NOSPAMrcraik at ntl.sympatico.ca
Thu Sep 14 09:39:09 EST 2000
George Bajszar wrote in message <8pq1o7$uq$1 at nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <39BFF09B.1FAC at vic.ozland.net.au>,
> jgcasey at vic.ozland.net.au wrote:
>Perhaps what is happening is that neurons generate
>random noise with their signals in the background of
Just a comment:
I can't resist the temptation to paraphrase Albert
Einstein with: "Neurons do not roll the dice."
But perhaps you are correct, the concept
seems to hold a place in your reasoning.
What other ways of generating signals that appear
random do we have? How about "chaotic", "arbitrary",
or "out of tune" for examples.
"Arbitrary" could be used instead of random to
indicate that the neuron decided, or arbitrated,
when and what signals are fired off. I would suspect
that randomness is filtered or tuned out at the neuron
level. The nature of neurons seems to be to make
"Chaotic" decisions might be reasonable to assume.
Arbitrary inputs are processed depending upon
the current state of the neuron, a state which may
be unpredictable due to some external influence.
The "out of tune" aspects, personally I would like to
explore . Neurons appear to have something like
a digital to analog to digital signal processing
capability. This type of exploration could make
some sense out of a chaotic signaling neuron.
>and often the random combination of
>messages spark the seeked correct answer.
If I had to design a neuron system, I'd try to
leave the random combinations outside
in the environment. Those outer neurons
have spent a lot of years evolving to get
rid of them. :)
More information about the Neur-sci