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

Basic Neuron Questions

KP-PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%
Mon Apr 21 12:04:35 EST 2003


----- Original Message -----
From: "KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%>
Newsgroups: bionet.neuroscience
Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: Basic Neuron Questions

> Hi Didier.
>
> "Didier A. Depireux" <didier at tango.isr.umd.edu> wrote in message
> news:b79jlr$c5a$1 at grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
> | r norman <rsnorman_ at _comcast.net> wrote:
> | > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:44:25 +0000 (UTC), "Didier A. Depireux"
> | > <didier at rai.isr.umd.edu> wrote:
> |
> | > [...]
> | Present the same stimulus 20 times and
> | you will never get 20 times the same
> | response, in most parts of cortex.

The game of "Freecell" that comes with Windows[tm] provides a useful
'analogue' with respect to Didier's 'point', and it's resolution, via
TD E/I-minimization within nervous systems. [It's not an exact
alologue [because it's inherently binary, and the neural
energydynamics are inherently, well, "analogue" :-]]

When one plays "Freecell" game-instances, one after the other, the
'moves' one must make as one's playing unfolds are 'analogous' to
Didier's "20 vs. 20" stuff above.

Each instance of the game requires 'different' detailed 'moves' [NQI,
of course. because binary vs. analogue. but useful enough an
analogue].

But what happens in the upper-right 'corner' of the game's user
interface is always relatively the same stuff - the 'cards' build in
their stacks that're always rigorously-ordered from 'ace' through
'king'.

The detailed moves that one must make if one is going to win the game
are 'analogous' to Didier's "20 vs. 20" stuff above, and the
upper-right-corner stuff is 'analogous' to the always-sameness of the
'goal' inherent in the dynamics of TD E/I-minimization. [Note well:
Within the TD E/I-minimization 'goal' there's compensatory
variability with respect to Didier's "20 vs. 20" stuff, the former
=maps= the latter into TD E/I-minimization. Get it?]

The in-between stuff that underpins the detailed 'moves' that're
Chosen is, literally, TD E/I-minimization-in-progress.

It's the variability of the TD E/I-minimization-in-progress that
'bridges' between the stuff of Didier's "20 vs. 20" observation,
above [which maps the variability inherent into TD E/I-minimization]
and the single 'goal state' of TD E/I-minimization that's displayed
in the upper-right 'corner' of the game's user interface.

Always-varing-ness -> always-the-one-'goal'-ness.

The playing of "Freecell" can, in this way, be reduced directly to
the 'climbing' of WDB2T :-]

What's interesting about this anologue of nervous system
energydynamics is that it makes the automation of 'knowing' with
respect to Didier's "20\20" stuff, above, vivividly apparent. One can
actually 'see' the energydynamics inherent as each instance of the
game progresses - 'heavy' atfirst, and working through to 'light' or
even 'heavier', depending on progress that's made with respect to the
upper-right-'corner' stuff.

As one plays the game, in the form of these energydynamics that can
literally be 'sensed', one can literally 'sense' the 'knowing' that's
entailed :-]

It's 'analogously' [caveat: bimary vs. analogue] 'similar' with
respect to the 'analogous' stuff within nervous systems.

Homework assignment: Fire up Freecell and play with it until you see
all that's discussed here. [When your Boss comes around, tell him
that you're doing it to increase your value to the company - which is
exactly what you will, in fact, be doing :-]

'Cheers', ken

> The same thing never happens in the [global] nervous system twice
> because mocroscopic trophic modifications occur as a result of the
> activation that occurs within nervous systems. Via ongoing
> convergence upon TD E/I-minimization the global system is =always=
> 'learning' - analyses must converge upon rigor with respect to
such.
> When this is accomplished, the cortical activation differentials
that
> you point out will become a [the?] primary means of describing the
> underpinning "micro-mods" - that is, activation differentials will
be
> referred back to neural Topology differentials [including the
> "supersystem configuration" dynamics that are discussed in AoK,
Ap5].
>
> Cheers, Didier, ken







More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

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