X-Message-Number: 3913 Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 21:09:08 -0800 From: John K Clark <> Subject: SCI.CRYONICS Uploading -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In #3904 "Keith F. Lynch" <> Wrote: >> Free electrons can not exist in an aqueous solution, >Right. >> especially one that has a lot of chlorine in it as neurons >>do. A chlorine atom would grab a free electron and >>become an Cl- ion >No. All of the chlorine is already in the form of chloride ions. No its not. There are lots of different chlorine compounds in a cell, I haven't counted them but it must be in the thousands . A chlorine atom in almost any molecule would love to grab hold of a homeless electron and become a chlorine ion. There was really no need for me to mention chlorine though, because as you say, free electrons can't exist even in pure distilled water. Water is both an acid and a base and can ionize itself so you always have (H3O)+ and (OH)- ions around. In #3905 (Eli Brandt) Wrote: >Brian Zimov(?) said, "if the simplest part of the brain is an >N-state device..." You said, "then it's a bunch of binary >devices." To shift gears and say that the hypothetical is >false does not address the issue. To say that the SIMPLEST part of the mind can change in N ways and N >2 is much worse than false, it's self contradictory, so I can't address the issue. If 2 + 2 =5 then how much is 5 +5 ? >>recently however suspicion has mounted that certain >>neurons may have active transmission even in their >>dendrites because passive transmission is just too >>slow for some things. >Oh. What's the prevalence of these "certain neurons"? Where >can I read about this work? See " The Astonishing Hypothesis" by Francis Crick page 96 and 97. One relevant quote: "It is now suspected that some neurons have active processes in their dendrites (as axons have), but they are probably not exactly the same as those found on axons." I found another interesting quote in James Watson's " Molecular Biology Of The Cell" page 1030: "Axons, though are much worse conductors than electric cables.[...] Passive spread is still less satisfactory for the long distance of transient signals, because the change in membrane potential that results from current flow is not instantaneous but takes time to build up. The time required depends on the membrane capacitance.[...] The membrane capacitance has the effect both of slowing down the passive transmission of signals along the axon and distorting them." >What I see is a lot of text without consensus Thank you, but your being much too polite, there is a near consensus, at least on Cryonet and it is that my views are idiotic. A consensus can be wrong however, as it is in this case. >this speed-up is going to be the limiting factor, rather than >the more spectacular speed-up you could get by replacing >active transmission. The brain uses various mechanisms for transmitting information and they all work at different speeds, but ALL of them are MUCH slower than light. If you speeded them all up so they worked at the same speed, the speed of light, there would be timing problems but not unmanageable ones. Gap junctions probably are the fastest and only operate over a billionth or so of a neurons length so the timing errors would be minute. Chemical signals are the slowest so the timing errors would be quite substantial but the amount of information involved is tiny and so easily handled by techniques currently used by computer designers such as catching. John K Clark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.i iQCzAgUBL1FXwX03wfSpid95AQGEvQTuK0dx+xR1C5qvpWrTo7xOt2q/189/17si ZXAq3UGUZq++cyEAmU7ZBSvhvetFzxSflXOep8V4ruyE86nCfwxVWKB4lHv3xzo1 XkOjTmbenf8yRxzumuRRYh5dujZuPz2sB2IRVvarY1kYEM7Wux3irOp2R1biH677 EomPYdYGaOGPTGLhmg1qFiXxLTQNUHuM7BMZ40dUBNWz8nA4tMo= =1XO2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3913