neuroscience training?

ken kpaulc at earthlink.net
Sun Mar 7 18:23:50 EST 2004


"Doktor DynaSoar" <targeting at OMCL.mil> wrote in message
news:uauk4055jrr1059dpp0a2in79qohr2rfif at 4ax.com...
> [...]

Clarifications re. what I knew, and didn't know,
while developing NDT:

> Informnation as in Shannon's negentropy,

I knew nothing of Shannon's work, but have
heard of it, in passing, in NG discussions.

This's the first I've heard of the "negentropy"
that you attribute to him. The whole "entropy
of information" thing just didn't 'click' with me,
because I thought it was all "Information Theory",
with respect to machines, and I was working
on how information is handled within the biology.

I'm smiling, now, though - 'cause it just imploded.

"'climbing' WDB2T" toward "negative entropy" :-]

One way to look at NDT is that it is about how
and why nervous systems 'seek' "negative entropy".

> but better described using Gabor's "logons" than
> bit,

After reading in Pribram's(?) "The Holographic
Brain", which =I think= was a Chapter in Arbib's
=The Metaphorical Brain= [I'd have to check back
through materials that I've not looked-at for more
than 30 'years' to get-it-straight], I checked-out
Holography, and, while retaining the 'holographic'
metaphor, moved-on to developing an hypothesis,
with respect to the Biology, that would produce
an analogous[+] multi-'image' 'memory' storage, ad-
dressing, and retrieval capabilities. It was, here,
in 1976, that I integrated neural glia functionality.

"TD E/I-minimization" drives 'addressing' within
this 'holographic'[+] 'memory' capability.

I couldn't work with Gabor's Maths because it
was all just 'squiggly-lines' to me [I always need
to literally =see= the dynamics unfolding, then I
just use relatively-simple Maths to embody what
I see. It's all that's actually Necessary.], but the
Holographic metaphor is a mainstay of NDT,
and I just converged upon the "3-D energydyn-
amics" that I've discussed reiteratively here in b.n,
achieving integration with respect to the coupling
of experience with the 'tuning' of the DNA\RNA
while 'resident' here in b.n.

The Maths I used is all the 'same' as the Maths
I've discussed in the "Differential EEG" thread -
all 3-D energy-gradients [the 'differentials'] that
are founded in the physical realities of ions'
'charge'-distributions. [This work includes a Sol-
ution to the protein-folding Problem.]

I've never heard of "Gabor's logons" prior to my
reading of your post.

> as well as his equations to describe the relevant
> electrical fields and how they relate to the information
> carried.

Here, I remain skeptical that Gabor achieved this,
because he was working in, and with respect to,
a =very= different storage-medium, and Holography's
storage and retrievals are Hugely-physically-different
from nervous systems' storage media.

The necessary Maths must be commensurately-dif-
ferent.

It doesn't do to say that brains are "the same as"
Holograms.

They are not.

So the Maths that works in the one case, =cannot=
work in the other case. [Which is why I didn't even
try to understand the Maths of Holography. I knew
it'd be a waste to do so - because the 'media' were
so physically-different.

One cannot proceed without 'carrying' the physical
realities of the 'media' through one's analysis.

> Kapinsky's "information metabolism" would
> probably serve as an even better concept, but
> Gabor's math would still cover it best.
> [...]

Until your post, I'd never heard of "Kapinsky", and
I stand on what I've posted with respect to the Maths
of Holography [even as I am Grateful for the concept
of 'spread-memory' that derives in Gabor's work in
Holography.

Come to think of it, it's probably why I was so Keen
for Lashley's "Mass Action" and "Equipotentiality".

The 'spread-everywhere-ness' carries-through.

Anyway, all of what's been referred to as "Mathem-
atics" is reduced to TD E/I-minimization within NDT.

So, all of "Mathematics" is rewritten in NDT, all in
a way that's Deterministically-coupled to the one-way
flow of energy, from order to disorder, that is what's
=described= by 2nd Thermo [WDB2T].

It's a =New-'Day'= for Maths.

NDT's stuff makes it Possible for Maths to 'go' where
traditional-Maths dare not 'go' [or where it just
'threw-up-it's-hands'].

I =want= to Demonstrate Truth, inherent.

Cheers, DynaSoar, ken [K. P. Collins]






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list