"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:KFlMd.8773$xR1.7051 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| [...]
I wrote a lengthy continuation of
my prior discussion, but've tossed it.
The artical is just =really= incomplete.
"Memory" is extremely-very-much
more than "synapses", but this article
reduces it all to "synapses".
So, from right-there, it "flies off the
handle".
"Memory" occurs as a function of
the neural Topology, which, with
respect to individual cells, includes
the =entirety= of the =highly= dyn-
amic cellular structure [including
it's glial "surround"].
Reducing "memory" to "synapses"
precludes the dynamicism that is
easily seen to be necessary.
Rather than constituting "memory",
"synapses" function as energy-trans-
ducers that map 3-D energydynam-
ics [TD E/I] into the cellular Topol-
ogy.
Given such energy-mapping, cells
manifest "microscopic trophic mod-
ifications" [AoK, Ap5] that literally
embody the =dynamic= 3-D energy-
dynamics.
I've discussed all of this stuff, re-
iteratively, in long-former posts.
No one read that stuff?
I'm continuing its development in the
"ER-Engram" stuff, and have already
integrated all of the "microtubule" and
"actin filament" stuff.
Which is why reading the "memory-
stickiness" article left me with my jaw-
hanging-down.
My 'heart' is "heavy".
I Ache for Beloved-Neuroscience.
That it is so 'moves away from' itself.
k. p. collins
