In 1997 Physicist Freeman Dyson, who has conducted classified research in the neural prosthetic field stated ,"once the organization of the central nervous system has been explored and understood we shall be open to develop the technology of brain signal transcription and subsequent transmission of such back and forth between organism and computer much more efficiently ."
...The chief barrier to progress in neurophysiology previously was the lack of observational tools small enough to capture brain signal at it's source .Development in nanotechnology has"caught up" with the "smallness of the things" concerning Brain Computer Interface as we needed tools that could fit inside or between the neurons to transmit reports of neural events to receivers outside the human organism. Previously our observing instruments were limited by either having allowanced to only use bulky neural prosthetics on subjects who conditionally could be outfitted with biotech only because these subjects already suffered from traumatic brain injury and many regulations were in place to make sure those fitted with 'chips(" usually for deep brain stimulation) would and never could be "used" for any testing that these neural prosthetics might have served for very precise "mind management " .Wearable biosensors have quite a difficult time bypassing the thickness of the skull to get at the root of synaptic exchange .The limitations of wearable biosensors cannot significantly capture the initiation and nuance of signal begins. The modern digital data-handling technology now capable of recording and analyzing the signals emerging from millions of tiny transmitters simultaneously is all based on nanotechnology. All that is lacking in order for researchers to make use of these new "pin point" observational tools is impetuous to use neural biotech for non medical based studies .Perhaps some type of world cataclysmic event might be needed to foster less regulations in progressive brain science and more leeway concerning both solicited and unsolicited human testing
...The chief barrier to progress in neurophysiology previously was the lack of observational tools small enough to capture brain signal at it's source .Development in nanotechnology has"caught up" with the "smallness of the things" concerning Brain Computer Interface as we needed tools that could fit inside or between the neurons to transmit reports of neural events to receivers outside the human organism. Previously our observing instruments were limited by either having allowanced to only use bulky neural prosthetics on subjects who conditionally could be outfitted with biotech only because these subjects already suffered from traumatic brain injury and many regulations were in place to make sure those fitted with 'chips(" usually for deep brain stimulation) would and never could be "used" for any testing that these neural prosthetics might have served for very precise "mind management " .Wearable biosensors have quite a difficult time bypassing the thickness of the skull to get at the root of synaptic exchange .The limitations of wearable biosensors cannot significantly capture the initiation and nuance of signal begins. The modern digital data-handling technology now capable of recording and analyzing the signals emerging from millions of tiny transmitters simultaneously is all based on nanotechnology. All that is lacking in order for researchers to make use of these new "pin point" observational tools is impetuous to use neural biotech for non medical based studies .Perhaps some type of world cataclysmic event might be needed to foster less regulations in progressive brain science and more leeway concerning both solicited and unsolicited human testing
No comments:
Post a Comment