🚀 go-pugleaf

Just in case...

 In neither my current discussions, nor my prior comments re. 'qm'
and Neuroscience, have I 'discounted' the role of cytoskelleton
constituents.

All my comments were with respect to 'qm' being a non-starter in
Neuroscience - at =any= 'level'.

All along, I've been referring to Tapered Harmony which is a complete
sans-'q' replacement for 'qm'.

Physical reality, including physical reality within nervous systems
is continuous and deterministic - there's absolutely zero
'uncertainty' in-there.

All 'chance' stuff is as I've described in another post in this
thread - due to knowldege deficits, with respect to which, nervous
systems tend to 'guess' in an 'interpolative' fashion, with respect
to existing knowledge.

Such can be wildly off the mark, as is the case with respect to
choices being made in our 'time', all aroung the world, with respect
to the furture of Humanity.

Everyone's 'guessing', without sitting down to gather knowledge with
respect to one another.

The results of such is always interactive 'explosiveness'.

Anyway, there's nothing 'quantal' in nervous system function, at
=any= 'level'.

It doesn't matter what the textbooks say. While the textbooks do deal
with the experimental data, they are wrong because, as I've discussed
in my recent posts in bionet.neuroscience, they just unquestioningly
carry-forward the errors made in, and prior to, 1900.

This's the 'point' I was addressing in my prior comments with respect
to cytoskelletal constituent stuff [which enters into supersystem
configuration dynamics at the neuronal 'level']. I was addressing the
fact that it's not 'qm' in-there, not 'ignoring' the cytoskelletal
stuff itself.

Just in case folks were buzzing-me-in-the-background :-]

It's often like this in my discussions. I write without
fully-comprehending that what I'm focusing upon isn't just obvious to
everyone... and folks tend not to seek clarification, or challenge
anything I post - so I have to try to imagine stuff that needs
clarification... "whittle, whittle, whittle,..." [AoK, Ap5]

If folks 'wonder', I'm remain 'devastated' that the long ago
discussions of NDT's reification of the phenomenon of decussation did
not win a hearing for the rest of the work I've done - you know - win
me a place somewhere where I could do what I do for some small
sustaining remuneration.

NDT's reification of the phenomenon of decussation remains the single
most-significant 'event' within the history of science - and the one
who brought it forward can't even feed or shelter himself.
'neuroscience' is, apparently, just going to allow him to starve to
death?

It's 'hilarious'.

I'm so 'disappointed' in that 'reaction' to the work I've done.

If folks done see the significance of NDT's reification of the
phenomenon of decussation, they need to just drop everything, and go
back to grad school until they do see it.

Forgive me, please, but what's happening to me is just unacceptable.
I wasn't allowed to become a member of the club. I either had to
leave grad school and do it on my own [of course working with the
proven experimental results that were hard-won through the efforts of
'club members'], or forsake the stuff that I saw needed doing.

I'm being 'punished' twice - once in not being allowed to attend grad
school, and again for doing what needed to be done without any
standard 'credentials' - without a valid 'membership' in the 'club'.

Wake up! It's the Science that matters, not the supposedly
'important', but in actuality, damnable if they preclude recognition
of the significance of stuff like NDT's reification of the phenomenon
of decussation.

Or is it because folks 'think' I'm remiss in not publishing NDT's
stuff in the 'normal' peer-reviewed way?

All I can say is that I tried that.

Look, I've been unemployed for going-on five years - just flat out
unable to find employment because I 'broke' my employment's
continuity [or for other reasons, including my being 'black-listed'
because I 'blew the whistle' on some corporate malfeasance [and then
they stole my earned severance pay]].

How does one write a paper when one cannot even afford an ink
cartridge for one's printer - or to go to the Library for that
matter.

You know?

Things'd be different if it'd not cost me ~$700,000 of my own
resources to drag NDT's stuff out of the 'jungle' where the answers
live, but that's what was required of me, and I gave such without
complaining - I only began to 'call folks to task' way, way, way,
after NDT was solidly verified and unified - hell, all via
Neuroscience's own experimental results.

That's what's left me 'devastated' - Neuroscience 'rejects' a tight
integration of everything that it's heaped upon its pile of
experimental results?

It's just 'hilarious'.

Folks in Neuroscience are really going to just allow me to starve to
death?

And it 'wonders' why a guy gets 'pissed-off'?

Look, nobody was doing what needed to be done.

Get over it.

Stop treating me like some lab animal.

NDT's reification of the phenomenon of decussation is the
most-significant 'event' in the entire history of science. It changes
=everything= Human, not just the Neuroscience.

And 'you' are going to just let me starve?

Forgive me, I've earned the right to eat - I know such with
Certainty.

I'm not in-Error in that expectation.

So why am I in-fact, on the verge of starvation?

Why?

I know my contributions to the field are sufficient.

Haven't I begged sufficiently?

Thousands of visits, thousands of letters, thousands of phone calls,
thousands of NG posts, conferences attended, papers handed out
gratis.

You know? There's sufficiency in-there. So, what gives, Neuroscience.

Tell me, plain, what is it that I must do in order not to perish at
the hands of 'your' neglect of one who's served Neuroscience well.

Don't be 'shy' - just tell me, plain.

And please do so either today or tomorrow, before the end of the day.

K. P. Collins

>[...]