every ionic-conductance is a vector.
and the only 'coding' stuff that it's possible to describe consists in
describing the ionic-conductance vectors in 3-D.
because that's the substrate for all activation-dependent stuff... all
microscopic trophic modifications. [in AoK, 'biological mass'.]
it doesn't do to 'average' vectors, because, in doing so, one 'throws-out'
the impetus in which microscopic structure derives.
in other words, in taking 'averages', one 'throws-out' all 'coding'.
the same is True for 'timing'.
one 'throws-out' all 'coding' if one does not describe the 3-D correlations
of the criteria that are 'timed'.
A -> B is different from B -> A, and simply stating a 'time' that's related
to A and B doesn't maintain that difference.
to maintain the difference, the discussion must integrate the 3-D neural
within 'the nervous system', 'coding' is a 3-D thing.
sans 3-D there's no possibility of describing [or discussing] 'coding.
i wish not to be a 'curmudgeon' , and i hope you'll not be 'offended' that
i've responded to your post.
my responses are actually 'addressed' to all of Neuroscience [all of
it's just so frustrating that no one will allow me to discuss this stuff
[and the rest] at a chalkboard, where it merits discussion.
i'm Grateful for the opportunity to discuss because of your post.
ken [K. P. Collins]