On my previous posts or in my other blog right after!.. I want to say I think fMRI may be valuable for finding who's telling the truth as in situations with healthcare these days where cheating by doctors is common.
Here I want to go in more detail with some technical reasons that I believe that truth is mostly simple and so the brains ways of storing its memory and us finding them may be simple also.
As I say on my post about this the truth seems highly simple, I asked AI would it thought of the truth whether it was complex or simple and the AI said truth is simple but the way it works out is complex. We consider that there are a few principles that are highly important to all the rest of the events. Emily Noether ( Pronounced "noyeeter") The woman who Einstein thought was the greatest math myth genius discovered her own theorem named Noether's theorem. In essence this shows that the more things change the more they stay the same. So you have something that remains unchanged in every action reaction pair of energy and mass in the universe. But you have something that changes too a random part and a non-random part. I found this leads to the classification of all sets in math, based on what changes and what stays the same. This has been so powerful it's gone right to the foundation of physics and subatomic physics and this enabled major progress in this field by way of classifying all the different types of patterns of the quantum numbers, all kinds of symmetries and more.
To me this relates directly to how the neurons have a simple end like an axon and a complex in like a dendrite and we tend to generalize this to say that the synapses themselves so the chemicals and the synapses are probably going to be arranged by a closely related method.
Edgar Allan Poe Expressed his idea in his mysteries because they're often solving codes. ..and he said that any code that can be created can be reversed around and so it would be solved. I think of the brain code that fMRI is trying to solve as a finite problem which faster and faster development of computers and our machines may be able to completely overpower because the problem itself to solve is staying constant. And don't you and I know in a simple way? Turing who was the computer pioneer would say that any computer with enough time can solve any problem. While Turing went on to list a considerable number of problems that are essentially unsolvable, often with randomness this would not seem to be one of them.
One issue might seem to be about how a person might be able to learn a strong enough counter thought so that when asked a question they could smooth it over enough to avoid being found by the machine. This seems like the chemical Gaba a neural influencing compound that acts to limit your saying the wrong words when the boss is watching over you. Just asking them questions under the MRI might be good enough for some to receive what they shouldn't have by just taking enough Gaba. But if they've done something wrong the memory is still stored there in other neurons so this could be done without asking questions. I would think it's possible newer machines may have much higher resolution.
The units of resolution of an fMRI machine are called voxels or volume pixels; This is the unit of resolution of the fMRI, about an eighth of an inch. Machines using converging low energy lasers are conceivable that sense a small area once they converge and then re-radiate out..
So the idea that we can only find the general volume of the blood flow in the brain as they say may be improving with the resolution of the fMRI or other sensors like this by leaps and bounds.
You might wonder if reading a memory will change it as they say that the only people with pure memories who haven't been tainted by thinking about them are those with severe amnesia and the rest of us always change those memories by reading them.
And here is where an idea of mine might be valuable.. Brain research in the 1920s found that every neuron stores all the memory of the entire brain..this is the assumption of the method of the so-called "holonomic mind" of brain research pioneer Karl Pribram. In the research they found that when the brains of the lab mouse were cut smaller and smaller they remember all of what they knew when they had the entire brain intact. People can actually function with half their brain with no measurable reduction in cognitive value!
What I think this means is that we may be able to extract one neuron from a person's brain and use high resolution sensors to find any kind of information that's stored in the brain. This might even work for the brains of witnesses like dogs to use as a report at least to some extent on some events otherwise out of reach of law science. Dogs are as smart as a 3-year-old but some 3-year-olds I've had to outwit sometimes are a real genius!
In any event we wouldn't damage the memory as we read it because we could sense the memory in one bit of the brain. If a suspect tried to invalidate the claim of of what might have been found with the fMRI by usual machines because by reading the information it would change it like with the converging low energy to high energy laser beam method of sensing the areas of the brain, this will be solved by reading one neuron and all the other neurons are unchanged.. Or moreso if several neurons are sensed and compared to each other with calibration this might be more reliable.
And here is where an idea of mine might be valuable.. Brain research in the 1920s found that every neuron stores all the memory of the entire brain..this is the assumption of the method of the so-called "holonomic mind" of brain research pioneer Karl Pribram. In the research they found that when the brains of the lab mouse were cut smaller and smaller they remember all of what they knew when they had the entire brain intact. People can actually function with half their brain with no measurable reduction in cognitive value!
What I think this means is that we may be able to extract one neuron from a person's brain and use high resolution sensors to find any kind of information that's stored in the brain. This might even work for the brains of witnesses like dogs to use as a report at least to some extent on some events otherwise out of reach of law science. Dogs are as smart as a 3-year-old but some 3-year-olds I've had to outwit sometimes are a real genius!
In any event we wouldn't damage the memory as we read it because we could sense the memory in one bit of the brain. If a suspect tried to invalidate the claim of of what might have been found with the fMRI by usual machines because by reading the information it would change it like with the converging low energy to high energy laser beam method of sensing the areas of the brain, this will be solved by reading one neuron and all the other neurons are unchanged.. Or moreso if several neurons are sensed and compared to each other with calibration this might be more reliable.
