The Brain, A Decoded Enigma Part 1

The Brain, A Decoded Enigma.

by Dorin T. Moisa.

Introduction

This book contains my original theory, called MDT (Modeling Devices Theory) on the basic hardware function of the brain (human or animal).

As any scientific theory, it is a symbolic model. Any symbolic model is based on a limited number of basic terms and a limited number of basic relations between the basic terms.

For the basic terms and only for them, there are accepted descriptive definitions. All the others terms are generated by the model, together with their normal definitions. These definitions are generated by the model by logical and mathematical procedures.

These are the basic characteristics of any scientific theory and so, I follow the procedures described above, to make a theory on the basic hardware functions of the brain.

This theory is in a total opposition with all the actual sciences a.s.sociated with the functions of the brain. The present sciences, a.s.sociated with the functions of the brain, are not based on a single fundamental model. In this way, as my theory will be accepted, all what it was already written in the actual sciences a.s.sociated with the functions of the brain, have to be re-written or forgotten.

This attempt of total revolution is necessary because the actual sciences on the brain don't use normal definitions of the terms; there are only descriptions a.s.sociated with them. Because the definitions of the terms are not generated by a single fundamental model, the logical corelation between them is not possible. So, the actual sciences a.s.sociated with the brain cannot evolve to become positive science anymore.

In psychology, for instance, about any scientist has his/her own list of descriptive definition a.s.sociated with the terms used by him/her. In this way, it is not possible to make a logical structure to integrate all the terms used in that field. So, the psychology, for instance, is not a positive science.

Another example: Let's consider a cla.s.sical positive science, as Newton's Mechanics is. In this symbolic model, all terms have exactly the same definition for all the scientists. These definition are not changed since 340 years ago when they were generated by the symbolic model of Mechanics. For instance, the term "speed" is defined as v=s/t. That is, "speed" means that the "s.p.a.ce" is divided by "time". This definition is a normal definition generated by the symbolic model of Mechanics not a descriptive definition.

Let's suppose now that a symbolic model a.s.sociated with the basic hardware function of the brain is already created or it will be created. The first consequence is that all the terms used in a.s.sociation with the functions of the brain will be generated by the model by logical and mathematical procedures, together with their normal definitions. There is no reason to suppose that any descriptive definition which is already used in the present sciences of the brain will be compatible with the definitions generated by that symbolic model.

So, all what is already created in the present sciences a.s.sociated with the brain has to be re-written or forgotten.

Regardless of the fact that MDT theory will be accepted or not, a symbolic model which covers the basic hardware function of the brain will produce this total revolution in all the sciences a.s.sociated with the brain, including psychology, psychiatry, gnoseology, epistemology, many parts of social sciences and so on.

Let's consider that a symbolic model to cover the basic functions of the brain is created and is already accepted. The persons who already work in these fields have to re-start everything about from zero. Their opposition will be enormous and I have no illusion in this direction.

This theory was created about 10 years ago. Based on my personal experience, the theory is easily understood by persons with special orientation on positive sciences, including children's over 12 years old. Also, the persons who already work with symbolic models (mathematicians, physicists, engineers and so on) have a high capacity to understand it.

Let's see what MDT offers.

First of all, MDT treats the brain as a device which processes the information. In this way, MDT has no direct connection with the medicine.

MDT is concerning only with the basic functions a.s.sociated with information processing and it is not interested by problems as "what part of the brain is doing something" or "how a function is implemented". MDT is a theory a.s.sociated with the processing of the information and so it has no direct interference with the hardware implementation of the physical brain.

As a symbolic model a.s.sociated with the basic function of the brain, it generates precise definition, based on logic, of all the terms used in a.s.sociation with the basic hardware functions of the brain. In this way, all the terms are logical correlated between them.

Examples: MDT generates normal definitions for: knowledge, consciousness, to imagine, to think, intelligence, emotion, to be irritate, love, happiness and many others. E.g. the "consciousness" is the facility of a brain to make and operate a model which contains the being itself as an element. MDT defines, than, 6 different types of consciousness which are, of course, defined in the same precise way. Even more, based on MDT, it is possible to design a logical structure to implement the function called "consciousness".

MDT explains the basic functions of the brain up to the level to make a logical design to synthesize all the brain's functions (human or animal). Of course, a technological implementation of that functions is not possible now because the computers, for example, have yet a very low power to process the information and this situation will last, I think, at least in the next 25 years.

In fact, the brain is treated by MDT as a technological product. So, there are defined the main design goals and also, the main deficiencies (by design or given by technological implementation).

There is a.n.a.lyzed the problem if, by evolution, it is possible or not to evolve from animal brain to human brain.

There are a.n.a.lyzed the design and technological problems, including the functional illnesses of the brains.

The theory treats also the paranormal phenomenon and suggest some methods to develop such activities.

The Application section (ETAs) contains also many items as a history of the evolution of the brain, the evaluation of the problems of psychological tests and performance tests for a brain, some problems a.s.sociated with the present and future levels of evolution of the brain, some long range problems a.s.sociated with the development of the human society (including the terrorism) and many others.

The basic elements of MDT occurs in 1993 and the first written form (on WEB) in 1997. In 2003 a printed edition of the theory was published (in Romanian language) by the Romanian Publis.h.i.+ng House "Editura Albastra"

and in 2004, in the frame of Gutenberg Project, a new edition also in Romanian. The process of developing is continuing.

Dorin T. MOISA [email protected]

THE BASIC FUNCTIONS OF THE BRAIN

ABSTRACT

This theory, called by me as MDT (Modeling Devices Theory) considers that the basic hardware function of any brain (human or animal) is to make and operate image models (or a.n.a.logic models) which are a.s.sociated with the external reality. In this frame, for the human brain only, there is an additional hardware facility: to make and operate symbolic models.

FUNDAMENTAL TERMS (KEYWORDS)

Image model (or a.n.a.logic model), symbolic model, simulation on model, information, truth, reality, input reality (IR), external reality, image, harmony, logic, general communications language (GCL), logical and mathematical language.

DEFINITIONS a.s.sOCIATED WITH THE BASIC TERMS

This theory is a symbolic model. Any symbolic model has a limited number of fundamental terms. For these terms and only for them, there are accepted descriptive definitions. A descriptive definition is, usually, not precise enough for a scientific approach. This lack of precision is due to the fact that it uses terms which must be defined before. The terms used in the definition must also be defined using already defined words. This process seems to be endless.

In any positive science, the descriptive definitions are accepted only for a very limited number of terms. These are called "fundamental terms".

For instance, in the symbolic model of Newton's Mechanics, the fundamental terms are ma.s.s, s.p.a.ce and time. None of these terms have a normal definition (i.e. generated by the model). They have only descriptive definitions.

Once the fundamental terms are introduced by description, all the other terms have normal definitions, which are generated by the symbolic model, by logical and mathematical operations.

Let's see the definitions of the terms used by the MDT theory.

Model: this is a term used on large scale in science and technology. The MDT theory accepts the definition used there.

A model means some fundamental elements and some fundamental relations between the elements.

The elements could be of any type (physical objects, the representation of any object in any form, including pictures of any type or images of any type or mathematical symbols of any type and so on). In fact, an element could be a.s.sociated with anything which can be considered as an ent.i.ty. The elements have some properties, which must be specified somehow. There are a number of relations between the elements, which must also be specified.

An image model (or a.n.a.logic model) contains an unspecified number of elements and an unspecified number of relations between the elements. An image model is just given as it is. It is not possible to specify in explicit and precise ways which are the elements and which are the relations.

Examples of image models: maps, models of an object of any type, an a.s.sembly of such models including any material elements (water, air and so on), any representation in any form of such elements.

A symbolic model uses as elements letters, numbers or words. The relations are of logical or mathematical type.

The most important symbolic model is the General Communications Language (GCL). The elements are usually nouns and the relations are usually verbs.

Warning: GCL is not really a symbolic model. The GCL just contains all the elements and all the relations. When a symbolic model is made (a sentence, for instance), elements and relations from GCL are used. Thus, because there is no available word, I decided to consider, by extension, the GCL as a symbolic model. In this frame, GCL has to be considered as "symbolic model".

Once a model given, it is possible to simulate some situations on it. For simulation, a change must be made to the model. After that, the entire model will be changed because all the elements have some relations between them.

Any implicit or explicit information which is generated by simulation by a model, is called "truth". Any truth must be a.s.sociated with the model, which generated it. This is the definition of the term "truth" in the MDT theory.

All the information, which is or could be generated by a model by simulation, is called "reality" a.s.sociated to that model. This is the definition of the term "reality" in the MDT theory. We also see here that before declaring the reality, one needs to declare the model which generated it.