Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

ibm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 58 posts

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#21

Post by christophilus »

abc123abc123 wrote: post #17
bambax wrote: post #3

> Every memory begins with tiny changes inside the brain Maybe. But the brain is not the only place where memory is stored. Flat worms remember things (and skills!) after their head has been cut off and they regrew it: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/these-decapita...

"Every memory begins with tiny changes inside the brain. A discovery that helped explain those changes has earned neuroscientist Oswald Steward one of science’s highest honors. Steward received the 2026 Kavli Prize in Neuroscience, a USD 1 million award and one of science’s most prestigious awards, for research that transformed scientists’ understanding of how the brain learns and stores memories." And that's what it…

Well, it does seem that memories may be embedded in the nervous system as well as the brain, so I don’t think the OP is wrong. You sometimes hear of heart transplant patients having other people’s memories / preferences. So, it’s not good evidence, but it’s a possibility.

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#22

Post by layer8 »

kator wrote: post #16

I think the most interesting thing is that it took 15 years for people to apparently take this seriously. And another 40 to recognize its impact. The original paper[1] was from 1982... Having been in software development for 45 years, I find this crazy. Maybe it's because in our world, it often takes a month for something to spread from "interesting" to the new technology of the day, or the new way of doing things. […

It used to be slower in software development as well. The internet and the exponentially increasing number of software developers accelerated it. And of course new hardware that made things practical that were only a theoretical possibility before.

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#23

Post by kator »

layer8 wrote: post #22
kator wrote: post #16

I think the most interesting thing is that it took 15 years for people to apparently take this seriously. And another 40 to recognize its impact. The original paper[1] was from 1982... Having been in software development for 45 years, I find this crazy. Maybe it's because in our world, it often takes a month for something to spread from "interesting" to the new technology of the day, or the new way of doing things. […

It used to be slower in software development as well. The internet and the exponentially increasing number of software developers accelerated it. And of course new hardware that made things practical that were only a theoretical possibility before.

True, that said, I downloaded and compiled Perl in 1987 from comp.sources.misc, even back then, things moved at light speed compared to health and medical.

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#24

Post by Earw0rm »

adrianN wrote: post #15
Roark66 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you know human overies contain neurons? I suppose memories are not stored there :-) but still the fact is rather surprising.

I believe there are tastebuds in your colon too.

AFAIK the gut in large terrestrial vertebrates has its own nervous system that rivals the complexity of the entire system in simpler creatures.

The idea that all stateful/regulatory stuff is entirely localised to the brain is a bit too simple to be true. Most of it, sure, but that last few percent can be doing all sorts of clinically important stuff. Nature is an incredibly brilliant engineer, but not always a tidy one.

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#25

Post by ProllyInfamous »

coldtea wrote: post #13
project2501a wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm sorry, I cannot agree that anything like that can create "originality".

As opposed to what? Water and tissue?

>>They're made out of meat...

>>>They're made out of weights...

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#26

Post by Earw0rm »

christophilus wrote: post #21
abc123abc123 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Every memory begins with tiny changes inside the brain. A discovery that helped explain those changes has earned neuroscientist Oswald Steward one of science’s highest honors. Steward received the 2026 Kavli Prize in Neuroscience, a USD 1 million award and one of science’s most prestigious awards, for research that transformed scientists’ understanding of how the brain learns and stores memories." And that's what it…

Well, it does seem that memories may be embedded in the nervous system as well as the brain, so I don’t think the OP is wrong. You sometimes hear of heart transplant patients having other people’s memories / preferences. So, it’s not good evidence, but it’s a possibility.

That's quite a leap. The idea that _semantic_ memories are encoded so as to be transmissible via blobs of neural tissue stretches plausibility.

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#27

Post by Earw0rm »

taneq wrote: post #6
project2501a wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm sorry, I cannot agree that anything like that can create "originality".

Creativity can be thought of as a combination of two things: A random idea generator, and a nonsense filter. Generate new random results ideas, filter out the nonsense ones, and you’ve generated good ideas.

IMV creativity that matters contains a third ingredient: intent, purpose, the will to make an artistic statement of some kind about how the world is or should be.

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#28

Post by embedding-shape »

Earw0rm wrote: post #26
christophilus wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it does seem that memories may be embedded in the nervous system as well as the brain, so I don’t think the OP is wrong. You sometimes hear of heart transplant patients having other people’s memories / preferences. So, it’s not good evidence, but it’s a possibility.

That's quite a leap. The idea that _semantic_ memories are encoded so as to be transmissible via blobs of neural tissue stretches plausibility.

It doesn't seem so implausible: Personality Changes Associated with Organ Transplants (https://www.mdpi.com/2673-3943/5/1/12)

> Personality changes have been reported following organ transplantation. Most commonly, such changes have been described among heart transplant recipients. [...] A cross-sectional study was conducted in which 47 participants (23 heart recipients and 24 other organ recipients) completed an online survey. In this study, 89% of all transplant recipients reported personality changes after undergoing transplant surgery, which was similar for heart and other organ recipients.

Who knows the cause though, could be anything I suppose, not necessarily that "memory sits in tissue".

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#29

Post by [deleted] »

Earw0rm wrote: post #26
christophilus wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it does seem that memories may be embedded in the nervous system as well as the brain, so I don’t think the OP is wrong. You sometimes hear of heart transplant patients having other people’s memories / preferences. So, it’s not good evidence, but it’s a possibility.

That's quite a leap. The idea that _semantic_ memories are encoded so as to be transmissible via blobs of neural tissue stretches plausibility.

[deleted]

Re: The discovery that changed how scientists think about memory

#30

Post by Earw0rm »

embedding-shape wrote: post #28
Earw0rm wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's quite a leap. The idea that _semantic_ memories are encoded so as to be transmissible via blobs of neural tissue stretches plausibility.

It doesn't seem so implausible: Personality Changes Associated with Organ Transplants ( https://www.mdpi.com/2673-3943/5/1/12 ) > Personality changes have been reported following organ transplantation. Most commonly, such changes have been described among heart transplant recipients. [...] A cross-sectional study was conducted in which 47 participants (23 heart recipients and 24 other organ recipients) completed an o…

It's massive, hugely traumatic surgery, taking the patient past what was considered the point of death a century ago, bringing them back alive, and all with the aid of some of the most powerful drugs in modern medicine's arsenal.

And if your heart is needing transplantation in the first place, you'll be running far below optimal for blood O2 and a dozen other things.

It'd be more surprising if it didn't result in significant change.

Post reply on HN