Is Computational Neuro Science Dominating Neuro Science?

Support the show to get full episodes, full archive, and join the Discord community.

Randy and I discuss his long-standing interest in how the brain stores information to compute. That is, where is the engram, the physical trace of memory in the brain? Modern neuroscience is dominated by the view that memories are stored among synaptic connections in populations of neurons. Randy believes a more reasonable and reliable way to store abstract symbols, like numbers, is to write them into code within individual neurons. Thus, the spiking code, whatever it is, functions to write and read memories into and out of intracellular substrates, like polynucleotides (DNA, RNA, e.g.). He lays out his case in detail in his book with Adam King, Memory and the Computational Brain: Why Cognitive Science will Transform Neuroscience. We also talk about some research and theoretical work since then that support his views.

• Randy's Rutger's website.
• Book:
  • Memory and the Computational Brain: Why Cognitive Science will Transform Neuroscience.
• Related papers:
  • The theoretical RNA paper Randy mentions: An RNA-based theory of natural universal computation.
  • Evidence for intracellular engram in cerebellum: Memory trace and timing mechanism localized to cerebellar Purkinje cells.
• The exchange between Randy and John Lisman.
• The blog post Randy mentions about Universal function approximation:
  • The Truth About the [Not So] Universal Approximation Theorem

0:00 - Intro 6:50 - Cognitive science vs. computational neuroscience 13:23 - Brain as computing device 15:45 - Noam Chomsky's influence 17:58 - Memory must be stored within cells 30:58 - Theoretical support for the idea 34:15 - Cerebellum evidence supporting the idea 40:56 - What is the write mechanism? 51:11 - Thoughts on deep learning 1:00:02 - Multiple memory mechanisms? 1:10:56 - The role of plasticity 1:12:06 - Trying to convince molecular biologists