Unstable->Stable Equilibrium Transitions

k p Collins kpaulc at [----------]earthlink.net
Fri Feb 6 19:32:13 EST 2004


"k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bcOUb.12649$jH6.11448 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> A few brief comments added below.
>
> "k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:BANUb.12607$jH6.1652 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > "Peter F." <effectivespamblock at ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:aoLUb.261$J9.7353 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> > >
> > > "k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:CTFUb.12106$jH6.11577 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > [...]

There is one Large caveat with respect to
the Analysis that I discussed in my
previous post, linked-to above.

It is that, as I've discussed repeatedly
in long-former posts, Humanity-wide
TD E/I has been massively-augmenting
for decades.

This'll interfere with folks' becoming
'familiar' with NDT's stuff.

"Zone of randomness" [AoK, Ap4].

"Unstable equilibrium".

Some of the collective TD E/I(up)
is 'good', be-cause such enables
'keenness' with respect to getting-
to-work.

But, when I look-around, I don't
see anyone willing to broach the
topic of NDT's understanding.

So, how can getting-to-work
get-started?

k. p. collins





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list