Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!pacsbb.UUCP!tlohrbe From: tlohrbe@pacsbb.UUCP (trevor lohrbeer) Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest Subject: Re: Can we human being think two different things in parallel? Message-ID: <19880905045751.7.NICK@HOWARD-JOHNSONS.LCS.MIT.EDU> Date: 5 Sep 88 04:57:00 GMT Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 56 Approved: ailist@ai.ai.mit.edu To: Path: pacsbb!tlohrbe From: trevor lohrbeer Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest Subject: Re: Can we human being think two different things in parallel? Date: Wed, 31 Aug 88 22:31 EDT References: <19880827040817.6.NICK@HOWARD-JOHNSONS.LCS.MIT.EDU> Organization: PACS - Philadelphia Area Computer Society, Penna. Lines: 45 In another article, Ken Johnson says: >> Can we human being think two different things in parallel? > >I think most people have had the experience of suddenly gaining insight in >into the solution of a problem they last deliberately chewed over a few >hours or days previously. I'd say this was evidence for the brain's abili >ability to work at two or more (?) high-order tasks at the same time. >But I look forward to reading what Real Psychologists say. In response to this, Jeff Hartung writes: >The above may demonstrate that the brain can "process" two jobs >simultaneously, but is this what we mean by "think"? If so, this still >doesn't demonstrate adequately that parallel processing is what is >going on. It may be equally true that serial processing on several >jobs is happening, only some processing is below the threshold of >awareness. Or, there may be parallel processing , but with a limited >number of processes at the level of awareness of the "thinker". I think the problem does indeed lie in what we mean by "thinking". But if we define thinking in terms of working out a Xdefinit solvab problem,, such as working out a math problem (a large one consisting of say m multiplying two three digit numbers, not something that can be recalled fro memory), and also append the notion that one must be consiously thinking it for it to be "thinking", then the problem is solvable. To solve it, try to do the problem. Try for example multiplying 356 x 674 and 965 x 3124, at the same time. T A way to be pretty sure that you are figuring out the problem serially, is to see if you come out with the answers to both problems at the same time. Try to do it and you'll find that even for a mathematical wizard, it is impossible to work out the two problems simultaneously, if done at the consious level. At the unconcious level though, it is possible to think in parallel. Take an instance of walking and talking at the same time. The brain must send m messages to the legs, mouth, heart, and many other muscles, all at the same time. It must also intake the senses of touch (for balance), of vision (to see where your going), and sometimes smell. It then has to analyze it all while still keeping all the muscles moving and intaking more data. So at the unconcious level, the number of things able to be done in parallel become innumerable. Trevor Lohrbeer