Unstable->Stable Equilibrium Transitions

k p Collins kpaulc at [----------]earthlink.net
Thu Feb 5 17:14:55 EST 2004


"k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:xhnUb.10620$jH6.6559 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Hi Neil.
>
> "NMF" <neil.fournier at sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:2lmUb.5153$ZN1.486985 at news20.bellglobal.com...
> >
> > > Like a lot of other stuff in NDT, this
> > > 'unstable equilibrium' is "special" - be-
> > > cause, as one gains experience with
> > > respect to that which is relatively-'un-
> > > familiar', the 'instability' 'disappers',
> > > being replaced by stability - as that
> > > which was 'unfamiliar' becomes 'fam-
> > > iliar' - as the TD E/I-minimization
> > > mechanisms transform TD E/I(up)
> > > into TD E/I(down).
> >
> > Could you explain precisely - either
> > mathematically or by considering actual
> > neuronal physiology- how this process
> > that you suggest (change from unstable
> > to stable equilibra) would occur in the
> > nervous system?
>
> It's what I've been discussing all along -
> "TD E/I-minimization".
>
> There are =many= examples of such
> dynamics. Every protein-folding instance
> is a transition through instability to
> stability, for instance [do a Groups
> Google[tm] on:
>
> protein+folding+3-D energydynamics+kpaulc [<-CORRECTED]
>
> [...]
>
> It's late, and I need to sleep.
>
> I'll work-up a simplified description of
> a 'generic' case tomorrow.
>
> The dynamics are =really= common place.
>
> Basically, it's what "Life" is.

The Googled discussion is sufficient [read the
'extra' 466 lines], except for one additional
comment:

The transition from instability to stability
occurs via a 3-D energydynamics equi-
partitioning that, itself, is antagonistically
biased with respect to the one-way flow
of energy from order to disorder that is
what's =described= by 2nd Thermo
[WDB2T] - so that, overall, the 3-D
energydynamics tend, strongly, to 'climb'
WDB2T.

[There are many 'caveats' - instances in
which the 3-D energydynamics flow =with=
WDB2T. The general nature of these is
sufficiently-treated in AoK [generalized
TD E/I-minimization, with mechanisms
that 'release' at high-TD E/I - in a way that's
exactly analogous to the "switch above the
dam" that's in the Googled discussion].

In this nervous system instance of the
instability->stability-transition dynamics,
what happens is that the internal 3-D
energydynamics adjust themselves, under
the 'pressure' of the external 3-D energy-
dynamics that are being experienced, in
a way that redistributes the positions of
ionic gates within the neural Topology, in
a way that, simultaneously, Solves the
problem of molecular activation, the re-
sult being that the molecular-'level' 3-D
energydynamics are driven in a way that
'retrofits' the neural Topology with re-
spect to its achievement of TD E/I-mini-
mization.

:-]

There are many common place examples
of engineered mechanisms that =crudely=
mimmic these dynamics. In electronics,
all diodes' actions are like "ratchets" that
permit energy to flow in only one direction.
In 'clocks', the energy-flow is, similarly,
in one direction, because the potential
energy stored in the spring [battery, etc.]
is biased in one direction, and the energy-
flow is governed by the 'clock's escapment
[so that the spring doesn't 'sproing']. In
internal-combustion automobile engines,
the 'timing' of the spark is tuned so that
the power-impulses that the spark ignites
will drive the crankshaft on only one dir-
ection. Etc., throughout all of engineering.

What Engineering has 'lacked', however,
is the sort of mechanism that was discussed
in the Googled posts - a mechanism that has
a =generalized= 'awareness' of WDB2T
built-right-in, which enables it to tune itself
in a way that's antagonistic to WDB2T, 're-
gardless' of what external 3-D energy-
dynamics are imposed upon it.

The transition from instability to stability is
literally embodied in the 3-D energydynamics
that so-'climb' WDB2T.

As I've discussed, here in bionet.neuroscience,
in the recent past [a few weeks back], all of this
stuff is =passively= 'recorded in snowflakes'
interplay of symmetry and asymmetry.

And the way to to Engineer the =generalized=
dynamics is mapped [disclosed] in the "lawn-
mower experiment, which I also discussed a
few weeks back here in b.n.

In the lawnmower experiment, the water crystals
[formerly referred to, incorrectly, as "water
oscillons"] constitute an information-content that
is Deterministically-coupled to the nonlinear wave
dynamics that are generated by the mower's engine's
dissipation of energy in Deterministic accord with
WDB2T, =and= the shape of mower deck with
respect to that nonlinear dissipative driving.

Clearly, the shapes of the water crystals, and, there-
fore, information-content, can be actively tuned
by modifying either the vibratory dynamics and/or
the shape of the mower deck. [In the long-former
discussion of the "lawnmower experiment", posted
on the 'day' after(?) it's stuff was first observed, I
pointed out that the flow-rate of the water through
the drain-hole in the mower deck is also tunable -
because grass-clippings accumulated at the drain
hole, thereby modifying the water's flow through
the drain hole. I'm repeating this, here, because
I neglected to mention it in the more-recent dis-
cussion of the "lawnmower experiment".

Exact Maths?

As far as I'm concerned, it's all been Stated [but
I have to smile when I Assert such, because the
Maths I use is 'foreign' to all but myself - I do it
Graphically, literally mapping the energy-gradients
via color-gradients - no 'symbols'. It can, "of course",
be translated into symbolics, but I, long ago, 'moved
away from' symbolic representation be-cause sym-
bolic representation is 'anemic' relative to Graphical
representation, particularly with respect to theoret-
ical exploration, which is what I've always been
'attracted' to. The 'finding-out' is enormously-encum-
bered if it has to be, simultaneously, 'crammed' into
symbolics that are old-long-since. The old-long-
since symbolics' pre-existing limits flat-out render
the ability to freely-explore artificially-'impossible'.
So I use Graphical Maths, which suffer no such
artificially-imposed limitations.]

If folks look, they'll see that, in this discussion, a
reification of the Navier-Stokes [Turbulence]
Equations is Given, and that reification is extended
to the totality of Universal-WDB2T.

I understand that what's here will probably leave
folks 'scratching-their-heads', and =that= is why
I want to meet with folks in-person.

I've been exploring for 45+ 'years', and I've cram-
med everything into this one post.

There's a need to 'walk-through' all that's 'crammed'
in-here - a need to discuss the sub-dynamics that
are integrated here.

If no one wants to take the in-person route, where
everything can just be 'clicked-off', then start with
the Googled post, then do more Googles on "3-D
energydynamics", and, coupled with the discussion
in AoK, you'll find all you need to comprehend what's
here in-fullness.

Me?

I'm smiling.

Later today, I'm going to go watch =Lost in Translation=,
And, while viewing the flick, ponder how [I surmise]
the same-stuff has happened with respect to my resort
to Graphical [but exploration-powerful] Maths.

I hope this newer Bill Murray flick is as good as =Ground-
hog Day=.

Anyway, the =ONLY= thing that's in my asking to meet
with folks in-person is my old-long-since Awareness that
the Graphical Maths that I use does, in fact, leave folks'
'scratching-their-heads'. [Do 'you' understand? Not only
do I not want to 'bash' anyone, or 'whine', or 'lament'
anything, all I want to do is =GIVE= folks the means to
understand. Gees 'louise'! I've been thinking about pur-
chasing an Artist's outfit so I can 'paint folks a picture'.
Look back on all of my 'whining', and filks'll see that it's
been this Maths-translation stuff that I've been talking-
about all along - =not= 'recriminations'. It's just been
that I've known that, the more I do online, the more
'embarassing' it will be when folks finally get-it. I've
=WANTED NOT= to 'embarass' anyone - because
I've also understood that, if such gains precedence, then
it'll tend to stand as a 'wall' in which all the 'doors' are
closed and locked by 'blindly'-automated TD E/I-min-
imization. Get it? I've been racing the slamming of the
'doors'.

I want to meet-with-folks in order to Translate between
the Maths I use and the Symbolics that everyone else
uses.

That's the =ONLY= reason I want to meet with folks
in-person. [I do want some fair-witnesses there be-cause
it's been my experience that some folks have taken-
advantage of offline communications - stuff I've not
been able to do online. But, even with respect to this
stuff, I'm =NOT= out to 'bash' anyone. The fair witnesses'
only purpose will be to assure that there will be no
taking-advantage, and that what will be discussed will,
in fact, be launched on its way to the Children.

I'm Sorry for having to 'spell-all-this-out', but, gees 'louise'!
I'm 'tired' of being treated as if I've got the plague and
'cannot' stand in anyone's presence.

You know?

You know - so it'll not be =Lost in Translation= :-]

I expect I'll continue this discussion later.

Try to communicate its stuff by presenting some
little analogies.

'Paint the picture.'

ken [K. P. Collins]





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list