SciAm article [was Happy Groundhog Day!]

kenneth collins kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Fri Feb 4 10:45:54 EST 2005


"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message 
news:CQzMd.1851$Th1.937 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| [...]

There is one thing that, if it's True,
will turn out to be extremely-import-
ant with respect to "memory".

It's the way that it's discussed in the
article that "high frequency" activation
that's artificially applied [to hippocamp-
al slices] has to be "separated" by
"pauses" if the "synaptic strengthening"
upon which the author focuses is to
occur.

All this is is an artificial "recreation" of
'the' 3-D energydynamics that are in-
herent in the dynamics of "active-pass-
ive phase shifts" as they've been dis-
cussed in AoK, Ap5 and Ap7, all
along.

When the "high frequency" stimula-
tion is "paused", the 3-D energy-
dynamics of the subject neuron lit-
erally reverse Directionalities.

This 'replicates' the central 3-D en-
ergydynamic of that occurs within
"passive-active phase shifts", and
which, as I discussed in another re-
cent post in the "On Janov's view"
thread, is what instantiates "mem-
ory" consolidation. [In the other
thread, I discussed how this Fact
can literally be used to Direct the
formation of "non-Swiss-cheesy-
memory". I Encourage everyone
to learn the stuff of that discussion.]

So this part of the results that the
author reports is Significant.

Why I didn't make-the-connection
was two-fold.

1. It "pissed-me-off" to read of the
author's emphasis on non-physically-
real 'time'.

and 2. It was only in the other thread
that my attention was focused upon
the =supersystem-wide= dynamics
of active-passive phase shifts with
respect to "memory"-consolidation.

So, from there, as ongoing TD E/I-
minimization occurred within my nerv-
ous system [with an intervening sleep-
ing-consciousness" "database-walk-
ing [see my long-former discussions
with Dag], that I connected this part
of what the author discussed in the
SciAm article with the global dyn-
amics of active-passive phase-shifts.

But the necessity of "pauses" be-
tween "high frequency" artificially-
applied activation definitely, if
crudely, correlates to the naturally-
occurring 3-D energydynamics
"reversals" that =always= occur
within the 3-D energydynamics of
active-passive ["passive-active"]
phase shifts.

Such phase shifts are easily seen
to coincide-directly to =specific=
"information-points" that are of
relatively-high significance -- be-
cause, when the phase shifts oc-
cur, it's =always= because there's
been a significant variation in glo-
bal TD E/I -- and that's =precisely=
the stuff that it's Important to "cap-
ture" within "memory" -- be-cause
it coincides-directly to stuff in the
host organism's experiential external
environment that "countermanded"
the TD E/I-minimization that was
going on when the "supersystem
configurations" that embody phase
shifts occur.

Get it?

"Remembering" that stuff is Important
within long-term TD E/I-minimization
because it coincides with stuff that
"makes a difference", which is exactly
what the phase shifts that are discussed
in AoK physically-embody [as has been
explained in AoK all along].

But the author's emphasis on non-phys-
ically-real 'time' just really "pissed-me-
off".

It's =NOT= 'time', 'dammit' :-]

If one invokes non-physically-real 'time',
to the degree that one does so, one
cannot =See= the energy-gradients
that literally empower nervous system
function -- which leaves 'invisible'
everything that needs to be Seen, if
nervous system function is to be un-
derstood.

In the stuff that I'm addressing, here,
of what the author wrote, saying that
it's "time" says absolutely =NOTHING=,
so why say such?

Why, when 'just' seeing the 3-D energy-
gradients discloses =everything= that
empowers cellular function?

Non-physically-real 'time' is =just= an
Ancient =ERROR= that had been
handed-down, intergenerationally, be-
cause it correlates with groupwise-
'blindly'-automated-TD E/I-minimiza-
tion -- =NOT= anything that actually
has Existence outside of what's mere-
ly become 'familiar' [TD E/I-minimized]
within nervous systems via 'blindly'-
automated intergenerational "repetition".

"Gees 'louise'!"

It's =Simple=.

Invoking non-physically-real 'time' =blocks=
comprehension of nervous system function.

Why do such?

"Dammit" :-]

But, if it is True, the stuff I've discussed in
this post, of that which is discussed in the
SciAm article, is Important, as is discussed
above.

k. p. collins 





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list