IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

An Experiment to do -- EEG Skull Cap

kenneth collins kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Tue Dec 14 00:05:36 EST 2004

Some "subtlties" discussed below.

[I've retained the whole context of
the prior post.]

"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in 
news:lcZud.1079940$Gx4.344948 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| "kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in
| message
| news:D1Hud.114444$7i4.8627 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
|| "kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in
|| message
news:c2psd.1030833$Gx4.115719 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
||| [...]
||| Variations in the technigue include
||| using it to explore the neural dyn-
||| amics that underpin "curiosity's"
||| behavioral orientation dynamics
||| as they are discussed in AoK,
||| Ap5. [Here, the problems of
||| getting "novelty" into the scan-
||| ning apparatus, and of scanning
||| regardless of orientation move-
||| ment are left to the Experimenter
||| to resolve :-] [I know it can be
||| accomplished, but I've no hands-
||| on experience with "scanning",
||| and I'd need that before I can
||| figure out how I'd do it.]
||| [...]
|| Can LCD monitors remain func-
|| tional in the 'magnetic' environ-
|| ments of a scanner?
|| If not, then perhaps some sort of
|| Rub[e]-Goldberg chain of non-metalic
|| mirrors could be employed to give
|| subjects something to see while
|| they're being scanned.
|| [...]
|| The "multi-Mobius-ed Klein
|| bottle" stuff will just precipitate-
|| out -- like in th[o]se sets of sup-
|| posed 'single-photon' increment-
|| al-accumulation images that are
|| invoked as 'substantiation of
|| quantum mechanics'.
| In this post I'm going to focus up-
| on the EEG Skull Cap technique
| because it's relatively-easy to ob-
| tain really-spectacular results us-
| ing it in pairs [or multiplets] that
| make careful use of the rigorous-
| ly-delimited externally-imposed
| artificial restrictedness that I brief-
| ly discussed in my preceding post
| [linked-to above].
| ----- DATA ANALYSIS -----
| The results are data-intense, though,
| and the necessary data-analysis is
| a bit demanding. But this is not an
| insurmountable "obstacle" because
| the data can be saved indefinitely,
| so the data-analysis algorithms can,
| themselves, be refined incrementally.

and the formerly-collected data anal-
yzed using the refined algorithms.

[There really should be Data Archives
that save =ALL= experimental data,
from =ALL= disciplines, so that this
sort of algorithmec-refinement can be
applied in an open-ended way.

It's such a =waste= that experimental
data are routinely collected, poked-at
a bit, and then just discarded.

Instead, 'all' of this stuff should be
permanently saved. [Funny-quotes
aroung " 'all' " be-cause, as is discus-
sed in the "jump" button at the end of
AoK, Ap3, the data archive should
be set-up in a way that allows various
datasets to be ordered, over 'time'
with respect to their verified quality.]

This data-archiving is doable, and
it'd also constitute a useful way of
spending research dollars because
it'd keep the data-storage folks in-
Business :-]

But, most-importantly, it'd =not waste=
Priceless data.]

| More on data-analysis below.
| The general idea is to have two, or
| more subjects, each wearing one of
| the EEG Skull caps, and each hav-
| ing it's independent data-collection
| system.

I left it implicit in my prior discussion,
but this's a useful approach because
it allows what's actually happening
within nervous systems to be observed.

First, I'm discussing global-nervous-
system function =only= [although
the methodology does "scale" to
other types of experiment].

Single-subject trials "fall-flat" in this
regard be-cause they get shunted-
off into the "never-never land" of ex-
perimental designs' artificiality. It's
not hard to find published experi-
mental results [and analysis] that are
completely-Erroneous because the
subjects are responding to "expect-
ations" that're built-into the experi-
mental design which yields exactly
Zero actual "data".

Can folks See how and why it's so?

This 'difficulty' is largely overcome
when two [or more] subjects are
included within an experimental de-
sign -- because the subjects exper-
ience each others' actions as their
"environment", not the experimental
design [which counterbalances be-
tween subjects], and not experi-
menters' expectations [well, rela-
tively not -- wired-up folks are ex-
periencing "novelty" that's inherent-
ly 'abnormal', and that's unavoidable.

Can folks See how any why this
last point matters?]

| This's not as expensive as
| it might seem because, in the tech-
| nique I'm proposing, all that's nec-
| essary, at this point in the experi-
| mental design, is to simply collect
| the data for subsequent analysis.

=Save= data. It's Priceless. Don't
"discard" it.

| This makes the necessary hardware
| much less complex than setups that
| do real-'time' processing. The one
| Critical thing is that all of the record-
| ings that are grouped in a single tri-
| al have to be sequentially-synchro-
| nized in a way that is referenced in
| each data subset. [This "syncroniza-
| tion-reference can then be used as
| a "primary key" in a database table,
| enabling the data in each table to be
| accessed in a completely-synchron-
| ized fashion. Do this one thing and
| everything else that I'll discuss in this
| post just becomes flat-out doable.]
| The general idea is to present the
| subjects with specifically-delimited
| tasks to focus upon during each
| trial. The task instructions should be
| written-up and stored in a "trial spec-
| ifics" table [or group of tables] in the
| database. [It would also be nice to
| record video of the subjects' behav-
| ior during each trial. If this is practi-
| cable, the video recordings must al-
| so be referencable via the synchro-
| nization key. And while an Experi-
| menter is at it, record and store as
| much other data as one can -- EMG
| from as much of the musculature as
| is possible [here, I'm reiterating my
| long-prior discussions of "Myographic
| Array Diagnosis ["MAD", which I
| invented in the late 1980s]. Ideally,
| this would be done via body suits
| studded with myographic sensors.
| Build temperature, perspiration, and
| any other type of sensors that can
| be dreamed-up, into this body suit
| [but understand that the more cum-
| bersome the suit becomes for its
| wearer [e.g. the more data-collection
| leads that tether subjects], the more
| the data collected will be shunted-off
| into extraneous directions, skewing
| the data that will be collected. This
| can be controlled for, [t]o useful de-
| gree, via suit-design trials -- incre-
| mentally cross-reference data col-
| lected from body suits with and
| without each of the individual encum-
| berances, extracting the "background"
| that's correlated to the "encumbrance",
| and building it cummulatively. If this
| is done, this "background" must be
| updated periodically because, as
| subjects gain experience, this back-
| ground that's due to suit encumbrance
| will alter [which will be extractable
| in the data, and, when it is, will be
| found to be correlated to 'just' more
| TD E/I-minimization :-]
| Record heart-rate, blood pressure,
| respiration, eye movements, and
| anything else that has any possibility
| of being useful [of course, I'm going-
| ahead, looking 'round the bend in the
| technique's development -- early im-
| plimentations should be as simple
| as possible -- two EEG skull caps -- 
| because what's most-important, early-
| on is to concentrate on developing
| the database and data-analysis al-
| gorithms =with care with respect to
| cleanness= of the code so that it can
| be used as a "base" for all manner of
| enhancements, branched designs [de-
| signs that are the same, up to a point,
| but which diverge in their foci at that
| point]. When developing data-analysis
| code, it's extremely-important to be
| =Careful= about such open-ended
| "cleanness".]
| Remember, one of the most-useful
| attributes of Computers is that they
| allow incremental development, so
| be sure to "backup, backup, backup",
| and, while you're doing so, keep
| careful version-'state' data.
| Anyway, after getting a start with a
| simple version of all of the above [of
| course, in early versions, most of
| what's above will only be "allowed-
| for" in your "clean" design], go ahead
| and start collecting data. At this point,
| your main focus must remain on the
| development and verification of your
| data-handling. The most-important
| thing is to assure that any bit can be
| rigorously cross-correlated with any
| other synchronized bit, so build all
| the necessary stuff into your database
| and focus upon maximizing the effic-
| iency of such cross-correlation [most
| data processors fail to do this initial
| work adequately. Don't fail, here,
| and everything that's subsequently
| done becomes flat-out easy to ac-
| complish. Fail here, and everything
| subsequent becomes Hard-to-do].
| When the above data-handling stuff
| is accomplished, it's 'time' to start
| collecting real data that will pass
| through open-ended ["cleanly"-de-
| signed] data-analysis algorithms.
| Capture all the data that can be cap-
| tured, not 'worrying' about what you
| think is "important" to capture. All of
| it is important. It's just that, since you
| are =saving= the data that you collect,
| you can, subsequently, analyze it to
| your 'heart's content -- for decades,
| and centuries :-] which is why the
| essential thing is to work "cleanly" -- 
| to develop code that enables the
| sort of open-ended building of data-
| analysis capabilities that are necessary
| if all that's in the data you'll collect
| is to be extracted.
| ----- NEUROSCIENCE -----
| Everything you need, from the per-
| spective of Neuroscience, has been
| in AoK, all along.
| In designing your trials, focus upon
| delimiting the subjects' tasks to min-
| imal requirements.
| We're working with yoked-pairs
| or multiplets] of subjects in interac-
| tion. In each trial, one subject will,
| be "motor-" ["active-"] phase dom-
| inant and the other "sensory-" ["pas-
| sive-"] phase dominant [AoK, Ap5
| and Ap7].
| Trials can be as 'simple' as having
| two yoked subjects converse, which,
| of course, would mean that active-
| and passive-phase processing will
| 'alternate' between subjects. This
| is no problem, however, because
| you've developed your data-proces-
| sing capabilities "cleanly" :-]
| But it's best to start simple -- prob-
| ably with simple somatosensory in-
| teraction. Blindfold the subjects
| and instruct one of them to reach-
| out and touch the other. Record
| from both.
| What you'll see, here, will be the
| generation of "probing" movements
| in the "active" subject, and the gen-
| eration of orienting-to-stimulus move-
| ments in the "passive" subject.

And this stuff will all be "Directionality"
as I've discussed it in recent and long-
former posts here in b.n.

| It's necessary to be aware that the
| subjects' performances, and, hence,
| the data that's collected, will vary as
| their 'familiarity' builds [as TD E/I-
| minimization occurs] with respect to
| their experience within the experi-
| mental design. Since you're saving
| =all= of the data you collect, and
| since it's all 'time' synchronized, this
| "habituation" is not a problem -- it
| is 'just' more of what's in 'normal'
| nervous system function. You want
| to See it.
| From here, the methodology is in-
| finitely-useful. That is, there's no
| end to the ways in which it can be
| used to explore nervous system
| function [AoK, Ap1].
| This is doubly-True because you
| can not only vary the tasks submit-
| ted to your subjects in infinite ways,
| you can also analyze the data that's
| collected in any trial in infinite ways.
| But, since you've designed "cleanly",
| this open-endedness is not only not-
| a-problem, it's your =Opportunity=.
| And as the dust settles in this exper-
| imental approach, you'll end up in-
| dependently Verifying what's been
| in AoK all along [except that you'll
| find that there are 4 "dimensions"
| instead of 5 [AoK, Ap2] because
| there is no such thing as "time" [what's
| been referred to as "time" is =just=
| energy flowing in rigorous accord
| with WDB2T]].

What's been referred to as "time" is
the particular "subtlty" that I wanted
to discuss in this addendum to my
prior discussion.

If the "primary key" into the data is
'time', and all of the data-analysis
depends rigorously upon that "sync-
hronization key", then isn't it "non-
sensical" to assert that there is no
such thing as "time"?

Nope. What's been referred to as
"time" is just being used as an =or-
dering-principle= with respect to
WDB2T energy-flow.

It's the energy-flow that's physic-
ally-real, not 'time'.

Objector: "But, Ken, if you can't
analyze the data without it, it must
be physically real, no?"


The data can be just as easily, and
much-more-productively, synchron-
ized and analyzed by using Topo-
logically-Distributed energy-flow as
the "key". I used 'time' in my discus-
sion be-cause that's what folks're
'familiar' with.

When energy-flow is used, nervous
systems' relationships with their host
organisms' experiential external phys-
ical realities just become flat-out See-
able -- flat-out visible.

One can literally See stuff like "Love"
and "Hate", and everything else that
comprises "Consciousness".

Using energy-flow as the ordering-
principle, instead of non-physically-
real 'time' is one [abstract] way of
looking at what NDT is all about.

NDT is about making all of the stuff
that's been deemed to be "mysterious"
about nervous system function and
behavior plain-as-day easy to See.

You know?

It's such Seeing that makes possible
the Understanding that makes a Dif-
ference with respect to enabling folks
to extracate themselves from what has
been Humanity's self-Ravaging.

But alas, although I've been discussing
the non-Existence of 'time' all along,
but the fullness of what I'm discussing
in this "subtlty"-addendum just passes
through nervous systems, undetected,
because it's fullness requires in-person
interaction. You know -- it's 'picture'
has to be 'painted' in terms of inter-
active Directionality -- be-cause that's
what "energy-flow" is.

When "words" are used, the main
energy-flow that's observable is with
respect to the functionality of the "lang-
uage interface", and can be =anything=
with respect to what's going on within
physical reality, including nervous sys-
tems' internal physical realities.

But in-person, the energy-flow can be
made Concrete be-cause it can be,
little by little, literally acted-out, which
enables folks nervous systems to con-
struct the "biological mass" that allows
them to Think the everything-is-energy-
flow Thought, which, subsequently, can
be invoked during "conversation".

Until this Necessary foundational work
is accomplished via in-person inter-
action, 'time' can be used as an ordering
principle even though it's non-physically-

I haven't been "withholding" this stuff.

I've been discussing all of it, here in
b.n, for more than 14 'years'. It's all
passed-through folks nervous systems
without being detected -- be-cause
folks who've read my discussions [if
anyone has :-] constructed "biological
mass" with respect "language" dynamics
instead of constructing it with respect
to the underpinning =energy-flow=
dynamics that I've been discussing all

Get it?

Remember all of my long-former dis-
cussions of "3-D energy-dynamics"?


So stop 'snickering' about my using
'time' as the "synchronization key".

I do so be-cause I understand that
you cannot, yet, Think the "energy-
flow" Thought.

I do so be-cause I =want= to lift-
you-up to being able to Think the
"energy-flow" Thought, but under-
stand that you 'cannot' do so, =yet=.

Why it's Important is be-cause folks
Kill, and otherwise Ravage, one an-
others' Beings be-cause of the =energy-
flow=, not 'because' of 'time'.

Which is why I've gotten into this
"yoked-EEG-skull-cap" stuff -- to
enable folks to See the 3-D energy-

Work on it in your own Good noggin'

[This stuff is Physics, and it'd be better
if I were allowed to discuss it in a
'place' like sci.physics.research, but
they just 'erase' what I send to them,
so I discuss it here in b.n -- which
makes bionet.neuroscience the most-
significant 'place' where Physics is
being done, and ever has been done.

Forgive me, please. It's True :-]

[It's some of why it 'Hurts' so much.]

[The rest of this post is the same as
it was in my prior post.]

k. p. collins

| What's discussed above is exactly
| how I developed NDT, except that
| I had to do it all in the ol' noggin' lab,
| working with the data that had been
| collected by my Colleagues in Neuro-
| science, as it was deposited in the
| Neuroscience stacks and standard
| references.
| Working in one's noggin' lab has some
| powerful advantages, a main one be-
| ing that noggin' labs can do millions
| of iterations in parallel, billions of
| 'times', reiteratively, and once one
| comprehends TD E/I-minimization,
| all of this innate information-processing
| capacity becomes flat-out Directable,
| just like "language" is during 'normal'
| conversation.
| This's why I've taken the 'time' to
| 'translate' what I do in the ol' noggin'
| lab into this multi-EEG-skull-cap
| data-analysis methodology. If folks
| do it, folks'll see, in it, an analogue
| of the way NDT was developed, and,
| hopefully, in that, gain a sense for
| what's been in AoK all along.
| k. p. collins 

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net