Reversal potential/Equilibrium potential Definitions! (should be easy for you guys)

KP-PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%
Tue Apr 29 19:14:11 EST 2003


Hi New Zelander,

--
"Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
"BilZ0r" <BilZ0r at TAKETHISOUThotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns936DDD66A39BBilZ0rhotmailcom at 202.20.93.13...
| "KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in
news:G4ura.130481
| $ja4.5722746 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
|
| > My position is not yet accepted by others, but here it is:
| >
| > "reversal potential" just the 'sweet spot' around which ionic
| > conductances 'hover', and can, itself, vary, absolutely, as a
| > function of the net ionic 'state' which varies in a complex
fashion
| > right down to microscopic 'levels'.
| >
|
| I would have thought you would have brought up the 2nd law by now!
This is
| a time where its actaully applicable. Seeing that its really all
about
| equilibrium.

First, I don't talk about 2nd Thermo. I talk about the energy-flow
that is what's [inadequately] described by 2nd Thermo.

2nd, there's actually no "equilibrium" in-there. It's not trivial to
see such, but everything's =continuously= varying, including what's
referred to as the "reversal potential".

To see this, one has to step pack a bit, to view the 'big picture'.

An analogy helps. Consider the lillies of the firld whach have just
popped through the surface of the earth [a couple of days ago where I
live [New England, but about 6 months ago where you live :-]. The
sprouts srpout, their photosynthesis capacities augment as their
surface areas augment, so their internal energy supplies agument,
until they've enough 'excess' energy to be extravagant, and they
blossom [with sweet fragrance that I Love], if they're lucky, the
bees are busy, and they get polenated, bearing the 'fruits' of their
labors in the seeds of yet another generation's cycling. They hang on
into the summer, wither and 'die'.

My 'point' in all of this is, where is anything that's in
"equilibrium"?

Where is anything that can be referred to as an "absolute set point"?

None and none. 'quantum mechanics' not withstanding, everything
in-there is 'just' a continuous energy-flow.

The analogous thing is True eithin nervous systems because
microscopic trophic modifications ["biological mass"] occur in a way
that's rigorously-coupled to the neural activation that actually
occurs amongst neurons.

Our nervous systems are like the lillies in this way.

The main 'point' is that, yeah, one can stick an elecrode in a
neuron, connect it to a meter, and observe that the meter
periodically crosses it's "zero", but such is devoid of anything but
the most-extremely-trivial 'meaning' - because the neuron is
continuously adapting its neural architecture with respect to the
activation that it experiences [and, in vivo, it's terrifically
moreso because group-discipline amongst globally-integrated
'mechanisms', including glial function, act upon the neuron's
energydynamics [see all of AoK].

As I've discussed in other posts, the net result tends strongly to be
[or at least can be] continuous 'motion' with respect to [and,
hopefully, with net 'climbing' of] the energy-gradient that is WDB2T.

So, there's actually nothing in-there that constitutes a "zero"-able
"reversal potential".

Yes, the meter does 'read' "zero" somewhat periodically, byt why
glorify a meter's reading when, given trophic dynamics, what's
actually happening is nerver the same twice?

Doing so is akin to one calling the ground upon which one stands 'the
center of the universe' - it's not. It's just another place within
the universe - tied to everything else within the universe via the
one-way flow of energy from order to disorder that is WDB2T.

Saying the "reveraal potential" 'is always zero' is like saying a
popsicle is always at zero degrees centigrade if the freezer it's in
is set at zero degrees centigrade.

"Yeah, but, so what?"

Everything that's going on in-there is 'just' being 'overlooked' in
order to take note of the meter's reading.

Calling something "special" doesn't make it "special".

Don't get me wrong, It's OK to take note of the "reversal potential",
but only with regard to everything else that's going on in-there.
When this's done, it's seen that the "reversal potential" is just
another 'point' in the overall energy-flow - same as any other
'point' within the overall energy-flow - not anything "special".

What I've discussed in this msg is some of why in vitro experiments
are 'dangerous' - they can easily 'blind' folks to the big picture -
render the 'forest' un-see-able.

'Deny' the existence of the 'forest' just to sustain the
'specialness' of the no-special-ness called "special" because "that's
what the meter says"?

Nope.

The meter lies [or, at least, 'withholds' Truth :-]

Main point: Despite the meter's reading "zero", the "zero" it reads
is never the same thing twice.

Course, folks can make it look 'otherwise', in vitro, but that
doesn't make it otherwise in vivo.

[I'm not trying to be a "smart-alec". It's just hard for me to go
over the same-stuff never-endingly [I've discussed all of what's
here, repeatedly, in the past], so I look for new ways to say the
same stuff - and that comes out "smart-alec-y" - all I'm doing is
doing what needs to be done in ways that keep my Being from
'dis-integrating' from the "boredom" [AoK, Ap5, 7 & 8].

The meta-main-'point' is that there's real worth in understanding
nervous system function in a globally-integrated way. NDT was
developed to fill this need.

It's why folks sending both it and me down 'the Waste shute' 'hurts'
so much, and,  simultaneously, so 'hilarious'.]

Neural tissue undergoes thophy as a result of activation that occurs
within it. There's nothing in-there that can be pointed to as being
'disconnected' from these trophic dynamics - everything is always
changing, despite the meter's False reporting :-]

The trophic dynamics constitute the 'thing' of greatest importance
with respect to 'climbing' WDB2T, which is what everything within
nervous systems [within all of Life] do [does].

It's unacceptable to not =See= this just so one can 'be on friendly
terms' with 'the meter'.

ken [K. P. Collins]





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list