Basic Neuron Questions

KP-PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%
Sat Apr 12 01:23:38 EST 2003


DLARIFICATION below.

"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:4Prla.22950$cO3.1697128 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| "r norman" <rsnorman_ at _comcast.net> wrote in message
| news:incb9vkhq5unqqc48ed611939f8g25hp39 at 4ax.com...
| | [...]
| | Certainly there are specific cases
| | where timing of nerve activity,
| | even to the sub-millisecond level,
| | is critical.  And certainly
| there are cases where a few
| | interpolated spikes in a relatively
| | steady train of a constant frequency
| | can cause large changes in response
| | through short term facilitation. But as
| | a general rule, does critical timing
| | really count or is only a rough running
| | average of frequency count? For now,
| | the latter seems like the usual way of
| | coding.  Anyone who suggests
| | otherwise has a heavy burden of proof
| | to show that the timing mechanism is
| | actually a general phenomenon in real,
| | live brains, not in conceptual models.
|
| Naw - the Proof ain't heavy' - and it's
| been organized for decades - all it
| requires is an academic Neuroscience
| group, somewhere, that isn't 'afraid' to
| actually do Neuroscience.

My earlier reply to Mr. Norman's comments [what's pertinent is quoted
above] were open to ambiguous interpretation.

I was talking about the Proof of the =general= solution, =not= any
'proof' of 'time-' or 'rate-coding'.

'time' and 'rate' coincidences can, of course, be 'demonstrated', but
neither 'time' or 'rate' encodes information within nervous systems.
[I've discussed "frequency-coding", myself, in the past, but my doing
so was an inadequate attempt to communicate the underpinning WDB2T
reality [it was a 'tweener'].

'time' and 'rate' are =artifacts= within TD E/I-minimization - 'time'
has no physically-real existence, so how can something that has no
physically real existence 'encode' anything? And, since 'rate' occurs
as a function of non-existent 'time', 'rate' is also just a cognitive
construction that also has no physically-real existence, so how can
'rate' 'encode' anything? [When one speaks of, say, the "rate" of
motion of an automobile on a highway [as in "65 miles per hour"],
what one is actually doing is addressing what  are the underpinning
energydynamics via a 'convenient' 'short-cut' that derives in
groupwise-coersed experience.]

Neither 'time' nor 'rate' can encode anything.

That 'time' and 'rate' coincidences can be 'demonstrated' derives not
in physical reality, but in False "finitizations" [AoK, Ap4] with
respect to physical reality that 'move toward' stuff whose only
'existence' derives in long-'familiar' [long-TD E/I-minimized]
ancient Errors being perpetuated =solely= be-cause doing so does, in
fact, allow further TD E/I-minimization within this or that
interactive group that tacitly 'agrees' that the False stuff 'is
true'. [I understand that this stuff is 'difficult', but getting a
handle on it is Crucial with respect to understanding how nervous
systems process information - so, if you want to begin to understand
how nervous systems work, save this msg with a special name so you
can go back over its stuff repeatedly until you get it. Else, don't
'whine' about the 'difficulty' inherent. Doing so is just being
'lazy' and blaming it on 'me' :-] [Forgive me, please for saying it
plain.]

So what actually Encodes information within nervous systems?

It's as I've been discussing - information-content is encoded via the
work [sum(force * distance)] that's entailed in achieving TD
E/I-minimization with respect to this or that that is more or less
'known'.

Nervous systems work by doing work :-]

The 'pushing' or 'pulling' of each ion within the nervous system -
within each molecular dynamic - in this way or that, during
"supersystem" [AoK, Ap5] TD E/I-minimization, constitutes an instance
of (force * distance) - an instance of work.

What nervous systems do is perform globally-disciplined-work to align
'all' instances of such (force * distance) via TD E/I-minimization
with respect to external and internal WDB2T.

The microscopic trophic modifications ["micro-mods"] that develop as
a rigorously-correlated =effect= of the neural activation [=cause=]
that actually occurs within nervous systems develop as the =result=
of the work that nervous systems do, as above, and, therefore
literally =store work=.

That is, the TD E/I-minimization-vectored energy-flow inherent in the
work that nervous systems do is what drives the vectored formation of
the micro-mods - the development of the micro-mods 'just' goes with
the flow of energy inherent in the nervous system's performance of TD
E/I-minimization work - this internal [to the nervous system]
energy-flow is exactly analogous to EM radiation ["light"] with
respect to photo-trophic dynamics in photosynthetic plants - in fact,
via an energy-transformation, the internal instance is literally
indistinguishable from the EM case with respect to plants - they can
be transformed into each other - it's all the one universal
energy-flow that is WDB2T - the only 'distinguishing' features that
can be discerned derive in the mechanics of the physical instances
that 'access' the WDB2T energy-flow - plants do it via physical
mechanisms that instantiate photosynthesis, nervous systems do it via
physical mechanisms that instantiate metabolic chains within
"supersystem" TD E/I-minimization - but it's literally all the one
WDB2T energy-flow.

'Addressing' occurs within nervous systems in a way that's analogous
[but extremely-very-much more dynamic] to the way Sun's inclination
'address' phototrophy in plants. Plants grow with respect to light.
Nervous systems grow with respect to the internal anologue of light -
the energy-flow that's vectored by nervous systems' 'striving' to
achieve TD E/I-minimization - this TD E/I-minimization-vectored
energy-flow is literally analogous to light - it is "internal
`light`". [Of course, as is discussed in AoK, Ap6, evolutionary
dynamics have 'engineered' structural 'tools' within 'addressing'
[the physical substrate in which "Information Calculus" occurs], and,
as id disdussed in AoK, Ap6, these, themselves, rigorously implement
TD E/I-minimization - that 'moves toward' WDB2T * -1].

This's how and why the micro-mods store the essence of =work= - which
is what "biological mass" is - which is why "behavioral inertia' has
physically-real existence within nervous systems - the "biological
mass" and "behavioral inertia" are =exactly= analogous to "mass" and
"inertia" in Physics =except= that the former occur in a way that's
rigorously-mapped with respect to the "special topological
homeomorphisms" of individual nervous systems, and, therefore,
correlate to the experience-driven TD E/I-minimization work that
nervous systems do [where "mass" and "inertia" within external
physical reality just are, despite experience [except, of course,
where "biological mass" and "behavioral inetrtia" are invoked, within
nervous systems, to transform high-'level' external forms of energy
[low-'level' energy is 'just' WDB2T]]].

What, in all of the above, is "straightforward and simple"?

Neural-Topological variation derives rigorously in
activation-dependence. [This's all of NDT in one sentence.]

The internal, directed-in-rigorous-accord-with-TD E.I-minimization,
energy-flow tunes the neural Topology in accord with the
'instantaneous' sum(force * distance) [work] that is occuring within
the neural Topology.

It's all functional be-cause external WDB2T is mapped into the
nervous system via the body-environment interface, and back to the
environment via the effectors.

The neural Topology maps directionality with respect to TD
E/I-minimization.

Divergences from universal WDB2T ^ -1 cause TD E/I(up) to occur
within the neural Topology, and since the neural Topology is
rigorously mapped to WDB2T within the experiential external
environment, nervous systems are able, over the long-term, to
'blindly' and automatically 'know' how to manifest behavior that
tends to counter such divergences from universal WDB2T ^ -1.

It is the Purpose of NDT to remove the 'blindness' inherent in such
automated 'knowing', enabling Knowing [literally with respect to
Truth], especially  with respect the many examples that have been in
AoK all along, and that I've reiterated, or discussed anew, here in
b.n, of 'blindly'-automated infliction-of-harm, but, from there, with
respect to Truth ...Period.

NDT's approach is to show =how= and =why=, in terms of the proven
Neuroscience experimental results, the 'blind'-automation is both
=unnecessary= and =unworthy= of Humanness - that it constitutes a
=generalized= form of Ignorance that 'blindly, automatically, and
=needlessly= inflicts =great harm= upon Humanity.

So, it's the Purpose of NDT to, through the synthesis of the hard-won
proven Neuroscience experimental results, Eliminate the
'blind'-automation that has so Ravaged Humanity since the Beginning.

Every detail presented in every replicable Neuroscience experimental
result is integrable within NDT, but what's in this msg is the "big
picture" gist of it.

It's not 'time-' or 'rate-coding'.

Information-content is encoded in the work that nervous systems do.

Work =is= the information-content.

The information-content is addressed via the TD E/I-minimization work
that nervous systems do.

The information-content acts upon both the external and internal
environments via work.

Everything within nervous systems is 'just' sum(force * distance)
within TD E/I-minimization that 'seeks' WDB2T ^ -1 with respect to
the one-way flow of energy from order to disorder that is universal
WDB2T.

What I want to do is the work inherent in addressing everything
that's in the contemporaneous Literature from this perspective -
which is flat-out doable.

If you can do so, =Please= help me win some small opportinity [as
I've described in other recent posts here in b.n] that will allow me
to do this work.

Thanks for the energy you devoted to reading, rereading, and studying
what's here - but please decide quickly whether or not you're going
to allow me to continue to work.

Thanks for that, too.

K. P. Collins





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list