In article <2n4qvr$s0u at emoryu1.cc.emory.edu>, bioaw124 at emoryu1.cc.emory.edu (Claire Maier) writes:
|>|> Please post a _real_ abstract of your paper, if that is what you
|> are claiming to be doing. It should be under 300 words. And given
|> your love of historical non sequiturs, please do not make any
|> direct references to anything before 1980.
What's magical about 1980? A lot of great neurobiology was donw quite a bit
before that. Ramon y Cajal and Hodgin-Huxley come to mind quickly. Much of the
work for my dissertation involved a neuronal model that I derived from AV Hill's
work in 1936. While it is not right, I think, to discount all of modern work,
it is equally incorrect to limit references to "after year X".
dr bruce parnas
brp at psychomo.arc.nasa.gov
/usr/local/Std.Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are mine and
not those of NASA, but you probably could have guessed that.
It's not my fault. Not all of us here at NASA are Rocket Scientists