Whether right or for wrong, the human brain is often compared to a computer, and vice-versa. They both receive data, process it, store it, and output new data. Unlike computers, however, the human brain doesn’t crash. Yes, people have nervous breakdowns, but that has more to do with psychological stress than with data management. Now, researchers from Yale University have figured out why our brains succeed where computers fail.
The research team compared the genome of E coli bacteria with the Linux operating system. Both of the control networks, it turns out, are arranged in hierarchies. In E coli, the molecular networks are arranged in a pyramid. A limited number of master regulatory genes sit at the top, controlling a wide range of specialized functions beneath them.
By contrast, Linux is more like an inverted pyramid - numerous routines are at the top, controlling a few generic functions at the bottom. This is because software engineers save time and money by building on existing routines, instead of starting systems from scratch. Such an approach makes the system vulnerable to breakdowns, however, as even simple changes to a generic routine can be very disruptive. To minimize problems, the generic components need to be continually fine-tuned by software designers.
The Yale scientists noted that in a living organism, generic components that need to be constantly updated would not be a good survival trait. Instead, over billions of years of evolution, the E coli bacteria has evolved many highly specialized modules. Together, these modules are ready to handle most eventualities, resulting in a much more robust network.
Whether right or for wrong, the human brain is often compared to a computer, and vice-versa. They both receive data, process it, store it, and output new data. Unlike computers, however, the human brain doesn’t crash. Yes, people have nervous breakdowns, but that has more to do with psychological stress than with data management. Now, researchers from Yale University have figured out why our brains succeed where computers fail.
The research team compared the genome of E coli bacteria with the Linux operating system. Both of the control networks, it turns out, are arranged in hierarchies. In E coli, the molecular networks are arranged in a pyramid. A limited number of master regulatory genes sit at the top, controlling a wide range of specialized functions beneath them.
By contrast, Linux is more like an inverted pyramid - numerous routines are at the top, controlling a few generic functions at the bottom. This is because software engineers save time and money by building on existing routines, instead of starting systems from scratch. Such an approach makes the system vulnerable to breakdowns, however, as even simple changes to a generic routine can be very disruptive. To minimize problems, the generic components need to be continually fine-tuned by software designers.
The Yale scientists noted that in a living organism, generic components that need to be constantly updated would not be a good survival trait. Instead, over billions of years of evolution, the E coli bacteria has evolved many highly specialized modules. Together, these modules are ready to handle most eventualities, resulting in a much more robust network.
Anyway, for your interested information, brains do crash. They crash when they have an epileptic seizure. Not everyone gets seizures, but anyone can get a seizure. It\'s just that some brains have a higher seizure threshold than others.
Brains also crash when they have a psychotic break. This isn\'t about psychological stress, it\'s about information processing, and some brains have a lower threshold for crashing due to information overload than others. That\'s why we have antipsychotic medications. They stabilize the brain. There are lots of people who are on anti-seizure meds to prevent psychotic breaks.
Finally, all of our brains crash when we\'ve been awake too long. We get sleepier and sleepier until we finally fall asleep and our brains get the opportunity to go into a reset cycle.
Henry
some innocent bystander opinion (yet a CIO ;-))
Brains are Brains and Bacteria are Bacteria... although I cannot derive the straight rule of 3 where if Bacteria behave in the proposed form we do also and therefore as it is deducted we opposite to computers, do not crash.
To this I need to say that Programming has long since introduced object oriented programming that in a way mimics what is mentioned about bacteria, unfortunately PC\'s unlike brains host applications developed by countless developers with countless variables which set the priority to the scope of the program and very often with embeded floors and faults which then tend to be corrected with releases same as we do with experience.
Crashes are in any case common in both, brains and Systems (which after all also brains are) the difference is the consequences and the fact that brains are mostely uniquely wired and thus uniquely triggered to crash opposite to systems that in worse case scenarios can be restored or reset....
Still waiting to see how the code and perhaps even more the programs will look like for Organic Computing Systems... will we then learn more about brains, computing... or both?