I know it is well studied, I'm a neuroscientist. What I am saying is that we must not assume that the effects over time are the exact opposite in each direction.
Good question, but we mustn't assume that reversing the direction was a persistent underclock. Brain plasticity isn't linear. Regardless, I would like to know.
I wasn't going into the success/willpower thing at all.....I don't think anyone "deserves" better because they are smarter, even though that is generally what happens in reality.
Except there are LOTS of things rats can't learn, or that we can't ask them (...which is everything since they don't speak!). Not at all open and shut.
HM was certainly a very important brain, but not *the* most important. There are plenty of patients out there with very similar injuries that have yielded equally (if not more) important discoveries. It is frustrating to see someone present research on medial temporal lobe damage that contradicts studies with HM and see other people be like "But HM!." They have to be reminded that six patients tested with superior methodologies to those around 30-50 years ago should come out on top. He made valuable contributions, but as a field I'd like to see memory research move on from HM.
Well, if I made a few changes to some genes your brain would be about as useful as a liver. Are you trolling? Because you are basically arguing against half a century of research in the cognitive and neural sciences with no evidence.
Given how it is a bitch to get an NSF or NIH grant under the age of 40 (or so I am told), as a future academic I am actually happy to see that someone is saying "hey, young faculty, have we got a grant for you! - And even if you hate weapons, you can work on non-weaponized stuff that will one day help civilians as well!"
I think the reason why it is so hard to have a lab under 30 is because Ph.D.s take longer, and postdocs are more common. Pretty much every professor I know over the age of 40 took four years to get through all of grad school (masters and PhD) in experimental psychology(non-clinical) and neuroscience. It will take my friends and I five or six years. This is because we now need more publications just to get our postdocs, and our Master's Theses had better be publishable, and not just a "first year project." Some schools are starting to cut out the master's degree or even the comprehensive exams (although the latter is rare) just so they don't have to support students for an eternity.
Another upside to these grants is that sometimes the grad students in your lab need security clearances or to at least be US citizens only. This means that those labs can only recruit American students, which is good considering how foreign students are getting more and more of the graduate degrees at American Universities, which can lead to a brain drain if they return home or don't go into industry.
The problem with the dream as preparation theory is that the frontal lobes are basically switched off. This is why you do stupid things in dreams, or are unable to realize that you are dreaming despite all the weird stuff going on. So, if the parts of the brain that are involved in logical thinking and executive control aren't switched on, then I don't see if this can be much good.
15 to 20? Citation needed there. That is between 2000-3000 lbs on a 150 pound person. Fighter pilots have to train to maintain high Gs, which even then they only pull for a matter of seconds (at the highest levels) when flying, and for maybe a few minutes in a centrifuge. They have to wear g-suits to avoid blacking out. Early on during the Korean war, the Mig pilots from the North didn't have g-suits. So the American pilots quickly figured out that if you just get them to follow you into a very high g turn they would black out and crash.
It was banned on and off throughout its career. It didn't do too many supersonic flights in the states even when it was allowed. It wasn't even that loud on takeoff, and flew higher than regular airliners.
I think we should do it just so that some accountant at BP has to enter "Cost of nuclear warhead" into their excel spreadsheet. At least that way we can get a laugh out of this.
Slashdot Mirror
I know it is well studied, I'm a neuroscientist. What I am saying is that we must not assume that the effects over time are the exact opposite in each direction.
Good question, but we mustn't assume that reversing the direction was a persistent underclock. Brain plasticity isn't linear. Regardless, I would like to know.
I wasn't going into the success/willpower thing at all.....I don't think anyone "deserves" better because they are smarter, even though that is generally what happens in reality.
Except there are LOTS of things rats can't learn, or that we can't ask them (...which is everything since they don't speak!). Not at all open and shut.
HM was certainly a very important brain, but not *the* most important. There are plenty of patients out there with very similar injuries that have yielded equally (if not more) important discoveries. It is frustrating to see someone present research on medial temporal lobe damage that contradicts studies with HM and see other people be like "But HM!." They have to be reminded that six patients tested with superior methodologies to those around 30-50 years ago should come out on top. He made valuable contributions, but as a field I'd like to see memory research move on from HM.
Well, if I made a few changes to some genes your brain would be about as useful as a liver. Are you trolling? Because you are basically arguing against half a century of research in the cognitive and neural sciences with no evidence.
You are a brain. Even if that brain is very influenced by the world around it, you are still a brain.
And as a neuroscientist let me tell you, brains ARE different.
Oh, yeah. I know about that. I thought the AC was implying that this war was for the profit of the US or other NATO countries.
What part of the Afghan war is for profit? Iraq, ok. This war? Not.
Given how it is a bitch to get an NSF or NIH grant under the age of 40 (or so I am told), as a future academic I am actually happy to see that someone is saying "hey, young faculty, have we got a grant for you! - And even if you hate weapons, you can work on non-weaponized stuff that will one day help civilians as well!"
I think the reason why it is so hard to have a lab under 30 is because Ph.D.s take longer, and postdocs are more common. Pretty much every professor I know over the age of 40 took four years to get through all of grad school (masters and PhD) in experimental psychology(non-clinical) and neuroscience. It will take my friends and I five or six years. This is because we now need more publications just to get our postdocs, and our Master's Theses had better be publishable, and not just a "first year project." Some schools are starting to cut out the master's degree or even the comprehensive exams (although the latter is rare) just so they don't have to support students for an eternity.
Another upside to these grants is that sometimes the grad students in your lab need security clearances or to at least be US citizens only. This means that those labs can only recruit American students, which is good considering how foreign students are getting more and more of the graduate degrees at American Universities, which can lead to a brain drain if they return home or don't go into industry.
But I thought he went to evil medical school, not evil law school?
The problem with the dream as preparation theory is that the frontal lobes are basically switched off. This is why you do stupid things in dreams, or are unable to realize that you are dreaming despite all the weird stuff going on. So, if the parts of the brain that are involved in logical thinking and executive control aren't switched on, then I don't see if this can be much good.
Really? Because empirical data trumps your anecdotal evidence.
15 to 20? Citation needed there. That is between 2000-3000 lbs on a 150 pound person. Fighter pilots have to train to maintain high Gs, which even then they only pull for a matter of seconds (at the highest levels) when flying, and for maybe a few minutes in a centrifuge. They have to wear g-suits to avoid blacking out. Early on during the Korean war, the Mig pilots from the North didn't have g-suits. So the American pilots quickly figured out that if you just get them to follow you into a very high g turn they would black out and crash.
According to the wikipedia article on the concorde, it was actually quieter than many other models in service at the time.
It was banned on and off throughout its career. It didn't do too many supersonic flights in the states even when it was allowed. It wasn't even that loud on takeoff, and flew higher than regular airliners.
Jefferson? Not a political philosopher? Did you grow up on the Texan curriculum or something?
Deleting Jefferson is rewriting history.
Good. Maybe some kid there will pick it up and learn something from it and get out of white trash world.
So if I speak Spanish, but not Portuguese, the latter should annoy the crap out of me compared to Chinese?
Scientology has more of a beef with *psychiatry* because of the use of drugs to treat mental disorders.
It is Mac, not MAC. And while we are at it, it is pronounced OS ten, not OS ex. I find the two mistakes are highly correlated.
Obviously you haven't met many academics. They have the vocabulary to crush most people, and swear like motherfuckers.
I think we should do it just so that some accountant at BP has to enter "Cost of nuclear warhead" into their excel spreadsheet. At least that way we can get a laugh out of this.
It probably has more to do with the fact that people think physicists can solve anything. I don't know where this comes from.