'Jupiter Brain' is a supercomputer that is as large as a whole planet! 'Matrioshka brain' is even larger, yes, larger than the Dyson Sphere!This is one of those megastructures that scientists, interested with existence of alien up there in stars, are searching for. Contrary to how it appears, it is harder to figure out the use of such a supercomputer than it is, to figure out how to build one! So the reason why the universe is not teaming with such 'brains' may as well be that they are useless, rather than that there are no ETs powerful enough to build them.
As the name suggests, these 'cosmic supercomputers' idea is conceived by people who think that the brain is nothing but an extremely complex computer! So an ET creating such a megastructure will have succeeded in creating a sentient being, hence a 'brain'! So this 'brain' has two functions. One is to simulate a reality and the other one is to simulate the brain. Since according to them, the brain is just a complex computer, then simulating a brain in a computer is supposed to simulate consciousness as well! So if we make a computer big enough, not only can we recreate all of us, but we can also create any universe we want. Indeed if a brain is nothing but a computer, then creating a Jupiter brain should be the ultimate aim of any civilization! You will be stupid if you think otherwise!
The thing that I like about this 'brain simulation' idea is the way in which the idea of a brain as a computer leads to the conclusion that thus immortality can be attained! This is one of the biggest ironies! But it is because the following common reasoning is a non sequitur logical fallacy, just like I have often suggested:
1.) My consciousness is caused by the brain
2.)The brain is nothing but a complex computer
3.)Therefore there is no life after death
The conclusion '3' does not follow from the premises 1 snd 2. To arrive at 3 you must show what does not cause consciousness, not what it causes it. In the case of 'being a computer', what will it prevent some future designer from making another 'computer' similar to your brain, hence effectively 'resurrecting' you. Of course there is nothing that can prevent such, so ironically, the people who wanted to deny after life, by supposing that the brain is just computer, ended up beleiving in another kind of immortality!
The idea of simulating everyone's consciousness by a single, massive computer closely resembles the new age idea that 'we are all one' and 'are experiencing some virtual reality' so that some 'mind' is all that exists. The only difference is that 'Matrioshka brain' or 'jupier brain' attempts to achieve such through technology! So two groups of people that seems to believe in two totaly different models of reality ironically ends up with similar conclusions as to the resultant of their models! As far as 'enjoying realities spawned by the same mind', the two models are indistinguishable. It is only the understanding of 'mind' that differers! But should this matter? I don't think so!
The Matrioshka Brain idea is also similar to 'God' idea, as far as experience is concerned! Indeed a person who believe that 'brain is a computer' should easily believe in God, if he thinks carefully further. Again, this is ironical since 'brain is a computer' is often seen as a product of the overally 'materialistic' who wants to deny God's existence. For instance if you think that a human can create a computer that is more intelligent than the very same human, then that computer might, in turn, creat another even more intelligent computer. This can go on until the computer becomes such intelligent that it might as well figure out how to resurrect all people! That computer becomes equivalent to God! But ironically, this 'creator of us' will be also our own creation! Such a 'God my son' being is called 'Omega God'. This is a kind of God who is 'Omega but never Alpha'. He will be there in the 'end' but he was not there in the beginning! It is a 'half of God', but of course which is far better than a 'no God' at all. Maltrioshka brains might be attempts done by 'intelliget robots' to create an 'Omega God'! So their god will be a massive robot! If we reverse this argument and say that perhaps we are already living in a matrioshka brain where the 'reality' we see is a computer simulation, we arrive at the same old idea of 'God' but now with a different understanding of 'God', yes even thinking of 'God' as an insanely complex robot. Again I ask whether this matter.I don't think so! Life is good, regardless. I enjoy honey. Who cares if I am a robot, anyway?
However, to pour some cold water on the 'Matrioshka brains' or whatever, one might note that at best, such a 'brain' would be nothing but a monstrous, rapid idiot in complete darkness! It has no better chance of being conscious than a series of gears, levers and gogs can be. It doesnt matter how large it can get. May be this is the reason scientists in search for intelligent, extraterestials (e.g. SETI) are yet to find one such a structure in the sky. The intelligent ETs simply knows better! So I find the idea of Matrioskha brain only good as a 'scalf holder' that might end up helping a so called 'materialist' to figure out not only how life can be after death, but also 'where' the 'heaven' is in such a case!
Do scientists, per chance, think that if you reproduce an exact copy of your brain somewhere, then your consciousness will appear at that point? This should be a monumental failure to understand consciousness, but it follows logically from the 'you are just a computer' premise! Thinking more carefully, you should note that you can only simulate what something DOES but never, what it IS. It is logically possible to make something BEHAVE completely like you, without the thing becoming you. In the case of simulation of your brain inside a 'Jupiter brain' in Andromeda, you won't suddenly appear as a consciousness inside such a computer. However, in case there is a COMMUNICATION between your brain and that supercomputer, then yes, your consciousness will appear as though inside that computer. Scientists are yet to understand that you seem 'omnipresent' inside your brain simply because it is interconnected and various points communicate with other points. So connecting your brain to another 'brain' just bring about the effect of 'having a bigger brain'. So CONNECTION, not SIMULATION, that can bring about transference of consciousness.
If we insist that 'computation' is what brings about 'consciousness' there is still, another thing that eludes these scientists. For the purposes of consciousness, a computer is not necessary. What looks like 'computation' can take place even without any computer! It survives to show how a 'transistor' can be there in the sand without any need for anyone to manufacture it! What we call 'computer' is not what brings about 'computation'. Rather, it is what makes a human being make use of the computation which already happens inside rocks! But for the purposes of just being consciousness, it is not necessary at all for the 'computer' to be useful to a human. To understand how such a 'computer' can exist inside a rock, think of a computer with an extremely flexible 'motherboard'. The wirers that interconnects the components cannot brake no matter how you munch the mother board. Now you are going to twist it and twist it,...crunch it, crunch it, munch it, hammer it etc. The computer will still be working since all its components remains interconnected the same way. But the computer is nolonger recognizable, and perhaps is no longer any useful to you!
Comments
Hi! Leave god out of your premise."
my reply:
Define the word 'god' for this purpose.
A human could not allow the logic gate itself to 'make its own decisions' simply because then the gates would cease 'giving the correct answer' and as such the computer becomes useless to humans! So ensuring that a computer is 'mechanical' is essential to its usefulness. This makes a computer almost the opposite of a brain. The brain is not so 'engineered' only to be used by an external user. Therefore in biology, there are no equivalent of logic gates. Therefore it is scientifically wrong to compare brains with computers! I thought science was about FACTS not OPINIONS and world views! This is 'facts' then: Ask the numbskull to first show you a 'logic gate' in the brain, or something that works that way in the sense that its output is solely determined by the combination of inputs.
A neuron is a living thing. This one makes it totally different from a transistor, or a collection of them. Though a neuron might have several inputs, it will always 'veto' on the inputs and it can generate its own output. So we can go further inside a neurone to check if there are logic gates there. You see that there are non! In every system that has 'inputs' and 'outputs', there is always a possibility of the system 'vetoing' on inputs and then generating its own output. Take 'input chemical signals' to DNA for example. Yes, the presence of a certain combination of chemicals inside the cell can influence how the DNA transcription will take place. But nature has not, in any way 'tamed the DNA itself' nor the enzymes working in the transcription process etc from influencing what the DNA will transcript regardless of the input chemical signals. This is not a surprise! What a human will regard it as 'noise' inside a computer will not necessarily be regarded so by the living cells simply because the later are not designed to be used by humans who may simply not understand what this thing the call it 'noise' is. If you don't understand Chinese, then it is 'noise' to you, but not to a Chinese!
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/uploads/articles/two-input-and-gat...
1.)CPU is
2)Memory tank is
3.)ALU is
4.)Programs are
5.)Data bus is
No one has ever created a software for the brain, to make it do what it normally doesn't do. The brain is not run by programs!
The brain does not calculate by feeding data into a circuitry that might be termed 'ALU'. The closest thing similar to a transistor in the brain cell is ion channels. A neuron is switched on and off by opening/closing the ion channels. But a neuron donnot have many inputs and a single output. In other words how the neuron will behave is not determined by the combination of inputs, like a computer logic gates are. Instead a neuron have few inputs and many outputs. So whatever a neuron outputs depends on the intrinsic property of the neuron itself, not just the combination of inputs. This arrangement makes the brain totally different from a computer. The brain is not 'mechanical'.