The credibility of claims that mathematical calculation comes from brains is inversely proportional to the speed and capacity and reliability at which things can be mentally calculated. There are numerous signal slowing factors in the brain, such as the relatively slow speed of dendrites, and the cumulative effect of synaptic delays in which signals have to travel over relatively slow chemical synapses (by far the most common type of synapse in the brain). As explained in my post here, such physical factors should cause brain signals to move at a typical speed very many times slower than the often cited figure of 100 meters per second: a sluggish "snail's pace" speed of only about a centimeter per second (about half an inch per second). Ordinary everyday evidence of very fast and accurate math calculation is therefore evidence against claims that unaided human math calculation occurs because of brain activity, particularly because the brain is totally lacking in the things humans add to constructed objects to allow fast recall (things such as sorting and addressing and indexes). Chemical synapses in the brain do not even reliably transmit signals. Scientific papers say that each time a signal is transmitted across a chemical synapse, it is transmitted with a reliability of 50% or less. (A paper states, "Several recent studies have documented the unreliability of central nervous system synapses: typically, a postsynaptic response is produced less than half of the time when a presynaptic nerve impulse arrives at a synapse." Another scientific paper says, "In the cortex, individual synapses seem to be extremely unreliable: the probability of transmitter release in response to a single action potential can be as low as 0.1 or lower.") The more evidence we have of very fast and very accurate calculation occurred by humans unaided by any devices, the stronger is the evidence against the claim that human math calculation occurs from brain activity.
It is therefore very important to collect and study all cases of exceptional human mathematics performance. The more such cases we find, and the more dramatic such cases are, the stronger is the case against the claim that unaided human math calculation is a neural phenomenon. Or to put it another way, the credibility of claims that math calculation is a brain phenomenon is inversely proportional to the speed and reliability of the best cases of human math performance. The more cases that can be found of humans that seem to calculate too quickly and too accurately for a noisy address-free brain to ever do, the stronger is the case that human thinking is not a neural phenomenon but instead a spiritual or psychic or metaphysical phenomenon. My previous post "They Mentally Calculated Faster Than a Brain Could Ever Do" described many such cases, as did my post "They Too Mentally Calculated Faster Than a Brain Could Ever Do." Now let us look at some more cases of this type.
Some cases of exceptional math performance can be found in the book The Great Mental Calculators by Steven B. Smith. Below from page 179 are the results of very hard math calculations by Arthur Griffith (born 1880):
We see above a record of blazing-fast speed in very hard math calculations. The "extraction of cube root" referred to is solving the problem: what number multiplied by itself three times gives the supplied number? The "extraction of a square root" referred to is solving the problem: what number multiplied by itself twice times gives the supplied number?
A long newspaper article on Arthur Griffith can be read here. We read this:
"While engaged in working a series of tests Griffith multiplied 142,857,143 by 465,891,443 and obtained the product 66,555,920,495,127,349, in ten seconds. He multiplied 999,999,999 by 327,841,277, and had completed the writing of the product, 327,841,276,672,188,723, in nine and a half seconds. Other numbers required a longer time, but in no case was the time needed to complete the multiplication more than thirty seconds. Factors of numbers were called out as quickly as the number was submitted. The fifth power of 996, which equals 980,159,361,278,976, was obtained in thirty-seven seconds. Cubes of large numbers were given without hesitation, and in case the number was not a perfect cube the number which is the nearest perfect cube was given at once."
Using the web site here, I verified that the first multiplication result is correct. The second multiplication result, 327,841,276,672,188,723, is incorrect only in the fifth-to-last digit, all other digits being correct. We can't tell whether it was a calculation error by Griffith, or an error by whoever wrote down his answer or who typeset the newspaper article.
On page 297 the author says he was asked by Wim Klein to give two five-digit numbers. The author gave 57,825 and 13,489. In 44 seconds Klein multiplied the two numbers together mentally. On the same page we are told Klein extracted the 19th root of a 133-digit number in under two minutes.
On page 301 we read this about lightning-fast calculations by Maurice Dagbert:
The same page refers to astounding multitasking and number memorization capabilities of Dagbert:
In the 1952 newspaper story here, we read of rave reviews of Devi's calculation abilities. A reporter attempts to stump her:
"Your reporter, at this point, slyly glanced at a piece of paper he had laboriously prepared, and asked: 'What is the cube root of 3,375 multiplied by the cube root of 117,649 divided by 5?'
'147,' said Shakuntala, stifling a yawn, and adding, almost apologetically: 'I am usually given problems that present difficulties of one sort or another.' ”
On page 311 of The Great Mental Calculators, we learn of the astonishing short-term memory of Hans Eberstark, who could memorize 40 digits after hearing them spoken only once:
According to a page on Guinness Book of World Records, "The most decimal places of Pi memorised is 70,000, and was achieved by Rajveer Meena (India) at the VIT University, Vellore, India, on 21 March 2015."
To give another example, In 2004 Alexis Lemaire was able to calculate in his head the 13th root of this number:










No comments:
Post a Comment