Richard Hall wrote:
>> Thanks for the helpful reply. I don't really need references for the
> answer you gave, but if you wanted to try to tell me that signals can
> only flow in one direction, I would demand proof . . .
>> I've been mulling over some ideas that are based on signals being able
> to flow in either direction, and I wanted to make sure that I wasn't
> violating established knowledge before I go too far.
>> Here's a follow-up:
> If synapses are, in fact, unidirectional, impulses moving in the
> opposite direction can not proceed beyond the synapse, but would such an
> impulse inhibit or disrupt the transmission of impulses moving in the
> other direction. That is, what happens when an antidromic signal
> reaches a synapse?
...it depends on what type of synapse it is... if it's a chemical synapse,
there's no "normal" way for the signal to continue, if it's an electrical
junction, the signal can procede... all impulse activity alters the ionic
"state" in its vicinity... such ionic conductances can build to have
consequences for further impulse activity...
...your question about the possibility of a "backward" impulse interfering
with a forward impulse... if such occured within the refractory-period limits
of a section of axon, yes... which is some of why the nervous system is
engineered in a way that actively minimizes such (which amounts to
uncontrolled signalling)...
...it's wetware, not hardware...
_____________________________________________________
People hate because they fear, and they fear because
they do not understand, and they do not understand
because hating is less work than understanding.
