Nerve interface was Re: FSK, Vision, and the Brain

KP_PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Wed May 14 21:17:45 EST 2003


"Rich Grise" <richardgrise at yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3df9fd6c.0305141147.79d991ad at posting.google.com...
| r norman <rsnorman_ at _comcast.net> wrote in message
news:<7q60cv8nmpgth7v2g4rqkbn4o33os3de8v at 4ax.com>...
| > On Mon, 12 May 2003 23:09:11 +0200, Jean-Michel Friedt
| > <friedtj at imec.be> wrote:
| >
| > >> [...]
| > > [...]
| > [...]
| > And also getting tissue cultured cells
| > to grow along a silicon substrate is a
| > lot different from trying to interface to
| > cells inside a real, living brain.
|
| Actually, what I was thinking was more
| along the lines of something interfacing
| with the nerve stub in the stump, which,
| admittedly is a little off-topic for the thread.

My view, which is not yet accepted by anyone else, is that the
problem is one within which severed neuron "stubs" have to be "sent
back in 'time`" with respect to their developmental dynamics. In
addition to it's being subjected to the violence which severed it,
the severed end is 'mature', but in 'normal' neuronal development,
the growth 'cone' is 'immature' - so I think the promising route will
be one that selectively 'recognizes' the special disorder of 'mature'
neural tissue abruptly terminating, without the usual gradation to
less-mature tissue.

That is, what I think in secessary is to send the "stump" back in
neuronal-development 'time' by rendering the "stump" 'appropriately'
'immature' - then, 'normal' growth has an optimum opportunity to
occur.

It's not so easy because it will probably require all of the "stub's"
neural 'neighborhood' tissue, including [probably especially] glia to
simultaneously induced to co-operate in going 'back in
neuronal-developmental 'time' - and that's hard to do because
non-injured tissue 'wants' to do its 'normal' stuff. The 'key'm here,
it seems to me is the fact that non-injured neural tissue will still
experience the fact that an injury has occurred elsewhere, because
it's 'normal' globally-integrated functionality will have altered
post-injury.

The last thing constitutes a "TD E/I(up)" condition [it's a long
story - I'm mentioning it here for folks who know of the concept]
that can be 'read' directly in its relative-order differentials
[relative to non-injured analogous stuff].

The bottom-line? There's more than enough information in-there to do
it, but the doing requires a lot of careful study, a lot of
experiment, corelated progress within molecular-'level' neuroscience,
and just-plain-persistence.

| According to what I know about it, a severed nerve
| "wants" to grow back, and one doctor told me that
| they do a millimeter a week. So what we'd need to
| do is find something to do to an interface chip that
| makes it "look" (or feel) like a dendrite to the live
| neuron. I'd be quite reluctant having something
| implanted in my skull (although if, God forbid, I were
| struck blind, I might change my tune), but I think if I
| lost a limb I'd be happy to have scientists experiment
| with my stump.
|
| As long as they can do it painlessly.
|
| I'm also fascinated by the "phantom limb" phenomenon, and I think
| it'd be neater than a rat to see if a phantom limb makes a Kirlian
| photograph image.

My view on the "phantom limb" phenomenon, which is also not yet
accepted by others [I hope only because I'm sharing it for the first
time, here :-] is that the phenomenon is the result of
globally-integrated TD E/I-minimization that is occurring with
respect to the plastic take-over of the 'disconnected' cortical
'spaces' that were formerly correlated to the severed limb's
functionality - as the plastic take-over occurs, there's still neural
architecture ["biological mass"l AoK, Ap5] in-there that's correlated
to the former limb-functionality. The result is a lot of novel neural
activation [it's like a little neural 'battle-ground'], and 'normal'
TD E/I-minimization still occurs with respect to this novel
activation, and works to achieve globally-integrated TD
E/I-minimization with respect to it. The waining of the "phantom
limb" experience over 'time' reflects the 'tide' of the 'battle' for
the cortical spaces within the plastic take-over.

All of this happens in the brain, so there'll be no 'Kirlan image' of
the non-existent limb, but there will be analogous stuff, correlated
to what's described above, if the brain itself is scanned.

Cheers! right-back, ken [K. P. Collins]

[p. s. I could not post to sci.electronics.]

--
"Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list