From: Joel Peter William Pitt (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jan 18 2006 - 15:34:29 MST
On 1/16/06, fudley <email@example.com> wrote:
> I'm not interested in chemicals only the information they contain, I
> want the information to get transmitted from cell to cell by best method
> and few would send smoke signals if they had a fiber optic cable. The
> information content in each molecular message must be tiny, just a few
> bits because only about 60 neurotransmitters such as acetylcholine,
> norepinephrine and GABA are known, even if the true number is 100 times
> greater (or a million times for that matter) the information content of
> each signal must be minute. Also, for the long range stuff, exactly
> which neuron receives the signal can not be specified because it relies
> on a random process, diffusion. The fact that it's slow as molasses in
> February does not add to its charm.
> If your job is delivering packages and all the packages are very small
> and your boss doesn't care who you give them to as long as it's on the
> correct continent and you have until the next ice age to get the work
> done, then you don't have a very difficult profession. I see no reason
> why simulating that anachronism would present the slightest difficulty.
> Artificial neurons could
> be made to release neurotransmitters as inefficiently as natural ones if
> anybody really wanted to, but it would be pointless when there are much
> faster ways.
I wouldn't discount the influence that spatial and temporal patterning
of neurotransmitters within the brain could have on the creation of
The whole reaction-diffusion process might be necessary to relate
temporal events and since it is non-reversible may contribute to our
perception of time.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT