I'm sure it's not pure trial and error, but also governed by instincts. But I'm also quite sure not all ants build structures which are identical, right? I'm sure the same species in different areas (with different environments) have slightly different methods of doing things. These differences are probably due to different results from trial and error.

I'm sure it's not pure trial and error, but also governed by instincts. But I'm also quite sure not all ants build structures which are identical, right? I'm sure the same species in different areas (with different environments) have slightly different methods of doing things. These differences are probably due to different results from trial and error.

I'm sure it's not pure trial and error, but also governed by instincts. But I'm also quite sure not all ants build structures which are identical, right? I'm sure the same species in different areas (with different environments) have slightly different methods of doing things. These differences are probably due to different results from trial and error.

I read a few months back that some group in Japan is trying to make a real working life size Gundam... as close as possible to a real one. But the furthest they got was on the movement, nothing else so far... must be a billions wasted on trying to make a robot ...

Thinkingfox,

I assume that when you say INSTINCT, you meant what is programed in the DNA.  Now, given that we have LITTLE KNOWLEDGE as what most of the human being's DNA do, how do we know that our INTELLIGENCE is not based on INSTINCT aka programed by DNA??

We do not know.  Human intelligence might just be a computer will a huge program based on DNA's information.

Dreamer

We do not know for sure, yet. But our ability to learn and improve our technologies, shows, to some extent, that we do not know all at once. If the human intelligence is a computer with a huge programme based on DNA, why did we have to progress in stages? For example, if we knew that it would be more efficient to use electrical engines, why did we ever use steam-engined trains? And why did we use magnetic computer storage instead of using blue-ray or the best possible technology immediately?

Thinkingfox,

Based on the BEST available research, normal people only use 3% of their brain.  Genius like Einstein use 6% of his brain.  So, even in the best case, 94% of our brain is UNUSED.  So, it is entirely possible that our so called learning is NOTHING but discovering and using part of our brain that we have not used.

For example, we do not know how to use electricity is because we have not discover the knowledge about electricity in our brain.

So, we do not know for sure.  It STILL can be pre-programed....

Read MORE science fiction stories.  All those possibilities have been explored extensively in fictions.

Dreamer

The human brain is complex. Along with performing millions of mundane acts, it composes concertos, issues manifestos and comes up with elegant solutions to equations. It's the wellspring of all human feelings, behaviors, experiences as well as the repository of memory and self-awareness. So it's no surprise that the brain remains a mystery unto itself.

Adding to that mystery is the contention that humans "only" employ 10 percent of their brain. If only regular folk could tap that other 90 percent, they too could become savants who remember π to the twenty-thousandth decimal place or perhaps even have telekinetic powers.

Though an alluring idea, the "10 percent myth" is so wrong it is almost laughable, says neurologist Barry Gordon at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore. Although there's no definitive culprit to pin the blame on for starting this legend, the notion has been linked to the American psychologist and author William James, who argued in The Energies of Men that "We are making use of only a small part of our possible mental and physical resources." It's also been associated with to Albert Einstein, who supposedly used it to explain his cosmic towering intellect.

...

Although it's true that at any given moment all of the brain's regions are not concurrently firing, brain researchers using imaging technology have shown that, like the body's muscles, most are continually active over a 24-hour period. "Evidence would show over a day you use 100 percent of the brain," says John Henley, a neurologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. Even in sleep, areas such as the frontal cortex, which controls things like higher level thinking and self-awareness, or the somatosensory areas, which help people sense their surroundings, are active, Henley explains.

...

Take the simple act of pouring coffee in the morning: In walking toward the coffeepot, reaching for it, pouring the brew into the mug, even leaving extra room for cream, the occipital and parietal lobes, motor sensory and sensory motor cortices, basal ganglia, cerebellum and frontal lobes all activate. A lightning storm of neuronal activity occurs almost across the entire brain in the time span of a few seconds.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article....ercent-of-brain

You said normal people only use 3% of the brain, may I know according to what method did the researchers arrive at that percentage?

Thinkingfox,

I thought they use MRI to scan the brain.  But, the point is STILL VALID.  We DO NOT KNOW how much of our brain is used.  And, a lot of our so called "KNOWLEGDE" could be something that is pre-existing in our brain.

Dreamer

Although it's true that at any given moment all of the brain's regions are not concurrently firing, brain researchers using imaging technology have shown that, like the body's muscles, most are continually active over a 24-hour period. "Evidence would show over a day you use 100 percent of the brain," says John Henley, a neurologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. Even in sleep, areas such as the frontal cortex, which controls things like higher level thinking and self-awareness, or the somatosensory areas, which help people sense their surroundings, are active, Henley explains.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article....ercent-of-brain

So next time you hear someone say that they only use 10% of their brain, you can set them straight. Tell them:

"NOT TRUE; We use 100% of our brains."

If you find any news articles or advertisements using the 10% myth, please send them to me: Dr. Eric H. Chudler.
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html

Brain Myths: How Much of Our Brain Do We Use?
by Dr. Karen on Tue 05 Jun 2007 07:19 PM EDT  |  Permanent Link  |  Cosmos
Question:
"I have been told that we only use 10% of our brain's capacity. Not sure all the reasons why we cannot access the other 90%. I want to. I wouldn't mind having a better memory!"

Answer:
There are differing opinions on this. Some say it's true and it's the result of a built-in redundancy. Not available until something goes wrong.

I personally am in the "I don't think so" school and there are a number of lines to evidence to support me on this. I suggest our brain is 100% active - with more brain activity in some areas at some times for some life activities.
http://neurofeedback.blogharbor.com/blog/_.../5/3001163.html

Thinkingfox,

Based on the BEST available research, normal people only use 3% of their brain.  Genius like Einstein use 6% of his brain.  So, even in the best case, 94% of our brain is UNUSED.  So, it is entirely possible that our so called learning is NOTHING but discovering and using part of our brain that we have not used.

For example, we do not know how to use electricity is because we have not discover the knowledge about electricity in our brain.

So, we do not know for sure.  It STILL can be pre-programed....

Read MORE science fiction stories.  All those possibilities have been explored extensively in fictions.

Dreamer

These figures were made up through MRI scan plotting area with activity peaks. If we only use 3-6% of our brain, why would we need such a big brain to start with?

A simple injury to one tiny part of your brain will kill you and I don't think that support the above mentioned theory at all.

Maybe it is the way we define 100%.

We can say 100% of our brain which means that 100% of area/volume of the brain is used. But we CANNOT definitely say that we use 100% of the POTENTIAL capacity of the associated area.

How can we say that at a certain age we use 100% and yet later in our lives, we can still learn more things?
ps. keyword is potential, not capacity.

Thinkingfox,

I thought they use MRI to scan the brain.  But, the point is STILL VALID.  We DO NOT KNOW how much of our brain is used.  And, a lot of our so called "KNOWLEGDE" could be something that is pre-existing in our brain.

Dreamer

But how do we quantify potential? Is it measurable? If the 3 or 10% is talking about potential, I'm really interested to know how they arrive at the figure because from my Googling, I have yet to stumble across any of such articles.