>> Cheng, what are peripheral receptor potentials, how do they come to be
> and why are they called peripheral?
>>These would come the already accepted neurophysiology: peripheral pain,=
> pressure, vision, sound. . . receptors,etc.
Can they perceive photons?
>> >receptor potentials (electrons generated at
>> > the site of peripheral stimulation are directly transported)
>> > along the nerve pathways all the way up into the central
>> > sensorineurons,
>> How do they react inside?
>A good question. However, it is certain that the incoming nerve
>impulses do interact and activate the central cortical sensorineurons
>for perception to occur.
>Only because this interaction occurs has
> It has to be considered a subatomic event
Yes and then also no.
>giving rise to a sensation of the incoming electromagnetic particles. =
Explain the electro and the magnetic bit.
>> >thus preserving
>> >the electromagnetic information
>> > in a stimulus-specific fashion for sensation and memory
>> > formation.
>Electromagnetic particles can be easily stored subatomically. =
And how long?
>> Cheng, I somewhere mentioned some candle-flame game telepathically
>> linked. Maybe try it. Then think about it physically.
>>Telepthy is only one of the phenomena but relying on it to prove memory =
>and the mind would be fatal: none would believe it! =
You are an idiot.
(Semi -offer elseplace concerning perceiving withdrawn.)
You did not even understand what I mean, and then babble about
proving as if I were a sense-censored neuro and would have to care.
Well, maybe some year or decade you will understand the meaning.
>> > Insofar as memory goes, it is not something as simple as stating
>> > "since light exists in quanta form, memory is also quanta."
>> What are the differences and what is quanta?
>> >Not only must it be proven that such photons directly enter into the
>> > brain to be so sensed,
>> Why must it be proven?
>Unless it's conclusively proven, it is not yet a scientific fact, memory
>would not have been found yet: not there, not reused, not proving and
>accounting for functions, therefore no memories. =
Yeah, and next I prove that there actually is a way I remember this
language a bit stoned.
That is the difference between you and me: I do not have to prove
anything, neither where my left little toe is not the front
computer, nor eg.3, nor have to tell the Frankensteins anything on
any of the taboo areas, nor about the dear memory they might be
So maybe mine can sit in my brain, and if I drop dead, they would not
now how to get it, and then it is gone. Und tschuess! Nix 2084.