>From the follow up post from our group it appears that your question goes
The reason is because no one knows for sure. Different theories suggest
Consider the Correlational Opponent Processing model at http://turn.to/ai
and its connection to oscillons.
Physical oscillons exist in global/local system of brass balls vibrating in
a tray with two speakers emitting sounds at two different frequencies. A
stimulus input of a pencil into the tray will create a oscillon or gaussian
ball of vibrating brass balls that go up into the air then fall into an
inverse gaussian hole. This memory is maintained in the system - a systemic
memory. Sometimes when the pencil is pulled our the oscillon is given
momentum and moves toward the wall. When it hits the wall it reappears
instantly on the otherside of the tray,
a type of warp drive in a systemic memory.
Now lets apply this to your question. Perceptrons are memory units in the
neural system. Perceptrons are local/global. They have momentum.
Therefore relative to a particular action potential probe data for the same
event would generated a variable data range with a value of zero, just as
you have observed.
To observe this effect of positive/negative perceptrons use the spiral
illusion referenced at http://turn.to/ai
or the flag illusion. Since this phenomenon has been observed and reported
for 2300 years. The closes names for these events are Correlational
Opponent Processing, Associational Reciprocal Inhibition, or Adaptive
Resonance Theory (Stephen Grossberg - steve at bu.edu). I prefer Correlational
Opponent Processing because of the outstanding work of Hurvich
(hurvich at aol.com) - "Opponent Processes as a Model of Neural Organization",
and his friend Richard Soloman - "The Opponent-Process Theory of Acquired
Motivation". Karl Pribram's (kpribram at runet.edu) concept of holograms as
memory units is intimately connected. Walter Freeman's
(wfreeman at socrates.berkeley.edu) group report of a standing 30 hertz wave
associated with olfaction is connected.
The question has been raised what relationship exist between resonance's and
We can chemically separate various chemicals by creating a standard
frequency wave around a small glass tube. What we want to receive is
dependant upon the frequency. This would be true for all chemicals, but
some would argue that neurotransmitters do not obey the laws of physics and
would refuse to respond because they did not see it.
What is most likely happening is special standing wave frequencies for
various functions and the vibratory frequency of the neurotransmitter at a
temperature of 98 degrees as an informational overwrite. Naturally,
evolution would preferentially chose different chemicals for the
informational overwrite and the standing wave frequencies. Fundamentally
speaking, the chemicals across various species should be similar and must be
useful for producing two types of wave functions - excitatory and inhibitory
over a wide range of reference temperatures.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Zemunik" <graham at psy.uwa.edu.au>
To: <neur-sci at hgmp.mrc.ac.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 4:39 AM
Subject: variability in recorded action potential amplitudes
>> I'm presently doing computer modelling of neurons etc (ie I don't do
> any recording from neurons) and there's a phenomenon that I can't seem
> to find a good answer for.
>> I have many papers in which there are figures of intracellularly
> recorded responses from neurons. The amplitudes of the
> action potentials seem to vary quite widely from one figure to the next
> (even when recorded from similar preparations/animals, under the same
> conditions). For example, one figure may have amplitudes of say 20mV and
>> another of 60mV.
>> From computer simulations of neurons it seems that all viable action
> potentials tend to reach at least 0mV, with some going quite close to
> the sodium reversal potential (say 45mV) - this equates to amplitudes
> approx 70mV-110mV. Note, I'm not talking here about the action
> potentials in phasic bursts (which can be of smaller amplitude), just an
>> ordinary spike here and there. Also I'm talking about neurons that
> definitely do have channels with high reversal potentials (Na and Ca).
>> The question is: what is the cause of this variabilty in the recordings
> published in the literature? Is is due to limitations in the recording
> technology? or perhaps (and more importantly) differences in the density
>> of ion channels throughout the neuron arborisation (hence recordings
> from areas of lower density producing lower amplitudes)?
>> Many thanks,
> Graham Zemunik