Walter Eric Johnson wrote in message <782ueh$980$1 at news.tamu.edu>...
>That's the problem with trying to explain "how neurons could
>work" rather than "how neurons work". It bothers me to see
>fanciful explanations of how neurons could work when there is
>no evidence to support those explanations. From there, it is
>just a short step to rationalizing that the neurons really do
>work that way because they could work that way.
Welcome to the real world! Experimental science is very
different, indeed. Even the physicists I know seem to
have difficulty understanding just how complex biological
system really are.
>FWIW, I'm working on my PhD in Computer Science and am going
>back and taking courses that I need to understand the real
>neurons better without jumping to conclusions based on
>limited knowledge of only one aspect of the phenomena.
>>What's really strange is to take a course for which you had
>the prerequisites well before anyone else in the class was
>born and before the prof was in college or even high school.
Probably not if you take my course! (Truman was president when
I started high school) And, besides, intro biology has changed
just a wee bit in the intervening many decades, not to mention
biochemistry and cellular/molecular biology!