The ratio of Glial cells to neurons is a significant factor too. It's still a little unclear what exactly Glial cells do (scientists know some of their functions, but not all), but the ratio is much higher in humans than in other species and the ratio seems to grow progressively as you progress from less intelligent to more intelligent species.

Does this guy think that if he says ONE thing that is correct (or at least sounds correct) that people should believe everything every other thing he says on that topic? It sure seems that way to me.

For example... if you trace back the neurons in the CNS to their origin you get... sensory neurons (often from the peripheral nervous system)! (i.e. the things you see, hear, feel, taste, listen with, as well as get your balance and sense of position etc). Yet he jumps from tracing the origin of neurons to a philosopher who died hundreds of years ago and had no real knowledge of how neurotransmission worked.

And yes of course, not every neuron originates from a typical sensory fiber; there are inter-neurons and various control centers in the brain, however even those are not working in isolation, they are getting input from other parts of the brain (e.g. the hypothalamus).

Descartes believed in dualism, a distinction between mind and body, and people are free to believe in that idea, but it is simply that... a belief - much like religion. I get the feeling that a lot of theory that came out of that time was heavily influenced by the fact you could often get executed for not being a strong member of your church/faith, but that could just be me.

It's kind of weird because Descartes is also known as the man for stripping down philosophy into known truths.

That's my point. The brain channel isn't about you thinking a dog is amazing for thinking of something. There's a description of the channel, by the channel owner, which explains what the channel is for and when you should invoke it:

http://videosift.com/brain

"From the molecular biology of neurons to theories of consciousness, the Mind and Brain channel is devoted to workings of the brain and its emergent mind. All videos in this channel offer some insight into the workings of brains (organic or synthetic). Videos of trippy optical illusions and Derren Brown mind tricks are generally not acceptable - unless, of course, they contain some explanation of how the brain is being manipulated to produce the demonstrated results."

"The dog was smart to use its brain of doing that" doesn't fit. The same way so many of your channel assignments don't fit.

I'm sorry, but you really do need to look at what the channels are for because honestly you're just making a mess of the site with your constant throwing channel assignments out to the point where their meaning is lost.

Granted, some channels don't have good descriptions (which is why you tag every god damn thing that has a car in the background with wheels), but still, I hope you understand what I mean.

CBD possesses sedative properties (Carlini and Cunha, 1981), and a clinical
trial showed that it reduces the anxiety and other unpleasant psychological
side effects provoked by pure THC (Zuardi et al. 1982). CBD modulates the
pharmacokinetics of THC by three mechanisms: (1) it has a slight affinity for
cannabinoid receptors (Ki at CB1 = 4350 nM, compared to THC = 41 nM,
Showalter et al. 1996), and it signals receptors as an antagonist or reverse agonist
(Petitet et al. 1998), (2) CBD may modulate signal transduction by perturbing
the fluidity of neuronal membranes, or by remodeling G-proteins that
carry intracellular signals downstream from cannabinoid receptors, and (3)CBD
is a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A11 metabolism, thus it blocks the
hydroxylation of THC to its 11-hydroxy metabolite (Bornheim et al. 1995).
The 11-hydroxy metabolite is four times more psychoactive than unmetabolized
THC (Browne and Weissman 1981), and four times more immunosuppressive
(Klein et al. 1987).
CBD provides antipsychotic benefits (Zuardi et al. 1995). It increases dopamine
activity, serves as a serotonin uptake inhibitor, and enhances norepinephrine
activity (Banerjee et al. 1975; Poddar and Dewey 1980). CBD protects
neurons from glutamate toxicity and serves as an antioxidant, more potently
than ascorbate and α-tocopherol (Hampson et al. 1998). Auspiciously, CBD
does not decrease acetylcholine (ACh) activity in the brain (Domino 1976;
Cheney et al. 1981). THC, in contrast, reduces hippocampal ACh release in
rats (Carta et al. 1998), and this correlates with loss of short-term memory consolidation.
In the hippocampus THC also inhibits N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)
receptor activity (Misner and Sullivan 1999; Shen and Thayer 1999), and
NMDA synaptic transmission is crucial for memory consolidation (Shimizu et
al. 2000). CBD, unlike THC, does not dampen the firing of hippocampal cells
(Heyser et al. 1993) and does not disrupt learning (Brodkin and Moerschbaecher
1997).
Consroe (1998) presented an excellent review of CBD in neurological disorders.
In some studies, it ameliorates symptoms of Huntington’s disease, such
as dystonia and dyskinesia. CBD mitigates other dystonic conditions, such as
torticollis, in rat studies and uncontrolled human studies. CBD functions as an
anticonvulsant in rats, on a par with phenytoin (Dilantin, a standard antiepileptic
drug).
CBD demonstrated a synergistic benefit in the reduction of intestinal motility
in mice produced by THC (Anderson, Jackson, and Chesher 1974). This
may be an important component of observed benefits of cannabis in inflammatory
bowel diseases.

--"Cannabis and Cannabis Extracts:
Greater Than the Sum of Their Parts?
John M. McPartland
Ethan B. Russo"

Yup, it's a motion after effect. I doubt it "evolved" for a specific purpose however. Adaptation effects of this sort are thought to result from neural "fatigue." That is, the tendency for a neuron not to fire after a prolonged period of high activation. The idea that short term neural adaptation exists for some purpose other than straightforward biological constraints is appealing on the surface, but unlikely imo. You have to remember that it only works if stimuli are held perfectly still with respect to the retina for periods that are much longer than natural. In fact, there are some that argue there are special eye-movements to ensure that exactly that doesn't happen (look up Troxler fading for a similar phenomenon).

However, it's an extremely useful phenomenon empirically. The effect can be used to probe the stimuli that a distinct subpopulation of neurons (the adapted subpopulation) is responsive to. This ability to make inferences about neural mechanisms from strictly behavioral evidence rather than direct neural recordings makes it an important psychophysical tool. Behavioral arguments of this sort, where it is shown a population of neurons specifically responsive to X must exist, often precede physiological confirmation obtained later either with functional imaging studies or electrophysiological recordings in animal models.

Not to say that there isn't a great deal of skill involved but mirror neurons are a wonderful thing.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Notes & Neurons Science Festival; Bobby McFerrin plays crowd. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

I apologize...thank you.

To quote the poster on the other video:

"That's a lot of stupid for just one person."

I saw your killed video but the killed on the other did not register. I even watched it multiple times and compared it to this one.

In any event...I need to...grow a neuron.

Chin blow carries mechanical force from mandible directly to the skull with no soft tissue shock absorption along the way--and the direct mechanical force of the blow translates to fore-and-aft movement of the skull WITHOUT any rotation absorbing the energy---skull imparts blows force directly to soft tissue of the brain as the inertial mass of the brain leaves it standing in place, being sloshed through the normally cushioning layer of cerebral spinal fluid to make direct mechanical contact with the inside of the skull (albeit through the layers of the pia, mater and dura) ----forebrain and probably including midbrain structures---and then whipsaws backwards with a contra-coup impact on the back the brain as the head snaps back. (occiput/visual centers)

The mechanical impact of the brain tissue on the inside wall of the brain probably causes (now I'm guessing, but it's an informed guess) the neurons to respond to the blow with a mass ionic depolarization/electrical potential trigger---and concussion.

If he's only averagely unlucky, he'll also have a intra-cerebral/parenchymal micro bleeding---and if he's really unlucky, he'll keep getting in that ring and he'll end up like the NFL players with serial concussions or like Muhammed Ali. A demented, Parkinsonian cripple.

Don't get hit in the head.

I'm still worried about phase. The argument is that he can represent any phase he wants. I challenge him to represent different phases of his Nyquist frequency without the reconstruction losing power. He keeps saying "band limited", which I don't believe to be exactly true. I agree, the ear can only detect powers at frequencies below 22.1k, I'm not convinced it's ability to detect phase shifts is limited in the way you would expect with a digital signal with a cutoff at that frequency. For instance, the human ear can localize an impulse with accuracy down to about 10 microseconds. I can't see how a Dirac function can be localized that accurately by a sampled wave unless the system acted like a 100K sampled system. The latter, IMHO, is supported by the neuro-anatomy. There are different mechanisms for identifying pitch and onset. The quote-unquote Calyx of Held neurons carry the phase information, and are designed to fire with astonishing precision. Much more temporal precision than would be predicted from the "nyquist frequency" of the place coding subset of 8th nerve ganglia. I understand that this is what he was trying to address with his bit at the end, but he kept insisting on "band limited" inputs. Pressure waves aren't band limited dodge-rammit.

Excuse me, what? This isn't us being fanatic. This is more simple dismissiveness. You haven't convincingly demonstrated significant wasteful spending. Your arguments are all hypothetical or anecdotal. Give me data to sink my teeth into and I might bother to show you fanatical.

Of course there are other priorities, but maybe basic science and medical research don't even register in the budget. You're the one defending defense research, remember? I would send citizens buried by medical expenses (like myself) knocking on your door. I wouldn't suggest they consider cuts to research that experts in biological sciences have agreed show promise. I hate to think how many advancements we aren't funding as it is.

Where I will fault science is in their incapacity to efficiently communicate. Our job description amounts to summarizing the unintuitive. For my money, this communication gulf accounts for most of the perceived waste in science. When you're inside you see how all the ant work science (both metaphorical and literal) contributes. Most of the great discoveries end up looking more like great summaries. Every field has someone come along once a decade or two, but it's hard to know who. Then the universe is easier to understand; and everybody wins.

Here's an example. Studying gill-withdrawal responses in sea slugs provided the foundation for what we now know about neuronal learning and memory. This was circa 1952. Reasoning similar to yours would have prohibited that expense. That would have been dumb. I agree if your point is simply that we should do a better job of convincing you of that.

Mirror neurons at work.

How do you make decisions? Neurons firing in your brain.
How do neurons work? Electrical signals.
What are electrical signals? flying electrons
Quantum mechanics effects electrons.

Read up or watch about Schrödinger's cat

Sigh. Its not that I dont want a "spiritual experience", its just that the "spiritual" DOES NOT EXIST. This is chemicals reacting with the neurons in your brain, making you think you are experiencing "spiritual" things. It doesn't matter that you go "you just dont understand,man, try it yourself" blahblahblah. I dont have to. Because whatever subjective experience I'll have or you've had, will not change some basic facts that we all have to deal with: That we , along with our brains and our consciousness, are evolved biological phenomena that abide by the laws of physics. We even know that the brain is a fallible instrument thats just SO easy to fool, you dont even need drugs. Right now there are literally billions of people who are wasting almost their entire life believing in nonsense, They use laptops, mobile phones, planes and they've seen the freaking moonlanding, and they think a freaking Palestinian zombie was the son of god who rescued us from collective sin because a couple ate a fruit recommended by a talking snake.
And that's not even the dumbest religion.
People believe such bullshit because they are not really thinking straight , not taking in the facts discovered by science, not understanding the process by which such discoveries are made, not understanding the carefulness by which they are doublechecked, not understanding the implications that such discoveries have.

Damn mirror neurons... you happy