Connect with us

Are CNS electric signals AC or DC?

Discussion in 'Electronic Basics' started by Radium, May 11, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Hi:

    Are the electrical currents generated and used by the nervous system
    AC or DC? Some sources say DC [like the book "The Body Electric" by
    Robert Becker & Gary Selden]; however, the changes in polarity of
    those neuroelectric signals would seem to me like they are AC
    currents. If an electric current is DC, its polarity does not reverse.

    http://www.amazon.com/Body-Electric-Electromagnetism-Foundation-Life/dp/0688069711


    Thanks,

    Radium
     
  2. Benj

    Benj Guest

    Actually they are both although when one says "AC" one thinks of pure
    sinewave alternating current as in a wall plug. Think about it. A body
    consists of chemicals and water in which is dissolved salts. This
    means you have the necessary conditions for the construction of a
    battery. Cell walls form one of the most common and widespread
    batteries in the body. Nervous signals, on the other hand, are
    transmitted by "action potentials". These are pulses which may or may
    not be bipolar, but that is of no consequence since any pulse can be
    Fourier decomposed into various frequencies and a DC term. Thus
    nervous signals tend to have a lot of "AC" in them although some such
    as brain waves are more "AC" than some others (such as from the
    heart...though the baseline can shift on those just depending on where
    you attach electrodes. There are also some electromagnetic signals as
    well and those generally tend to be classified as "AC".
     
  3. You might put the same question concerning computers. No reasonable
    expert would say computers work with AC. Also, the idea of Fourier
    decomposition would sound rather silly if you try to describe the
    function of a computer. There are still huge differences between
    nowadays computers and the brain. However, computers tend to use lower
    voltage and more operations per second. Future computers will perhaps
    come closer to the sub 100 mV range of voltage in brain, and will have
    more parallel and failure tolerant structures. I do not hope for quantum
    computers because putatively achieved entanglement might be a mistake.
    Batteries always provide DC voltage, not AC voltage. This is even true
    for the battery with the highest voltage within our body being located
    within striae vascularis within the organ of Corti. Basilar membrane and
    outer hair cells act like an amplifier of alternating mechanical
    amplitude. Already the inner hair cells are then performing a subsequent
    one-way rectification.

    Eckard Blumschein
    ovgu.de
     
  4. Chuck

    Chuck Guest

    As Benj pointed out, the currents may
    contain both AC and DC.

    It is surprising that Becker and Selden
    say the currents are DC.

    Changing polarity is one way to
    distinguish AC from DC but it is not
    always useful.

    A more common notion in electronics is
    that if a voltage varies in some way
    with time, it contains one or more AC
    components. These components are often
    of major interest to investigators, as
    in EEG and EKG analyses.

    Chuck
     
  5. bill

    bill Guest

    Are the electrical currents generated and used by the nervous system
    Signalling traffic is not generally considered to break into dc
    or ac, rather into analog or digital. AC and DC are modes of energy
    transmission, whereas the signals in the CNS are information
    carriers.
     
  6. Puppet_Sock

    Puppet_Sock Guest

    The categories analog and digital don't fit very well either.

    The nervous system is an evolved system. It has some
    features that are elegant and wonderful. It has other
    features that are gross kludges that have only been
    retained because there is nothing better that is only
    a little bit different.

    In some cases, electrical behaviour of the nervous
    system has a digital character about it. It's "on" or
    it's "off." But in other cases, it depends on the strength
    of the signal.
    Socks
     
  7. Don Bowey

    Don Bowey Guest

    On 5/10/07 10:29 PM, in article
    , "Radium"

    (snip)
    It most certainly can reverse; it is called a bipolar signal and it has wide
    use in electronics.
     
  8. Guest

    The first thing you have to decide is if you are doing a steady state
    analysis or a transient analysis.

    In a steady state analysis, if the signal is changing it is AC and
    if the signal is constant it is DC.

    Therefor something like a digital data stream or the signals from
    the nervous system are AC signals with a DC component in the steady
    state.

    In a transient analysis, DC and AC only make sense in the initial
    state.

    The initial state of lightning is before the air breaks down and
    the arc forms. At that point you have DC.

    As the arc forms, everything goes to the transient state and AC/DC
    no longer has any meaning.
     
  9. Uncle Al

    Uncle Al Guest

    Any pulse shape resolves into a Fourier series of AC inputs.

    Idiot.
     
  10. Bob Myers

    Bob Myers Guest

    As with most of Radium's posts here, the question itself
    is essentially meaningless, or at least implies a far, far too
    simplistic a model of the actual system to permit any sort
    of simple and yet meaningful answer.

    Part of the problem here, at least, is that the "signal" in
    question isn't exactly, especially at the macro level, an
    "electric current" in anything like the conventional sense
    of the term.

    Bob M.
     
  11. Benjamin

    Benjamin Guest

    | On 5/11/2007 7:55 AM, Benj wrote:
    | > [...]
    | >> [...]
    | [...]
    | [...]

    | There are still huge differences between
    | nowadays computers and the brain.

    Yes.

    | However, computers tend to use lower
    | voltage and more operations per second.
    | [...]

    One point of 'contention':

    Since every 'ion' and 'atom' in 'the' nervous
    system acts as a continuous source of
    "operation", the "number of operations'
    that're occurring continuously 'within' a
    nervous system is uncountably-greater
    than the number of "operations" that oc-
    cur within any "clocked" system [e.g. all
    "computers".]

    As you implied in the first statement of
    yours that I've quoted above, there exists
    no actual means of comparing "brains"
    and "computers" -- they're just completely-
    different physical systems.

    Nervous systems are to computers as
    computers are to counting-on-the-fingers-
    of-one-hand, only literally infinitely-moreso
    be-cause nervous systems function every-
    where-continuously -- everything in nervous
    systems is continuously-occurring -- there
    exist no "dividing lines" 'within' nervous
    system function -- and, importantly, these
    continuous in-formation-processing
    dynamics are continuously-coupled to
    the external-experiential environmnets
    in which nervous systems' host organ-
    isms exist.

    With respect to the "AC"-"DC" Q, it's
    moot -- the overall continuity is 'DC',
    but there're myriad Directed-thresholding
    dynamics that are, in effect, 'AC', all of
    both 'components' varying in their local
    energy-gradients and the 'apparant-time'
    during which energy-gradients 'flow'
    'within' nervous systems.

    A nervous system can work on a problem
    for 'decades', during which the 'current'
    underpinning the problem's existence
    'within' a nervous system is =both= 'DC'
    and 'AC' [usually a moontonically-increas-
    ing 'DC' that's overlaid by a very-dynamic
    'AC' with the monotonically-increasing 'DC'
    periodically 'converting' to a nonlinearly-
    increasing 'DC' [when 'promising-prob-
    lem-resolution-paths' are detected], in
    the end [if Resolution ever occurs], 'con-
    verting' to a monotonically-decreasing
    'DC', with the overlaying 'AC' occurring
    =throughout=.]

    Nervous systems "Know" on the basis
    of these currents' relative-correlation to
    the one-way flow of energy, from order
    to disorder, that is what's =described=
    by 2nd Thermo [WDB2T], which is, it-
    self, exactly like the 'DC'-'AC' stuff I dis-
    cussed in the preceding paragraph, ex-
    cept that, =overall=, it is always-mono-
    tonically-increasing -- which is how and
    why "Knowing" is Possible with respect
    to Truth.

    Relatively-local WDB2T-variances cor-
    relate to local-divergences from Truth.

    k. p. collins
     
  12. Benjamin

    Benjamin Guest

    | [...]

    | The nervous system is an evolved system. It has some
    | features that are elegant and wonderful. It has other
    | features that are gross kludges that have only been
    | retained because there is nothing better that is only
    | a little bit different.
    | [...]

    Please offer an example of a "gross kludge" 'in nervous
    systems'.

    k. p. collins
     
  13. Rich Grise

    Rich Grise Guest

    Misspelling "clooge" such that it rhymes with "sludge".

    Cheers!
    Rich
     
  14. Bob Myers

    Bob Myers Guest

    Well, let's see - there was the French method, developed
    during their Revolution, to add an "off" switch....;-)

    Bob M.
     
  15. Benjamin

    Benjamin Guest

    | On Fri, 11 May 2007 18:46:06 +0000, Benjamin wrote:
    | > | [...]
    | >
    | > | The nervous system is an evolved system. It has some
    | > | features that are elegant and wonderful. It has other
    | > | features that are gross kludges that have only been
    | > | retained because there is nothing better that is only
    | > | a little bit different.
    | > | [...]
    | >
    | > Please offer an example of a "gross kludge" 'in nervous
    | > systems'.
    | >
    |
    | Misspelling "clooge" such that it rhymes with "sludge".

    It's 'in' nervous system function, but only
    as a consequence of erroneous-program-
    ming.

    Big-Difference.

    k. p. collins
     
  16. Benjamin

    Benjamin Guest

    |
    | | > | > | [...]
    | >
    | > | The nervous system is an evolved system. It has some
    | > | features that are elegant and wonderful. It has other
    | > | features that are gross kludges that have only been
    | > | retained because there is nothing better that is only
    | > | a little bit different.
    | > | [...]
    | >
    | > Please offer an example of a "gross kludge" 'in nervous
    | > systems'.
    |
    | Well, let's see - there was the French method, developed
    | during their Revolution, to add an "off" switch....;-)

    It's 'in' nervous system function, but only
    as a consequence of erroneous-program-
    ming.

    Big-Difference.

    k. p. collins
     
  17. Pegs

    Pegs Guest

    Dr. Becker is referring to Analog and Digital control system.
    The Digital being the known Action Potentials and the Analog
    something about direct currents in the body and semiconducting.
    The following are direct excerpts from his works that describes his
    experiments and discovery and how he proved it is current and not ions
    using some Hall effect tests. Comments welcomed.

    Dr. Becker shared his findings in the book "The Body Electric":

    "Reasoning that all cells had transmembrane
    potentials, Bernstein maintained that, after injury,
    the damaged ceil membranes simply leaked their ions out
    into the environment. Thus the current of injury was no
    longer a sign that electricity was central to life, but
    only an uninteresting side effect of cell damage. "

    <snip>

    "In all the time that the Bernstein hypothesis had been
    used to explain away the current of injury, no one had
    ever thought to measure the current over a period of
    days to see how long it lasted. If it was only ions
    leaking from damaged cells, it should disappear in a
    day or two, when these cells had finished dying or
    repairing themselves. This simple measurement, with a
    comparison of the currents in regenerating versus
    non-regenerating limbs, was what I planned to do. I
    would uniformly amputate the foreleg s of frogs and
    salamanders. Then, as the frogs' stumps healed over and
    the salamanders' legs regrew, I would measure the
    currents of injury each day."
    <snip>

    "First I found a good supplier of salamanders and
    frogs, a Tennessee game warden who ran this business in
    his spare time. Sometimes the shipment would contain a
    surprise, a small snake. I never found out whether he
    included them deliberately or by error. At any rate,
    his animals weren't the inferior aquarium-bred stock
    but robust specimens collected from their natural
    habitats. Next I worked out some technical problems.
    The most important of these was the question of where
    to place the electrodes. To form the circuit, two
    electrodes had to touch the animal. One was the "hot"
    or measuring electrode, which determined the polarity,
    positive or negative, with regard to a stationary
    reference electrode. A negative polarity meant there
    were more electrons where the measuring electrode was
    placed, while a positive polarity meant there were more
    at the reference site. A steady preponderance of
    negative charge at a particular location could mean
    there was a current flowing toward tha t spot,
    continually replenishing th e accumulation of
    electrons. The placement of the reference electrode,
    therefore, was critical, lest I get the voltage right
    but the polarity, and hence the direction of the
    current, wrong. Some logical position had to be chosen
    and used every time. Since I postulated that the nerves
    were somehow related to the current, the cell bodies
    that sent their nerve fibers into the limb seemed like
    a good reference point. These cell bodies were in a
    section of the spinal cord called the b rachial
    enlargement, located just headward from where the arm
    joined the body. In both frogs and salamanders,
    therefore, I put the measuring electrode directly on
    the cut surface of the amputation stump and the
    reference electrode on the skin over the brachial
    enlargement. After setting up the equipment, I did some
    preliminary measure ments on the intact animals. They
    all had areas of positive charge at the brachial
    enlargement and a negative charge of about 8 to 10
    millivolts at each extremity, suggesting a flow of
    electrons from the head and trunk out into the limbs
    and, in the salamanders, the tail. I began the actual
    experiment by amputating the right forelimbs, between
    elbow and wrist, from fourteen salamanders and fourteen
    grass frogs, all under anesthesia. I took no special
    precautions against bleeding, since blood clots formed
    very rapidly. The wounds had to be left open, not only
    because closing the skin over the salamanders'
    amputation sites would have stopped regeneration, but
    also because I was investigating a natural proces s.
    In the wild, both frogs and salamanders get injuries
    much like the one I was producing-both are favorite
    foods of the freshwater bass-and heal them without a
    surgeon. Once the anesthetic wore off and the blood
    clot formed, I took a voltage reading from each stump.
    I was surprised to find that the polar ity at the crump
    reversed to positive right after the injury. By the
    next day it had climbed to over 20 millivolts, the same
    in both frogs and salamanders .

    I made measurements daily, expecting to see the
    salamander voltages climb above those of the frogs as
    the blastemas formed. It didn't work that way. The
    force of the current flowing from the salamanders'
    amputation sites rapidly dropped, while that from the
    frogs' stumps stayed at the original level. By the
    third day the salamanders showed no current at all, and
    their blastemas hadn't even begun to appear. The
    experiment seemed a failure. I almost quit right there,
    but some thing made me keep on measuring.

    I guess I thought it would be good practice. Then,
    between the sixth and tenth days an exciting trend
    emerged. The salamander potentials changed their sign
    again, exceeding their normal voltage and reaching a
    peak of more than 30 millivolts negative just when the
    blastemas were emerging. The frogs were still plugging
    away with slowly declining positive voltages. As the
    salamander limbs regenerated and the frog stumps healed
    over with skin and scar tissue, both groups of limbs
    gradually returned (from opposi te directions) to the
    baseline of 10 millivolts negative.

    Here was confirmation better than my wildest dreams!
    Already, in my first experiment, I had the best payoff
    research can give-the excitement of seeing something no
    one else seen before. I knew now that the current of
    injury wasn't due to dying cells, which were long gone
    by then. Moreover, the opposite polarities indicated a
    profound difference in the electrical properties of the
    two animals, which somehow would explain why only the
    salamander could regenerate. The negative potential
    seemed to bring forth the all-important blastema."

    <snip>

    "The first order of business was to repeat Burr's
    measurements on salamanders, using modern equipment. I
    put the reference electrode at the tip of each animal's
    nose and moved the recording electrode point by point
    along the center of the body to the tip of the tail,
    and then out along each limb. I measured voltages on
    the rest of the body and plotted lines of force
    connecting all the points where the readings were the
    same. Instead of Burr's simple head-negative and
    tail-positive form, I found a complex field that
    followed the arrangement of the nervous system. There
    were large positive potentials over each lobe of the
    brain, and slightly smaller ones over the brachial and
    lumbar nerve ganglia between each pair of limbs. The
    readings grew increasingly negative as I moved away
    from these collections of nerve cell bodies; the hands,
    feet, and tip of the tail had the highest negative
    potentials. In another series of measurements, I
    watched the potentials develop along with the nervous
    system in larval salamander s. In the adults, cutting
    the nerves where they entered the legs-that is,
    severing the long nerve fibers from their cell bodies
    in the spinal cord-wiped out the limb potentials almost
    entirely. But if I cut the spinal cord, leaving the
    peripheral nerves connected to their cell bodies, the
    limb potentials didn't change. It certainly looked as
    though there was a current being generated in the nerve
    cell bodies and traveling down the fibers. To have a
    current flow you need a circuit ; the current has to be
    ma de at one spot, pass through a conductor, and
    eventually get back to the generator. We tend to forget
    that the 60-cycle alternating current in the wall
    socket isn't used up when we turn on a light but is
    merely coursing through it to the ground, through which
    it eventually returns to the power station. Since my
    measurements were positive over collections of nerve
    cell bodies, and increasingly negative out along the
    nerve fibers, it seemed a good bet that current was
    being generated in the cell bodies, espec ially since
    they contained all of the "good stuff"-the nucleus,
    organelles, and metabolic components-while the fibers
    were relatively uninteresting prolongations of the
    body. At the time, I supposed the circuit was completed
    by current going back toward the spine through the
    muscles. This was a good start, but it wasn't
    scientifically acceptable proof. For one thing, my
    guess about the return part of the circuit was soon
    dis- proved when I measured the limb muscles and found
    them polarized in the same direc tion as the surface
    potentials. For another thing, it had recently been
    discovered that amphibian skin itself was polarized,
    inside versus outside, by ion differences much like the
    nerve membrane's rest- ing potential, so it was just
    barely possible that my readings had been caused by
    ionic discharges through the moist skin. If so, my
    evidence was literally all wet. Much of the uncertainty
    was due to the fact that I was measuring the outside of
    the animal and assuming that g enerators and conductors
    inside w ere making the pattern I found. I needed a way
    to relate inner currents to outer potentials. This was
    before transistors had entirely replaced vacuum tubes.
    A tube's characteristics depended on the structure of
    the electric field inside it, but to calculate the
    field parameters in advance without computers was a
    laborious task, so radio engineers often made an analog
    model. They built a large mock-up of the tube, filled
    with a conducting solution. When current was applied to
    the model, the field could be mapped by measuring the
    voltage at various points in the solution. I decided to
    build a model salamander. I made an analog of the
    creature's nervous system out of copper wires. For the
    brain and nerve ganglia I used blobs of solder. Each
    junction was thus a voltaic battery of two different
    metals, copper and the lead-tin alloy of which the
    solder was made. Then I simply sandwiched this "nervous
    system" between two pieces of sponge rubber cut in the
    shape of a salamander, and so aked the model in a salt
    solut ion to approximate body fluids and serve as the
    electrolyte, the conducting solution that would enable
    the two metals to function as a battery. It worked. The
    readings were almost exactly the same as in the real
    salamander. This showed that a direct current inside
    could produce the potentials I was getting on the
    outside. If my proposed system was really a primitive
    part of the nervous system, it should be widely
    distributed, so next I surveyed the whole animal
    kingdom. I tested flatworms, earthworm s, fis h,
    amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and humans. In each
    species the potentials on the skin reflected the
    arrangement of the nervous system. In the worms and
    fish, there was only one area of positive potential,
    just as there was only one major nerve ganglion, the
    brain. In humans the entire head and spinal region,
    with its massive concentration of neurons, was strongly
    positive. The three specific areas of greatest positive
    potential were the same as in the salaman der: the
    brain, the brachial plexus between th e shoulder
    blades, and the lumbar enlargement at the base of the
    spinal cord. In all vertebrates I also recorded a
    midline head potential that suggested a direct current
    like that postulated by Gerard, flowing from back to
    front through the middle of the brain. It looked as
    though the current came from the reticular activating
    system, a network of crosslinked neurons that fanned
    out from the brainstem into higher centers and seemed
    to control the level of sleep or wakef ulness and the
    focus of attention.

    At the same time, to see whether the current of injury
    and the surface potentials came from the same source, I
    made electrical measurements on salamander limbs as
    they healed fractures. (As mentioned in Chapter 1, bone
    healing is the only kind of true regeneration common to
    all vertebrates.) The limb currents behaved like those
    accompanying re- growth. A positive zone immediately
    formed around the break, although the rest of the limb
    retained at least part of its negative potential. Then,
    between the fifth and tenth days, the positive zone
    reversed its potential and became more strongly
    negative than the rest of the limb as the fracture
    began to heal. Next I decided to follow up Burge's
    experiments of two decades before. I would produce
    various changes in the state of the nervous system and
    look for concomitant changes in the electrical
    measurements. To do this right I really needed a few
    thousand dollars for an apparatus that could take
    readings from several electrodes simultaneously an d
    record them side by side on a chart. My chances of
    getting this money seemed slim unless I could publish
    another paper fast. I decided to use the equipment I
    had for a simple measurement during one of the most
    pro-found changes in consciousness-anesthesia. Burge
    was right. The electrical responses were dramatic and
    in-controvertible. As each animal went under, its
    peripheral voltages dropped to zero, and in very deep
    anesthesia they reversed to some extent, the limbs and
    tail going positive. They reverted to normal just b
    efore the animal woke up. I had enough for a short
    paper, and I decided to try a journal on medical
    electronics recently started by the Institute of Radio
    Engineers. Although most of what they printed was safe
    and unremarkable, I'd found that engineers were often
    more open-minded than biologists, so I went for broke;
    I put in the whole hypothesis-analog nervous system,
    semiconducting currents, healing control, the works.
    The editor loved it and sent me an enthusiastic letter
    of acceptance, along with sugges tions for further
    research. Best of all, I soon got another small grant
    approved and bought my multi-electrode chart recorder.
    Soon I had confirmed my anesthesia findings, and with
    the whole-body monitoring setup I also was able to
    correlate the entire pattern of surface voltages with
    the animal's level of activity while not anesthetized.
    Negative potentials in the brain's frontal area and at
    the periphery of the nervous system were associated
    with wakefulness, sensory stimu li, and muscle
    movements. The more activity, the greater the negative
    potentials were. A shift toward the positive occured
    during rest and even more so during sleep.

    In my reading on solid-state electronics I found
    another way I could test for current in the salamander.
    Luckily it was cheap and easy; I could do it without
    buying more equipment. Best of all, it should work only
    if the current was semiconducting. Suppose you think
    you have a current flowing through some conductor-a
    salamander's limb, for instance. You put it in a strong
    magnetic field so that the lines of force cut across
    the conductor at right angles. Then you place another
    conductor, containing no current, perpendicular to
    both the original conductor (the limb) and the magnetic
    field. If there is a current in whatever you're
    testing, some of the charge carriers will be deflected
    by the magnetic field into the other conductor,
    producing a voltage that you can measure. This is
    called the Hall voltage, after the gentleman who
    discovered it. The beauty of it is that it works
    differently for the three kinds of current. For any
    given strength of magnetic field, the Hall voltage is
    proportional to the mobility of the charge carriers.
    Ions in a solution are relatively big and barely
    deflected by the field. Electrons in a wire are
    constrained by the nature of the metal. In both cases
    the Hall voltage is small and hard to detect. Electrons
    in semiconductors are very free to move, however, and
    produce Hall voltages with much weaker fields. After
    finding a C-shaped permanent magnet, an item not much
    in demand since the advent of electromagnets, I set up
    the equipment. I took a deep breath as I placed the
    first anesthetized salamander on its plastic support,
    with one foreleg extended. I'd placed electrodes so
    that they touched the limb lightly, one on each side,
    and I'd mounted the magnet so as to swing in with its
    poles above and below the limb, close to yet not
    touching it. I took voltage measurements every few
    minutes, with the magnet and without it, as the animal
    regained consciousness. I also measured the DC voltage
    from the tips of the fingers to the spinal cord. In
    deep anesthesia, the DC voltage along the limb wa s
    zero and so was the Hall voltage. As the anesthetic
    wore off, the normal potential along the limb gradually
    appeared, and so did a beautiful Hall voltage. It
    increased right along with the limb potential, until
    the animal recovered completely and walked away from
    the apparatus. The test worked every time, but I don't
    think I'll ever forget the thrill of watching the pen
    on the recorder trace out the first of those Hall
    voltages

    This experiment demonstrated unequivocally that there
    was a real electric current flowing along the
    salamander's foreleg, and it virtually proved that the
    current was semiconducting. In fact, the half-dozen
    tests I'd performed supported every point of my
    hypothesis.

    Scientific results that aren't reported might as well
    not exist. They're like the sound of one hand clapping.
    For scientists, communication isn't only a
    responsibility, it's our chief pleasure. A good result
    from a clean, beautiful experiment is a joy that you
    just have to share, and I couldn't wait to see these
    data in print. I went for the top this time. The
    journal in American science is aptly named Science.
    Each issue reports on all fields from astronomy to
    zoology, so publication means a paper has more than a
    specialized significance. Mine was accepted, and I was
    jubilant."
     
  18. Benj

    Benj Guest

    Actually, "information" related to WDB2T-variances and "truth" are two
    different quantities, but that is another issue.

    Benj
    (Who isn't Benjamin)
     
  19. Benjamin

    Benjamin Guest

    |
    | | > | > | [...]
    | >
    | > | The nervous system is an evolved system. It has some
    | > | features that are elegant and wonderful. It has other
    | > | features that are gross kludges that have only been
    | > | retained because there is nothing better that is only
    | > | a little bit different.
    | > | [...]
    | >
    | > Please offer an example of a "gross kludge" 'in nervous
    | > systems'.
    |
    | Well, let's see - there was the French method, developed
    | during their Revolution, to add an "off" switch....;-)
    |
    | Bob M.

    BTW, I've long experience being on the
    receiving-end of one-bit kill-switches.

    Never in History has their 'use' been
    so-rampant as here in This Nation
    that I Love.

    k. p. collins
     
  20. Benjamin

    Benjamin Guest

    |
    | Benjamin wrote:
    |
    | > Relatively-local WDB2T-variances cor-
    | > relate to local-divergences from Truth.
    | >
    | > k. p. collins
    |
    | Actually, "information" related to WDB2T-
    | variances and "truth" are two different
    | quantities, but that is another issue.
    |
    | Benj
    | (Who isn't Benjamin)

    Nervous systems converge-upon 'mo-
    tion' by calculating the anti-WDB2T
    Direction.

    In so doing, to the degree that they do
    so, nervous systems 'move toward'
    Truth -- be-cause WDB2T permeates
    physical reality in an everywhere-con-
    sistent way, so, get-that-straight, and
    one simultaneously 'Knows' Truth as
    it occurs within physical reality.

    I Proved it 'decades' ago.

    I've been discussing what's entailed
    for 15+ 'years' here in b.n -- there're
    "details" that I don't routinely reiterate
    because I write for folks who've been
    reading all along [even when I'm cross-
    posted to NGs other than b.n.

    Seems [to me] that folks're getting-it.

    k. p. collins
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-