Talk:Blue Brain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Starting date

May 2005 or July 2005? -- Boggie 15:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] At the molecular level?

This phrase requires more specificity—taken at its face value it would imply the use of an utterly fantastic amount of computer power. Do I presume correctly that the actual goal is to simulate bulk-level cytochemistry? --207.245.10.221 20:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It seems this question appears in the BBP FAQ:

Q: And this is all still at the cellular level of simulation. Simulating the brain down to the molecular level is inconceivable with the kind of computers we have today, no matter how much faster they get. Correct?

HM: Yes, it is very unlikely that we will be able to simulate the human brain at the molecular level detail with even the most advanced form of the current technology. However, there are other directions to solve this problem. We are going to move to molecular level modeling of a NCC. This software version could in principal be converted into a hardware version - a molecular level NCC chip - and then we can duplicate as many of them as we want.

I'm sorry, but this is clear as mud to me. How precisely does BMI intend to achieve the gigantic leap in computing power this would require? --207.245.10.221 20:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

They cant and they wont, they will use tons of simplifications, I bet that all that is meant by 'molecular level' is that they will attempt to model some simple molecular interactions, maybe genetic switches or something like that. We cant simulate a bacteria or an organelle or anything bigger then a few biomolecules at molecular level. Lack of computing power is one reason but lack of knowledge is also a serious problem. All in all I think that this article is pretty misleading as it can give an uninformed person an idea that our knowledge of the brain is much better then it really is.Kezorm (talk) 21:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)