Technology Review - Published By MIT
Log in to My.TechnologyReview.com | Register
Advertisement
[1] 2 3 Next »

Monday, February 13, 2006

Big Brain Thinking

Stanford neuroscientist Bill Newsome wants to implant an electrode in his brain to better understand human consciousness.

By Emily Singer
smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Scientists are learning volumes about the brain -- how it can make split-second decisions, how it learns from past mistakes, how it converts pulses of light into a complex visual scene. But, for some, deciphering the "language" of the electrical pulses that travel through our brains is only half the story. The second part, and one that is far more philosophical and complex, is how that brain activity translates into consciousness -- a person's self-awareness and perception of the world around them.

Bill Newsome, a neuroscientist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA, has spent the last twenty years studying how neurons encode information and how they use it to make decisions about the world. In the 1990s, he and collaborators were able to change the way a monkey responded to its environment by sending electric jolts to certain parts of its brain. The findings gave neuroscientists enormous insight into the inner workings of the brain.

But Newsome is obsessed with a lingering question: How does consciousness arise from brain function? He feels the best way to answer that question is by implanting an electrode into his own brain -- and seeing how the electric current changes his perception of the world.

Newsome would not be the first person with a brain implant. Epilepsy patients undergo electrical stimulation prior to brain surgery. A paralyzed man in New England has an experimental implant that translates his brain activity into movements of a robotic arm. And, perhaps most famously, Kevin Warwick, a cybernetics professor at the University of Reading, U.K., first implanted a chip into nerve fibers in his arm in 2002, then implanted a chip in his wife's arm, as part of his quest to become a cyborg.

It's not certain that Newsome will get approval for such a radical undertaking. But, if he does, his experiment won't be in the interest of curing a disease or become a human machine. He's hoping to do something broader: understand consciousness.

Technology Review: Why is understanding consciousness so important to you?

Bill Newsome: I think that how consciousness arises out of brain function is one of the most fascinating and important questions in all of neurobiology. If we understand the system completely (from input to output) at a cellular level, but still do not know exactly what causes conscious mental phenomena, we will have failed.
[1] 2 3 Next »

Comments

  • Emergency
    Guest (Bruce Cox) on 02/13/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Try this: consciousness does not emerge from brain activity; brain activity emerges from consciousness.  An experiment such as the one described will likely produce ambiguous results, or will confirm the null hypothesis, depending on the bias of the experimenter/subject.  Separating the experimenter from the subject has its value, which should be more than enough reason to not do as described, quite apart from the risk of brain damage.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Big Brain Thinking
      Guest (Hal Seyle) on 02/14/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Can't trans cranial magnetic stimulation induce current in specific neurons?
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • TMS is not specific enough
        Guest (A) on 02/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        TMS is not very localized, e.g. you can induce large temporary lesions
        in visual cortex but not more.
        Rate this comment: 12345
    • Big Brain Thinking
      Guest (John Hatten) on 02/14/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      I think that consciousness emerges from brain activity AND brain activity arises from consciousness.

      I would love to be part of this research. I am very involved in learning about the brain since my TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) in 1973. I've come back further than just about anyone I've known with TBI (and as a Case Manager for a TBI research project and now as a vocational rehabilitation counselor who presently works with several people with TBI, I've met hundreds)
      Rate this comment: 12345
    • overlay and filter
      Guest (travis mattera) on 02/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      I do agree that physical brain activity is directed by our consciousness, but it is also quite true that physical conditions, let alone stimulus, can have quite an effect on consciousness.  What will be the true scientific problem is how to rigorously formulate experiments and extract data.  Time to get creative!
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • Consciousness before brain activity?
        Guest (Mike) on 02/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        How could this be?
        We can easily show that brain activity effects consciousness, but not the other way around.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        • A thought
          Guest (MrMosis) on 02/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          Not that I know anything about a human MT beyond what is said in the interview, but suppose his realization that and experience of his MT being stimulated causes his MT to explode.

          Brain activity being altered will have had an effect on coinscious activity, which subsequently had an adverse effect on brain activity. (which would then no doubt cause a serious counscious/personality shift and Bill Newsome would embark on a career change and become an artist.)
          Rate this comment: 12345
        • Consciousness?
          Guest (Ben Shumway) on 02/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          Consciousness?  These people talk about it like it was some scientific fact.  What is consciousness??  How can you be searching for something when you don't know what "it" even is?  Decisions?  Who says we make decisions?  From instinct (emotion), you want to do one thing more than the other.  So, decisions and consciousness is simply the brain's ability to say "food is more important than being comfy", etc.  Why are people trying to overcomplicate things?  There is no ghost in the machine.
          Rate this comment: 12345
          • Could be.
            Guest (/e) on 02/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
            Posts:
            1
            You can't rule it out either.
            Rate this comment: 12345
            • can't rule out
              Guest (Mannan) on 02/16/2006 at 12:00 AM
              Posts:
              1
              You can't rule it outtttttttt.
              http://maair.net
              http://mannan.zabvision.edu.pk
              Rate this comment: 12345
          • Outside our realm
            Guest (Gard) on 02/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
            Posts:
            1
            The problem with studying consciousness, is that it is our own consciousness that tries to study it. Now try to grab your right arm with your right arm.
            Rate this comment: 12345
            • The simplest plausible solution
              Guest (Derlin) on 02/16/2006 at 12:00 AM
              Posts:
              1
              Aren't we looking for the level of abstraction from stimulus to activity to consciousness? I don't believe they are separable but this kind of research may determine boundaries and even lead to breakthroughs in priorities. For example, the heartbeat is more important than breathing, breathing is more important than stopping bleeding and so on. It may be that shocking a brain will kill a person but a carefully applied stimulus may cause critical activity which could lead to the resumption of conscious thought. At least, that is how it would work in science fiction and is what shock paddles do with the heart.
              Rate this comment: 12345
          • consciousness
            Guest (eranimos) on 05/02/2006 at 12:00 AM
            Posts:
            1
            conscsiosness is awareness of our own thought ,ablity ,behaviour .
            Rate this comment: 12345
            • [no subject]
              Guest on 07/10/2006 at 12:00 AM
              Posts:
              1
              Also your bearings/whereabouts
              Rate this comment: 12345
        • Why Not - Encouraged to read on Kant
          Guest (Gurbachan Singh) on 04/26/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          How does an artist or philosopher creates art or notions completely original. We need to visit Kant and Clausewitz on coup de oeil or intution. A simple article is at chap 3 of the following link
          http://www.maxwell.af.mil/au/aul/aupress/SAAS_Theses/SAASS_Out/Pellegrini/pellegrini.pdf

          Cheers


          Rate this comment: 12345
  • The stimulis is simply artificial data in
    Guest (Sandi) on 02/20/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    By stimulating the MT he is only inputing false data to be interpreted by the consciousness. And to begin with he doesn't even know what data he inputs until his consciousness responds to it.

    I fail to see what he can learn beyond the effects of normal sensory input, except that he has fooled his consciousness with false data.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Not just simulated stimulus
      Guest (Evan) on 02/21/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      The part of this that could shed some light on consciousness is the fact that it is not just simulating stimulus.  By bypassing certain parts of the normal flow of optical information you can start to see what parts of the brain contribute to conscious thought as opposed to unconcscious calculations.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • interpreting false data is the whole point
        Guest (Nate) on 04/13/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        We can speculate that the  stimulation of the monkey MT does things to the monkey because of the monkeys response. 

        you can stimulate a monkey all day long, but at the end of the day the monkey's response is still just oooohhh aahha ahhh oohh.

        This guy will be able to describe the experience (assuming he doesn't accidentally damage his brain too much) of having his MT? stimulated.

        He knows the data is false, but will be able to still experience the sensation of the stimulation and describe with great detail what occurred.

        I think the fooling of the consciousness with false data is the whole point
        Rate this comment: 12345
  • math
    Guest (chydgv) on 03/08/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    hi fatty
    Rate this comment: 12345
Add New Thread

Related Articles
Advertisement

Current Issue

Technology Review July/August 2008
The Business of Social Networks
The future of the Web is social. But can social-networking sites ever make money?
•  Subscribe
Save 41%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News

Magazine Services

•  Gift Subscription
•  Digital Subscription
•  Reprints, Back Issues, Customer Service

Career Resources

Visit the Job Board and Resource Center to move your career to the next level.

MIT Technology Insider

Stories and breaking news from inside MIT about the latest research, innovations, and startups--in a convenient monthly e-newsletter. Subscribe today
Advertisement

Wire Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology