Posted on 12/10/2001 8:29:43 AM PST by RightWhale
Could new groups be added --as in adding a new lobe or replacing a lobe in its entirety-- and would the new lobe communicate with the existing structure? Could I have a lobe added to replace my missing aesthetic lobe?
I suspect that many of the crucial functions of the brain are established during development. Replacements of whole areas of the brain might well survive but communicate very little with existing structures, resulting in a reduced "you". The stem cell panacea is based on the notion that new development takes place in a context which directs the new cells to their proper function.
Indeed they are. Some symptoms of schizophrenia might be due to cross-wiring in the lower brain, whether acute and temporary or slowly developing and permanent. Some people see colors as part of their aesthetic reaction to objects. Read that in an old Smithsonian.
As if the organ knows what to do with fresh stem cells. This is a mystery. If that is actually true, why wouldn't a general subcutaneous shot of stem cells go to every place in the body they are needed and regenerate all lost or impared functions?
This is sort of what happens. Bone marrow stem cells, for instance, are released into the blood stream during the normal course of cell replacement. Once in the blood stream, they migrate to areas that need new cells. When these stem cells are injected into another person's veins, they migrate, in the same fashion, to areas of deficit.
Who gives the orders and provides the directions?
Interesting. Explains why my mom has always had the same problem. So maybe there's hope yet for some kind of, you-know-what therapy to replenish the right proteins in the right places to maybe do that, um, thing I want done, um, repair, that's it. (God I hate that syndrome!)
If you're really curious, and have at least some mathematical background, read this book: "Sparse Distributed Memory" by Pentti Kanerva
It's brilliant. It lays out a novel method of storing and retrieving data, and then rigorously analyzes the properties that such a memory device would have.
Interestingly, the storage method described has properties that are strikingly similar to human memory. For example, it can retrieve data via "reminders" that are only partially similar to the stored information; it has no fixed capacity, but overloading it tends to cause similar stored items to "blend together", with older data fading faster than more recently stored data; storing the same or similar data repeatedly helps to ensure long-lasting "memories"; and no piece of data is stored at any particular location -- if you cut chunks out of it, some memories lose coherence more than others, but none simply vanish.
Furthermore, it can have the "tip of the tongue" problem you describe, wherein it "knows" that it knows something, but can't manage to retrieve it at the moment.
Finally, the actual method of storage is both incredibly simple, *and* very well suited for being implemented in a device that is "grown" instead of meticulously arrayed -- and the more elements the memory device has, the crisper the memories will be. You could make one by building millions of identical components, and letting each one randomly decide what memory location it wants to be (with no problems caused by any two deciding to be the same location, or by none deciding to be any particular location). So an undiffentiated mass of neurons would be suitable for memory storage of this type.
Finally, the last section of the book shows a schematic drawing of how neurons in the human cerebellum are connected, and the layout looks strikingly similar to how a device built to implement the author's design would be constructed. (The cerebellum is the seat of "muscle memory", i.e. physical coordinations learned over time by repeated practice.)
The same storage technique, slightly altered, is also suitable for the storage of time-based data, such as speech and songs, and the technique would make it easy to retrieve succeeding data given a short passage from the middle of a sequence (just as humans can mentally "play through" their memory of an old song after you play a few bars for them from any point -- the memory floods back after you've heard a piece of the song again.)
It's a fascinating book, and I think the author is really on to something.
Some further reading
Actually, the ape is smarter, though. He doesn't pretend to be presidential material! Is there anything more ignorant than self-delusion?
That is truly amazing. This "behavior" must be programmed in the DNA. It is mind-boggling to consider that each of the specialized stem cell types is a slightly different program and these differences are also somehow coded into the DNA. What is a head scratcher is how the symmetry is broken since all start from one and a division should produce identical copies. I presume the mechanism is a sort of beat the clock race. The first cell to achieve the new type inhibits the twin cell from also differentiating. In terms of organism development this race must be modified by position, otherwise our noses might end up next to our other cheeks. At least that is my guess.
Let me guess… LOL!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.