Human thought runs at just 10 bits per second, say Caltech scientists — that's why we are mostly single-taskers

Caltech scientists
(Image credit: Caltech)

Humans process thoughts at just 10 bits per second, according to a recent paper published by Caltech researchers. In contrast, a human's sensory organs gather data at a billion bits per second. So, if you ever feel overwhelmed by what is going on around you, it's only natural.

The research paper, dubbed 'The unbearable slowness of being: Why do we live at 10 bits/s?' ponders the human neural substrate which limits thoughts to such a slow pace, and proposes new research to look into this 'bottleneck' now that it has been quantified.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Mark Tyson
News Editor

Mark Tyson is a news editor at Tom's Hardware. He enjoys covering the full breadth of PC tech; from business and semiconductor design to products approaching the edge of reason.

  • hotaru251
    10 bits per second?
    Eat it NES!

    Do wonder if its just thought is considered a "less important" task and its slowness is by design to keep more important data (i.e. senses that can tell you about world/dangers) from ever being slowed down as a survival thing.
    Reply
  • newtechldtech
    This is not Science. this is complete utter rubbish . no one "knows" how thoughts happens in the brain. Full Stop .
    Reply
  • Dementoss
    It's hard to understand how hey have come to the conclusion, that human thought processes are so slow. If our thought processes are really so slow, it would be interesting to know how they believe we can do things like, driving a car in a busy town centre whilst listening to the radio and talking talking to a passenger, riding a mountain bike at speed on a difficult trail, or learning to fly a plane, etc...
    Reply
  • acadia11
    Always been said we are serial processing pattern inference machines. Maybe, over billions (really 500 million or so since Cambrian expansion) of years we’ve derived an extremely complex digital compression algorithm and it’s far more efficient / optimized to use as little energy as possible. Consider we are creating “thinking machines” today but it takes an ungodly amount of energy to do so … if we learned and processed information like our AI inventions how would the human body power the brain? I’d trust nature on this one otherwise we’d probably need to eat candy by the tanker load?
    Reply
  • A Stoner
    If I actively try to think of an image in my mind it is going to give me something in billions of colors with nearly infinite pixels and I can summon that up in a fraction of a second. I can even think in moving images. I can control the image for what it is composed up of.

    That all requires much more bandwidth than 10 bits per second.

    Talking would be far more than 10 bits per second. A fast talker can bring forth hundreds of words per minute. Each word is many bits in size. I checked my calendar and it is not April 1.
    Reply
  • Notton
    I can kind of see it being true.
    If you've looked into any sort of how the human brain works, you quickly realize it makes shortcuts everywhere.
    We have handedness because it saves brain power (calories)
    What we see with our eyes isn't actually what we see, and our brain fills a huge portion of the missing bits. (This is why we fall for visual tricks)
    The brain doesn't process a large part of the functions, like reflexes, breathing, digestion, etc.
    Humans are awful at math without writing it down on something.

    I'd imagine we would have to consume a million calories per day to run our brains at full power.
    Reply
  • Alvar "Miles" Udell
    It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, using the least amount of energy to accomplish a task. But there's also research into if the brain processes information in a quantum way such that it causes consciousness as well.

    But as it relates to machines being able to stimulate sensory inputs, if it will only take a low bit rate to do it then it bodes well for more affordable, power efficient bionics.
    Reply
  • pjmelect
    Utter rubbish, I can easily read and understand what I am reading at 300 baud and although it is a strain I can read at 1200 baud without a problem which makes nonsense of the 10 bits per second.
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    If anyone ever needs an example of I read the headline and not the article then went straight to the comment section to argue. This thread is it.
    Reply
  • adamXpeter
    A Stoner said:
    I can even think in moving images. I can control the image for what it is composed up of.

    That all requires much more bandwidth than 10 bits per second.
    They weren't speaking about sensory information, but about the speed of thinking. Your vision misleads you, it is hard to see with the single lens we had. So the brain avoids looking through the eyes and prefers it's internal model of the environment. I am sure it happened to you that you did not find the keys of the car before leaving the house - the more stressed you were because of the potential of being late, the less you found the key. Because more CPU power went to counter the danger than remained to correct the physically distorted picture, the brain used more the inner model where the places for the keys were limited by rationality :)
    Reply