Differential EEG

kpaulc kpaulc at earthlink.net
Thu Mar 4 13:22:03 EST 2004


"kpaulc" <kpaulc at removeearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:gfy1c.32278$hm4.27869 at newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> [...]
> "kpaulc" <kpaulc at removeearthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:oXx1c.32268$hm4.12325 at newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > [...]
> > "Doktor DynaSoar" <targeting at OMCL.mil> wrote in message
> > news:q5pc40d2nbkmmopth3r235rqt0hv6jmkbg at 4ax.com...
> > > On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 19:57:49 GMT, "kpaulc" <kpaulc at earthlink.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > } "k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > } news:zMS0c.29106$hm4.12683 at newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > } > "NMF" <nm_fournier at ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > > } > news:3ft0c.2257$qA2.152895 at news20.bellglobal.com...
> > > } > > [...]
> > > } > [...]

The problem that I'm actually working
on in this thread is that of rendering the
neural Topology, graphically, by work-
ing back from EEG data, which is def-
initely doable, but which has remained
undone [unattempted?] - probably be-
cause the EEG-analysis methodologies
that are commonly used have been
handed-down from Professor to Stu-
dent without any Thought being given
to rendering data graphically - probably
be-cause, as 'dynasoar' has pointed-out,
the methodologies date back to the
to the Inventor of the EEG, before com-
puter graphics existed, and probably be-
cause the demands of developing Ex-
pertise in the previously-existing meth-
odology are such that they coerse the
Student away from thinking graphically.

[This is an 'old-song' that's been 'playing'
across the full spectrum of scientific
endeavor, and, of course, is a dynamic
that NDT shows reduces to 'blindly'-
automated TD E/I-minimization.]

Anyway, why I'm emphasizing 'differen-
tials' in this discussion is that they consti-
tute the information that can be worked-
with to render the neural Topology graph-
ically, using SDEEG data.

It's not an easy problem because the vari-
abilities of neural action-potential genera-
tion are so great - but, at least in early imp-
limentations, these variabilities will 'just'
decrease attainable resolution.

In the future, such resolution deficits will be
minimized by convergence upon an 'intel-
ligent' SDEEG that will 'learn' to compen-
sate by working-backward from neural-
topological data established by other means
[basically, an 'overlaying' of the Neuroanat-
omy].

The payoffs of pursuing this course would
be immense.

The instantiating thought with respect to
this discussion came while reading, yesterday
morning, in, =Sleep=, by J. A. Hobson, 1989,
ISBN: 0-767-5050-3, specifically, with respect
to "stage II spindling". For several reasons,
this "spindling" is quite reminiscent of "sup-
ersystem configuration" [AoK, Ap5] transitions,
and when I read of it, and viewed it's 2-D EEG
trace, I was 'carried-away' with a 'longing' to see
the data in 3-D.

So, wanting to see that goal achieved, I've 'stuck
my neck out' in an effort ot lite a 3-D 'fire' with-
in the community of Electrophysiological Ex-
pertise.

I do everything that I do by transforming data
into graphical representations that can just be
fired-up and watched, which renders 'every-
thing' that's in-there powerfully-'telling' - which
is what I'm talking about when I say "I've seen
it with my own eyes."

I've always worked in this way [probably as
a result of being with my Dad in his cellar work-
shop - having to 'put his projects together' in
my mind, to see what he was building], and it's
my position that, although any data are Precious,
most of what's in any data is Wasted if the data
are not rendered 3-D-graphically visible.

Toward this goal, I'd Love to have some actual
EEG data to 'play'-with. Standard EEG data will
be less than SDEEG data, but 'dynasoar's dis-
cussion showed me that there's enough in-it to
get-a-start, and to better-define the independent
'perspectives' of the SDEEG approach.

I am Grateful to you, 'dynasoar'.

Anyway, I just do stuff like this discussion be-
cause, having NDT's stuff, allows me to under-
stand how "behavioral inertia" correlating to
strongly-established "biological mass" 'blinds'
folks, even in Science, from seeing stuff that's
ourside of their external-experiential environ-
ments.

There's no 'easy' way to do it, but not doing
it abandons folks to the dictates of what was,
so I usually just do what needs to be done to
get-past that illusory 'wall', 'taking my lumps'
at the 'hands' of 'blindly'-automated TD E/I-
minimization - in order to teach folks how to
strip 'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization
of it's 'power' to 'Dictate' that folks "shall be
'blind'".

It's in the Freedom that comes with having
given one's self completely.

You know - after a certain 'point', nothing
more can happen to one - so one is Free
to do what hadn't been done.

One Learns that the 'heat' that always comes
has nothing to do with one's endeavoring to
'look-elsewhere', and everything to do with
the TD E/I that folks experience within their
nervous systems when one presents anything
that's not already long-'familiar' within their
experience.

Anyway... as usual, I'm working on both
problems at once - because the meta-Problem
is always in-there, so why waste that?

ken [k. p. collins]





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list