Mindscape 140 | Dean Buonomano on Time, Reality, and the Brain

“Time” and “the brain” are two of those things that are somewhat mysterious, but it would be hard for us to live without. So just imagine how much fun it is to bring them together. Dean Buonomano is one of the leading neuroscientists studying how our brains perceive time, which is part of the bigger issue of how we construct models of the physical world around us. We talk about how the brain tells time very differently than the clocks that we’re used to, using different neuronal mechanisms for different timescales. This brings us to a very interesting conversation about the nature of time itself — Dean is a presentist, who believes that only the current moment qualifies as “real,” but we don’t hold that against him.

Dean Buonomano received his Ph.D. from the Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Texas Medical School, Houston. He is currently a Professor in the Department of Neurobiology at UCLA. His lab studies how the brain perceives time and constructs models of the external physical world. He is the author of Brain Bugs: How the Brain’s Flaws Shape our Lives and Your Brain is a Time Machine: The Neuroscience and Physics of Time.

#podcast #ideas #science #philosophy #culture

[protoword]

Great interview among many others on MINDSCAPE! To me, Sean is better interviewer than many journalists, because of his scientific background! Old saying said: “To have right question, you have to know alredy half of the answer”! Great questions to exceptional guest! Thank you!

[mamszczury]

I would love to see discussions at this level on public TV. God bless internet.

[jeremydoerksen]

I absolutely loved this episode, Sean! Thank you for continuing to make the podcast; and for keeping the podcast both informative and interesting! Listening to new episodes of this podcast are among the highlights of any of my given weeks!

[AdamAlbilya]

Awesome podcast, intriguing right at the beginning!

8:00
As for nueronic errors: no problem, there is errors in bits too; what we do? Accumulated grouping for mininimize error rate (several neurons represent 0/1 via connection to minimize error for all to fail), plus errors correction mechanism (e.g. checksum).

Neurons: flip-flop time bits + hard memory representation (can be done either flash memory or hard memory via feedback loop of weighted [neurotransmitters] flip-flops net).

As for the "amazing effectiveness of math" or something, i.e.:

how come we can describe the world by models, which we put together using imaginary formal languages we invented?

Because it is describable; for the fact of being existing.

After all, the phenomena itself, is the most perfect model which represents a description of onself characteristics. From the phenomena itself we explore in science for how to describe its behavior and nature, using an increasingly percise models for approximating reality with better an better precision and prediction power.

How come we can describe it using pattern? Because it's entailed by the fact that if we can perceive it -> it's describable using a models the brain represented via recursive sign language, developed by evolution for communication between brain's modules/senses etc.

Why? Well, our senses, eyes, ears, etc; what they do? Describes their interactions with objects, encrypting the characteristics of these interactions, and delegates it for the brain to recognize patterns and assign labels for patterns its recognize in this information; including a baggage representing experience as what to so next time this pattern achieved again, with respect to survivability value etc.

It does it according to a hard coded computation (dna, evolution); it's progresses via feedback loop of (roughly) immediate hard coded genetic program interacts with its environment, and retrospective which changing the program for 'how to interact next time'.

Program reacts immediately first by its characteristics entailed by the current brain's activity pattern (no 'freewill', already happened), then it transfers the description of the action it took, to be evaluated by the judgmental retrospective module (thus feeling as if currently occures by self); so the action performed by the braon at moment t-1, can be further explored for how it was resulted, consequences, what to do with it, compare to labled-baggage ("experiencs") on memory from past experience, and change the program/memory/brain etc with resolutions for next moments.

Well I wrote much more on the subject, but that's too much for now; lol gonna continue watching.

Edit:
20:45
Wait, So that solves the problem he raises before; trivially.

That feature makes it natural for creating a physical mechanism pattern serving as a damn accurate calculator. Need more reliability? Just add connections minimizing errors up to arbitrarily negligence factor.

[globaldigitaldirectsubsidi]

it is so frustrating to see that high quality content just doesn´t get the attention it deserves on these social media platforms.

[origins]

Would have liked to hear a mention of savants. Such as the real life Rain Man. Some people are born with extraordinary calculator like abilities, that are not learned or gained through learning a method but rather seem to be innate. Similarly people have extraordinary Savant like abilities to reproduce music. Almost always there is a deficit in normal functioning abilities. Anyway would have been interesting because this pretty much contradicts what the guests said. It certainly seems like the brain can do calculator like mathematics. But it just doesn't normally wire this way, so clearly there's something more going on then simply a difference in kind between digital and biological computing. Anyway I think that kind of goes against what Sean's guest was saying

[nilshellblom]

Really liked this one. Nice change with more of a debate.

[domtgtheonly]

As Stephen hawking said thinking three dimensionally is already difficult enough

[SandipChitale]

There is a middle way in which Sean and Dean are thinking about simulteneity and presentism. Dean was focusing on presentism that is local at specific given point and only that point. Sean was talking of lack of simulteneity as defined from the perspective of a point with respect to all other points across the universe. But a third or maybe middle way of thinking about presentism is - the. present moment for each point from its own perspective. This is basically along the lines of present moment of proper time on the world line of each point in space. I think it would be illogical to say that a given point is at two different moments on its own world line. I subscribe to that notion of presentism. I mean each point in universe at one moment along its own worldline.

[JustOneAsbesto]

"Give me an example of your cat thinking about the future."

[leomarcus]

Please don’t equate arithmetic with mathematics. Actually humans do mathematics much better than computers!

[davebewshey]

Put the ads at the beginning or the end please take a note from lex Friedman it does not break the flow of the conversation

[daverei]

My wife always comments that it seems to take longer to go somewhere new, but shorter to get home.

[imperialcereal]

great episode! also please consider anil seth as a guest! love your podcasts and how broad the perspective is :))))

[sirilandgren]

Letting our subjective perception be the tiebreaker with regards to presentism vs eternalism - isn't that what Smolin does with his insistence that time flows?

[lifetheuniverse]

15:35 Speaking for myself I like to try to cancel simple common prime factors: 360/(8=2^3), 180 90 45. This does require knowing some prime numbers 2 3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37 ... 47:00 Sometimes people speak a bit too slowly or with many verbal utterances 1.5-2. At other times speaking with a UK dialect or dense topics 1-1.25.

[raybeeze]

great discussion. great guest. please put put him (or this topic) on the short list of return guests and topics.

[TheologyUnleashed]

But what about the people who can do calculations in their head?

[aaronclarke]

Maybe the invariance of grids evolved both in our brains and in mathematics because it reflects something about Nature generally. That it’s a good way to navigate the world because it reflects something about the world. How many other forms of navigation could have evolved?

[singularonaut]

If eternalists are right, right now must be infinitely many copies of me, separated from each other by tiny Planks time) And somehow I am here right now and the one who is write this comment, why I am here but not tomorrow now, and not 30 years from now? On those questions eternalists doesn't have answers. But presentists does, because from the beginning you are the only one and live in eternal now and evolving with it by time, and time passes so much that you are here, and you are not in yesterday or tomorrow, because tomorrow is depending from now, and tomorrow just another word to describe evolving now and you within from 24 hours from now) therefore I am on presentists side 😇