neurotransmitter storage (all or one?)

Richard Norman rsnorman at mediaone.net
Wed Aug 30 14:25:24 EST 2000


"Theophilus Samuels" <theophilus.samuels at btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8ojiam$3cq$1 at plutonium.btinternet.com...
>
>.....<snip a lot of stuff>   The key thing to
> remember here, is that the digitial input/output mechanism is a
well-defined
> operation - it either happens or it dosen't, there's no messing around [I
> will come back to this again later>
> .....<snip another lot of stuff > Now here
> lies the difference between the randomness of an analogue system based on
> graded responses (this was the original argument) and .... <snip a lot
more>

Your argument from the beginning seems predicated on your thinking that
a digital system is well-defined whereas an analog system is "random".  You
have included this type of statement now in several of your posts.

This is non only non-sensical, it departs from everything we have learned
about the universe in the history of science.  There is underlying reason
why
a graded or analog system cannot be determinate.  The mathematics of
partial differential equations well describes a tremendous variety of
phenomena that are continuously variable in space and in time.  In my
mind, digital systems with probabilistic state transitions are far more
"random" than the clockwork machinery of the Newtonian universe.








More information about the Neur-sci mailing list