Dipole Neurology

First lab work shows the Magnetic Dipole forces shaping the embryonic brain

2011-11-03T09:20:00.022Z

An unexpected turn in events occurred in that Vincent Fleury a French embryologist Research director at Centre National de Recherche Scientififique in Paris has developed a novel filming technique which can capture the live movements of early gestation chick embryos. Fleury has long advocated for a view of neurodevelopment first proposed by Darwin but argued against by geneticists called “structuralism”. That structure dictates gene expression rather than the other way around and is the reason most creatures are tetrapods (four-limbed forms).

The idea of structuralism is controversial and PZ myers slated Fleury initially in 2009 as “crackpot” science, with his inevitable sheeplike atheist crowd following in the unnecessary abuse. Myers is now making a quiet turnaround on this position since the death of Brian Goodwin. Richard dawkins has similarly recently conceded that structuralism may be working hand in hand with genetic expression. I do find it odd to the integrity of these science figureheads, that it takes the death of fellow colleague for them to backtrack on their insulting positions. However for those who are not dogma addicts and interested in broadening their perspective on evolution, recently two breakthroughs for structuralism have emerged.

Fleury used mathematical techniques to derive the conclusion that the forces he is filming in the developing brain are hydrodynamic magnetic dipole pulses, interrupted by quadrupole pulses. Anybody familiar with my work will immediately realize this is what has been predicted by dipole neurology theory. If this is not clear what this means is the dipole neurology theory now has the following.

The predicted mechanism proven by the cortex wide pulsing of calcium waves in development (see below)

Independent conformation for the spherical harmonic structure predicted for the lateral ventricles and the limbic system

Actual live lab work illustrating in motion the hydrodynamic dipole and quadrupole are present in the developing embryonic brain at the stages predicted.

This is the first movie made of this dipole force in motion.

For more information his recent paper on this is here.

News release http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110818101740.htm

Independent work has also found the genetic basis for structuralism at the same time is consistent with Fleuries work and Cortical EMS theory.. : From Blue Whales to Earthworms, a Common Mechanism Gives Shape to Living Beings ScienceDaily (Oct. 13, 2011)

If anybody pulls the paper for this groundbreaking work "The Dynamic Architecture of Hox Gene Clusters" they will notice that the Hox gene clusters produce a linear sequence which dictates precisely the form but stops at the head. It appears that there is no sequence for forebrain development. Obviously the missing instructions are for the Radial Glia. So it is clear at this stage that evidence is not being made to fit, the predicted mechanism for the Dipole, Quadrupole formation is chemical gradients pulsing through connexin hemichannels (see below). i.e. The genetic sequence is predicted to cluster (and conserve) for this mechanism at a high level in the development hierarchy.

finally a nice quote from

A New Science of Qualities
A Talk With Brian Brian Goodwin [4.29.97]

"All the great scientists, Einstein, Feynman, you name them, would say intuition is the way they arrived at their basic insights, their new ways of putting parts together into coherent wholes. The famous guys are allowed to say this. The rest of us have to pretend that we're really basing everything on hard fact"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Magnetic fields of radial glial in Prenates: Mechanisms for a cortical dipole structure by VZ calcium waves

2011-10-05T04:14:00.003+01:00

There are 6 papers in the pipeline for this as a PHD project, but this dense paper which has been peer reviewed is the best representation of the work so far.

Magnetic fields of radial glial in Prenates: Mechanisms for a cortical dipole structure by VZ calcium waves

Felix Lanzalaco (a,c), Wajid Zia. (a,b)

(a) Psychology Cares Scotland, Firdon Crescent , Glasgow G15, Scotland (b) Dept of Clinical Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Scotland (c) Open University, Milton Keynes.

http://www.dipoleneurology.org.uk/__Pages/PDF/Dipole%20Neurology%20preprint%20jan%202009.pdf

also available from NQ journal archives

PRESENTED TO

Integrative Approaches to Brain Complexity
October 7 - 10, 2009

Organizers:

Seth Grant, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, UK
Nathaniel Heintz, HHMI/The Rockerfeller University, USA
Jeffrey Noebels, Baylor College of Medicine, USA

http://www.neuroscience.cam.ac.uk/news/article.php?permalink=996f8a0687

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Are Cortical Magnetic models ready for experimental verification ?

2011-08-31T04:53:00.015+01:00

Dipole neurology neurodevelopment theory could not have been built without existing works proposing the key mechanism that glial cells could play in producing cortex wide magnetic fields.

Ingber & Nunez, 2010 , Bokkon & Banaclocha, 2010 , Pereira & Furlan, 2010, Størmer & Laane, 2009

Prof Ingber of Caltech supports the proposal that glial magnetic models are a key missing link in brain function. His primary contribution is to focus on mathematical statistical models to calculate the aggregation of these proposed magnetic interactions.

His recent paper is the best physics based summary for magnetic models, and summarizes that enough theoretical work has been completed for lab verification to begin.

Pereira & Furlan provide a more neuroscience based overview for glial magnetic processes.

This following work provides experimental data which supports my prediction that calcium waves in astrocytes which other researchers think give rise to magnetic pulses across the cortex surface in adults are the mechanism which can give rise to a cortex wide magnetic field in neurodevelopment.

The developing brain has a stem cell derived scaffold throughout it called "radial glial" through which calcium ions pulse. This scaffold works just like the astrocytes in that it is an interconnected synctium for ions to pulse through and so macroscopic magnetic fields can arise. The mechanism is so similar that the radial glial eventually dissolves from stem cells to become astrocytes. The researchers already knew there was ion pulsing, in neurodevelopment but due to practical and ethical reasons they had to stimulate an entire hemisphere to pulse calcium ions by the method described below.

If this is not clear it means that the cortex dipole theory has a mechanism. If an entire magnetic field can pulse through each hemisphere it means that there can be opposite poles in each hemisphere. Due to the tendency for magnetic fields to orientate the domains they influence into poles as large as the fields themselves, I predict the fields are ordering the ferroelectric components of the unmyelinated axons (microtubules and voltage gate potassium channels) into a dipole configuration. A common objection raised to me in the past was that these glial pulses are too weak to overcome the earths static background field. After discussing this with various experts including Michael Persinger, I was informed a weak pulsed field can overcome a more powerful static field. Lester ingber has also independently produced statistical mechanical mathematics in the paper linked above to describe this aggregation of magnetic fields in more detail than I could.

So in a strange way it did turn out after all, there is pure quantum mind aspect to the entire brain, but only in neurodevelopment. As soon as immature neurons migrate along the scaffold and start to operate, this scaffold fades and so does the interconnected calcium ion field. Not surprising then why milk is so important for infants, but of all elements, why did nature choose calcium to produce magnetic fields? Its not hard to understand the principle. Large magnetic fields can orientate larger biological structures together due to their ability to pass through liquids and biological material. As to calcium rather than say iron, Recent work from the genome centre using blue gene computers has dated the origin of glial cells at the same time neurons become ion based and replicated into large assemblies in bilateral sea creatures. Fish mostly. At this time the most abundant element in the ocean were deposits of calcium carbonate that older sea creatures left behind after the Ordovician–Silurian extinction event of 440–450 Ma. It’s this abundance of calcium that was responsible for creatures developing bilateral (symmetrical) hard structures and then skeletons. There is simply an abundance of the material.

Ok enough background here are the results of the lab work.

Ca2+ waves in development can propogate through entire hemisphere radial glial: Weissman, TA et al; 2004.

Calcium Waves Propagate in Partial Whole-Brain Preparations
(A) Partial whole brains were prepared by removing ventral structures to open the ventricles, allowing for tissue perfusion and calcium indicator loading. Schematic shows partial whole-brain preparation and electrode placement. A, anterior; P, posterior; e, ganglionic eminence; v, ventricle; c, cortical anlage. (B) Low-magnifi cation view of Fluo-3 fl uorescence shows a mechanically stimulated calcium wave (electrode displacement of 5 μm) that propagates across the hemisphere. Higher-magnifi cation view shown in (C). Scale bar, 100 μm (B), 50 μm (C). This wave can be requested as a Supplemental Movie.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dipole Neurology at Ratskep. Pseudoscience or Kangaroo review ?

2011-07-20T14:44:00.115+01:00

EDIT: A seperate website is being built for this issue as it has become overtly political for a science blog. When the website is built next year the blog below will provide an article feed to it.

http://rationalskepticism-forum.blogspot.com/

Following the review by Juan Carlos Pinto (log into facebook) , founder of the Strong Ai group, another artificial intelligence researcher Paul Almond ( www.paul-almond.com ) has completely misrepresented this theory on RationalSkepticism forums and posted it in the pseudoscience section. Interesting move considering his works were posted as pseudoscience in the very same section over a year ago.

His stated reason is that the central concept for my research is based on nothing more than brain imaging. There are strong grounds to suspect that this is a pretext to further a preexisting political dispute, which I will illustrate in a moment. First of all to tackle this so called point of contention. Brain imaging was one of many cross discipline results and played no part in generation of the project concept. Any images used are a means to pick out morphogenetic features, (as do other neurodevelopment theories) or put together for conference posters. As this has been clearly stated in the papers introduction it would appear Mr Almond had not even started to read the work he is critiquing. Further misconceptions to be made clear are:

1. The VZ Cortex dipole is not a quantum mind theory. It is a neurodevelopment theory with physical mechanisms based on growing support for glial magnetic models i.e. (Ingber & Nunez, 2010 , Bokkon & Banaclocha, 2010 , Pereira & Furlan, 2010, Størmera & Laanec, 2009)

2. The concept has not been based primarily on how the brain looks, but on how the brain develops its structure and functionally processes information.

The VZ calcium wave to dipole concept IS fully science interactive. It has undergone peer review, multiple independent review by experts, scrutiny at high level neuroscience conferences and is an on going project with further plans for publication, PHD summarization, falsification and experimental design.

If this model is successful there could well be a considerable advancement over previous neurodevelopment theory. This has a possible potential to lead to a deeper understanding of how the brain developed its structure by integrating fundamental principles of physics over evolutionary time scales.

This blatant misrepresentation of my work, has very little to do with the theory. It is an extension of a pre-existing political dispute I have had on going with the people who run that forum since early in 2010, long before they were aware I had scientific works. The thread against me was posted within hours of me revealing my identity and was purely designed to irritate their strongest critic. Anybody who has read it will soon realize it has no bearing on the actual work itself.

After raising the issue with the staff privately I had the option given to have the thread removed. As a member of the forum the rules state another member is not allowed to post a thread criticizing an existing member without that members permission. I decided to leave it online for the following reasons.

1. It illustrates that a controversy exists which is better than to be ignored, even if the work is misrepresented.

2. It’s quite humorous and serves as a fun level advertisement for my work.

3. Their forum provides web permanence that is impossible to buy, which helps readers see the online progress.

4. Although i would fight to prevent this being the only representation people see of my work, I certainly do no want to supress review, even if it is this bad.

OK so whats the big problem then, if i am not bothered about their review ?

My disupte with Ratskep was always about a more general principle in other areas and not related (directly) to my own work. Because these activists mis-conflate atheism with science they feel entitled to take on a political mentality and pool resources in to behavior that erodes the spirit of science. This political trouble was quite serious at one stage and the primary reason Richard Dawkins faced pressure, closed down his forum RDF, and RationalSkepticism then had to be formed as an umbrella organization for these more active members.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7322177/Richard-Dawkins-in-bitter-web-censorship-row-with-fellow-atheists.html

This resulting platform to rally a cause, scoops up science into an anti-creative climate where hierarchies are enforced. A pedantic and rigid framework called "rationalism" is invoked at every turn. This is nothing more than an excuse for political activism, intellectual laziness and misrepresentation for those that cannot or do not want to produce groundbreaking ideas. As members bind each other to a rigid covenant which prevents creative production in this political atmosphere all that remains for expression in this closet is attacks on theists and cheap shots to thrash anything that dares push the boundaries of our understanding.

i.e. Anything the slightest bit controversial or new. This is really a rigid neophobia that no scientist or futurist (of our past) would ever have wanted to see emerge. These forums serve no useful function that is outwith political activity suited to keeping creationism out of classrooms. They dont produce ideas, they dont critique ideas (competently). They don’t solve a scientific problem, yet they aggressively market themselves into that domain and oust scientists peer reviewed works out of google with a misleading and respectable looking front page that tried to emulate Richard Dawkins forum and attract those members. The ratskep graphics are really a tabloid newspaper dressed as an in depth one.

As there are no actual journal editors (or ex editors) and very few published scientists on ratskep, they have a very low awareness in regards to what editorial standards and requirements really are. If published works appear which back up a theory they decided not to like, the journal or institution is then criticized, mostly just to ensure group cohesion between forum members. Very rarely are these papers they criticize read (I tested that by presenting peer reviewed works and watching if the view counter increased). Over one year 60 members ridiculed a theorist yet only two actually accessed the primary work to read it. This is the worst kind of climate for review. The journal system is already difficult, but these members obviously think that system (which they have very little practical insight to) is not good enough.

Its no surprise then to see there are no hallmarks of the refined functions of science or journal procedure when they review and classify works. i.e. Standards, protocol or procedure in review. Contacting of the author for rebuttal, in depth (often none !) reading of the reviewed material, no criteria for “pseudoscience”. no appeal or libel, no regulation, assessment of reviewer expertise etc. The policy which has been stated by their moderators, is that any works which are not encoded in the mainstream are pseudoscience. This policy is at odds with the expert classifications by Thomas Kuhn, Imre Lakatos and A. Musgrave. Ratskep wilfully classifies together Protoscience and fringe science with Pseudoscience. A complete misrepresentation. Pseudoscience is clearly demarcated as not being treated with the scientific method and a form of dishonesty by the proponent of the idea, either to themselves (mostly) or to others.

In other words this forum is quite happy to misrepresent anybody who pushes the boundaries of science and uses scientific methods but who cannot at that time complete their works for various reasons, as intellectually dishonest pseudoscientists that fail to apply scientific methods.

OK...but still its their world in there so leave them to it ?

Unfortunately thats not an option now. They are able to supplant peer reviewed works and academic pages from google so that a scientist without Web SEO skills can end up represented on google by pages of ratskep threads misrepresenting their works as "Pseudoscience". This has not affected me, as i am an ex web designer, but it has done to many unfortunate scientists, a list which i will post shortly.

How ratskep managed to climb google and supplant peer review works, was the result of clear and organized intent to attain a high google rank by a knowledgeable web developer/owner. Here is an insight from the owners Bernhard Breisser (forum name LIFE) instructions to his members. This statement was made not long after richard dawkins ejected them from his site for being irrelevant to science and reason.

HOWTO: Building links for RatSkep to gain higher search engine rankings

To be fair the owner of the site Bernhard Breisser does not appear to take part in this activity (or at least leaves them to it) and was surprised when i showed him a list of scientists that had been affected by his sites agressive marketing.

"It it unfortunate that Google results are what they are, we can only do so much to prevent "misleading" rankings if that would be the case. Say we do rename the section to something "less inflammatory", people can still put "Pseudoscience" in the title and the text and thus result in the same thing. I hope you are not suggesting staff should review each and every thread just to ensure everything is where it should be? Whenever you feel like there is some thread in a wrong category use the report button, there's even a special report reason for these cases. If you suggest to rename the category altogether and can provide convincing reasons for it then of course, you are always free to do so as well.

If members (incl staff) decide that we chance it then I will gladly implement whatever there is to be implemented"

Bad advice. Reports are ignored, and it took 6 months for a thread on the matter to be dealt with, which was to close it down. I had already informed Breisser of this before he made that statement so he was really saying “don’t care, but ill be polite about not caring, and leave it up to others”. On that basis its extremely doubtful that change will occur .

UPDATE: As of 11/11/2011 The Ratskep forum staff voted and agreed to continue with scientific mispresentation, which was no surprise of course. The page i linked to above illustrating their SEO action was then removed. I have replaced the link now to a google Cache copy. I copied this after Bernhard Breisser denied the existence of such a page of instructions publicly. So I posted contents of this page online to jog his memory, he than stated publicly, he had forgotten about this campaign. Two weeks later he deleted the above page. This sequence of events certainly gives the impression that he is fully aware this page constitutes evidence of something. Either the techniques proposed were dubious or he is trying to hide responsibility that the site had such a campaign which has tarnished the google results of many scientists they have misrepresented.

As there is no international libel law to deal with this problem a plan has been constructed to have a complaints blog optimized to appear under a search for "Rational Skepticism". This may be put into progress in middle of 2012. Its content will be dictated on how the scientists that have been affected view this issue.

----------------------------------------------------------

Independent model proposes spherical harmonics for lateral ventricle development

2011-03-21T01:29:00.009Z

Neurodevelopmental mathematicians Monica K. Hurdal and Deborah A. Striegel have produced a paper in September 2009 that proposes the lateral ventricles can be described in neurodevelopment by spherical harmonics. This is of course consistent with the dipole neurology 2003 Limbic EMS (electromagnetic multipole solution) model that is based on spherical harmonics for the lateral ventricles as well as all limbic system appendages. Limbic EMS was not a hypothesis I had been comfortable with but was important to publish as the limbic system would have to remain consistent with the approach taken for Cortical EMS. It is more reassuring that there is now a solid foundation from which to build a case for Limbic EMS.

Paper is called "Chemically Based Mathematical Model for Development of Cerebral Cortical Folding Patterns"

http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1000524
http://www.math.fsu.edu/~mhurdal/posters/hbm10prolate36x48.pdf

Its should be noted Hurdal and Streigel do not endorse Limbic or Cortex EMS. They propose the traditional view that reaction diffusion is the prime driver for cortical folding patterns rather than the MagnetoHydrodynamic (MHD) Pulsing of VZ calcium waves predicted. It should be pointed out that MHD pulsing is consistent with turing reaction /diffusion due to highly similar mathematical models which will be made clearer in a forthcoming neurodevelopmental paper for CorticoLimbic EMS.

-------------------------------------

Indpendent biology based computational designs based on toroidal connectivity

2010-12-24T15:36:00.012Z

As has been stated in the paper the Cortex dipole model is asynchronous with decreased connection giving higher localized column efficiency enabled by a dipole structure that has a central toroid (see section 4 of 2009 paper). A new proposal for Ai restructuring of todays supercomputers based on neurobiology is moving towards the dipole like model by arranging each processors connectivity within a toroidal connectivity network.

There has been ongoing communication with experts in AGI as to whether the dipole/linear multipole model can produce any predictive power or contribution to that field. Anybody who reads my preprint can have a look at the computational analysis i predict which can be derived from the large scale dipole and linear multiple functionality of the brain structure.

Paper : Biologically-Inspired Massively-Parallel Architectures- computing beyond a million processors

ftp://ftp.cs.man.ac.uk/pub/amulet/papers/SBF_ACSD09.pdf

------------------------------------

Dipole Neurology Theory critiqued By Juan Carlos Kuri Pinto

2010-11-17T14:59:00.009Z

Current progress with the Dipole Neurology theory of brain function is increasing its scope. This is due to the theories application back to the development of nervous systems. This requires concentrating on splitting up the work into several main areas covered by a paper for each.

1. Cortical EMS (Electromagnetic Multipole Solution)
2. Limbic EMS and Cortical EMS
3. Neurodevelopmental mechanisms
4. Evolutionary implications for the theory
5. Epigenetic implications for the theory

Currently the theory was last reviewed by Juan Carlos Kuri Pinto. He is an ESPOL postgrad studying for PHD in computational neuroscience and the founder of the Strong Artificial Intelligence Facebook group. You will need to be logged into facebook to read the review.

His critique

My reply

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Easy read poster of the theory

2010-02-10T00:49:00.007Z

Another paper which builds a developmental model consistent with known neuroscience is underway. This will addresses common questions and clarify points which can lead to misunderstanding of the theory.

In the meantime here is an easy read poster of theory.

-------------------------------------------------------

Paper now available from NeuroQuantology Archives

2009-10-20T16:27:00.010+01:00

A current version of the theory which is for sure becoming a theory of neurodevelopment and a tight integration of evolution with physics is available at Neuroquantology archives

After the conference "integrative approaches to brain complexity" it was realised that the dipole concept of separation of charges may reach back 700,000,000 years when bilateral (symmetric) nervous systems and ionotropic GABA/Glutamate receptors formed in salt water environments. Although it is still do be determined if this a co incidence and the symmetry has nothing to do with this..

The poster presented at the conference is an easy read version of the theory also available here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Integrative Approaches to Brain Complexity conference October 7 - 10, 2009

2009-07-18T01:59:00.012+01:00

Due to travel logistics TSC 2009 was not a good direction for progress of the Dipole Neurology project. I had concerns about taking the theory to a philosophy biased neuroscience conference when there are many technical problems still needing to be ironed out..

We feel the best direction is the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory/Wellcome Trust conference on Integrative Approaches to Brain Complexity. This will be held at the Wellcome Trust Conference Centre on the Wellcome Trust Genome Campus in Hinxton, UK. We will ask to present under "Data integration and systems biology".

From their site

"Understanding the structural and functional complexity of the vertebrate nervous system is the theme of this meeting. Advances in genomics and proteomics are defining the molecular building blocks that underpin the structural complexity of the brain and it behavioural output. Combining genetic discoveries with anatomical, electrophysiological and behavioural findings, it is now feasible to integrate this knowledge."

Photos of the conference here

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paper has been updated in light of trial peer reviews

2009-05-23T08:31:00.006+01:00

The paper downloadable from papers page

has been updated and reformatted to journal standard. Still not quite finished yet. Hemodynamic shift has now been removed, but a section on neurodevelopment of the cortical structure has been added (section 2.6).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Toward a Science of Consciousness Conference 2009

2009-04-23T18:31:00.009+01:00

A poster presentation of the theory will be viewable at TSC 2009.

Toward a Science of Consciousness Conference conference which will be held in Hong Kong from June 11th to 14th, 2009

http://www.asiaconsciousness.org

Due to pressure on time and resources i am not sure if i can make it personally. The poster will be up at poster session 1 in Physical & Biological Science section

http://www.sd.polyu.edu.hk/tsc09/posters1.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paper updated.

2009-03-14T18:11:00.005Z

After consulting with other scientists in the field of neuromagnetics the main papers section two, has been updated to include a previously ditched concept. That the hemodynamic response detectable in BOLD (Blood Oxygen Level Dependent) mri could be involved in sustaining cortical activity patterns.

Updated paper here

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Progress after journal presubmission.

2009-02-23T13:42:00.014Z

Feedback from journal editors has been favourable with positive feedback.

To summarize.

1. A technical version of this work has the go ahead for submission to a high impact journal. Another journal is agreeable on the idea of a follow up paper. An evolution based interpretation of the theory, which will be kind of a popular psychology version of the theory.

3. Got the OK to give a poster presentation at this years "Science of Consciousness" festival in Hong Kong. This will be in June 5-15th 2009. Quite a high profile event. More about that here

http://www.asiaconsciousness.org/home.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Main site now located at www.dipoleneurology.org.uk.

2009-01-24T20:05:00.009Z

Site testing is complete. Main site now located at

http://www.dipoleneurology.org.uk

All papers are located there, as well as online fully referenced versions of the theory.

Preprint of paper

Introduction Video

Online version of theory

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Theory summary

2008-10-19T17:15:00.005+01:00

First a quick summary of the theory.

Dipole Neurology:

1. Accounts for the distribution of all currently discovered lateralization of cortical neuronal content. Most neurotransmitters, receptors, modulators, enzymes, lipids, and secondary messengers.

2. Accounts for and unifies the marked difference between limbic system and cortical processes as discovered so far by EEG and computational analysis.

3. Explains why the cortex and limbic system have the structure they do.

4. Already has an insight to offer into brain wide disorders like schizophrenia

5. Unifies more neuroscience theories than any other known model.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Testing blog

2008-10-17T14:02:00.001+01:00

Testing blog feed