'curved-path' stuff

Kenneth Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Wed Jul 17 17:02:18 EST 2002


but i've not yet adequately address what is the heart of the "functional
multiplexing" problem as it's discussed in AoK, Ap9.

same stuff, different loci, different function.

so putting one thing in-there, in a generalized way, has differential local
consequences.

one might be 'good', while, simultaneously, others might be 'bad'.

the solution seems to depend upon 'hitching a ride' on the stuff that
underpins cellular-differentiation.

in my view, that's a Hard Problem because it's activation-dependent.

what about the adult stem cell differentiation work?

can the factors that're used to precipitate adult stem cell differentiation
be 'packaged'?

then, can these 'packages' be maintained-as-functional while being
'attached' to chemical factors, in a way that preserves the functionality of
the chemical factors?

if so, then, in such, there's a way through the "functional multiplexing"
problem.

at least outside the nervous system.

it's not so straight-forward within the nervous system because what
constitutes 'activation' is so dynamic.

still, everything within the IFR has its 'location', despite the dynamicism.

seems like one would have to follow ontogeny... a 'curved-path', itself.
[the inverse thing is that this's probably why ontogeny does follow a
'curved-path' - differential physiological dynamics along it's unfolding,
requires a sequenced-series of stuff, rather than anything steady-'state' -
which points back to my previous post on this topic, quoted below.

so the sequenced-series, 'curved-path' stuff is Solid.

eventually, it will all be do-able. at what cost to those treated? i mean,
will they have to lay in bed, immobilized, stuffed with needles, for months?

anyway, progress.

k. p. collins

Kenneth Collins wrote in message ...
>i've foun[d] what i 'dropped-out' to loo[k]-for.
>
>Kenneth Collins wrote in message ...
>>i'm going to work off-line for a while.
>>
>>i RETRACT my earlier statment with respect to having communicated "10%" of
>>the work i've done.
>>
>>i've not yet communicated 1%.
>
>I'd presumed' that more of what's in what i've discussed, but which wasn't
>addressed explicitly, had communicated than is actually the case.
>
>>
>>anyway, there was an important article in today's _New York Times_,
>"Science
>>Times" section: "Beyond Temporary 'Miracles"', by ABAGAIL KUGER, M. D.,
>pD6.
>>
>>the problem discussed, AIDS coc[k]tail side-effects, occurs as a function
>of
>>immune system function being a form of 'cognition', and "functional
>>multiplexing" [AoK, Ap9].
>>
>>i'm wanting to explore the problem inherent in the
non-external-correlation
>>of "functional multiplexing" [and i've also got to redouble my efforts at
>>finding a way to pay the bills]. so i'll be working offline for a while.
>
>since immune system function is a form of 'cognition', it's possible to
>'teach' it, and, via regimines which follow curved-paths, direct it to fix
>stuff that it'd not, otherwise, be able to reach.
>
>and, so, the 'functional-multiplexing' problem is not 'Impossible'.
>
>problem-solutions with respect to it 'just' have to follow curved paths.
>precisely-staged medication, in which the overall Thermodynamic is
>maintained, while, at each 'stage', what's left of the problem
Thermodynamic
>is minimized.
>
>get it?
>
>the approach to Hard Problems, like AIDS, will not happen via a design-it
>and administer-it-all-at-once approach.
>
>the approach that can work will have to 'morph' with respect to
>immune-system 'cognition'; with respect to the Thermodynamics inherent, and
>while adjusting to maintain the overall Thermodynamic [Life],
simultaneously
>adjust to ever-minimize the anti-Life Thermodynamic.
>
>get it?
>
>the functional multiplexing problem can be addressed through convergence
>upon Thermodynamic 'offsets' that take advantage of the
>window-of-opportunity that's inherent in the 'time'-course of immune-system
>'learning'. between 'naivete' and full-manifestation of this or that
>immune-system response, things are in flux.
>
>in order to address the problem of functional multiplexing, treatments have
>to be adjusted within that 'time' frame.
>
>it's like using tweezers vs. using pliers.
>
>treatments will converge upon correlated sequences, each including all the
>necessary Life-preserving Thermodynamic offsets, while including the
>anti-disease offsets, all correlated to 'momentary' immune-system 'state'.
>
>at first [always?] it'll have to be done in-Hospital only.
>
>new machines'll have to be developed to do the analysis, dosage
>combinatorials, and delivery, in real-'time'. [so it's not a
>snap-your-fingers thing, but as the technology progresses, it'll become
>ever-more strong.
>
>a significant side-benefit will be that the apparatus will be able to
>automatically construct an immune-system database, which, as it grows,
will,
>itself, constitute a rich field of investigation.
>
>anyway, this is the stuff that i broke-off to seek.
>
>i understand that it's probably not 'decipherable' to others, but i'm
>putting it here in the hope that it is.
>
>k. p. collins
>
>>[...]
>
>





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list