- Joined
- Apr 2, 2001
- Messages
- 28,934
- Points
- 113
Basically, they used an EEG to interpret brain patterns in two volunteers, to read one of two possible reactions from them. They were looking at a simple puzzle where the solution would be to either rotate a block, or not rotate that block. Depending on which solution was required, they would look at one of two possible patterns of light, which would cause their brain to have a measurable response.
The result of the EEG was sent to a transcranial magnetic device (which is non-invasive - it sits outside the person's head,) which sent a signal to the brain of a third volunteer.
By interpreting the signal being sent to his brain, that volunteer was able to read the solution being sent to him (either rotate the block or do not rotate the block.) On average, the three-person team was able to solve the problem around 80% of the time.
It's just one of several methods various teams are using to evolve brain-to-brain, and brain/machine communication, and it absolutely astonishes me. This is one of those things where, if asked, I probably would have said "I doubt this will happen in my lifetime."
https://www.scientificamerican.com/...irect-brain-to-brain-communication-in-humans/
The result of the EEG was sent to a transcranial magnetic device (which is non-invasive - it sits outside the person's head,) which sent a signal to the brain of a third volunteer.
By interpreting the signal being sent to his brain, that volunteer was able to read the solution being sent to him (either rotate the block or do not rotate the block.) On average, the three-person team was able to solve the problem around 80% of the time.
It's just one of several methods various teams are using to evolve brain-to-brain, and brain/machine communication, and it absolutely astonishes me. This is one of those things where, if asked, I probably would have said "I doubt this will happen in my lifetime."
https://www.scientificamerican.com/...irect-brain-to-brain-communication-in-humans/