"Could we ever retrieve memories from a dead person's" Topic

… brain?

"When a loved one dies, they leave behind their personal belongings, but what happens to all their life experiences? Could we ever retrieve memories from the brain of someone who's died?

Retrieving some parts of memories may be possible, but it's likely to be technically challenging, Don Arnold, a neuroscientist at the University of Southern California, told Live Science.

With today's technology, retrieving memories might go something like this. First, identify the set of brain cells, or neurons, that encoded a specific memory in the brain and understand how they are connected. Then, activate those neurons to create an approximate neural network, a machine learning algorithm that mimics the way the brain works…"

link

Armand

No. They're dead. Duh!

If you got to the corpse before decay set in, probably.

Some religious adherents believe a person's memories and experiences live on after their earthly expiration. But those memories and experiences are no longer accessible to the flesh bound. Researching the afterlife and near death experiences is an exercise for the reader.

It would not only depend on working very quickly after death, but on how the person died. The brain may be badly damaged by the cause of death or the process of dying.

Also…

First, identify the set of brain cells, or neurons, that encoded a specific memory in the brain and understand how they are connected

What the heck does that mean? The brain probably has billions of "memories" depending on how you define the word, and there are certainly a hundred billion neurons. So "Identify" is a problem. What does a "memory" look like?

Plus, you might not know what you're looking for. You might know the person knew something, but they might also have valuable memories you would not know to look for.

You know, I'm starting to think that was click bait…

I say we just go back to the old "essential salts" methodology. That seemed to work great.

You know, I'm starting to think that was click bait…

You think? 😄
Even "speculative fiction" sci-fi writers from the 60s and 70s were more … rigid in their speculations.
But, as usual, in this day and age, any crackpot "theorist" is free to publish anything they want on the internet, free of charge (relatively speaking) with no big bad editors to hinder them and enforce clear thinking.
Even the $.03 USD/word pulp sci-fi writers had more discipline.

Here's a hint. Just because it's in the Internet doesn't make it true.
Sturgeon's Law certainly applies. "90% of EVERYTHING is crap!" And that may be higher today, with AI generated "stories" disguised as fact.

Just because it's in the Internet doesn't make it true.

Wait, what? I have to rethink my entire approach to life in the 21st Century.

I can't remember what I had for dinner last night. Good luck retrieving memories out of my dead brain.

+1 for Choctaw!

I'm sure there will be advances in recording dead brains after they figure out how to record and play back a sleeper's dreams. But I'll have a flying car like from Back to the Future before that ever happens… ;-)

Ha!…

Armand

The way technology is going, they might get there some day ? Think they'd have to scan before death, though ? Aren't they already trying to blend us with AI ?

(smile)

Armand

Nooooooo! I don't want my wife and kids to access my memories before they were, respectively, my wife and kids! Nooooooo!

From the article "If scientists had a full model of the human brain (which they don't yet have)" and in my opinion are not likely to get for a long long time and when they do have the model that doesn't mean they know how it works, just what it looks like, two very different things.

Here's a hint. Just because it's in the Internet doesn't make it true.
Sturgeon's Law certainly applies. "90% of EVERYTHING is crap!"

Yeah, just the same guy churning out Teslas that burn and can't be extinguished, and running DOGE with a chainsaw. Oh, and shutting down any agencies investigating him.

(smile)

Armand

To the OP, a couple of thoughts:

Memories are not static "files." They are dynamic and spread across multiple brain regions, which makes retrieval after death implausible.
link
link
link

Engrams (the neural ensembles linked to memory) can shift locations over time, making retrieval even harder.
link
link

Even when two people are shown the same stimulus in a controlled setting, fMRI and electrophysiological studies show that the distributed neural activity patterns are often radically different.

There is no fixed "address space" for memory across people, or even within one person across time. Each brain develops idiosyncratic wiring and coding schemes as a function of genetics, prior experience, and ongoing plasticity.
(See: Huth et al., Nature, 2016 on semantic maps in cortex — same words light up different regions across individuals: link

When a memory is encoded, the physical structure of synapses and the weighting of neural ensembles reflects a "key" to reconstructing that experience.

But recall depends on the current brain state, which may have changed due to plasticity, aging, sleep, or even momentary neurotransmitter fluctuations.

This is why memory is reconstructive: the encoding "key" and the decoding "lock" don't always align perfectly anymore.
(See: Dudai, 2012, Annual Review of Psychology on reconsolidation and transformation of memories: link

Doesn't mean it can't be done for live brains (the above caveats of damage for dead ones), but it is way beyond the pale.

Quite interesting… many thanks.

Armand

And if we got past all the perfectly valid objections, we'd still have to deal with my memory of an event not necessarily corresponding with rhe reality. Happens to all of us.

@robert, my loved ones memories, that would presumably include my mum; not sure I want to go there. Lets just say she wasn't the sort who thught I was prefect in every possible way ;-P