Will ever biochemistry explain how the brain works?

[Carlos]

Since last century, medical science has progressed incredibly fast. We can now explain many things through chemmical reactions (ie. how the pancreas responds to high levels of glucose by producing inslulin, through a complex biochemmical pathway in alpha and beta cells in the pancreas etc). Altough there are still many things which remain unclear.

However, we haven't even begin to understand how, the organ that makes you what you are - the brain - works.

It's true, there are general trends, in the sense that we know more or less which part of the brain is in charge of what. But we cannot even begin to understand how those interactions between neurones give rise to the emotions we feel, remember, they are just chemmical reactions. Also, how our conscience can decide what to do, indepently of chemmical reactions.

How the brain, can give rise to a conscience of a person (lets say yourself)?. Why aren't we robot-like structures, an "object" with an incredibly complex network of chemmical reactions?

Remember, after all we are a bunch of atoms very inteligently placed together, there must be something, other than the physical material we are composed of that makes us bring alive. Some people argue it has to do with nuclear physics. Some kind of quantum state in atoms is in charge of giving the diference between something dead and another thing alive, or what we usually refer as, the soul.

Unfortunately, I think this will be unsolved forever, just like how the Big Bang appeared, or how time just begun. :hyper:

[HydrogenBond]

Biochemistry alone can not explain consciousness unless the biochemistry includes hydrogen bonding a fundamental variable. This makes connections much easier. Relative to the brain and consciousness, the connection is easier than it appears. If we look at neurons, cationic current almost always flows from the dendrite into the cell body then out of the axun of a neuron. The axun and dendrites from other neurons can interact with any part of another neuron, via a synapse, but the neuron will always output cation current via its axun. This is the standard direction of current.

 

If we look at the brain as a whole, on the top is the cerebral matter. The bulk axum processes from the cerebral matter are bundled in the center of the brain in the thalamus region. Based on the action of neurons, one can see the direction of current in the brain starts in the cerebral and flows into the thalamus. From there further axum branches go into the brain stem, the spinal column and then to all the cells of the body.

 

This configuration strongly suggests the brain is at the highest potential and the body is at the lowest potential. The body, creates a constant potential within the cerebral matter to lower potential. This is reflected by constant background neuron firing (brain waves). For example, the heart and lungs recieve a constant nervous signal due to the potential with the body. The lower potential of the body is maintained via the blood supply, while the higher potential of the cerebral is maintained by the ability of neurons to quickly recover from firing. Consciousness is expressed within the constant cerebral energy flux induced by the lower body potential.

 

In other words, consciousness needs an energy source to be able to influence the cerebral matter to induce memory or actiivity. Without a constant energy source one would have to depend on random firing of neurons. With the potential to the body the neurons will background fire in a way that coordinates with the body. This also provides a constant flux of energy by which consciousness can pertubate the brain further for free will.

[Drip Curl Magic]

Since last century, medical science has progressed incredibly fast. We can now explain many things through chemmical reactions (ie. how the pancreas responds to high levels of glucose by producing inslulin, through a complex biochemmical pathway in alpha and beta cells in the pancreas etc). Altough there are still many things which remain unclear.

However, we haven't even begin to understand how, the organ that makes you what you are - the brain - works.

It's true, there are general trends, in the sense that we know more or less which part of the brain is in charge of what. But we cannot even begin to understand how those interactions between neurones give rise to the emotions we feel, remember, they are just chemmical reactions. Also, how our conscience can decide what to do, indepently of chemmical reactions.

How the brain, can give rise to a conscience of a person (lets say yourself)?. Why aren't we robot-like structures, an "object" with an incredibly complex network of chemmical reactions?

Remember, after all we are a bunch of atoms very inteligently placed together, there must be something, other than the physical material we are composed of that makes us bring alive. Some people argue it has to do with nuclear physics. Some kind of quantum state in atoms is in charge of giving the diference between something dead and another thing alive, or what we usually refer as, the soul.

Unfortunately, I think this will be unsolved forever, just like how the Big Bang appeared, or how time just begun. :cup:

 

 

I'm pretty sure we are robots. Very advanced robots to say the least. And I'm pretty sure that everything we do is a result of incredibly advanced atomacle structure. Every atom in your body is part of a giant synthesized machine that is built to have emotional attachment to everything. I think all the atoms are working together to form some higher form of conciousness. I believe all atoms are concious by themselves... but at a different level of conciousness that we can't comprehend. But when nature constructs these atoms to be able to work together in harmony, a higher level of conciousness is born. We simply were not designed to see all of the energy that "dead" matter puts off. We can't comprehend any of it, because we are on sucha higher level and we put off so much more energy... that anything that puts off such a drastically minute ammount of energy compared to us, is simply just disregaurded as uncouncious.

 

I base this thoery on absolutely nothing...:cup: cheers! :cup:

[chatlack]

I agree my friend, but I have a few things to add. Our existence or existence of anything that lives is like existence of everthing. Every particle tries to create a bigger system. Milky way, atoms, cells, people who are nation together are the examples... You can find this structure everywhere in life.

So every system tries to survive. This is the main thing. Every living is a system . No death no life. This is the rule. No soul , just basic nerve system.

 

Mine has no base too. But whats is proven to be more true? :cup: =)

[Drip Curl Magic]

Our existence or existence of anything that lives is like existence of everthing. Every particle tries to create a bigger system. Milky way, atoms, cells, people who are nation together are the examples... You can find this structure everywhere in life.

So every system tries to survive. This is the main thing. Every living is a system . No death no life. This is the rule. No soul , just basic nerve system.

 

Absolutely. Sounds like we are on the same page. :cup:

[questor]

Hydrogen Bond, could you post a link to the source of your post on body potential ? i have not heard this explanation and would like to learn more. Thanks

[Racoon]

The answer to your question is YES, eventually.

The realization of the complexity of our brains will require more years of research.

I believe the future is in CATECHOLAMINES, the organic compounds that include epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine.

[Bio-Hazard]

*tries to remember how to explain conciousness*

 

My POV:

 

Nothing is "living" just geniusly placed all together to form a something we call a cell that does chemical reactions.

 

However, I like to use anthropomorphic similarities between atoms because I like to view things in a quantum state. I assume that all particles join together and then eventually talk to one main particle within the human body which would then be called the soul. Science can't totally eliminate the idea of soul for it has to be argued when you get down to the quantum stuff.

 

I just believe the consciousness is the soul and central node that all information comes to and is given back out to all the other particles in the body. The thing that has to be majorly questioned here in this view point is, "Does the consciousness/soul ever move?" Does this CPU-type particle that makes decisions ever go somewhere in the universe due to physical laws of nature? One would think so, but then you'd lose your soul.. of course getting any farther would get people to call this metaphysics. However I do believe in metaphysics, for sci-fi becomes reality.

 

However, for something to be living I guess it would have to have a soul or this central node that things communicate to. We don't know everything yet. The brain seems to be the neural network for all movements and most likely is. I see the soul as the battery for an electronic device. So yeah, in a way we are very complex robots. Of course the term robot for an assembled device that does highly complex tasks and uses energy.

[Carlos]

It seems many people haven't understood the point I was trying to make.

Really, withs this level we can NEVER EVER explain things like the conscience. We are just light years away. I mean, what kind of awnser would you expect? A chemical formula, a physics equation? That can explain many things about the physiology, but never will even begin to explain how does matter converts to "subjectiviness" or to a conscience.

We are not robots that detect electromagnetic radiation of wavelength of 590nm, or detect perturbations in the pressure of the media (sound), we SEE THE RED COLOUR, WE LISTEN TO MELODIES. And they are concepts which escape to all scientific explanations, it is not possible to understand how the information of "red colour" transforms to what we actually see in our conscience.

Remember, there are more neurones as stars in the universe! And there more possible combinations of neurones interacting with each other, than molecules in the universe (we cannot imagine the inmensity and complexity of our brain).

 

Chemistry can only explain things at a physical level, however, when it comes to explaining conscience, and the subjectivity of each "me" and why we are not robots but persons aware of themselves, another science is needed.

[Carlos]

The answer to your question is YES, eventually.

The realization of the complexity of our brains will require more years of research.

I believe the future is in CATECHOLAMINES, the organic compounds that include epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine.

 

Again, how the discovery of how certain neurotransmitters of chemmicals work bulding up the conscience, will give us an explanation of how it works at a chemical level. However, will be that a satisfactory awnser to explain how atoms, molecules or cells suddenly start to "think", be aware of itself and the others, experience emotions and feelings. How do you pretend that science, with the knowkedge we have, can explain this magical conversion?

[chatlack]

I think ,conciousness, conscience and things that we link to soul are the public opinion of our cells. Its magical when you look to the all, but if you observe a country you will see it there too. Also as we know body parts without brain can move; this is a simple proof that all of our cells have the ability of thinking and reacting for their existence.

What do you say???

[TheBigDog]

All portions of the human mind will be solved by science save 1. Free Will. Chemistry will explain emotions, conciousness, self awareness, and any other descriptor you can apply to brain function. But it cannot explain free will, for if it does then we truely are pointless. If our acions are not our own choice then we reliquish our being and are left with our lives as just illusion. A ride that we have no control over and we simply observe as it happens.

 

Not me

 

Bill

[hallenrm]

No!!! Biochemistry will never be able to explain how the brain works, just as alchemy could never explain radioactivity. The forms and fields of science evolve with time and several forms become extinct. Biochemistry too will become extinct, just like alchemy and give rise to a new science akin to modern chemistry with all its annotations of molecules and energetics. I doubt it very much that the humanity will ever understand completely how the brain works, just as we will never know how the universe was formed!!!

[jkellmd]

Yes and no, Carlos. The interdisciplinary investigation that embodies neuroscience is making huge leaps in the understanding of memory and emotion. Many of these discoveries are beginning to be considered as Nobel Prize material, after only a few years since first publication. A revolution in the understanding of the mind is underway. Be patient.

 

We have only recently developed crude tools able to measure microanotomical and biochemical changes in the brain without interfering too much, or destroying the system entirely. Immunohistochemistry and functional MRI advancements alone are feuling rapid expansion in research programs and PhD enrollment. Big results are being seen in small papers already. Larger controlled studies are slow in coming, unfortunately.

 

The problem is that there is not much money available. Politically charged issues like breast cancer (not as prevalent as prostate cancer, which is seldom discussed in comparison, partly because men have reliquished this aspect of their political power), and pediatric cancers, which are incredibly rare, bring in most of the available public money, with less emotionally compelling applications left to depend upon dwndling funding. At the same time, private monies are directed into fields that allow for immediate finanicial gains, like cardiologic pharmeceuticals and various kinds of medical equipment.

[questor]

if we can explain the origin of consciousness and free thought, we will then

probably know if Intelligent Design exists. thought has no mass, but it may have electrical energy. if it doesn't, then it may be an unknown force. if it can be explained by simple natural causes, it would be an argument against ID.

[Biochemist]

This is really impressive. In the last two posts, we have successfully intertwined biochemistry, the gender politics of research funding, free will and intelligent design.

 

This is clearly a talented group.

[billg]

Biochemistry certainly can explain "how the brain works", but on it's own cannot explain consciousness. It needs to be coupled with a better understanding of the networks involved in the brain - because consciousness is not a chemical reaction, it is a system - it is the whole of the interactions between the many parts of our brain, both on a molecular scale, and a larger scale.

 

Many modern brain researchers view consciousness as an "emergent property". An emergent property is a property that is not inherent in the individual constituents of a system, nor in their additive product, but only comes about due to a particular organisation. Colour is an example of an emergent property - subatomic particles like electrons and protons do not have colour, but when organised into atoms that absorb and emit particular frequencies of light, they do have colour. The emergent property is a result of the complexity of the interactions, not a physical object like a molecule, but rather an interaction between physical objects.

 

We are not robots that detect electromagnetic radiation of wavelength of 590nm, or detect perturbations in the pressure of the media (sound), we SEE THE RED COLOUR, WE LISTEN TO MELODIES. And they are concepts which escape to all scientific explanations, it is not possible to understand how the information of "red colour" transforms to what we actually see in our conscience.

 

It is not "us" that detects a wavelength of 590nm, you are correct. It is our eyes. But between our eyes and "us" is the incredibly complex computations and manipulations of the brain, which works AS A WHOLE to create consciousness. There are many interesting case studies that shed light on the connection between the brain as a physical object and consciousness as the major emergent property of that object and it's activity. Take for example the infamous patient HM who had much of the memory centers of his brain removed in an operation. HM cannot remember several years of his life prior to the operation, nor can he remember anything for more than about a minute. He will greet researchers who have worked with him for decades as if he's never met them before, and if they leave the room and return after another minute, will do so again. HM is clearly conscious, and will state he is if asked, yet he obviously has a different kind of consciousness to our own. I believe such cases of altered consciousness' are the best evidence of consciousness being an emergent property of the whole brain, and not a result of some inexplicable "soul".