What do you think?
Rate this book
The Relativistic Brain: How it works and why it cannot be simulated by a Turing machine
In this monograph, a mathematician and a neurobiologist join forces to address one of the most crucial and controversial scientific questions of our can the exquisite capacities of the human brain be simulated by any digital computer? By combining mathematical, computational, neurobiological and evolutionary arguments, Ronald Cicurel and Miguel Nicolelis refute the possibility that any Turing machine will ever succeed in such a simulation. As part of their argument, the authors propose a new theory for brain the Relativistic Brain Theory. This theory accounts for decades of neurophysiological and psychological findings and observations that until now have challenged the dominant dogma in neuroscience. Altogether, this monograph contains the inaugural manifesto of a movement intended to emphasize the uniqueness of human nature while discrediting pseudo-scientific predictions that the replacement of humans by machines is imminent. In the authors' opinion, the misguided and misleading belief that digital machines can emulate all human behaviors defines one of the greatest threats that society faces in the future to preserve our way of life, our human culture and our freedom.
104 pages, Paperback
First published April 9, 2015
27 people are currently reading
253 people want to read
About the author
Miguel Nicolelis
17 books88 followersMiguel Nicolelis is the Duke School of Medicine Distinguished Professor of Neuroscience and Duke University Professor of Neurobiology, Biomedical Engineering, and Psychology and Neuroscience. In 2004, Scientific American elected him as one of the twenty most influential scientists in the world.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
December 5, 2025
Nuove teorie sul funzionamento del cervello come un sistema integrato e dinamico analogico-digitale difficilmente riproducibile da un supercomputer. Brillante e convincente.
April 15, 2018
I am unsure whether to rate the book much lower because while the ideas presented are interesting the authors do not spend much time at all in the text going through the basic evidence that supprts their theory and refer to an appendix in which predictions are writ with little added information, context or countercriticism.
The book reads rushed and incomplete, more a teaser
for a more complete treatment.
The book reads rushed and incomplete, more a teaser
for a more complete treatment.
July 4, 2024
neurons distributed across multiple areas of the frontal and even parietal lobe, in both cerebral hemispheres, could contribute significantly to the population needed to execute the motor task.
some evidence suggests that the same combination of neurons is never repeated to produce the same movement.
According to the plasticity principle, the internal brain representation of the world, and even our own sense of self, remains in continuous flux throughout our lives.
conservation of energy principle. This principle proposes that, due to the limited and constant energy budget available for the brain, neural circuits have to maintain a firing rate cap. Thus, if some cortical neurons increase their instantaneous firing rate to signal a particular sensory stimulus or to participate in the generation of a movement or other behavior, other neighboring cells will have to reduce their firing rate proportionally, so that the overall activity of the entire neural ensemble remains constant.
According to the relativistic brain theory, complex central nervous systems like ours generate, process, and store information through the recursive interaction of a hybrid digital-analog computation engine
Instead, our theory proposes that, at any given moment in time, the brain generates its own internal analog hypothesis of what “it expects to see” by building an analog neural computer ahead of any encounter with a new visual stimulus.
Both the phantom limb sensation and the rubber hand illusion suggest that the brain contains an “a priori” internal and continuous “body image” that can be reshaped very quickly as a function of the subject’s experience.
most physical processes simply cannot be defined by a mathematical function.
“A living animal brain can generate some behaviors that are only fully described by non-computable functions. Since those cannot be dealt with properly by a Turing Machine, there is no possibility of simulating precisely a brain on a digital computer, no matter how sophisticated it is.”
‘intuition’ (a non-computable human property) is present in every part of a mathematician's thinking.
real world organisms, being integrated systems, can handle their complexity in an analog way that cannot be captured by a formal system, ergo neither by algorithms.
“If you believe that a given formal system is non contradictory, you must also believe that there are true proposals within the system that cannot be proved to be true by the formal system”.
there is no way to reverse engineer something that was never engineered in the first place.
computers fail when faced with tasks that require common sense
“Consciousness is just a massive amount of information exchanged by trillion of brain cells … I do not see why you should not be able to generate a conscious mind”.
analog computers build an internal analogy and compare it globally to a new incoming message, rather than decomposing the message into its building features as a digital machine does.
higher brain functions can only arise because of the evolutionary shaping of the physical structure of the brain that allowed information and organic matter to become intrinsically bound and intertwined.
Assuming that a proper mathematical language could be employed to analyze the “mental space”, it is conceivable to predict that, one day in the future, such an analysis could not only be utilized to diagnose mental disorders with great precision, but also preventively detect when the “mental space” starts deviating towards a configuration that could result in neurological or psychiatric disorders much later on.
the brain continuously checks the validity of its internal model of reality. As such, sensory cortical evoked responses emerge from the interference of an ascending sensory signal and the internal dynamic state of the brain. The same physical stimulus can generate very different cortical evoked sensory responses according to the animal behavioral state.
some evidence suggests that the same combination of neurons is never repeated to produce the same movement.
According to the plasticity principle, the internal brain representation of the world, and even our own sense of self, remains in continuous flux throughout our lives.
conservation of energy principle. This principle proposes that, due to the limited and constant energy budget available for the brain, neural circuits have to maintain a firing rate cap. Thus, if some cortical neurons increase their instantaneous firing rate to signal a particular sensory stimulus or to participate in the generation of a movement or other behavior, other neighboring cells will have to reduce their firing rate proportionally, so that the overall activity of the entire neural ensemble remains constant.
According to the relativistic brain theory, complex central nervous systems like ours generate, process, and store information through the recursive interaction of a hybrid digital-analog computation engine
Instead, our theory proposes that, at any given moment in time, the brain generates its own internal analog hypothesis of what “it expects to see” by building an analog neural computer ahead of any encounter with a new visual stimulus.
Both the phantom limb sensation and the rubber hand illusion suggest that the brain contains an “a priori” internal and continuous “body image” that can be reshaped very quickly as a function of the subject’s experience.
most physical processes simply cannot be defined by a mathematical function.
“A living animal brain can generate some behaviors that are only fully described by non-computable functions. Since those cannot be dealt with properly by a Turing Machine, there is no possibility of simulating precisely a brain on a digital computer, no matter how sophisticated it is.”
‘intuition’ (a non-computable human property) is present in every part of a mathematician's thinking.
real world organisms, being integrated systems, can handle their complexity in an analog way that cannot be captured by a formal system, ergo neither by algorithms.
“If you believe that a given formal system is non contradictory, you must also believe that there are true proposals within the system that cannot be proved to be true by the formal system”.
there is no way to reverse engineer something that was never engineered in the first place.
computers fail when faced with tasks that require common sense
“Consciousness is just a massive amount of information exchanged by trillion of brain cells … I do not see why you should not be able to generate a conscious mind”.
analog computers build an internal analogy and compare it globally to a new incoming message, rather than decomposing the message into its building features as a digital machine does.
higher brain functions can only arise because of the evolutionary shaping of the physical structure of the brain that allowed information and organic matter to become intrinsically bound and intertwined.
Assuming that a proper mathematical language could be employed to analyze the “mental space”, it is conceivable to predict that, one day in the future, such an analysis could not only be utilized to diagnose mental disorders with great precision, but also preventively detect when the “mental space” starts deviating towards a configuration that could result in neurological or psychiatric disorders much later on.
the brain continuously checks the validity of its internal model of reality. As such, sensory cortical evoked responses emerge from the interference of an ascending sensory signal and the internal dynamic state of the brain. The same physical stimulus can generate very different cortical evoked sensory responses according to the animal behavioral state.
January 20, 2021
I’m not a expert on the subject, neither a student or anything close but I’m a curious woman and this book has change my perception on how the brain works and how is import the studies Behind the theories that sometimes proves or disprove some publications. Hard one, but very interesting. I would easily recommend.
November 16, 2021
This thin book makes large claims that it does not back up with evidence. The matter may be true or not but this book does not do enough to make the case. The name also gives the impression this has something to do with Einstein's Theory of Relativity but it does not.
Not recommended.
Not recommended.
November 6, 2024
Interesting ideas and conjecture but I would have loved some mathematics to go with the arguments. The use of physics specific terms is rather cringe when not adequately justified.
December 20, 2021
Gostei muito, mesmo tendo algumas dúvidas e reservas específicas.
Nicolelis, em parceria como matemático Ronald Cicurel, fez a partir da neurociência a mesma coisa que Roger Penrose fez em "The Emperor's New Mind" a partir da Física: Entrou num diálogo com a Filosofia da Mente e com a neurociência para fazer a necessária crítica à Teoria da Identidade Mente/Cérebro, à concepção das máquinas de Turing e a hipótese da singularidade/Ray Kurzweil/Transumanismo.
Também fiquei encantada porque descobri, de maneira muito inteligível, a respeiro da Informação do Tipo II Gödeliana, que eu nem sabia existir. #Partiu biografia do Kurt Godel.
Dica de leitura: Os dois primeiros capítulos valem a pena, mas requerem um certa maturidade. Se alguém achar que não consegue, recomendo não desistir do livro e pular direto para o III, onde cessa a discussão dos neuro experimentos do Nicolelis (muito interessantes, de qualquer forma) e se passa ao diálogo com outras ciências.
Uma coisa que me chamou a atenção de forma muito particular foi a sugestão 19, contida no apêndice, de que eletromagnetoterapia transcranial não-invasiva poderia vir a ser um tratamento viável para autismo, se a hipótese de campos magnéticos neuronais que o livro apresenta estiver certa. Observação: o livro não apresentou nenhum experimento quanto a isso, mas abriu a ideia como possibilidade para a concepção de experimentos para testar a sua validade/viabilidade.
Recomendado --- para quem achar possível lidar com um material que adere enfaticamente ao evolucionismo... não é esse o aspecto predominante da conversa, embora, também não seja extrincável de alguns dos principais argumentos. Concorde ou discorde, dá para aprender com esse livro. Para todos os demais pontos, já temos Alvin Plantinga traduzido em português. Ou, de uma perspectiva materalista como a do Nicolelis, Thomas Nagel, que também compartilhou oportunidades de discussão com Plantinga.
São apenas 100 páginas. É uma leitura relativamente rápida, mas que não dá para se fazer de forma desatenta.
As versões em inglês e pt-br estão disponíveis na Amazon.
Nicolelis, em parceria como matemático Ronald Cicurel, fez a partir da neurociência a mesma coisa que Roger Penrose fez em "The Emperor's New Mind" a partir da Física: Entrou num diálogo com a Filosofia da Mente e com a neurociência para fazer a necessária crítica à Teoria da Identidade Mente/Cérebro, à concepção das máquinas de Turing e a hipótese da singularidade/Ray Kurzweil/Transumanismo.
Também fiquei encantada porque descobri, de maneira muito inteligível, a respeiro da Informação do Tipo II Gödeliana, que eu nem sabia existir. #Partiu biografia do Kurt Godel.
Dica de leitura: Os dois primeiros capítulos valem a pena, mas requerem um certa maturidade. Se alguém achar que não consegue, recomendo não desistir do livro e pular direto para o III, onde cessa a discussão dos neuro experimentos do Nicolelis (muito interessantes, de qualquer forma) e se passa ao diálogo com outras ciências.
Uma coisa que me chamou a atenção de forma muito particular foi a sugestão 19, contida no apêndice, de que eletromagnetoterapia transcranial não-invasiva poderia vir a ser um tratamento viável para autismo, se a hipótese de campos magnéticos neuronais que o livro apresenta estiver certa. Observação: o livro não apresentou nenhum experimento quanto a isso, mas abriu a ideia como possibilidade para a concepção de experimentos para testar a sua validade/viabilidade.
Recomendado --- para quem achar possível lidar com um material que adere enfaticamente ao evolucionismo... não é esse o aspecto predominante da conversa, embora, também não seja extrincável de alguns dos principais argumentos. Concorde ou discorde, dá para aprender com esse livro. Para todos os demais pontos, já temos Alvin Plantinga traduzido em português. Ou, de uma perspectiva materalista como a do Nicolelis, Thomas Nagel, que também compartilhou oportunidades de discussão com Plantinga.
São apenas 100 páginas. É uma leitura relativamente rápida, mas que não dá para se fazer de forma desatenta.
As versões em inglês e pt-br estão disponíveis na Amazon.
July 8, 2015
Livro muito bom que faz justamente o assunto estudado, o cérebro, pipocar com os conceitos apresentados ali.
Read
August 20, 2018A very compelling model of mind! And to boot, based on an interdisciplinary dialogue between a mathematician and neurophysiologist....I almost wish it were a transcription of the dialogues that took place between these two authors that lead to the book. This is the most difficult thing one can do as an academic!!!!! Learning the language and history of another discipline is a labor of love....In reading the book, what I really enjoyed was that the authors made room for what we still don't know...while explaining why the brain isn't a Touring machine, they also elevate the study of consciousness as the final frontier....
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews