cognitive fun! talk RSS http://cognitivefun.net Cognitive neuroscience for everyone! Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:16:26 -0800 what i say is an audible possibility, the mystification is my blunder, perhaps i'll know how to go about it someday. I use Numenta regularly, you're right, it is astonishing Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:51:58 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14431 Yeah. Psylocybin can do that. I see you've been taking notes from McKenna and maybe even Aleister Crowley. [I kid. I kid.] Numenta provides a toolkit (you must register there, though, which is free) for you to develop your own network using their proprietary HTM algorithm. There's also a demo. All you programmers into AI shouldn't take this lightly. Same for you neuroscientists out there. And, no, I'm not a sneak employed by Numenta to convince others. It would be nice to be paid for what I do.. Sun, 28 Jun 2009 10:32:37 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14427 prediction exists in an infinitesimal frame, chronicled, an outsider reinstated continual death, a violent gasp of light, a frantic representation of system behavior, abruptly to slip away Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:06:45 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14420 It seems these people would agree with me and have the facility to specify what processes they believe to be effected: "We believe that the effect of the racetams is due to a potentiation of already present neurotransmission and that much evidence points in the direction of a modulated ion flux by, e.g., potentiated calcium influx through non-L-type voltage-dependent calcium channels, potentiated sodium influx through alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor gated channels or voltage-dependent channels or decreases in potassium efflux. Effects on carrier mediated ion transport are also possible." Found here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8061686?dopt=AbstractPlus Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:40:44 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14412 Life Link's page has some good information, too: http://www.lifelinknet.com/siteResources/Products/NooRacetam.asp Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:58:07 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14408 Try the combination: Omega3 + Choline + Uridine (found in brewers yeast) + B vitamins (be careful on B6,it is toxic in large doses). In combination with running (= oxygen) is rocks! It are the building blocks of brain cells and all natural products. Google it you will understand. Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:01:12 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14402 "Individual nerve cells in the front part of the brain can hold traces of memories on their own for as long as a minute and possibly longer, researchers at UT Southwestern Medical Center have found." http://www.physorg.com/news152114323.html Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:16:04 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14378 I thought you were defusing any potentially malicious meaning with the ":p" but I wasn't absolutely sure. It's been a less than joyous day on my end... In any case, are you so sure there is a clear distinction between mind and brain? I would be inclined to say they are one and the same, particularly insofar as the brain is functionally constituted to do blah blah blah. Since you mention you work on AI, I would highly recommend you look into the likes of Hawkins, his Numenta, and so forth, if you have not already. It's incredibly interesting. Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:53:43 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14362 hehe, i know how my 'mind' works, whether or not this knowledge is applicable to my 'brain' is up in the air. i was just being facetious, most everything i say is silly because i'm not smart enough to think up anything serious Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:55:18 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14361 Forget the dash in stand by... I wasn't careful enough, plasticity be damned. Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:36:24 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14360 I doubt that you know how your brain works. If you did, well, by golly you would have a Nobel Prize in your pocket. At any rate, I didn't mean to touch a sore nerve, an obviously sensitive one. I still stand-by what I said. Besides, an A.I. in my view would be a brainless automaton... irony of ironies. Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:35:42 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14359 Well, there is an elementary elucidation. Data from WM gets encoded into LTM, the efficiency of this process is largely dependent on 'plasticity'. If info is taking a longer time to move into LTM, it follows that the data will be kept in WM for a longer period. this can lead to interference, ect Piracetam as advertised, seems to mimic a boost in plasticity, (improves membrane permeability, neuron excitability.. ACh levels) : if this augments encoding activity then it possibly results in less interference "LT-WM is non-generalizable" One's aptitude for acquiring such memory systems should indicate a certain kind of intelligence which is difficult to measure. "your insertion of "bio-defrag utility" only muddies this" I'm just a math/comp sci major who enjoys developing AI in his free time. Excuse me for liking to make ridiculous analogies involving hard drives. Also, I know how MY brain works, it is YOURS that is in question. And it is not so far fetched to assume that you are, indeed, a brainless automaton. the rest of society included :p Mon, 22 Jun 2009 07:44:26 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14357 My understanding, based on Jeff Hawkins' proposed theory of intelligence, would have to agree. But your insertion of "bio-defrag utility" only muddies this, for it is a kind of intuition about how the brain works that prevents us from really understanding it in accordance with its own terms, rather than in the terms of something else. I would conceive of Piracetam as something that makes the already-present processes more efficient, nothing more. What processes is what is at issue here, then. Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:04:01 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14353 nothing prevents the learning of new things more than the knowledge of what has previously been learned... piracetam's mode of action as a bio-defrag utility Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:18:36 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14351 Here's another link pointing to Proactive Interference, but this time it is in relation to Long-Term Working Memory: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Papers/Py104/ericsson.long.html You'll have to scroll down to "Proactive Interference...". It is perhaps a good source on those with high RST scores. LT-WM in conjunction with low susceptibility to interference would likely constitute a possible explanation. Reading is a kind of skill, and LT-WM is non-generalizable, so Piracetam is possibly a help to this kind of WM which is probably not exercised on JB-esque n-back tasks. Mon, 22 Jun 2009 01:43:10 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14348 Scribd has a whole hell of a lot of stuff on piracetam. E.g.: http://www.scribd.com/doc/6146240/Nootropics-James-South Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:27:17 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14297 I'm not sure about the effects of piracetam during long term supplementation http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a741442183 "No statistically significant changes in cell viability or number was observed at 0-7 mM Piracetam in both cell types, although at 70 mM cell viability in the L929 cell line was significantly reduced when compared with the control. Initial studies indicate that Piacetam is only toxic at concentrations greater than 70 mM; however, the effects of repeated dosages over long periods still need to be investigated. " Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:10:01 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14284 An informative .pdf article pointing to deficits in WM for the elderly as a function of increased susceptibility to interference rather than decreased capacity (RST is mentioned along with a modification thereto): https://pal.utdallas.edu/pubs/publication/download/980 Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:54:01 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14283 Like you, I recently started regular dosages of piracetam (in pill form). I also did not notice any significant gains (outside of the usual training improvements) on n-back training whilst using it, but I have noticed a 33.3% increase in my reading span: 6 before, 8 now. It may even go higher were I motivated enough to type that much, but seeing no study ever went higher than a 7 span (so far that I'm aware), I find myself in uncharted territory. In any case, it makes sense that my reading span would increase, considering the touted increase in verbalization granted by piracetam. Following this, it would appear piracetam has little to do with WM, but quite a bit with reading comprehension; reading with piracetam points to an augmentation in my ability to focus on passages to a significant degree (and not only on the RST). Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:44:22 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14279 I reached my highest score at 9-back on dual while "under the influence" of Piracetam but it's a bit ridiculous to pinpoint this as the reason for my high score (or a reason for low scores at 7 back which were also influenced by piracetam)...so the drug may or may not have helped my working memory. Thu, 18 Jun 2009 01:46:16 -0700 http://cognitivefun.net/talk/post/13989#r_14273