angle and once you recognize the object, the index is triggered. However, the memory itself is stored locally in the various functional areas of the brain. For example, sound info is stored in the auditory cortex / temporal lobe, the visual info in the visual cortex / occipital lobe, etc. Another important fact is that smell feeds directly into the limbic system and forms and triggers very vivid memories, perhaps because of its ancient origin. I mean, animals mostly communicate by scent, and so it makes sense that memory is required in this case.

Anyway, I'm afraid I have to unsubscribe because I see this being moved to General soon.

It is physical limited.
But virtual unlimited.

Think of a hammer as an brain-memory-swaped-out knowledge.
Loads of physics do manifest in the form of a hammer.

And besides:
I don't believe "the brain" "does know" something.
The brain is only a holographic sender/receiver.

If you listen to a orchestra playing Bach in the radio, you won't find little musicians by tearing the radio apart.

I just know there will be a complaint made soon about this reply but I don't care.That is not what anyone has referred to, the topic is about memory not overall brain usage when everything the brain can do is taken into its overall measurement of capacity. The human brain does not use all of its capacity for memory, it cannot physically do this. There are parts that relate to the control and functioning of organs, feeling, speech etc and they are not used for memory. If you believe they are then prove it.

By golly, I've been misunderstood, it seems. I know this is a misconception, already. That's why in the first place I did mention that there have been controversies over using 10% or some random number of the brain, claimed by the scientists.
I must work on choosing words which fit best.

Regards.

There was also a mythbusters episode on the 10% myth, and it was busted.

Here is an article on the brains memory capacity, note how much it is theorised it could hold in regards to "bites".

If anyone here is going to be alive for that long so they can gather and store, not to mention how much we forget through our lives, information let me know what your secret to the fountain of youth is. Like I said we do not use a fraction of our brains capacity for memory let alone 100% of it.

You actually remember each smell, sight, sound and feeling and taste right now. Every one of them every second you are conscious.

The problem is trying to access it.


Japan has started a unique trial. When a very senior person in some craft related work retires, they set out series of questions. The senior person writes down what they'd do and why. They feel it is better to trust a real human in input data than try to figure out a way to make a smart enough computer.