I am posting this blog that counters the monistic proposal for mind-body interaction by David Bohm and gives further justification for dualist interaction between the immaterial mind and the material synaptic networks of the human brain. The blog considers the quantum wave potential described by Bohm and suggests that it is the product of the mind rather than an entity within a monistic perspective.
The Mind and the Quantum Wave Potential
In my Hypothesis, stated at the beginning of Chapter Seven of my book, Nerve Endings of the Soul: Interaction between the Mind of God and the Mind of Man through Neural Synaptic Networks, it is proposed that a nonmaterial energy from the Mind of God induces the synaptic transmission of encoded specified information within spike trains of action potentials to the mind of Man by quantum tunneling across synaptic clefts. That the human cognitive mind is created in the image of the Mind of God, the same process for neural transmission through synaptic networks is likely by this created process. In this blog I will address how the mathematical expression of the quantum wave potential might relate to dualist interaction between the immaterial Mind of God/mind of Man and the material synaptic networks of the human brain. In my discussion I will be referring to the work of David Bohm, Hiley and Pylkkanen, John C. Eccles, Friedrich Beck, Stephen Meyer and William A. Dembski in particular. Much of what I am sharing has been presented in my books and earlier blogs, but I will consolidate what I have presented and include information from recent scientific articles that consider the “quantum wave potential,” a mathematical entity described by David Bohm in the quantum Hamilton-Jacobi equation.
Eccles and Beck designated quantum tunneling as the “trigger” for synaptic transmission when the mind willfully transmits specified, encoded programs through neural synaptic networks. Their proposal suggested how quantum tunneling could play a role in controlling the frequency of synaptic exocytosis, a stochastic process. Beck and Eccles proposed that quantum tunneling would enable the “self” to control its brain without violating the energy conservation law. Hiley and Pylkkanen have described a relationship between wave functions and quantum tunnelling. The question I propose is as follows: Does the cognitive mind activate the “trigger” by generating wave functions, or wave forms, that transmit quasiparticles (electrons) through the voltage potential barriers of synapses by tunneling in the cerebral cortex? [Basil J. Hiley and Paavo Pylkkanen, “Can Mind Affect Matter Via Active Information?” Mind and Matter, Vol. 3(2), 2005, pp. 7-27] The authors acknowledged the work of Eccles and Beck and elaborated on it by considering the role of a quantum wave potential described in mathematical detail by David Bohm in quantum tunneling. (D. Bohm, “A New Theory of the Relationship of Mind and Matter, Philosophical Psychology, Vol. 3, 1990, pp. 271-286; F. Beck and J.C. Eccles, “Quantum Aspects of Brain Activity and the Role of Consciousness,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol. 89, 1992, pp 11357-11361; F. Beck, Quantum Brain Dynamics and Consciousness, The Physical Nature of Consciousness, ed. By P. van Loocke, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2001, pp. 83-116)
Hiley and Pylkkanen proposed that the quantum energy involved in synaptic transmission is a form of internal energy distinct from kinetic and classical potential energy that transmits what Bohm called a new type of “active information.” The energy proposed is associated with simultaneous position and momentum determinants of quantum entities in contrast to the long-accepted Copenhagen perspective of indeterminism. How do quasi-particles (electrons) associated with quantum waves penetrate voltage potential barriers? By applying Bohm mechanics to tunneling they proposed that the wave form of a quasi-particle goes through a potential barrier depending on the position of the particle in the oncoming wave function. The total energy of the process is conserved because there is a redistribution of energy between the kinetic energy, the classical potential energy and the quantum potential energy described by David Bohm. Particles at the front of the wave function, or specified wave form, pass through the barrier by tunneling while those at the rear are reflected before they reach the barrier. The third group of trajectories remain inside the voltage barrier for a time. The quantum wave potential was described as having active information for the particles. At the quantum level this information was stated to organize and give direction to the dynamic evolution of quantum wave and quasi-particle flow in double-slit experiments. Could the proposed quantum wave potential also give direction to wave forms and quasiparticles through neural synaptic networks? The quantum wave potential energy is expressed in the shape or form of the wave rather than in its amplitude, accounting for the conservation of energy in tunneling. Hiley and Pylkkanen considered the quantum wave potential to have a physical, deterministic aspect by its influence on the kinetic and potential energies at synaptic voltage barriers in synaptic entities. A relationship was suggested between an internal energy and the material synaptic components without violation of the law of conservation of energy as proposed by Beck and Eccles.
The concept of a “new active information” in its role in quantum tunneling was not attributed to the cognitive mind by Bohm, but he stated that it had “mind-like” qualities. He considered that the mind was not distinct from the physical aspects of synaptic transmission, the two processes being essentially the same. He stated that “what we experience as mind . . . will, in a natural way, ultimately move the body by reaching the level of the quantum potential and of the ‘dance’ of the particles” involved in quantum tunneling. He posited that “in some sense a rudimentary mind-like quality is present even at the level of particle physics . . . there is no real division between mind and matter, psyche and soma.” He referred to “a greater collective mind . . . going indefinitely beyond even the human species as a whole.”
I cited Stephen Meyer in my blog post entitled “Waves in Our Brains,” Part Three (http://estanlennard.com) who stated “our uniform experience affirms that specified or functional information . . . always arises from an intelligent source, from a mind (Italics added),” and I emphasized that it refers to an immaterial mind. The direction given to a quantum wave and quasiparticle through neural synaptic networks would ultimately be by the intent of a mind, an intellect, with design and purpose. In my three blogs, each entitled “Waves in Our Brains,” I have given a compelling reason to believe that the cognitive mind of humans generates wave forms. We see that they have amplitude and frequency as well as the shape and form that has been attributed to the action of the quantum wave potential. (Scott R. Cole and Bradley Voytek, “Brain Oscillations and the Importance of Waveform Shape,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2017, Vol 21, No. 2, pp 137-149) I suggest, therefore, that it is the cognitive mind of Man (and of God) that determines the direction of encoded trajectories of spike trains of action potentials through synaptic networks. The question that is posed is if the internal energy of the quantum wave potential relates to the wave forms generated by the cognitive mind of Man (as well as of the Mind of God) that have been documented by electrocarticography and functional magnetic resonance imaging. This topic has been discussed in the “Waves in Our Brains” series. It is proposed that it is instantiated information from a mind that gives the wave form direction by its shape, phase and also by its frequency and amplitude. As a wave form is transmitted across pyramidal modules in the cerebral cortex the “detector function” described by Eccles within pyramidal modules matches the wave form that is being transmitted from the mind/Mind of god with intrinsic patterns within modules to form synchronous, coherent waves according to their shape and to their amplitude and frequency, a process that includes entrainment and cross frequency coupling. Direction is thereby given to the trajectories of spike trains of action potentials transmitted through synaptic networks. Modular neural activity is highly plastic and varied across the primary site of cognition, the cerebral cortex. By this process of matching, which is under active investigation in our day, direction is given to wave forms emanating from the mind’s intent that are linguistically encoded with information for meaning, specified purposes and actions (e.g. speaking, moving extremities, thinking, etc.) I offer that the quantum wave potential, if it exists, may reflect a causal effect of a mind that gives specified information to the processes and trajectories of quantum tunneling and synaptic transmission.
In “Waves in Our Brains,” Part Three I quoted Stephen Meyer who stated, “…in using language the human mind routinely generates highly improbable linguistic sequences to convey a preconceived idea. In the process of thought, functional objectives precede and constrain the selection of words, sounds, and symbols to generate functional sequences from a vast ensemble of meaningless alternatives . . . intelligent agents can select functional goals before the goals are physically instantiated . . . they can then actualize those goals in accord with a preconceived design plan or set of functional requirements.” Linguistic sequences are transmitted by wave forms constituting neural codes within spike trains of action potentials that are interpreted by the cognitive mind of humans and archived in memory.
I propose that the Mind of God and the mind of Man can by this process channel random synaptic events toward preordained, specified ends. The immaterial wave forms emitted from a mind/Mind are selected from initially random, or indeterministic, probabilities and given specification and direction possibly by an action of the proposed quantum wave potential. The role in the tunneling process of wave form amplitude is not directly addressed by Bohm and appears to be mathematically discounted, giving primary importance to wave form shape. I propose that the quantum wave potential emanates from, or is influenced by, the intent of a mind that imparts information to the shape of the wave form that determines trajectory direction through cortical modules and downstream synaptic networks. The wave forms are entrained with the wave forms of specific cortical neural modules to form synchronized spike trains of wave forms that are linguistically encoded and transmitted through coherent networks with meaning, purpose and intended action. The synaptic networks are referred to as nerve endings of the soul in my first book. Through a lifetime of learning and experience the cognitive mind interprets the neural codes, whether in sensation or motor function. Could this be in part the process by which communion occurs between the Mind of God and the mind of Man?
David Bohm postulated a monistic perspective of mind-body interaction. The proposal offered in this blog is in support of a dualist interaction between the immaterial mind and the material synaptic networks of the human brain.
Human will and the readiness potential
In her review Gholipour wrote that Aaron Schurger, a researcher at the National Institute of Health and Medical Research in Paris, “studied fluctuations in neuronal activity, the churning hum in the brain that emerges from the spontaneous flickering of hundreds of thousands of interconnected neurons, . . . an ongoing electrophysiological noise [that] rises and falls in slow tides.” In his review of Kornhuber and Deecke’s innovative approach to the study of this activity he found “no purpose behind these apparent trends . . . . the pattern would simply reflect how various factors had happened to coincide.” When he examined his own data from studies using the same method as the German team he “saw something that looked like the Bereitschaftspotential . . . [but considered that the] rising pattern wasn’t a mark of a brain’s brewing intention at all, but something much more circumstantial.” Gholipour shared that “neuroscientists know that for people to make any type of decision, our neurons need to gather evidence for each option.” In my books and blogs I have discussed how cognition initiates activity in the memory codes in the supplementary motor areas followed by the transmission of spike trains of action potentials through synaptic networks to, for example, move a finger or arm. There is prior neural activity just prior to the willful intent for physical action in this instance. Gholipour referred to more recent studies by Schurger and Princeton colleagues that “repeated a version of Libet’s experiment,” finding that brain activity in their subjects began only 150 milliseconds before a movement, “the time people reported making decisions in Libet’s original experiment. . . . In other words, people’s subjective experience of a decision - what Libet’s study seemed to suggest was just an illusion - appeared to match the actual moment their brains showed them making a decision.” Schurger’s studies “showed the Bereitschaftspotential may not be what we thought it was.” Gholipour pointed out in her article that Schurger’s work did not solve the question of free will any more than Libet’s did, but did deepen the question. In my more recent blogs I have identified several actions in synaptic networks that occur as a result of cognitive intent, including the proposed generation of wave forms that are transmitted via quantum tunneling to stimulate action potentials. Might this activity be included in the 150 milliseconds prior to a movement, thus giving support to dualist interaction between the immaterial mind and the material synaptic networks of the human brain?
Human volition, or free will
Chris Frith published an article entitled, “The Psychology of Volition,” in Exp Brain Res, 2013, Vol. 229: 289-299. I am posting several excerpts from that article that describe human volition, or free will. Materialists reduce the mind to the physical brain and go so far as to challenge the existence of free will. By reading these posts I hope you can come to your own conclusion about the reality of human volition.
“From the first-person view, our experience of volitional behavior includes a vivid sense of agency. We feel that, through our intentions, we can cause things to happen and we can choose between different actions. . . . In what sense do we control our behavior? Does such control imply the possibility of mental causation and the existence of free will? Is free will compatible with a materialist approach to the study of behavior? Is this truly free behavior uniquely human? . . . The key feature of a voluntary act as opposed to a reflex is that the voluntary act cannot be fully predicted from the preceding context. The implication is that, if the behavior is not being determined by external events, then the choices must be made ‘from inside’, endogenously. . . . [Frith asks] Is it possible for a nervous system to generate truly random behavior? . . . Unpredictable behavior . . . is self-generated, or endogenous. . . . Whatever the precise mechanisms underlying its perception, volition, seen from the first-person perspective, is associated with a vivid experience of agency. As agents, we have the experience of desiring an outcome and of choosing the action that will achieve it. Some believe that it is this experience of being an agent that leads to a belief in free will. . . . It is the first-person aspect of volition that is uniquely human. . . . The experience of agency requires that these signals be interpreted.” In my books and blogs I have made the effort to identify what does the interpretation, and it is the immaterial mind.
Dualist interaction and substance dualism
I have found an article that addresses substance dualism, essentially another term that can be applied to dualist interactionism. I share excerpts from this article that will be of value in clarifying what is meant by these terms, especially since the perspectives of monism, determinism, materialist reductionism and macroevolution still dominate much of the literature of neuroscience. The article is entitled “What Is Man, that You are Mindful of him? The Harmony of Substance Dualism and MBTI.” It is authored by Reilly LaRose from Taylor University, dated 2020, a student of Dr. Seeman, Philosophy of Mind. The article can be found at https://pillars.taylor.edu/philosophy/1. I will post a series of excerpts from this article.
Substance dualism, under the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, can be understood as affirming “a substance is characterized by its properties, but . . . it is more than the collection of the properties it possesses; it is the thing which possesses them. So, the mind is not just a collection of thoughts but is that which thinks - an immaterial substance over and above its immaterial states.” The roots of substance dualism are seated in a metaphysic which argues for the existence of both a physical body and immaterial mind within humans. . . . At base, there are two substances (maybe more) in existence, and humans are constituted by both. Many philosophers point out this unification of body and soul can be understood as a marriage of substances to accomplish beauty and purpose. This union doesn’t downplay the intimacy and interaction of both substances, nor does it deny that both substances are distinct.
LaRose stated, What seems to be captured in . . . substance dualism is the relationship between the body and soul - a meshing that makes consciousness capable of abstraction and thinking through the perceptual organs and phenomenal experience associated with embodiment. But in what sense can I call myself a unified “self” if my body isn’t my whole being? . . . a unified self exists over and above each of these consciousness and bodily experiences. . . . Because there is an enduring soul melded intimately with the body, the stimulations of the body coalesce into various inputs that the soul or mind sits over and above to experience and make decisions over.
In continuing this particular blog series addressing substance dualism and its compatibility with dualist interactionism, I am posting comments by LaRose citing Ralph C. S. Walker:
Walker states that on the basis of reason, the mental cannot solely be the physical. . . . reason provides sufficient justification to believe the mind is not physical since the process of reason interrupts the chain of physical determinism. . . . what reason does is “moves minds” towards certain ideas and behavior. In this way, no matter our physical being, should reason exist ontologically, then no conception of mind remains within the bounds of physical determinism solely: there must be a mental outside the physical to be moved by reason. . . . Further, having a separate, mental existence sets one up to subscribe to an enduring self beyond the physical. . . . Substance dualism holds a simple and profound answer for these observations of conscious life: the soul, the mind, the self is that which feels. We are more than the collection of qualitative phenomenal experiences, but that which experiences them.
Substance dualism, concluded
I conclude this series of posts from the article by Reilly LaRose with the following comments drawing from Riccardo Manzotti and Paolo Moderato:
The conclusion they arrive at is that neuroscience, while peddling a materialist explanation of mind in most cases, tacitly or implicitly holds a dualistic philosophy of mind: “nothing in literature explains why a certain neural phenomenon should produce a certain phenomenal experience. . . . Neuroscience faces an impossible mission . . . showing how a physical world which had been a priori defined as devoid of those properties that are essential of mind may contain or produce those properties.” What Manzotti and Moderato call this situation is an “ontological promissory note” of explanation, meaning that neuroscientists who hold materialist views can only promise that someday the cashing out of explanation for mind in physical terms and causes will be realized. All the while, a dualistic conception of mind and body is guiding the language and practice of neuroscience, for what a materialist calls “mental properties” doesn’t elude the problems associated with materialism and mind. As Manzotti and Moderato put it, these “mental properties” function the same as a dualist’s “mental qualities” in philosophical terms. Both are treated as things in themselves and inexplicable from the perspective of pure physicalism.
Dwelling of the Holy Spirit
It is my hope that dualist interaction between the immaterial and material has been compellingly defended both in my books and blogs by showing concordance between Scripture and neuroscience. Jesus sent as He promised the Holy Spirit to indwell those in repentance, to provide Counsel and Help to believers by faith to this present day. God is Spirit, as is His Holy Spirit, which indwells people via the immaterial human spirit, created in Man at his creation. We have seen that there is now evidence that the immaterial Spirit is causal through the human spirit on the immaterial human mind, with actions manifested in and through the material brain and body. This reality provides understanding of Ephesians 2:19-22:
Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rise to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.
A step toward understanding dualist interaction
In my succeeding blogs I will post excerpts from and my discussions in response to recent neuroscience articles that address the apical and distal tufts of the pyramidal cells of the neocortex. I offer a postulate that suggests how the proposed wave forms generated by the cognitive mind interact directly with these structures to actualize the mind’s intention for action, whether it be the movement of an extremity, a creative thought or a spoken word, even from the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit may be offering us an explanation of this interaction, a manifestation of his progressive revelation so that we can come to a personal, intimate communion with our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Tufts of the apical dendrites of pyramidal neurons - a role in cognition?
As I begin this series of blogs some definitions are in order. I will be focusing on a specific part of pyramidal neurons, the dendrites and their apical tufts. The information I am sharing is extracted from two articles, the first: M. W. Spratling, “Cortical Region Interactions and the Role of Apical Dendrites,” Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 1(3): 219-228, 2002, and the second: Nelson Spruston, “Pyramical Neurons: Dendritic Structure and Synaptic Integration,” Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, Vol. 9, March 2008, 206-221.
The cerebral cortex consists of a laminar structure of six layers. The cell bodies of pyramidal cells, the most abundant type of cortical neuron, are found in layers II-VI and have distinct morphologies, including two separate dendritic arbors: the basal dendrites which occupy the same layer as the cell body and the apical dendrites which ascend into more superficial layers. For pyramidal cells in layer VI the apical dendrites extend to layer IV, and for pyramidal cells in the other layers the apical dendrites extend to layer I where they are quite dense. Pyramidal cells consist of the only neurons that project outside the cortex “and [are] the primary source of connections between different cortical areas. This class of cell is thus likely to have a major role in cortical information processing.” (I remind the reader that information can only be generated by a mind, discussed in detail in previous blogs and in my books.)
Both the apical and basal dendrites receive connections with axons originating in different cortical areas. They are rich in dendritic spines that project from the dendritic body and along its length to make connections with boutons, specialized pre-synaptic structures at the ends of axons. Between the bouton and the spine is a very narrow synaptic cleft across which neural transmitters flow to generate action potentials transmitted through synaptic networks. Spines are highly variable in their size and shape and are plastic, changing with experience. “It has been suggested that thin, dynamic spines might be available to contribute to learning, whereas larger, more stable spines might be involved in the storage of established memories. Repeated activation of small spines leads to increase in their size by the Hebbian process discussed in my books.
Spruston describes pyramidal neurons as having basal and apical dendrites along with apical tufts. In my research I wonder if the wave forms that appear to be generated by cognition of the immaterial mind interact with the spines of apical dendrites within the apical tufts? Does this interaction occur at ionic channels in the tufts and/or in the specialized, pre-synaptic structures? Are axons involved? What is the result of the proposed interaction, and how are spike trains of action potentials generated that are transmitted through synaptic channels to bring about intended action? As this discussion proceeds I shall address these questions in relation to my postulate that apical tufts are sites for interaction with the immaterial mind.
My discussion that follows will focus on the basics of apical dendritic function which is markedly complex. The two articles to which I am making reference discuss this function in more detail. My focus is to address only one aspect of its function in relation to cognitive activity within the cerebral cortex, giving expression to related points made in earlier blogs in this context. Each blog that follows in this series will be entitled, “Apical tufts in cognition, part 1, 2, etc.”
Apical tufts in cognition, Part 1
I am posting below comments from Spratling’s article addressing the role of attention (by the cognitive mind) in information processing. It must be recalled that information is only generated by a mind (matter cannot generate information), and all information that is transmitted must be encoded (within neural codes to which my books and blogs have spoken).
“Attention is a top-down process that operates via cortical feedback projections. . . . Attention modulates the sensory-driven activation of cells, . . . such that activity in response to an attended stimulus is increased in amplitude and duration. . . . increased attention has effects similar to increasing the contrast or saliency of the stimulus. . . . In the absence of a stimulus, attention increases the rate of spontaneous firing (the author makes no mention of the causal effects of a cognitive mind, and I have shared in my more recent blogs that attention, intent and will likely generate wave forms with amplitude, frequency and phase that can tunnel through voltage barriers of ionic channels and synaptic components to increase ‘the rate of spontaneous firing’ in neural networks) . . . . attention is used to multiplicatively modulate the synaptic strengths of intra-cortical connections so that attended information can be selectively routed to higher cortical regions. . . . modulatory affects could also be achieved by employing neurons that have two functionally distinct dendrites (apical and basal dendrites).”
I continue with this author’s comments that address the complex feedforward and feedback activities that are known to operate in information transmission through interconnected neural networks. Cognition involves such interconnectedness in a top-down fashion. Stimulation and inhibition both operate within and between neural cortical modules to strengthen and direct the transmission of spike train trajectories through selected neural networks, a process that involves synchronization and entrainment as discussed in my recent blogs. I have proposed that linguistically encoded wave forms generated by the mind (e.g. attention) gain direction through neural networks to bring about specific activities (e.g. moving an arm) by entraining modular wave forms whose amplitudes, frequencies and phases are in synchrony with them, establishing coherent wave forms that transmit specified information through neural synaptic networks. The question that is being considered is how apical pyramidal tufts relate to this process. Note in the following excerpt how words (italicized) are used that reflect the cognitive activity of a mind!
“Feedback modulates activity generated by feedforward processing. such modulation may play a role in tasks such as recall, priming and attention. . . . by influencing activation each dendrite can affect learning in a biologically plausible manner. Neurons are likely to learn correlations between the separate information streams targeting the apical and basal dendrites. Apical inputs can therefore influence learning at the basal dendrite and may be considered a source of reinforcement or supervision. This interpretation is bolstered by the fact that the apical dendrites in layer I not only receive projections from other cortical regions but are also targeted by the limbic system; a widely projecting set of interconnected brain structures concerned with emotion and memory.” I offer that the neurons of the material brain cannot do all these functions! It is the mind that accomplishes correlations, interpretations, supervision, recall and learning. Memories are recalled from archived neural codes situated within the liaison brain (e.g. supplementary motor area) discussed in my books.
In my next blog I will return to the article by Spruston and consider in more detail the possible role of pyramidal apical tufts in cognition.
Apical tufts in cognition, part 2
I now return to the article by Spruston to focus on a possible role for apical pyramidal cell tufts in the cognitive activity of the immaterial mind. I am posting excerpts from his article along with my comments, primarily reflecting posts I have made in previous blogs and in my books.
“Pyramidal neurons are abundant in the cerebral cortex . . . they are found primarily in structures that are associated with advanced cognitive functions. . . . Critical to the function of each pyramidal neuron is how it responds to its synaptic inputs to produce an action potential that excites its postsynaptic targets. . . . All pyramidal neurons have several relatively short basal dendrites. Usually, one large apical dendrite connects the soma (cell body) to a tuft of dendrites. . . . [there is] some evidence [that] supports the division of pyramidal cell dendritic trees into . . . domains, which correspond to regions that receive distinct synaptic inputs and/or have synapses with distinct properties. . . . it is reasonable to postulate that pyramidal neurons with different structural features are also likely to differ functionally. . . . inputs to the main apical dendrite and the oblique apical dendrites might be integrated differently, but it is not known whether synaptic inputs to these domains are identical or different.”
Hence, it is acceptable for me to offer a postulate on how wave forms generated by cognition interact with the pyramidal tufts and their numerous spines to stimulate changes in the microstructures of ionic channels to initiate dendritic spikes. This action could involve quantum tunneling as we have seen with the transmission of wave forms through potential barriers at neural synapses to initiate spike trains of action potentials that transmit specified codes. Just where, I am asking, would wave forms generated by the immaterial mind act? In subsequent blogs I will address the statements of Sir John C. Eccles that are prescient in this regard.
“Pyramidal neurons are covered with thousands of dendritic spines that constitute the postsynaptic site for most excitatory glutamatergic synapses. . . . The function of dendritic spines remains enigmatic. . . . Spines vary considerably in their size and shape and are highly plastic [so that they may be functional in memory and learning].”
I have discussed in my books and several blogs how the immaterial mind “learns” to interpret neural codes over a lifetime as well as generates their formation within spike trains of action potentials. Neural codes are archived in memory and accessed by the mind to effect desired actions with purpose and meaning. An example I have discussed in my books is the supplementary motor area, where neural codes for various motor actions are archived in the so-called liaison brain described by Eccles.
When dendritic spines are stimulated by incoming wave forms they “exert significant influence over action-potential initiation through the activation of dendritic voltage-gated channels, which can enhance charge entry at distal synapses and might even lead to dendritic spike initiation. Several observations suggest that synapses at different dendritic locations are specialized to perform different functions . . . The apical tuft also has a relatively large number of [spine] synapses on the dendritic shaft. These differences suggest that these various dendritic regions receive synaptic inputs that have distinctive properties.” [The author does not address cognitive function and its potential application to this process.]
In my next blog I will continue to draw upon Spruston’s article, focusing on the process of dendritic excitability and coincidence detection, leading to the discussions by Eccles that are prescient in this context.
Apical tufts in cognition, part 3
Spruston discusses the very complex properties of apical and basal dendrites. Dendritic spikes include both calcium and sodium spikes activated at the ionic channels for these two ions by synaptic input. How the postulated wave forms generated by the cognitive mind may interact with the components of ionic channels, likely involving quantum tunneling, to generate these spikes is an unanswered question. “Once initiated, dendritic spikes propagate towards the soma where, in some cases, they can initiate an action potential. . . . [Spruston points out that] dendritic spikes do not propagate reliably from the apical tuft into the main apical dendrite,” propagation depending upon whether a ‘gate’ is opened or closed that governs the influence of distally generated dendritic spikes on axonal action-potential initiation.”
So we see that the function of apical tufts remains under study and that spike generation in dendrites and axons is most complex. Initiation of spikes in ionic channels and synapses by cognition is not ruled out. Spruston concludes with the statement that the answering of questions about dendritic function “will move [us] closer to a detailed understanding of the complex and dynamic function of pyramidal neurons, a crucial key to unlocking the mysteries of cortical function.”
I conclude my discussion of this aspect of cognition. My intent has been to show how progress in neuroscience is being made to shed light on an understanding of dualist interaction between the immaterial mind and the brain. There is much yet to learn, but I am confident that findings will reveal concordance between Scripture and science, so that our faith that the Holy Spirit communes with us in our time is strengthened.
The wisdom and knowledge of God
I am posting verses from Romans 11: 33-36 that were included at the end of my book, The Boundless Love of God: A Holy Spirit Story. Yes, we are learning much from advances in the neurosciences, providing confirmation of dualist interaction between the Mind of God and the mind of Man and perhaps how that works with wave forms at the level of pyramidal modules of the cerebral cortex and the consequent transmission of encoded spike trains through neural synaptic networks. But our God is so much more majestic and powerful, and we are humbled as we seek His Truth.
Oh, the depths of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how fathomless his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor? Or who has first given to God, that God needs to repay him? For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever! Amen.
Thank you for your attention to my blogs that expand on the contents of my books. I will continue my research through the available neuroscience literature, though my posts will be less frequent. I pray that I have provided to date and in future posts a means to increase your faith in the fact that our Creator God, by his grace through our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, desires to have an intimate, two-way personal communion with us as members of his Kingdom, now and forever more.