I'm not saying that anyone else 'has to do Neuroscience the way I've
I'm saying that, if the 'traditional' approaches are followed, and
gotten right, folks'll end up with 'NDT', having reiterated what was
in NDT 20 years ago.
"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:03Xfa.48069$S%3.1668626 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
|| "KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
| news:8Nwfa.26467$S%3.1533494 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...| | Oh yeah - the 'gates', themselves perform [alter their
| | 'conformations'] in accord with their local ionic concentrations
| | [this's where the "3-D energydynamics" stuff got it's start with
| | respect to biological considerations, BTW, back in the mid-1970s
| | recognized its stuff because of work I 'd done in my Physics
| | [if it matters]]
|| This's also one 'point' at which my work in developing NDT fad
| back into the stuff of my Physics 'hobby'.
|| I saw that everything within the brain could be viewed as one
| exquisitely-ordered energy-flow, and that this energy-flow can be,
| literally, viewed in the form of ionic conductances [remember my
| long-former emphasis on "ionic conductances"? This's what I was
| talking about.
|| I saw that, when 'learning' occurs, what actually happens is that
| "biological mass" [AoK, Ap5] is 'constructed' out of energy taken
| from the overall energy flow, and, subsequently, used to exert
| physical inertia within the overall energy flow, so as to direct
| flowing within the brain in formerly-non-existent ways.
|| I saw, in this stuff that what brains do is act upon the
| freedom-to-move of the energy that flows within them, and coined
| term "ephemerence" [afterward given the new spelling,
| by a South African chap back in the days during which I was
| discussing NDT in CompuServe's "Science Forum"; the term
| "ephemerance" was coined from "ephemeral", as a reflection of the
| fleeting nature of the energydynamics inherent in the TD
| E/I-minimization dynamics that occur within our brains].
|| Anyway, I saw that, since I'd rigorously coupled the stuff I'd
| learned about energy-flow within brains, which reduces to ionic
| conductances, to '2nd Thermo' [WDB2T], I started working the stuff
| my Physics 'hobby' along the same lines and,
| the Physics just 'took-off', on the way to imploding to unity, just
| as the Neuroscience had.
|| Back and forth, back and forth, the Neuroscience and the Physics
| 'symbiotically' assisted each other's development. [I owe some
| to the 'heat' I received in the CompuServe "Science Forum" - NDT's
| stuff was attacked from the perspective of 'quantum mechanics', and
| that attack is what transformed my Physics 'hobby' into 'just'
| Physics. I gave my work in Physics the name, "Tapered Harmony" [to
| simultaneously reflect the centrality of the energy flow that is
| WDB2T, and non-particulate "matter" that's ordered within SSW<->UES
| harmonics [this, too, is all in AoK, although I only 'pointed' to
| in a footnote discussing the "nonlinearity of perspective" in AoK,
| Ap6 [the footnote in which I discuss almost running into a pole
| writing in a notebook while out or an early morning walk; the sand
| sliding from the dump truck; the Children's hexagonal
|| Then, Chemistry just began imploding to unity along the same
| 3-D energydynamics which occur in rigorous accord with WDB2T.
|| I recall my thought in the midst of all of this: "I looked in the
| brain, and saw the universe."
|| In terms of the 3-D energydynamics, it's literally True. Brains
| 'emulate' physical reality, while incorporating physical reality
| through their being 'engineered' with rigorous respect to the
| task of climbing the WDB2T energy-gradient.
|| Back and forth, back and forth - I rewrote all of Science with the
| brain, as it's stuff is disclosed within NDT's synthesis of the
| hard-won experimental results within all of Science, as my
| with the Neuroscience experimental results being the 'seed crystal'
| in what, during my years of playing with Physics as a 'hobby' being
| the 'supersaturated solution'.
|| I want only to share all of this stuff, but will not be able to if
| cannot feed and shelter myself.
|| Hence, my 'whining'.
|| It's a Lover's 'quarrel'.
|| I did it for Love of 'you'.
|| Now, stop 'pouting', and let's do Science together :-]
|| ken [K. P. Collins]
|| | ken
| | "KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:Fuwfa.26448$S%3.1530447 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| | | The way I see it is that it's due to 'resting' background ionic
| | | concentrations being maintained homeostatically - because it's
| | | just so much variance can happen due to =any= 'pump' or gating
| | | 'event' - because the ionic dynamics 'want' to be at their
| | | 'set-points', overall - so a gating 'event' greates an ionic
| | 'force'
| | | that 'upsets the homeostasis teakettle', and the homeostasis
| | becoming
| | | locally-imbalanced 'reacts' with an opposing ionic 'force'
| | | proportional to the divergence from homeostasis due to the
| | | 'event' - this reaction ionic 'force' reverses the gate's
| | | flow-potential [and the actual ionic flow within it].
| | |
| | | This way enables extraordinarily-powerful overall integration
| | that's
| | | at a 'deeper level' than, for instance, synaptic dynamics.
| | [includes
| | | all of the neural glia considerations that are briefly
| | | AoK and which I've discussed in long-former posts here in b.n.]
| | |
| | | This can be tested by playing with background ionic
| | | in-vitro.
| | |
| | | Cheers, Chrissy, ken
| | |
| | | |"chrissy" <chrismin at bigpond.com> wrote in message
| | | news:5fe998a3.0303232039.4d88fb39 at posting.google.com...| | | | I was recently looking at an I/V plot for K+ current in a
| | | and
| | | | the plot was a straight line with an x-intercept (zero
| | at
| | | | about -45mV. I was told the K+ reversal potential is
| | about -80mV,
| | | so
| | | | I assumed the voltage-gated K+ channel stopped current flow
| | that
| | | | point, but I don't know enough about the properties of the K+
| | | channel
| | | | to be sure about that. The K+ concentration inside and
| | the
| | | | cell was what a normal neuron would have.
| | | | Was I wrong about the reason the K+ current stopped? It
| | | like
| | | | there's a better reason, but I don't know it...
| | |
| | |