| From: | Greg <greg@***.EDU> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: What happened? (Memory, biochemistry and Letterman.) |
| Date: | Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:47:21 -0400 |
>5) Question: Wouldn't rewiring the synapses in the brain affect HOW
>you think, and not your memories? IIRC, memory is a function of RNA.
>(and I know RNA is used in DNA transcription, so don't flame me on
>this unless you are studying bio at a sufficient level.) Now,
>theoretically, if RNA could be extracted form the brain and purified,
>memories could be inserted...
No need for flames this is a rather common misconception, especially in the
realm of cyberpunk/sci-fi. The trouble comes for the fact that
neurochemists talk about DNA as encoding information and RNA as
"transmitting" or acting as messengers for that information. This is
technically true, but you've got to remember that the vast majority of
biochemists are neural elimitavists and therefore believe that if you can't
talk about chemicals, you can't talk about anything. DNA does encode
information... protein synthesis information. RNA is the transcribing
factor that takes the information coded in the DNA and uses it to synthesis
proteins. it's the backbone of cellular life, but is doesn't really help
you remember your phone number. The generally accepted (Though not
uncontested) theory of how memory is stored is in terms of engrams. See,
everyone knows neurons connect at synapses; what isn't widely realized is
that synapses are all diffent. They all require different levels of
aactivation to propogate the neuronal firing and the axon of the second
cell is often fed by many synapses each of which may be inhibitory or
exitatory to a different extent. It is the combination of all this that
determines what is propogated to the next cell; and that's only two (there
are something like 10E12 neurons in the brain.) Also, all of the activation
strenghs can shift. So, memory is talked about as being a function of the
pattern of activation strengths and propogations patterns that exist in a
living brain; i.e. an engram.
Not to get on a rant, but most of why little advance has been made in this
field is that everyone assumes that it is the biochemical functions that
are important and not the cognitive and wide-view brain functions. This is
just ridiculous it's like trying to talk about what happened on Letterman
last night by discussing electron guns and phospher interactions.
Greg Childress
(took too many neuropsychology classes...)
P.S. I'm sure this probably has been addressed but i was away for a month;
who's going to be hanging out at Origins; i'd like to keep my eye out for
ya'll.
