Western Science has no clue on the term "memory" because they look within structure for the mind. The mind is not the brain. Once someone comes to grip with this truth, he could possibly start trying to understand cellular memory.
Here is a true example of cellular memory, without delving into the location of the mind.
A fish is normally hungry and spends much of
its time swimming around, looking for food.
In the course of these travels it may find food very often in warm water, and not find food in colder water. The fish will "learn" that it should spend more time swimming in warm water. This may have been true for centuries, in which case you could say that this fish is acting on instinct. So the fish normally looks in the warmer water for food, and the warmer water would normally near the surface, and in shallow water.
But, now let's look at a true chance occurrence for the fish.
The fish is swimming, looking for food, and it
swims in shallow water where there happens to be a rather rare red coral growing in this area of water. These are coral that
are red while most other coral is lighter in color. (True about red coral
or not, the example applies.)
The fish is swimming in this area for the
first time and as he is about to catch some
food the fish is attacked from
behind by a much larger fish -- the larger fish manages to get a bite out of the
tale of the small fish.
The small fish, of course, recognizes the bite as harmful, and as a warning to leave rapidly.
The small fish may have an "instinct" or a
"memory" that "pain in the tail" is equal to being bitten, and maybe
to being dead. But his action is "RUN!"
The small fish has a new observation in this example. The pain in the tail came at the same time as the fish saw red colored coral. (I do not try to claim that fish can see or not see "color" here.)
The fish "learned" that "red" is "dangerous." (Assuming that red coral is rather rare, then we would not expect the fish to have lots of previous instances of being bitten at the same time as he was close to red coral.)
This is the most simple of memories -- something is equal to something. "Red" equals "pain!"
The image on the left
may
be a type of experience which is too complicated to be stored into memory and
used. The fish sees a piece of "bait." The fish cannot see the hook in the
bait. He swallows the bait and gets caught. Maybe he learned, maybe
he didn't but he is no longer around to remember this lesson. Or, maybe he
even SEES the hook, but he sees the fish. He may or may not have any
previous instances of seeing a hook, seeing food, swallowing, and being caught.
He may still not be afraid of the baited hook. No instinct, no memory.
Or, maybe yes, but the need for food was stronger than the fear of the hook?
What a terrible decision for a smart fish!
The fish will avoid areas of water, now, where there is red stuff on the bottom. A very "smart" fish could differentiate between "red coral" and "red trash cans." A more simple memory would equate red coral, red tin cans and pink coral as all the same -- danger. Say away!
Let me also sup
pose that big fish are not more
likely to attack small fish in either shallow water or in water where there is
red stuff on the bottom. So, the "danger" perceived by the small fish, in
this example, is not a universal danger of "red stuff" but the accidental
conversion of a large fish happening to be swimming in that area at that time --
the large fish was not somehow "attracted" by the red stuff.
The small fish has a new memory. Areas
of water where there is red stuff is dangerous. Where there is red stuff
in warm water will be a problem of decision for the fish -- it would probably
depend on how many times he was bitten on the tail when there was red stuff and
how many times he got food when there was warm water. He "decides" on a
very primitive basis. Should he let go of the food in his hand to grab the
"food" in the mirror? You and I can see the difference between "food" and
an "image of food," but don't expect a fish to be that smart.
This is a false perception, but the very limited thinking power of a fish doesn't allow much logic or reasoning.
The small fish had learned, earlier, or by instinct, that shallow warm water is the best place for IT to find food. It has now also "learned" (it could not be instinct) that water with red stuff on the bottom is dangerous.
The small fish now has conflicting data --
more attacks by large fish, particularly in areas of red stuff, could reinforce
the "memory" that red stuff is dangerous.
Presumably it would never be rational to figure that "red stuff" is truly dangerous since it could be supposed that the large fish has NOT learned that there is more food to be had where there is red stuff on the sand.
A long story, but that is the background. If you want to quibble with the story, don't. Another story more in keeping with zoology could be generated with ease.
The above could be tested and found true. The task I lay on the scientist, then, is to replicate this example with something more simple -- actual cells can be observed acting and reacting to various stimuli. You can expose cells to food and to toxins. You would see that the cells move toward food and move away from toxins. There is something going on here. But, you can also make good food APPEAR to be toxic, while it is not. The cells will avoid this food. This would APPEAR to be suicide.
Or, you could make toxic stuff APPEAR to be good (for what is heroin, after all?) and the cells will move toward it. That would APPEAR to be suicide. But, only from your high viewpoint -- not from the viewpoint of the cell. (If not heroin, some other "non-food" -- like sugar!)
Cells do learn stuff -- using the type of "learning" described above for fish. It would be even more primitive for a cell.
After doing their own experiment, I then invite this scientist to FIND where this "memory" is located inside the structure of the fish or the cell.
Many years ago the word "engram" was defined as an "engraving" inside a cell! Click for a few paragraphs talking about memory being stored in "engrams." A much more modern definition of "engram" is HERE -- and this one has it right.
Here is a new thought -- group memory.
AS a body is made up of many cells, the body has a mind of its own -- affecting,
but not necessarily controlling the individual cells. And as the body is nothing more
than a group of cells, there are also "sub-groups" of cells -- such as all the
cells in the liver, or whatever.
It is likely that all the cells in the liver have a common purpose that is very specific -- the creation and continuing creation, therefore the survival, of the individual cell first, the liver, next, and the body next.
In many ways, as Dr. Ayyangar wrote, water seems to be a universal "good," but it is still recognized that the water in the gutter is fine for mosquitoes, but not necessarily for man.
How is the water in the gutter different from the water in the glass from the tap? One could say that there is a form, or a matrix for water. One matrix consists of Hydrogen, and two parts of Oxygen. This could be a molecule, but the "molecule" is too rigid an example for the matrix.
Another matrix of "water" might be many
hydrogens, twice as many oxygens, and a few arsenics thrown in. How many
arsenics? Well a few still allows the matrix to be harmonious with the
needs of man. The image on the left is the atom of arsenic. A lot of arsenics thrown in might have a
different chemical formula? But, more generally, and from the viewpoint of
the Ayurveda, the "more arsenics" make the matrix of water very different, and
no longer in harmony with man, but perhaps now, only, harmonious with some other
life form?
Strangely what component might you think is natural to virtually all life forms? It is sulfur! In some views of the origin of life, life started on this planet without oxygen -- but in a sea of sulfur and ammonia.
I do NOT wish to be seen as a proponent of the "sea of chemicals" origin of life, but there is, nonetheless, considerable evidence that sulfur was far more important in the origin of life than oxygen. Here is a not-unusual traditional view of the origin of life.
Coevolution of Life and Earth.
Note that the evolution of life had profound effects on the physical earth itself. Initially, all metabolism was anaerobic--there was probably several chemical bases for them including sulfur and carbon. With the evolution of the cyanobacteria with photosynthetic apparatus that produce oxygen, the atmosphere filled with O2. This was initially poison for most of life, then aerobic respiration evolved. Also, with the increasing levels of O2, the Ozone layer formed which reduced the level of radiation hitting the earth’s surface—an essential condition for the colonization of land. With the colonization of land by plants and fungi, living things had large array of effects on a surface that was previously colonized by bacteria alone.
Per these authorities, oxygen existed, but in the form of O2, and therefore toxic to life. Sulfur, however, was available in large quantities when life started, without oxygen as a part of life -- this was then and is called the "anaerobic" form of life -- without oxygen.
It is interesting to note that sulfur is
a very common element in the human body, by weight, that this sulfur is
NOT "sulfur dioxide" which is found in the crust of the earth in large quantity,
but the equivalent of "organic sulfur" since there is always a carbon atom
attached to a sulfur atom within the MATRIX OF LIFE.
Thus a matrix of any of many components, but which yet includes sulfur, can appeal to many, many structures of life, but there is NOT A SINGLE CURRENT LIFE FORM for which the matrix does NOT include sulfur. So, sulfur is seen as one of the basic building blocks of life, not oxygen. If you consider man, of course, oxygen is necessary.
Sulfa- drugs are NOT made up of sulfur in organic form.
The proper matrix will be harmonies with the structure of man. A common component of any such matrix will be sulfur -- and MSM is the most useful, and organic, form. The fine tuning of any matrix comes in the herbs which provide additional components.
As long as scientists look for something physical within the structure for the mind, they will invent foolish things and note the effects of a mind, but not the location or function of this mind.
This mind does exist, however, whether the scientist can "find" it or not.
This mind affects the body -- affects cells. A cell can appear to commit suicide, and the explanation would be that the cell has a false memory -- a memory that some substance is helpful to its survival (food, nutrients) and another memory that some substance is harmful to its survival. Either of these memories could be based on false observations, and when a cell "acts" on the basis of its stored memory it can be making a mistake -- take in bad stuff "by mistake" and that appears to be suicide from our viewpoint. From the viewpoint (and memory) of the cell it would be rational.
From our viewpoint suicide is never rationale, but from the viewpoint of the entity committing suicide it is ONLY rational.
Here is a rather mundane, common treatment of "memory" in the scientific community. It is, of course, false since the authors are looking for "memory" within structure. This entire article is a good example of claims made without any proof. But, the words are technical enough that the normal reader would think, "Ah! Well! This man must know what he is talking about!" He does not. Karl Loren
| Index to this page |
In every animal that has been studied, including
the acquisition of a memory occurs in two phases:
As its name suggests, this only lasts for a short period. It involves an increase in the efficiency with which nerve impulses pass across synapses. It does not require any protein synthesis or remodeling of the synapse.
This lasts for a long period. It involves the formation of new synaptic connections. These require new gene expression; that is, gene transcription and protein synthesis (translation).
Sensitization is an increase in the response to an innocuous stimulus when that stimulus occurs after a punishing stimulus.
An example:
When the siphon of Aplysia is gently touched, the animal withdraws its gill for a brief period. However, if preceded by an electrical shock to its tail, the same gentle touch to the siphon will elicit a longer period of withdrawal.
The sensitization response to a single shock (blue bar) dies out after about an hour, and returns to baseline after a day (yellow). So it is an example of short-term memory.
However, it the animal is sensitized with multiple shocks given over several days, its subsequent response to a gentle touch on the siphon is
This is an example of long-term memory.
These findings are the work of Eric R. Kandel (who was awarded a Nobel Prize in 2000) and his associates. Over the years, they have worked out the neural circuitry that the sea slug uses in this response.
Withdrawal of the
gill requires a two-neuron connection:
Sensitization to a noxious stimulus delivered to the tail requires:
Sensitization is the term used to describe the changed behavior of the intact Aplysia. It depends on increased synaptic activity - called facilitation. Facilitation is studied in vitro with isolated preparations of neurons.
The result: a longer period of gill-withdrawal in response to a light touch to the siphon.
With repeated applications of serotonin,
The result: a light touch to the siphon elicits a longer period of gill withdrawal, and this response is retained for a longer period.
Applying another neurotransmitter, a peptide containing 4 amino acids called FMRFa (for Phe [F], Met [M], Arg [R], Phe-NH2) [Link to table of the abbreviations for the amino acids] to these in vitro preparations produces an opposite effect from facilitation - the synapses become less responsive.
Long-term depression also requires changes in gene expression. A different CREB, CREB-2, displaces CREB-1 from the cAMP response elements. Not only is the positive signal, CREB-1, removed, but CREB-2 actively shuts down the promoters by recruiting a histone deacetylase (HDAC) to remove acetyl groups from the nearby histones, thus preventing RNA polymerase from beginning gene transcription. [More]
Long-term depression also occurs in preparations of mouse brain. [Link]
These responses of Aplysia are examples of implicit memory (also called procedural memory).
They involve changes in the efficiency with which motor activities of the body are carried out in response to a stimulus.
Explicit memory (also known as declarative memory) involves recall of objects, events, etc. outside the animal's body.
An example:
If a mouse is placed in a pool of murky water, it will swim about until it finds a hidden platform to climb out on. With repetition, the mouse soon learns to locate the platform more quickly. Presumably it does so with the aid of visual cues placed around the perimeter of the pool because it cannot see or smell the platform itself.
Explicit memory is also acquired in a short-term process followed by a long-term process.
In mice (and humans) it requires the functioning of the hippocampus.
| Link to a discussion of long-term potentiation (LTP) |
| Welcome&Next Search |
24 November 2002
Karl Lashley was a stimulus-response behaviorist. He theorized that physical memory traces (engrams) must be made in the brain when learning occurs.
[Karl Note: Behavioral psychology was invented by Dr. Wundt and still holds sway over much of modern society -- certainly education and medicine. Fortunately a logical mind can see the faults and holes in this false science -- to review the origin of behavioral psychology and its harmful goals, CLICK HERE.]
These new connections of neurons were assumed to involve the cerebral cortex, as proven by studies conducted by Pavlov. In 1929, Karl Lashley wrote his famous monograph, "Brain mechanisms and intelligence." This work consisted of studies with rats and mazes. Lashley removed portions of the cerebral cortex, varying from 10-50% in an effort to study the role the cerebral cortex played in learning.
These studies brought about two important theories.The first theory, entitled Principles of Mass Action, proved that the amount of cortex removed was critical to the learning abilities of the rats.
The second theory, entitled Equipotentiality, proved that all areas of the cortex are equally important to learning, or no area was proven to be more important than any other area.
Studies with the central nervous system further support the existence of engrams in the brain. All behavior reflects actions of the nervous system and because the nervous system is a physical-chemical system, changes in behavior from learning must cause physical-chemical alterations. Therefore, all learning must involve alterations between input and output of the central nervous system. Engrams must exist. However, Lashley was never able to find the existence of an engram and concluded therefore that "the necessary conclusion is that learning just is not possible." The engram has still never been found, but groundbreaking research has been conducted that has begun to substantiate the theories of Lashley.
| The Links Below Jump To Pages On Whatever Web You Are In | |||
| Table Of Contents | Search This Web | Navigation Help Page | |
| Write To Karl Loren -- He Pledges To Answer EVERY Personal Message, Personally. Click here or on his name in the box below. | |||
| The Links Below Are To Various Web Sites Published By Karl Loren | |||
| Karl Loren Web | Vibrant Life Web | Karl Loren's Book | |
| Super Colostrum | Bulk MSM | Heart Disease | |
| Emmessar | Happiness | Arthritis | |
| Instead Of | Chelation Therapy | Super Colostrum (2) | |
| Karl Loren's Catalog Store | Central Page For All 12 Webs! | ||
|
I promise to answer your message -- click here to send me a personal message
|
|
SUBSCRIBE: The Wednesday Letter is a free electronic monthly newsletter written and published by Karl Loren. You can view more than 50 back issues of this publication by clicking here. The Wednesday Letter subscription list is maintained on a secure server, no name is ever given or sold to anyone, and it is never used except for this Newsletter. It is automatically published on the Tuesday night just before the first Wednesday of every month. You can subscribe to this free monthly electronic letter by entering your eMail address and name below. You will then automatically receive a request for confirmation, sent to whatever address you have entered. If you do NOT receive this confirmation request, then you will not be subscribed. There may have been an error with your address and you should resubmit. The letter is never sent twice to the same address -- so you do not have to worry about a duplicate subscription. When you receive this confirmation request you must reply to it, or your subscription will not become active. No one can subscribe your name, and address, without you being notified, and if you get an unwanted notice of subscription you only need to DO NOTHING and the subscription will NOT be active.
REMOVAL: You can remove yourself from the subscription list in several different ways. Click here to read about this entire newsletter system. Every edition of The Wednesday Letter is delivered to your address with YOUR name and address in view on the letter, with a link that allows you to remove THAT name from the subscription list. If you try to send this removal message from an address different from the one you used to send in your original confirmation, then you will get a warning notice first, sent to the subscription address, asking you to confirm that you want to be removed from the list -- by replying to THAT request for confirmation, you will then be automatically removed. Thus, no one else can unsubscribe you, from some other computer, without your knowledge. But, if you send in the unsubscribe notice from the same machine used to receive the Letter, then the removal from the subscription list is automatic.
Personal Message: When you send a personal message to Karl Loren, you will receive a personal reply as per his instructions. Karl pledges that every personal message will get a personal answer. When you provide your mail address, we will send you free information including our free catalog and a cassette tape lecture by Karl Loren about heart disease, no charge, by mail, even if outside the US. You can select particular information you would like to receive, along with the free cassette tape and catalog.
