If you leave a message for me here, I'll respond here. If I leave a message on your talk page, I'll look there for a response (but of course you can respond here if you want to).

Archives

User Talk:Looie496/Archive 1 User Talk:Looie496/Archive 2

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 14 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Hi,

I need 200 participants, for an online survey, by next week (I got in this mess because the IRB was overwhelmed and couldn't approve my proposal until last week, despite the fact that I had it in to them by JULY!) Anyway, I'm getting a bit desperate now, so I asked on my talk page if it was ok to post my call for participants on my user page. The person who responded said it was ok and suggested that I post on related project pages. So I wanted to check and see if there was a place where it was appropriate to post such things, since I'm sure other people on here have had similar requests.

(My project, while not inherently a neuroscience project, in it's methodology, relates to models that have been applied to neuroscience research and addresses them from a neuroscience perspective.)

Thank you! --Xttina.Garnet (talk) 09:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it won't annoy people, you can post at WT:WPNEURO, the WikiProject Neuroscience talk page. But you'll be very lucky if you get half a dozen responses that way -- it isn't a very well-populated project. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm rather desperate, so I'll try it anyway. Thank you! --Xttina.Garnet (talk) 23:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the bad refs for Spazzstick - should have checked what I got from the other Wikipedia article. I've replaced it with a better reference (checked today). (And no, I have no relationship with the product - I don't even use caffeine... just trying to give some links to an orphan page.) Allens (talk) 16:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been rather busy over the last few days. I expect to finish reading the article over the next couple of days. Best wishes. Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looie496, I see you have been adding to the Science#Philosophy section, which I have been watching.

As you know, I have been following up on a suggestion you made previously, and I am hoping my additions to Talk:visual system#outline of the vertebrate visual system can become part of an independent outline soon, so I am asking whether the following scheme is acceptable:

I have separated the LGN M cell pathway and the P cell pathway to their own table, as a detail, because each of these pathways is a separate modality within vision. My problem has been to flesh out that table for the outline. As you know, I previously added a dysfunction table for parts of the visual system which have demonstrated necessary, but not sufficient, parts of the brain to implement some brain function,

As a didactic scheme for the layout of the outline, I propose to lay out some of the modalities under the problem of situated cognition (meaning cognition about a situation) by some agent which is embodied in a vertebrate organism. Thus the agent has an agenda, because the agent is engaged in embodied cognition. Based on that agenda, the agent has an interest in resolving a situation under 5 Ws and an H: WWWWWH. At any time, the resolution can be restarted or discarded as a bad guess. So the sequence is a rudimentary form of hypothesis formation as output from its sensory system, in preparation for transmission to the motor control (e.g., saccade to another angular position, so this is all happening very fast, and occurs before conscious thought 0.5 sec later).

1. Where: get place location of an object in the scene (in this case, angular 2D position of a target) first, because an embodied agent already knows its own reference frame, being at the origin of its coordinate system. I recognize that the agent must continually infer distance to that target (that is immaterial to WWWWWH because the brain works much faster than physical motion of any objects in the scene, even at 100ms response times).
2. When: the agent's body has previously taken multiple looks and has taken multiple assessments of any objects in the scene, including what to ignore (so that is a rudimentary form of attention). But time sequence is an easy way to filter out what to ignore or not, in the vast array of demands for our attention.
3. What: the agent assesses what an object might be (Friend, Foe, Food, Fun, etc. as a rudimentary form of prioritization)
4. Who: the agent has combined previous steps in the assessment to judge the name of the object in the scene (a rudimentary category)
5. Why: the agent has just filled in enough to determine whether the cognition fits the agenda. In the simplest agenda, whether to ignore the sensory input or not. If the assessment is to ignore, then our conscious attention would end here. (I care/I don't care about the posited situation)
6. How: the agent has decided how to implement its agenda (e.g., Fight, Flee, smile, talk, frown, etc.), and this has all happened at a glance, within the half-second delay before it hits consciousness.

I recognize that I am laying out an agenda of my own for the outline. Here is my motivation. In the 1980s I heard a talk by Francis Crick, who had decided to tackle human consciousness as a topic for research. But he recognized he would not live long enough to solve that inquiry, so he limited his study to awareness in the visual system, and mentioned V1 to us. Since then I have attempted to track the scientific progress toward that goal, and your suggestion about the outline might help us all. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 19:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I only have a pretty dim grasp of what you are saying here. My initial reaction, based on that dim grasp, is that you seem to be injecting a lot of your own ideas here, which is a dangerous thing to do in a Wikipedia article. But there's a good chance that I simply have failed to get the idea. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 21:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I will wait for these ideas to appear in the literature before I attempt to use them in a schema for the outline. It has been decades since Crick spoke to us, and this has been incubating in a lot of minds, so this will appear in some form sooner or later. WWWWWH is a generalization of the two streams hypothesis (so I thought it was an obvious follow-on, but I misjudged, apparently). My guess is that Ramachandran or another researcher will say these words, sooner or later. I was hoping that you had run across them already. -- Regards, Ancheta Wis (talk) 21:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very far from an expert on the visual system -- I just know it in broad outline. I'm sure you know a lot more about it than I do. Looie496 (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for creation/The American Psychological Association's Stance on Repressed Memories. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 08:47, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the "Coordinated Universal Time" article is ready for you to continue your GA review. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go with what you prefer. For the record, I think the article is a huge achivement, but I only stared to read it today, am about 1/3s the way through but impressed so far. Best. Ceoil (talk) 23:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Looie496. You have new messages at Tea with toast's talk page.
Message added Tea with toast (話) 01:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Yikes! Thanks for this. Can't imagine how I didn't notice my goof! Best,  – OhioStandard (talk) 09:54, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marasiḿat! Marasiḿatta sḩo larada, sḩo böttǜ laradainǜ, mak Halafḩasimatta mölökodǜ laradainǜ. Zölottafḩi maraida sḩo malüttmalütta haḿaźalú Tatamasama Poroźekka Ḩwýkkipidiyainü. Somoralara sḩo marupta, aksattamalara samado. Fḩaemaz taye mattamatta mofḩotte. Hafkafe hafkafeyadü mayadü. Holofḩźaye moromatar möraḿatöla mazeyar sobagalaka, yoğamdaligǜ yoğamazar hasbadafe sḩo-naik? Inýğiliźiz ka nafta maruksiḿat, em kala tatlaiku Maźittakǘz. Marasiḿat! Goluksopad (talk) 04:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What language is that? Looie496 (talk) 04:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keç Maźitakǘ ya. Maźitakǘ from Caucasus mountains. Sḩo eçekmet, zerǘt? Goluksopad (talk) 09:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think I would understand you? I'm an American, and only speak English and a little German. Are you mistaking me for somebody else? Looie496 (talk) 16:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ka, araçbý karaçme,sḩo maraptadak karasuçma, zavalük. Söreptadör hasbadafḩe samadakma umekçek, Nüralogaýnǘ Statý Poroźekka zükabaźet. Çedok tatlaikudas haraźbaź, kakda eçekömetadas? Maraḩasḿaḩle? Looie496, Neurologisty, this are correct. Kağolukluk varaç Inýğiliźiz vehereç, haźdele üçemdele Maźittaküz dönerle tatlaiku, öras maç dösidereos ka! Havaçekle źadok! Marasiḿat sörep-faikḩ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goluksopad (talk • contribs) 00:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point, I just didn't get any of that from the picture or the caption. Might be worth digging through the Commons for a picture of a human actually interacting with a dog, if you want to add it back with a clearer caption. --McGeddon (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Looie496. You have new messages at Talk:Coordinated Universal Time/GA1.
Message added 14:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The article Consciousness you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Consciousness for things which need to be addressed. Monty₈₄₅ 23:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might check out these surface reconstructions on Marty Sereno's website: http://www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/~sereno/

If you e-mail him, he may grant use for wikipedia, as he is very pro-sharing (see, e.g., the software for neuroimaing he develeped, FreeSurfer).

Cheers, Edhubbard (talk) 17:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Looie. Brandon Harris, Howie Fung, Fabrice Florin and I will be holding a second Office Hours session on IRC in #wikimedia-office on Thursday, 3 November at 24:00 UTC. This unusually late time is aimed at permitting East Coast editors, who would normally be at work, to attend. We will be discussing the new Article Feedback Tool designs; if you have any questions about it, feel free to leave me a message on my talkpage. I hope to see you there; thank you for your participation in the discussion so far :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]