Omega 3's and Neuropathologies
Kenneth 'pawl' Collins
k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Mon Jan 6 13:28:20 EST 2003
I understand that it's not immediately obvious that an generalized
entity, such as "membrane integrity", can be operated on in a
generalized, abstract, way as I have in my prior post, quoted below,
but it's not only possible, it;s exactly what happens within 'the
"Membrane integrity" constitutes a set of sets, which for each
individual membrane, includes all the properties upon which the
membrane's optimization is dependent. The superset's optimization is
just the sum of the subsets' optimizations.
And it works as I've described in my prior post [I've added
clarifying comments within that prior stuff].
If it seems "too simple", that's because folks haven't worked the
global-integration problem sufficiently to become able to discern
what's in stuff like this generalized membrane stuff.
Forgive me, please, for stating-it-plain.
K. P. Collins
Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
|Although I'm unfamiliar with virtually all of its detailed stuff, I
|found your post interesting, and want to comment, a bit, from the
|perspective in which I work.
I'm familiar, in general, with membrane integrity and functionality
issues, in a way that's sufficient with respect to the
global-integrity, and golbal-integration problems that constitute
|All of nervous system function can be looked from the perspective of
|membrane integrity. Membrane integrity can be looked at in terms of
|an optimizing 'pressure' dynamic.
Thousands of such globally-applicable perspectives are
cross-correlated, and integrated, within NDT. I was =not= asserting
that 'membrane integrity is all that there is' [sorry about having to
state-it-plain, but folks do, sometimes, 'misconstrue' this or that
that I post in such 'absurd' ways.
You know, I've been working with this stuff for decades. It's not
obvious, to e, what, in it, is not obvious to others, so it's often
the case that a description I post is adequate as far as I'm
concerned, but insufficient for others. I'm sorry that this is the
way it is, but folks haven't 'bothered' to discuss anything with me,
or to challenge stuff that I've posted. Folks only 'get together',
clandestinely, and 'decide' on the basis of their consensus
'knowledge' that 'there's nothing in what I've posted', or that what
I've posted is 'absurd'.
Well, as I've =pleaded= 'time' and 'again', the validities of these
sorts of 'conclusions' are, in-toto, dependent upon including me in
their discussion - otherwise they just perpetuate Ignorance with
respect to what NDT constitutes, and, [again], in that, tend,
strongly, to heap substantiation upon NDT.
You know, I've begged, and begged to meet with folks in-person, so
that all of these sorts of things can be worked-through, but folks've
chosen to leave me virtually-separated from them, while 'examining'
me, as if I'm some sort of caged lab animal.
And it's offensive in the extreme that it's long been verifiable that
'professionals' are plagerizing the work I've done [because, since
they suffer the coersed consensus that's forced upon students in grad
school, that the problem will not be resolved, they were unable to
work through the problem on their own, but they know enough to
recognize, if dimly, what's in the work I've done, witness my
'struggling' on behalf of the understanding, and see that they 'can
get away with' restating this or that of the work I've done 'in
technical terms', and 'no one will ever know the difference' - they
But, how can a man work on a problem, devotedly, for 31+ years, and
not recognize the work he's done, even when this or that 'portion' of
it is, supposedly, 'restated' using abstract 'technical' language?
You know? See AoK, Ap1 - what I'm discussing, here, has been in-there
all along. I stated it as I stated it, then, because 'professionals'
plagerism was, then, already rampant.
|That is, as membrane integrity augment[s], the correlated
|of all dynamics that are dependent upon membrane integrity is
|'forced' to augment commensurately.
|In other words, all such dynamics become more-precise [less 'fuzzy']
|in a way that directly reflects the augmentation of membrane
|Which is exactly analogous to what happens within all physical
|systems when global pressure is increased [up to an
|individual-system-correlated threshold, common to all physical
|systems, at which all physical systems, then tend to dis-integrate]
Again, it's a set of sets thing. What I'm discussing, as is always
the case in my discussions, is global integration - unification.
In the above, I'm saying that the generalized principles are common
to all physical systems, =not= that there's some common 'value' with
respect to which the dynamics of all physical systems hover.
There is such a 'number' but it occurs as a function of the
individual compositions of physical systems.
This actuality reduces to the energydynamics that're rigorously
treated in Tapered Harmony, and which I've been working, for the past
several months, to help folks see [not having realized, prior to
that, that all of the discussions of Tapered Harmony's stuff that
I've posted over the years, were insufficient with respect to other
folks' understanding of TH's principles [but, you know, it, again,
comes down to the fact that folks didn't discuss TH's stuff, or ask
for clarification, or challenge this or that that I was discussing -
and I tend not to 'guess' with respect to what folks understand and
what folks don't understand - whenever I discuss such, like I'm doing
here, that which I discuss stands Verified.]
You know? I'm not a "Saint", or anything like that, but I've been out
here, pouring both the work I've done, and myself, out to folks, I
see the net effect of what I'm doing, yet I witness, the fact that
folks treat me like a 'lab animal' - 'keep me caged' - do not allow
me to stand in their presence - do not allow me to publish my work in
any 'normal way - do not return phone calls, or acknowledge visity,
You know? Yet I can See that the work I've done has been, and is,
setting the course within Neuroscience [Tapered Harmony is, even as I
write this,doing the same within Phisics], yet, here I am, left to
Why do folks think I've been so 'desperate'? DO folks 'think' such
has been on my own behalf?
It hasn't been. It's been on 'your' behalf - because I wanted 'you'
not to Fail to just Do Science - I wanted it not to be possible for
anyone to say that 'you' 'ran away and hid', instead of meeting
'your' responsibilityies to Science.
But 'you' not only 'ran away and hid', 'you' transgressed, severely,
by Plagerizing the work I've done, even as 'you' ran away and hid'.
What do folks 'think' I'd been 'jumping up and down' about?
Such was not on my own behalf, but on 'yours'.
"You've" at best, 'stood-by' while all this was happening.
So, the 'time' has come to just state things plainly, as I've done
The 'lab animal' speaks, at last.
How dare 'you'?
K. P. COLLINS
|Increasing membrane integrity, 'forces' the optimization of
|everything else [again, up to a 'point']
|[Please forgive my wanting to contribute in this unfamiliar way. The
|membrane-integrity stuff is directly correlated to TD
|E/I-minimization capacity, and, so, I recognized that I could
|contribute. I've much analytical experience at the level of the
|generalized dynamics entailed. So please forgive what, I understand,
|will be an unfamiliar response to your
|ken [k. p. collins]
More information about the Neur-sci