On The Engram

kenneth collins kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Wed Jan 19 01:47:42 EST 2005


"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message 
news:EjiHd.566$8u5.405 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| [...]

Anyway, what I'm working to explicate
in this ER-Engram discussion is the way
that "information" is stored, cross-correl-
ated, and retrieved within nervous sys-
tems.

There just isn't any "data" in any sense
that's analogous to the way that "data"
are incorporated within Computers'
data-processing dynamics -- no "bits",
no "bytes", no "words", no etc.

What nervous systems do, at all scales,
is literally grow-toward TD E/I-minimi-
zation.

This growth determines the 'states' of
TD E/I-minimization that will, subse-
quently, be converged upon within all
of the various external motor-side "in-
terfaces" that are driven so as to mani-
fest "behavior".

These motor-side external "interfaces"
include the body's musculature in am-
bulatory behavior [which, itself, rout-
inely 'moves toward' environmentally-
embodied TD E/I-minimization oppor-
tunities], forelimb behaviro [which, it-
self, routinely 'moves toward' envir-
onmnetally-embodied TD E/I-minimi-
zation opportunities, whether they be
'moving toward' expressing an idea
in writing by "dancing" one's hands
and fingers upon one's keyboard [it's
the =idea= that's being 'moved toward',
not anything on the keyboard [although
us "hunt-and-peckers" do some 'mov-
ing toward' individual keys], or [con-
tinuing] one's activating one's forelimb
musculature so that one's finger tips
explore the 3-D structure of an ob-
ject that one has picked up in one's
hands, or writing with pen, pencil,
chaulk, etc., or, if you're up to bat in
the World Series, swinging the bat so
that it knocks the ball out of the park,
and so on.

When one speaks "language", one's
speech-driving musculature [jaw,
tongue, larynx, diaphram] all just
'moves toward' TD E/I-minimization
with respect to manifesting the se-
quence of words that connote the
'state' of TD E/I-minimization that
has been converged upon within
your nervous system as a whole,
with "inflection" that also encodes
'the instantaneous state' of TD E/I,
and with awesome embedded hier-
archical prioritization that'll pass-
through the warnings correlated
to sensory-side "startle" events, or
interrupt a conversation to cheer
the home run at the World Series
game you're attending with your
friend, etc. [myriad such prioritiz-
ations].

And when one expresses "emotion",
all that is is a behavioral interface that
literally communicates one's intern-
al 'state' of TD E/I. "Affect" is lit-
erally a bi-directional communications
interface that gives both one's self and
any with whom one is interacting a
behaviorally-manifested "picture" of
one's 'momentary state' of TD E/I.
[That is, what's been referred to as
"emotion" is =not= "fundamental" to
nervous system function but is a rel-
atively-high-level communications in-
terface that exists =solely= to "put
a subjective face on" internally-oc-
curring TD E/I. What =is= funda-
mental is TD E/I. But TD E/I is the
internal "language" of nervous sys-
tems, and nervous systems cannot
do the "Vulcan mine meld", so they
do "emotions" in order to commun-
icate there internal 'states' of TD E/I
amongst one another.]

=All= motor-side effector activations
'move toward' TD E/I-minimization
with respect to environmentally-em-
bodied stuff, which is not intuitively-
obvious until the functioning of the
mechanism of volition [AoK, Ap7]
is integrated -- highest-'level', longest-
term TD E/I-minimization.

All of the above stuff, including the
point with respect to the non-existence
of "data" [in the Computer sense] with-
in nervous systems, has been in AoK
all along. I'm just going over it, here,
trying to say it in a different way by
sharing my ER-Engram hypothesis,
which has some advantages in ren-
dering some "subtle" stuff visible.

It's in the ER-Engram hypothesis that
the 3-D conformation of the ER varies
as a function of TD E/I-minimization-
correlated ionic conductances that
occur in the vicinity of a cell's ER. If
this hypothesis is sustained, the ER dyn-
amics will literally constitute a 3-D im-
age of "the engram", and how it's "ad-
dressed".

But that will never be, in any way,
shape, or form, analogous to the way
that Computers store, retrieve and ad-
dress data -- which is always via "rank"
within some numerical spectrum.

Nervous system "memory" dynamics
are just not bounded in any analogous
way.

Instead, as long as TD E/I-minimization
occurs relatively-robustly [pre senesence]
within nervous systems, cellular [neuronal
and glial] processes just grow toward
['move toward'] TD E/I-minimization. It's
unbounded [bounded only by the approach
of death -- the break-down of nervous
systems' functional integrities.]

What gives nervous systems these extra-
ordinary information-processing capa-
bilities is that everything is "addressed
via infinitely-divisible "Coulomb forces",
at the sub-ionic 'level'.

That's how the ~Googleplex is Com-
puted in real-'time', in every 'instant' -- 
the positions of =every= ion are Com-
puted via the infinitely-divisible "Coulomb
forces" that, themselves, flow with the
myriad ionic conductances that are part-
and-parcel of every neuron and glia cell's
innate functionalities -- all rigorously-or-
dered to do exactly =one= thing: achieve
TD E/I-minimization at all scales.

And these boundless 'moving toward' dyn-
amics are all, subsequently, "addressed"
via 'just' more TD E/I-minimization, during
which still-further growth can occur which
enables the global system to better con-
verge upon problem-solving precision.

So, when a stimulus set comes into the
nervous system, the nervous system in-
nately "knows" what to do in response
to it -- achieve TD E/I-minimization. And
nervous systems are able to "know", and
evaluate, their own performances by
monitoring the degree to which TD E/I-
minimization is, in fact, achieved within
them.

And, to stave-off "retribution" for 'in-
adequate' or 'tardy' TD E/I-minimiza-
tion, nervous systems literally communi-
cate their internal 'states' of TD E/I via
"affective" behavioral manifestations that
enable other nervous systems to converge
upon 'replicas' of the first nervous system's
'state' of TD E/I, bu achieving TD E/I-min-
imization within themselves, using the first
nervous system's "affective" communica-
tion as "template" for convergence upon
TD E/I(min).

No "bits", no "bytes", no "words", no
numerical addresses, no stored data,
no Turing machines, no von Neumann
architecture, no digital processing.

There's i/o, but sans any of the above.

The neural Topology literally conforms
itself to TD E/I-minimization as the latter
occurs within it. The resultant neural-to-
pological 'state' literally configures the
nervous system so that it "addresses"
from input, through "association", to
output -- via 'temporarily' literally con-
forming itself to the 'state' of TD E/I-
minimization that has been converged-
upon.

If what's here is insufficient, please
"buzz" me.

Anyway, I'd appreciate it that, if anyone
obtains any preliminary results in their
labs with respect to the ER-Engram
hypothesis, they let me know, one way
or the other, what those results are.

[My "signature" was left off of my pre-
ceding two msgs because I wrote a
newsreader "signature", but didn't set
the switches to activate it properly.
Consider them "Signed".]

k. p. collins






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list