@nmandarina He did - to reproduce. He says so at the end.
And we reproduce to propagate our species and that is instinct. Why do we propagate our species? Survival. What to survive for? Again, instinct goes towards selfpreservation, but we mainly survive so we don't die out. What are we here for? Nothing, just to survive.
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
That's the way I see it. If you've ever tripped on a psychedelic drug (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, etc) it becomes QUITE clear that that is the case! Haha.
The cup girl was very impressive, but that feat was from trained muscle memory, far more than from conscious thought. It took disciplined cognition to create the pattern, yes, but it was trial&error through repetition, with on-site storage, that allowed that intense speed.
To transfer this to robotics, the motion sensors must have their own abilities for learned pattern recall. The brain at that point commands "perform series X" and the body does it. Unless, like he said, there is added input.
@DonQuixotedeKaw Impressive, BUT? Uh, she was using MOVEMENT. The topic of this video, you know? Movement doesn't have to be conscious thought, as his sea thing example shows.
Weird, I was just thinking and writing about this a few days ago, wondering if good robotic movement systems were already using the method (i mean it just seems so obvious): To use a constantly running internal simulation to control the speed of movements, based on how accurately your internal simulation seems to be predicting the real-world movement results (ie: giving robots a self-limiting sense of "confidence").
I'm glad to see it's already got a name: "Bayesian Inference".
simply genius. Great experimental design, and incredible ability to see the big picture...people always forget to bring it down to the basics! Movement!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Contrary to popular belief, being a great speaker, and having a foreign accent doesn't guarantee correctness... We and other animals? We're not animals people... fundamental flaw ;) Flaw #2: that we evolved... Also, it seems like this guy like to "tell you something", he just loves being the authority, and the standard for all truth in his area... interesting...
He could have Simply highlighted this by saying: "That an average top scientist makes 100-200K per year .. however an average top Sports player make Millions per year".
As a young man, Richard Feynman would pace when trying to solve a radio repair puzzle. Albert Einstein is reported to have said he did his thinking while in motion.
not at all sure about this. Bill Gates didn't become who he became because he moved better. Neither did Mandela or Feynman or any other prominent person of the last century. It is true that you still have to translate your thinking into movement, but the quality of movement is not essential to the evolution of man any more
@ennot you got it all wrong, the thing about movement is that it demands PREDICTION / ANALYTICAL skills, which certainly Bill Gates and other thinkers have plenty of.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
Well no duh, its all physics. Non-equilibrum, delta G cannot be 0. Thinking humans as a series of dots in space-time at different intervals leading to a causation of propagation of humans.
@Cyllid , interesting, but what charachter from Avatar the movie. Is "driving" a robot with your mind a similar idea? Isint that where hes going with this?
@funincluded oh, you're right! That's a form of communication that requires no muscles to either send nor receive.
And supposedly trees do communicate to eachother via smells, ie: Signalling distress. When one tree is under attack from insects, other trees nearby will change their sap chemistry to be less palatable to the insects.
anti joke chicken here, dreaming is a combination of physical memories and thoughts that you have, which are used in preparation for later actions. your imagination is a prediction of things to come which will make you more prepared if an event from your imagination comes to take place, or is an overlooking of the past and how you could have done things differently. compassion is a necessity for reproduction, and the physics of light is the most complex thing in the universe.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@mattmoore111 misfiring of a normally useful behavior. self sacrifice is a quality that is useful in preserving the gene responsible for it but the animal doesn't always use it only for relatives. it's somewhat similar to what happens with cuckoos, who take advantage of a misfiring of other birds. Dawkins explains this very well in several of his books.
What noise? How does machine vision and movement control have noise? He's adding superfluous variables.
The problems in machine vision are due to modeling the world in such a linear fashion that there is very limited learning from the experiences of machine vision. This problem can be solved by a more general system which learns a great deal from simple experiences, incorporates that knowledge into its expectations, and gradually gets better at succeeding in maneuvering in the real world.
Certainly animals evolved a nervous system INITIALLY to guide movement. A good example is in the evolution of bilateral symmetry and then the positioning of optical sensory apparatus at one end. This is observable in this basic, fundamental form in planaria. Planaria are super simple animals what cannot really "see" much but can sense light and dark and movement. The positioning of the sensory apparati at one side only allows a creature to have a sense of direction, and move TOWARD or AWAY.
Also, in his diagram of prior experience/memory + data/sensory + (or =) belief, he ignores instinct, which is not prior experience or memory. Babies instinctively fear heights, and at birth babies can often swim. Where do these at-birth capabilities fit into this?
I find his assertions VERY intriguing, but he hasn't completely sold me on the idea that the brain exists ONLY to control movement. Certainly this might be true in lower life forms. Aso one could argue that absolutely anything that is perceived as changing is movement. Typing and writing and talking all involve movement but their GOAL is to express thought.
Download the checkpoints app for free in the app store. When registering, enter the bonus code "conquer". That will give you 25,000 points for a $25 gift card of your choice. First 50 people only!
Nice talk - at times a bit simplistic in it's approach but I'm sure that's necessary to make it understandable for a wider audience. Truth be told the Bayesian statistics part didn't surprise me the least, but it's nice to have the suspicion confirmed.
what good is such a fact in a time that already has enough trouble developing its thought and emotion? it is hardly the case now (that the brain further evolve for movement control) with the exponential advances of technology.
now we rapidly decrease the imperative for the control of movement by our brain-bodies since it has become obsolete.
the brain has a new imperative to develop thought and emotion in order to break out of the abstract prisons of society.
This is profoundly interesting psychologically and suggests that below the subconscious there is a need go move, the body's basic intelligence? The appeal of sports at all levels, perhaps.
Only a neuroscientist can reduce belief to mathematics and discount consciousness to such a place that it does not even come iinto his thinking as a factor. Dead matter emerges into life then organs "the brain" evolve. Where is love and beauty? I guess no math for those.
@amercury7 Ugh. As humans we think that we are so special that when we are told we're made of the same stuff as the rest of the universe we go, "Nuh uh! No I'm not! you can't describe me using math!" Yes you can. Get over yourself. The human form is a spectacular machine, but it is a machine. That's why you can effect everything from mood to personality using chemicals in the brain. As for love, there are chemicals for that too. I enjoy love very deeply, but I also enjoy science.
@syntheticsteve I agree with your statement that the human form is a machine. I disagree with the premise that a human being is his or her form. Consciousness is first cause as Planck and so many other scientists have stated.
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." — Max Planck
@amercury7 To bad Planck new absolutely nothing about consciousness, the brain, psychology, the mind, or anything of importance to be able to make any sensible statement about consciousness. Planck's statements about consciousness are exactly as correct as anything Freud or Nietzsche would have said about theoretical physics. If you want to inform yourself on consciousness, read up on the theories by people that actually study it!
@Waranoa Note that Mr. Wolpert does not mention consciousness except in passing and that he is a materialist. Science has killed materialism. “all matter exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration which holds the atom together. We must assume behind this force is the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.“ Planck
"We know truth, not only by reason, but also by the heart."-Blaise Pascal (1723-1662)
@amercury7 I wasn't referring to Wolperto but to you. The next quote by Planck only illustrates he had no knowledge about the mind at all. When you want to study the mind, don't read physics theories, especially not outdated ones. Science progresses so fast, quoting a century-old book will only make you a laughing stock; it's not sociology......
Also, quoting people does not make you right. Consciousness is the fundamental force? where does it fit into the equation then, with all other forces?
@amercury7 thanks for making time to share your perspective ...the resulting conversation was fascinating ...indeed a worthwhile read ...I would have thumbs -upped your comment a subsequent replies but my vote fails to register
@gaiagale I understand. A man makes his life's work the study of the brain and has no understanding that the mind is something greater, grander, something of the metaphysical realm. This is very common. The ego is frightened when other ideas considered and attacks directly. "It is entirely possible that behind the perception of our senses, worlds are hidden of which we are unaware." Albert Einstein "Constantly regard the universe as one living being," Marcus Aurelius
@amercury7 yes It is indeed "...entirely possible that behind the perception of our senses, worlds are hidden of which we are unaware." Albert Einstein in fact the scientists seem to be becoming aware of 'worlds' both larger and smaller than were known in A. E.'s day
...and yes we might be wise to "Constantly regard the universe as one living being," Marcus Aurelius
The notion that there is a 'reason' for evolutionary results is faulty if you take it literally, which is the only sense in which a singular reason could exist. Figuratively speaking there are a number of reasons why brains evolved. If it's a matter of first priority, the initial figurative reason it is surely about movement control. Scientists of all people should realize the need for specificity, and it seems a little lost on this fellow who is unfortunately guilty of runaway reductionism.
His body is disabled. His brain, on the other hand, is more capable than most people's. Not moving doesn't make it any less of a brain like this guy indirectly suggests.
Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. The talker directly or indirectly states that a brain's value come only from it causing movement. Hawking has one of the greatest brains of his time despite being motionless. And even the way he manages to keep communicating with the outer world requires no complex muscle movement. and this goes against this guy's idea of assessing a brain's value. That is all.
@amjams I think you might have missed the point of the talk. He's basically asking "Why don't plants have brains?" and answering, "Because they don't move." If an individual member of some random species loses a limb and somehow manages to kill and eat more critters in its lifetime than most other individuals, that has no bearing on what the limb's original evolutionary purpose was or the value of that purpose to all the species who have limbs.
@shiftyjake Fair enough, and I'm convinced that complex movement could be the reason why natural selection favored brains, but that being said, in the case of humans, we must acknowledge the other aspects of the brain, even if proven to be incidental... so his research is brilliant, but his presentation was too materialistic for my taste.
@amjams To each his own. I think even Wolpert would agree that once the simplest brains developed for movement, evolutionary pressures favored other features as well, like abstract thought in humans. It's just all built on a common foundation.
@roidroid I'd say GM's play with intuition this comes from pattern recognition ,a GM will not look at all the moves he/she will pick a few candidate moves .but there again it's seldom calculated they look at the end result . like if you image going shopping you may just imagine key parts of the trip not step by step . computers are really dumb .I know I've written a chess programme :) but in the future who knows
@sausage4mash as far as i know the only goal of chess is to win.
If the computer is beating these GMs, then IT'S THE GMs who arn't playing chess properly, they're failures.
Harsh i know, but think about it. Is the ultimate goal of the game of chess REALLY to make plays based on intuition, pattern recognition, misdirection etc? Not really. Sure it makes it more fun and interesting when playing against a human opponent, but the goal of the game of chess is not to be fun and interesting.
@roidroid I don't think you understand what I'm saying ,the fact that a human can still beat these machines is testament to the human mind ,the computers are basically cheating ,if you had written a chess programme as I've you'd get what I'm saying ,in the game of GO computers are hopeless ( too many permutations), when you take away their ability to calculate millions of lines (as opposed to a chess player looking at a dozen lines ) they are stupid .
@sausage4mash technically the human brain is subconsciously calculating more lines than you are giving it credit for. Mental processes that we are conscious of, make up only a small segment of our brain's activity. I suspect a lot of the "useful calculations" are happening subconsciously and automatically in the GM's visual and spacial regions of the brain, before they are even aware of checking lines. Or to put it another way, this is what you are calling "Intuition". It's just calculation.
@roidroid nope that's not how it works ,there has been study in this field it's all about patterns ,with GM's their vast knowledge of familiar patterns seem to be stored in the language centres of the brain ,but it is not lists of calculations ,it's familiar patterns ,if you see a GM play bullet it's often to a high standard and it's played way to fast for any calculating beyond 1 or 2 moves it's all patterns .if you're interested I'll dig out some info on this
@sausage4mash your brute-force chess program might not have done pattern recognition, but others do.
i assure you that pattern recog can be simmered down to calculations, i suppose you could describe the evolving table of variables as nothing more than a "list" if you ignored the fact that the data stored amongst neurons can also be stored as a "list". There's no magic here, it's all essentially just number crunching, regardless of wetware or hardware.
@sausage4mash oh. Well i guess to be honest i'm not really too interested, until it seems that the paper contradicts my points (ie: parallel subconscious mental processes silently bolster conscious decision making). From your description of the paper so far, it doesn't seem like there is a contradiction. Which is why i'm currently concentrating on our conversation at hand, as i suspect we may be miscommunicating in some way.
in response to his last point about vision, how then would he explain bats? they lack vision though are very capable-in fact extremely precise-of movement.
He never said vision was required for movement. Bats obviously use sonar instead. But in the context of humans, it is important to understand vision in relation to movement.
good talk. interestingly, the start uses the exact same argument, almost in the same way, that Rodolfo Llinas made in "I of the Vortex" (2002) if anyone is curious about more sources
@xjustamem0ryx your comment came up when I used the google browser along with others of course (I checked several site but failed to actually find the words) I'm curious to the origin thanks
@hilariofreire roughly the same classical musicians would think about deathmetal, acid trance or dubstep? Loads of noise, but once you understand the patterns and purpose of the noise it can become beautiful.
We think with our minds; we move with our brains. You are not a gray slug wrapped in a wonderful hasmat suit. You are a mind that is connected to a brain that is connect to a body.
holy crap.. i just dozed off...
shikhanshu 3 days ago
so you just shows how habits become addictive
vabhru 2 weeks ago
the animation of the guy tickling himself is really creepy
chainedtotheworld 3 weeks ago
9:49 guy on the right= me in class :p
AlphaDeutsch 3 weeks ago
Posh lol
divineagent 3 weeks ago
And he forgot to ask himself "Why do we move? " :)
nmandarina 1 month ago
@nmandarina He did - to reproduce. He says so at the end.
And we reproduce to propagate our species and that is instinct. Why do we propagate our species? Survival. What to survive for? Again, instinct goes towards selfpreservation, but we mainly survive so we don't die out. What are we here for? Nothing, just to survive.
darksaiyan2006 3 weeks ago
@darksaiyan2006 but thats boring :P and that is what makes us human hehe
erikofthenorse 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
lightandbeautiful 2 months ago
The name of the game is Tit-for-Tat. hehe (14:20)
TheHickstead 2 months ago
the brain did not evolve to perceive information, but to filter OUT all information which does not directly benefit our selfish needs.
MyGwendel 2 months ago
@MyGwendel
That's the way I see it. If you've ever tripped on a psychedelic drug (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, etc) it becomes QUITE clear that that is the case! Haha.
Titus420ful 2 months ago
@MyGwendel why did the brain get more complicated if it needed to work with less in formation. your statement makes no sense lol
Tolstoievsky 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
thisisnotanick 1 day ago
Best channel ever
ashhazz01 2 months ago 3
The cup girl was very impressive, but that feat was from trained muscle memory, far more than from conscious thought. It took disciplined cognition to create the pattern, yes, but it was trial&error through repetition, with on-site storage, that allowed that intense speed.
To transfer this to robotics, the motion sensors must have their own abilities for learned pattern recall. The brain at that point commands "perform series X" and the body does it. Unless, like he said, there is added input.
DonQuixotedeKaw 3 months ago
@DonQuixotedeKaw Impressive, BUT? Uh, she was using MOVEMENT. The topic of this video, you know? Movement doesn't have to be conscious thought, as his sea thing example shows.
bubbah 2 months ago
"I happen to know my children don't lie." haha boy who is he kidding?
russelgene1 3 months ago
@russelgene1 - A joke, no doubt, however dry the delivery.
Jefferdaughter 3 months ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
adaptive model based filtering or what an adaptive Kalman filter does.
0MoTheG 3 months ago
Man, I was going the zombie snacks option... Boy, was I wrong!
warlord1981nl 3 months ago
Weird, I was just thinking and writing about this a few days ago, wondering if good robotic movement systems were already using the method (i mean it just seems so obvious): To use a constantly running internal simulation to control the speed of movements, based on how accurately your internal simulation seems to be predicting the real-world movement results (ie: giving robots a self-limiting sense of "confidence").
I'm glad to see it's already got a name: "Bayesian Inference".
Yay learning!
roidroid 3 months ago
If you close your eyes and just listen, you hear Stewie!
IIiTzVicII 3 months ago 45
@IIiTzVicII lol close enough yeah
NadOlivier 3 months ago
@IIiTzVicII "If you close your eyes and just listen, you hear Stewie!"
The accent is not exactly the same and he lacks the psychopathic overtones...
DrSpooglemon 3 months ago
@IIiTzVicII a teutonic stewie perhaps...
alexhamster1134 2 months ago
@IIiTzVicII : Amazing that so many of us see the world through our television, and not much beyond that.
Bmants 1 month ago
@Bmants The only television I actually watch is sports... but if you don't know who Stewie is, I have to be honest that I feel bad for you.
IIiTzVicII 1 month ago
Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnn.
zestydude87 3 months ago
4:50 the robots are probably thinking "GO TO THE RECYCLE BIN YOU FLESH BORN SHOW OFF!"
srgwarcock 3 months ago in playlist ted talks
simply genius. Great experimental design, and incredible ability to see the big picture...people always forget to bring it down to the basics! Movement!
fonzdaii 3 months ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
The brain named itself. WOAH
CanadianImperialist 3 months ago 32
funny pant-butt
elchafa 3 months ago
If we were made for moving, we would naturally enjoy it more than we do. Instead human beings go for convenience above all else. Hmm...
SejeonK 3 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Contrary to popular belief, being a great speaker, and having a foreign accent doesn't guarantee correctness... We and other animals? We're not animals people... fundamental flaw ;) Flaw #2: that we evolved... Also, it seems like this guy like to "tell you something", he just loves being the authority, and the standard for all truth in his area... interesting...
themeloninc 3 months ago
@themeloninc wtf seriously
VincentBlouin 3 months ago
@themeloninc Creating strawmen is one of the symptoms of an inferiority complex. Have you seen your local psychiatrist, I mean... uh, faith healer?
kramark123 3 months ago
@themeloninc are you really that dumb? or trolling?
entropyfu 3 months ago
@13:45 Or the children just do what children do while their lips are moving. (i.e. lie to parents).
ROAtheist 3 months ago
He could have Simply highlighted this by saying: "That an average top scientist makes 100-200K per year .. however an average top Sports player make Millions per year".
Raazh 3 months ago
As a young man, Richard Feynman would pace when trying to solve a radio repair puzzle. Albert Einstein is reported to have said he did his thinking while in motion.
fossilman2 3 months ago
Nerdgasm at 2:16 lol
I love these TED talks ^_^
^ unrelated comments
ThElitE 3 months ago 2
@ThElitE LOL at the guy on the left, stony faced, unreserved agreement :D
tdreamgmail 3 months ago
Yup movement is ontological primary, physics shows it. All objects are primary made from motion.
Reproduction is not an end though, it is a means of survival. The end is survival.
SuperFinGuy 3 months ago
Summed up some time ago by Gautama Buddha: "With our thoughts, we make the world.".
alanpgoodwin 3 months ago
I CAN BRAIN TOO. I BRAIN ALL SORTS OF THINGS.
CognosSquare 3 months ago
and then ith th-sthhhopths
i wonder how many saliva this guy spits per second?
DeadIslandTrailers 3 months ago
not at all sure about this. Bill Gates didn't become who he became because he moved better. Neither did Mandela or Feynman or any other prominent person of the last century. It is true that you still have to translate your thinking into movement, but the quality of movement is not essential to the evolution of man any more
ennot 3 months ago
@ennot you got it all wrong, the thing about movement is that it demands PREDICTION / ANALYTICAL skills, which certainly Bill Gates and other thinkers have plenty of.
fonzdaii 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 3 months ago
seems legit. No really does.
437thx1138 3 months ago
Great talk, very insightful. One of my favorites so far just for the great paradigm shift.
1ucasvb 3 months ago
Well no duh, its all physics. Non-equilibrum, delta G cannot be 0. Thinking humans as a series of dots in space-time at different intervals leading to a causation of propagation of humans.
ScorpiaX 3 months ago
@ScorpiaX by delta G , do you mean Gib's free energy?
Wepper1 3 months ago
Hes even standing in front of a bit of the set from Avatar....
mattmoore111 3 months ago
@Cyllid , interesting, but what charachter from Avatar the movie. Is "driving" a robot with your mind a similar idea? Isint that where hes going with this?
mattmoore111 3 months ago
What about emitting smells?
funincluded 3 months ago 2
@funincluded oh, you're right! That's a form of communication that requires no muscles to either send nor receive.
And supposedly trees do communicate to eachother via smells, ie: Signalling distress. When one tree is under attack from insects, other trees nearby will change their sap chemistry to be less palatable to the insects.
roidroid 3 months ago
bold claim but we really don't understand much of how the brain works. movement is just one aspect the brain does.
doesnt explain dreaming, imagination, compassion, etc.
the brain is the most complex thing in the universe. too early to jump to conclusions.
ejayarts 3 months ago
@ejayarts
anti joke chicken here, dreaming is a combination of physical memories and thoughts that you have, which are used in preparation for later actions. your imagination is a prediction of things to come which will make you more prepared if an event from your imagination comes to take place, or is an overlooking of the past and how you could have done things differently. compassion is a necessity for reproduction, and the physics of light is the most complex thing in the universe.
StudlyJones 3 months ago
just be mindless...
atolliver91 3 months ago
some people dont have sex by choice. this undermines his entire argument.
tronist 3 months ago
@tronist not really. There's always mutants
roidroid 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 3 months ago
@lightandbeautiful Wow, you're insane. I thought you were from this post, but going to your channel confirmed it.
Cyllid 3 months ago
If that speaker was in the movie Avatar, what charachter would he have been.
mattmoore111 3 months ago
@mattmoore111 Sokka.
Cyllid 3 months ago
So does the animal with the largest relative brain size have the most complex movements and uses?
mattmoore111 3 months ago
Or how does it explain the sharing of information with strangers , stephen hawking, meditation, hearing, or hair?
mattmoore111 3 months ago
So how does that explain physical self sacrifice for non relatives?
mattmoore111 3 months ago
@mattmoore111 misfiring of a normally useful behavior. self sacrifice is a quality that is useful in preserving the gene responsible for it but the animal doesn't always use it only for relatives. it's somewhat similar to what happens with cuckoos, who take advantage of a misfiring of other birds. Dawkins explains this very well in several of his books.
Tammyaway 3 months ago
@mattmoore111 this is a hypothesis about the relationship between movement and the human brain.
It has nothing to do with what you asked.
It's like asking how germ theory explains planetary motion. It doesn't, it's unrelated.
roidroid 3 months ago
Very interesting,
THINKER43 3 months ago in playlist all on page
he lisps a bit, doesn't he?
TheLOLLLLLLLLLLLLLZZ 3 months ago
God Probabilistic methods was hard.
boonexy 3 months ago
Funny how due to computers most brain use occurs with minimal body movement.
Khyrid 3 months ago
2:08 - 2:20 is specially funny cuz this guy has tenure at Cambridge.
DrQuijano 3 months ago
What noise? How does machine vision and movement control have noise? He's adding superfluous variables.
The problems in machine vision are due to modeling the world in such a linear fashion that there is very limited learning from the experiences of machine vision. This problem can be solved by a more general system which learns a great deal from simple experiences, incorporates that knowledge into its expectations, and gradually gets better at succeeding in maneuvering in the real world.
lordjavathe3rd 3 months ago
and yet jellyfish do move (according to documentary: the invasion of the jellyfish) and claims are made that they don't have a brain.
nomusician 3 months ago
Comment removed
nomusician 3 months ago
Indeed one might argue that the placement of the concentration of sensory apparatuses is even more significant than the brain itself.
MikoVideos 3 months ago
Comment removed
MikoVideos 3 months ago
Certainly animals evolved a nervous system INITIALLY to guide movement. A good example is in the evolution of bilateral symmetry and then the positioning of optical sensory apparatus at one end. This is observable in this basic, fundamental form in planaria. Planaria are super simple animals what cannot really "see" much but can sense light and dark and movement. The positioning of the sensory apparati at one side only allows a creature to have a sense of direction, and move TOWARD or AWAY.
MikoVideos 3 months ago
Also, in his diagram of prior experience/memory + data/sensory + (or =) belief, he ignores instinct, which is not prior experience or memory. Babies instinctively fear heights, and at birth babies can often swim. Where do these at-birth capabilities fit into this?
MikoVideos 3 months ago
I find his assertions VERY intriguing, but he hasn't completely sold me on the idea that the brain exists ONLY to control movement. Certainly this might be true in lower life forms. Aso one could argue that absolutely anything that is perceived as changing is movement. Typing and writing and talking all involve movement but their GOAL is to express thought.
MikoVideos 3 months ago
So, sport is more of a brain game than sudoku?
BlitzKriegDelay 4 months ago 42
@BlitzKriegDelay interesting point ...I'm curious as to what D.W.would say to that
gaiagale 4 months ago
I'm paralyzed.. so can I eat my brain now?
Wes4one7 4 months ago
In the future:
Professor---"Back in the 21st century, they used to believe a brain's functions were to do complex reasoning, and..."
Students---"hahaha wtf!"
BlitzKriegDelay 4 months ago 48
@BlitzKriegDelay
though the consequent may laugh at the antecedent when he is false, the consequent needs the antecedent so that he may become of consequence.
xjustamem0ryx 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Download the checkpoints app for free in the app store. When registering, enter the bonus code "conquer". That will give you 25,000 points for a $25 gift card of your choice. First 50 people only!
CheetosYummyful 4 months ago
Nice talk - at times a bit simplistic in it's approach but I'm sure that's necessary to make it understandable for a wider audience. Truth be told the Bayesian statistics part didn't surprise me the least, but it's nice to have the suspicion confirmed.
DigitizedSelf 4 months ago
what good is such a fact in a time that already has enough trouble developing its thought and emotion? it is hardly the case now (that the brain further evolve for movement control) with the exponential advances of technology.
now we rapidly decrease the imperative for the control of movement by our brain-bodies since it has become obsolete.
the brain has a new imperative to develop thought and emotion in order to break out of the abstract prisons of society.
xjustamem0ryx 4 months ago
please help fid a cure for m.s.
owenkilleen 4 months ago
02:20 one guy dont laugh he is dead inside
AXharoth 4 months ago
This is profoundly interesting psychologically and suggests that below the subconscious there is a need go move, the body's basic intelligence? The appeal of sports at all levels, perhaps.
doug24444 4 months ago
Only a neuroscientist can reduce belief to mathematics and discount consciousness to such a place that it does not even come iinto his thinking as a factor. Dead matter emerges into life then organs "the brain" evolve. Where is love and beauty? I guess no math for those.
amercury7 4 months ago
@amercury7 Ugh. As humans we think that we are so special that when we are told we're made of the same stuff as the rest of the universe we go, "Nuh uh! No I'm not! you can't describe me using math!" Yes you can. Get over yourself. The human form is a spectacular machine, but it is a machine. That's why you can effect everything from mood to personality using chemicals in the brain. As for love, there are chemicals for that too. I enjoy love very deeply, but I also enjoy science.
syntheticsteve 4 months ago
@syntheticsteve I agree with your statement that the human form is a machine. I disagree with the premise that a human being is his or her form. Consciousness is first cause as Planck and so many other scientists have stated.
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." — Max Planck
amercury7 4 months ago
@amercury7 To bad Planck new absolutely nothing about consciousness, the brain, psychology, the mind, or anything of importance to be able to make any sensible statement about consciousness. Planck's statements about consciousness are exactly as correct as anything Freud or Nietzsche would have said about theoretical physics. If you want to inform yourself on consciousness, read up on the theories by people that actually study it!
Waranoa 4 months ago
@Waranoa Note that Mr. Wolpert does not mention consciousness except in passing and that he is a materialist. Science has killed materialism. “all matter exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration which holds the atom together. We must assume behind this force is the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.“ Planck
"We know truth, not only by reason, but also by the heart."-Blaise Pascal (1723-1662)
amercury7 4 months ago
@amercury7 I wasn't referring to Wolperto but to you. The next quote by Planck only illustrates he had no knowledge about the mind at all. When you want to study the mind, don't read physics theories, especially not outdated ones. Science progresses so fast, quoting a century-old book will only make you a laughing stock; it's not sociology......
Also, quoting people does not make you right. Consciousness is the fundamental force? where does it fit into the equation then, with all other forces?
Waranoa 4 months ago
@syntheticsteve AlsoSteve I think your special! In fact I know so! :)
amercury7 4 months ago
@amercury7 thanks for making time to share your perspective ...the resulting conversation was fascinating ...indeed a worthwhile read ...I would have thumbs -upped your comment a subsequent replies but my vote fails to register
respect
gaiagale 4 months ago
@gaiagale I understand. A man makes his life's work the study of the brain and has no understanding that the mind is something greater, grander, something of the metaphysical realm. This is very common. The ego is frightened when other ideas considered and attacks directly. "It is entirely possible that behind the perception of our senses, worlds are hidden of which we are unaware." Albert Einstein "Constantly regard the universe as one living being," Marcus Aurelius
amercury7 4 months ago
@amercury7 yes It is indeed "...entirely possible that behind the perception of our senses, worlds are hidden of which we are unaware." Albert Einstein in fact the scientists seem to be becoming aware of 'worlds' both larger and smaller than were known in A. E.'s day
...and yes we might be wise to "Constantly regard the universe as one living being," Marcus Aurelius
gaiagale 4 months ago
hot chick in the first row..
raileanulucian 4 months ago
@raileanulucian The blonde in the white dress?
chinito0604 4 months ago
@chinito0604 yes
raileanulucian 4 months ago
@raileanulucian ok i agree ^^
chinito0604 4 months ago
@raileanulucian oh my god did you see that woman in the front row?
she was totally a woman.
totally.
so hot
roidroid 3 months ago
Comment removed
KillaNinja0 4 months ago
Comment removed
JonahTorn 4 months ago
Comment removed
JonahTorn 4 months ago
Mind=blown.
OhManTFE 4 months ago
The notion that there is a 'reason' for evolutionary results is faulty if you take it literally, which is the only sense in which a singular reason could exist. Figuratively speaking there are a number of reasons why brains evolved. If it's a matter of first priority, the initial figurative reason it is surely about movement control. Scientists of all people should realize the need for specificity, and it seems a little lost on this fellow who is unfortunately guilty of runaway reductionism.
dookiecheez 4 months ago
@dookiecheez an interesting comment ...I would have thumbs-upped but my vote fails to register
gaiagale 4 months ago
It is obvious that brains exists for the zombies to have something to eat, the same way the sunflower exists to power an entire infantry.
And, yes, this is a reference to something.
maliciousMayfly 4 months ago
@maliciousMayfly A reference to something awesome.
"Dawn of the Daisy" ftw
Yametz 4 months ago
@maliciousMayfly Plants vs. Zombies :)
roc08rschaefers 4 months ago
Interesting talking, but..
Stephen Hawking's brain for instance... think about it.
amjams 4 months ago
@amjams That is why we call what he has a dissability.
FosbackFilms 4 months ago
@FosbackFilms
His body is disabled. His brain, on the other hand, is more capable than most people's. Not moving doesn't make it any less of a brain like this guy indirectly suggests.
amjams 4 months ago
@amjams I don't think he was suggesting that the brain was only useful for movement. Just that movement was its primary purpose.
FosbackFilms 4 months ago
@amjams Are you being serious or funny...?
oSoloDolo 4 months ago
@oSoloDolo
Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. The talker directly or indirectly states that a brain's value come only from it causing movement. Hawking has one of the greatest brains of his time despite being motionless. And even the way he manages to keep communicating with the outer world requires no complex muscle movement. and this goes against this guy's idea of assessing a brain's value. That is all.
amjams 4 months ago
@amjams I think you might have missed the point of the talk. He's basically asking "Why don't plants have brains?" and answering, "Because they don't move." If an individual member of some random species loses a limb and somehow manages to kill and eat more critters in its lifetime than most other individuals, that has no bearing on what the limb's original evolutionary purpose was or the value of that purpose to all the species who have limbs.
shiftyjake 4 months ago
@shiftyjake Fair enough, and I'm convinced that complex movement could be the reason why natural selection favored brains, but that being said, in the case of humans, we must acknowledge the other aspects of the brain, even if proven to be incidental... so his research is brilliant, but his presentation was too materialistic for my taste.
amjams 4 months ago
@amjams an interesting discussion to read
thanks for making time to comment and in turn ...to reply
gaiagale 4 months ago
@amjams To each his own. I think even Wolpert would agree that once the simplest brains developed for movement, evolutionary pressures favored other features as well, like abstract thought in humans. It's just all built on a common foundation.
shiftyjake 4 months ago
@amjams indeed
gaiagale 4 months ago
that cat is so smart hehe
hotcatmax123 4 months ago
computers don't understand chess they just calculate a stupid amount of lines or refer to human opening books
sausage4mash 4 months ago
@sausage4mash who's to say that's not all chess really is?
roidroid 3 months ago
@roidroid I'd say GM's play with intuition this comes from pattern recognition ,a GM will not look at all the moves he/she will pick a few candidate moves .but there again it's seldom calculated they look at the end result . like if you image going shopping you may just imagine key parts of the trip not step by step . computers are really dumb .I know I've written a chess programme :) but in the future who knows
sausage4mash 3 months ago
@sausage4mash as far as i know the only goal of chess is to win.
If the computer is beating these GMs, then IT'S THE GMs who arn't playing chess properly, they're failures.
Harsh i know, but think about it. Is the ultimate goal of the game of chess REALLY to make plays based on intuition, pattern recognition, misdirection etc? Not really. Sure it makes it more fun and interesting when playing against a human opponent, but the goal of the game of chess is not to be fun and interesting.
roidroid 3 months ago
@roidroid I don't think you understand what I'm saying ,the fact that a human can still beat these machines is testament to the human mind ,the computers are basically cheating ,if you had written a chess programme as I've you'd get what I'm saying ,in the game of GO computers are hopeless ( too many permutations), when you take away their ability to calculate millions of lines (as opposed to a chess player looking at a dozen lines ) they are stupid .
sausage4mash 3 months ago
@sausage4mash technically the human brain is subconsciously calculating more lines than you are giving it credit for. Mental processes that we are conscious of, make up only a small segment of our brain's activity. I suspect a lot of the "useful calculations" are happening subconsciously and automatically in the GM's visual and spacial regions of the brain, before they are even aware of checking lines. Or to put it another way, this is what you are calling "Intuition". It's just calculation.
roidroid 3 months ago
@roidroid nope that's not how it works ,there has been study in this field it's all about patterns ,with GM's their vast knowledge of familiar patterns seem to be stored in the language centres of the brain ,but it is not lists of calculations ,it's familiar patterns ,if you see a GM play bullet it's often to a high standard and it's played way to fast for any calculating beyond 1 or 2 moves it's all patterns .if you're interested I'll dig out some info on this
sausage4mash 3 months ago
@sausage4mash your brute-force chess program might not have done pattern recognition, but others do.
i assure you that pattern recog can be simmered down to calculations, i suppose you could describe the evolving table of variables as nothing more than a "list" if you ignored the fact that the data stored amongst neurons can also be stored as a "list". There's no magic here, it's all essentially just number crunching, regardless of wetware or hardware.
Thoughts are merely hard to debug atm.
roidroid 3 months ago
@roidroid are you not interested in the scientific studies done in this field of research ? I'll dig out the papers for you .
sausage4mash 3 months ago
@sausage4mash oh. Well i guess to be honest i'm not really too interested, until it seems that the paper contradicts my points (ie: parallel subconscious mental processes silently bolster conscious decision making). From your description of the paper so far, it doesn't seem like there is a contradiction. Which is why i'm currently concentrating on our conversation at hand, as i suspect we may be miscommunicating in some way.
Youtube is hard to chat with :(
roidroid 3 months ago
what a smart dude.
toothasaur 4 months ago
Mc Lovin's dad by any chance?
theoriginalliquid 4 months ago
Our brain are always "on the go" mode... cool.
leonidasx666 4 months ago
Feldenkrais feldenkrais feldenkrais
jackbenimbleish 4 months ago
wow...one of the best TED I have watched
Forkroute 4 months ago 25
13:57 is the point where I would have simply punched my brother and informed him I'm right as always and get out of my room!!
ryoshi100 4 months ago
....cnidarians dont have brains and they move quite fine
ryoshi100 4 months ago
14:06 Hottayyyy
iamthe3rd 4 months ago
He went over 16 minutes.....no fair!
wangabo123 4 months ago
I wish we could have the usual clever, funny, and/or profound top rated comments instead of just the 0:15
JLJorgenson18 4 months ago
@JLJorgenson18 Ja hope they will start fixing the sound some time. It is even more nerving tbh.
xilliah 4 months ago
9:50, the man with the glasses and blue shirt looks like he totally understands everything.
gayglue 4 months ago
Sounds more like baseless conjecture than science. TED is kind of hit and miss.
Ryakki 4 months ago
@Ryakki there is no S in TED
roidroid 3 months ago
in response to his last point about vision, how then would he explain bats? they lack vision though are very capable-in fact extremely precise-of movement.
Dhragonfly 4 months ago
@Dhragonfly
He never said vision was required for movement. Bats obviously use sonar instead. But in the context of humans, it is important to understand vision in relation to movement.
rafaravioli 4 months ago
good talk. interestingly, the start uses the exact same argument, almost in the same way, that Rodolfo Llinas made in "I of the Vortex" (2002) if anyone is curious about more sources
CPLains 4 months ago
11:33 that's how you jerk someones bird.
frungahr 4 months ago
the drama of life so woven by thought and emotion, yet 'tis but a mere afterthought of the shelter that houses it.
xjustamem0ryx 4 months ago 2
@xjustamem0ryx your comment came up when I used the google browser along with others of course (I checked several site but failed to actually find the words) I'm curious to the origin thanks
gaiagale 4 months ago
@gaiagale
me xD
xjustamem0ryx 4 months ago
@xjustamem0ryx brilliant! ...a thought as astute and profound as it is poetic
gaiagale 4 months ago
I wonder what he thinks about parkour and free running
hilariofreire 4 months ago 32
@hilariofreire
Brain Sex?
ZombieXJester 4 months ago
@hilariofreire roughly the same classical musicians would think about deathmetal, acid trance or dubstep? Loads of noise, but once you understand the patterns and purpose of the noise it can become beautiful.
gulllars 4 months ago
0:15
2:11 :D
jahrleriksen 4 months ago
We think with our minds; we move with our brains. You are not a gray slug wrapped in a wonderful hasmat suit. You are a mind that is connected to a brain that is connect to a body.
SuperToughnut 4 months ago
This has