IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Mind a no-brainer?

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Wed Jan 5 15:52:38 EST 2000

"Sir Knowitall" wrote:
> The NDT and the TD E/I min generalization is an over-generalization being
> pushed overly much into the foreground [...]

quoting from AoK, Ap4:

    Of  course,  this  symbolic  representation  of  the unifying
    principle  is  over-simplified.  It  does  not  describe  the
    topological  "twists"  that   are  incorporated  within   the
    physical  reality  of  the  CNS.  These  detailed  things are
    referred  to  by  "TD" ("topologically-distributed"). Consid-
    erable complexity, including all of Neuroanatomy, is  grouped
    together within  this "TD"  symbol. Working  out the  details
    that it represents has consumed  the major portion of the  17
    years that were required to develop Duality Theory. (See  the
    body of the  paper and appendices  1, 5, 6  and 7.) Think  of
    Neuroanatomy  with  a  strong  topological emphasis, in which
    each   neuroanatomical   "twist"   reduces   to  mathematical
    functions.  In  Duality  Theory,  all  of  these mathematical
    functions are  integrated into  a unified  whole. It  is this
    whole that is represented by [heart] = [sum](TD E/I)[down].


    The  simple  TD  E/I-minimization  principle  and the central
    nervous system's special  topological homeomorphism make  the
    comprehension  of   CNS  function   a  straight-forward,   if
    time-consuming,  process.  Within  Duality  Theory,   notions
    externally-observable functionality  are replaced  by a  con-
    ceptualization  that  focusses  upon  TD E/I within rigorous-
    ly-mapped neural pathways. For instance, when addressing  CNS
    functioning in the theory's terms, one does not discuss  "the
    arm moving away  from a painful  stimulus", but, rather,  one
    discusses  the  neural  architecture  and  the topologically-
    mapped activation of the effectors which results when TD E/I[up]
    occurs at  some topologically-mapped  locus (or  set of loci)
    within that neural architecture. The TD E/I[up] can be  followed
    along pathways as it  flows from receptors to  effectors. The
    result, ultimately, is always TD E/I minimization. The  arm's
    moving  away   from  an   environmental  source   of  noxious
    stimulation occurs only as a by-product of the CNS's TD  E/I[down]

Clearly, Peter, the refs cited in AoK, which describe the Neuroanatomy
that's being discussed in AoK, are to be referred-to by anyone who
actually wants to comprehend NDT.

all of this is explained right in AoK:

    The bibliography is a "selected" one. Since the summer of
    1980,  when  Neuroscientific  Duality  Theory began its rapid
    implosion  toward  unity,  the  theory  has been able to deal
    strongly  with  any,   and  all,  functional-neuroanatomy   /
    neurophysiology papers  that I  have pulled,  at random, from
    the neuroscientific  stacks. The  theory is  regularly put to
    the test in this manner. Further tests of this assertion  are
    welcome. [the paper version says a bit more. KPC]

AoK was written as an integrative-'overlay' with respect to the standard
texts and everything that was in the Neuroscience stacks as of the
'time' when AoK was written.

you say you are put-off by my 'whining'. let's examine such.

i worked for more than a decade completely within the 'system'. the only
reactions i got, other than at the Smith College presentations, were
condescending-say-nothingness ('whining').

all those years, i was on the edge of not being able to sustain Life
within myself. i continued because i knew that folks were out-to-lunch
with respect to the integrated functioning of the nervous system.

so i put together AoK which does all of the integrative work with
respect to what was then in the standard literature.

but, since no one bothers to actually study the standard literature with
respect to integrating it, no one could recognize the integration of the
contents of the standard literature, even though such was just handed to
them in AoK.

this is a considerable 'difficulty'.

if "standing on my head, singing 'Yankee Doodle Dandy', spitting wooden
nickels" is what it takes to reach folks with the fact that, in AoK, the
integrative work is done for them, and that they can read the literature
=and= AoK's integration of it, and understand how nervous systems
process-information, then i'll "stand on my head, singing 'Yankee Doodle
Dandy', spitting wooden nickels".

although, in the paper version of AoK, i express my hope that i'll be
able to win an opportunity to expand AoK into a comprehensive
Neuroanatomy/Neurophysiology text, a fellow cannot do such if he's
unsure of being able to even feed and shelter himself, can he?

the writing of a comprehensive text, which would have to reiterate the
published experimental results and include myriad neuroanatomical
diagrams and photos, requires more 'time' than a fellow who doesn't know
whether he'll be able to feed and shelter himself can foresee =just= to
establish the necessary Permissions with respect to the work that's been
done by others.

one cannot 'just' put the references to one's scanner and publish the
result, can one. one must contact each referent publication or
researcher, and acquire permissions.

when i tried to do such, early in my effort, hardly anyone even

what does a fellow do in the face of such?

he does what he can, which is what AoK is.

the other thing that makes what you've posted completely discountable is
all the 'borrowing' of my work that's occurred, which means that,
contrary to what you've posted, what's in AoK is widely comprehended.

all along, i've =made= allowance for the possibility that all the
'borrowing' has actually been folks' Celebrating of what's in AoK, just
as what's in AoK Celebrates the work of those who've Labored to uncover
the 'mysteries' of nervous system function.

but if that's the case, i've received no indication of it's being the
case, because no one has ever communicated such to me.

so, what's a fellow to do?

it's easy to see all of the unattributed 'borrowing'. it's easy to see
the 'striving' of the 'profit seekers'. it's easy to see that the folks
on whose behalves NDT was done remain Forsaken. it's easy to see that
millions of folks have been Ravaged as a result of this combination of

and it's easy to see that, because i've taken a firm stand with respect
to this combination of things, that i'll 'get hammered'.

but it's also easy to see that, if i were to 'move away from' Truth out
of a 'desire to not 'get hammered', more Innocents would be Ravaged as a
result of my wanting to 'save my own butt'.

and it's no-contest.

i see Clearly what Truth requires of me.

Science isn't 'profit seeking'.

Science isn't 'fame' or 'adulation'.

Science is drawing one's self up to Truth.

=EVERYTHING= depends on such.

do i wish things'd gone otherwise?


for decades, i went to my mailbox everyday, Hoping, Expecting, to find a
letter telling me to drop everything and get my butt here or there so
that what's in AoK could be Communicated.

that letter never arrived.

what's a fellow to do in the face of such?

he goes out to knock on doors?


he goes Conferencing?


he telephones?


he Begs?


he "leaves no stones untruned"?


but nothing happens.

what's a fellow to do in the face of such?

a man does what Needs to be Done,

and Accepts the Consequences.

for having done the best thing i can do, i'm being =Murdered=.

what's a fellow to do in the face of such?

while Guarding folks' Free Wills, as much as he can before the 'bullet'
reaches his 'Heart'.

K. P. Collins

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net