Dear Pedro, Good morning from a snowy corner of the University of Manitoba.
Many thanks for initiating this very important and stimulating discussion about the marriage of topology and the brain. The proposed topological framework for the brain has far-reaching implications, especially if we consider the rich mathematical structures that are implicit in the variants of Borsuk-Ulam theorem. It is definitely possible for us to use projections and mappings in the description of brain activity. Best regards, Jim Peters ------------------------------------------------------------------------ James F. Peters, Professor Computational Intelligence Laboratory, ECE Department Room E2-390 EITC Complex, 75 Chancellor's Circle University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V6 Canada Office: 204 474 9603 Fax: 204 261 4639 email: james.pete...@ad.umanitoba.ca https://www.researchgate.net/profile/James_Peters/?ev=hdr_xprf ________________________________________ From: Fis [fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] on behalf of Gyorgy Darvas [darv...@iif.hu] Sent: November 24, 2016 11:17 AM To: Pedro C. Marijuan; 'fis' Subject: Re: [Fis] NEW DISCUSSION SESSION--TOPOLOGICAL BRAIN A recommended recent additional reading: http://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(16)30500-1 On 2016.11.24. 17:45, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote: Dear Arturo, James, and FIS Colleagues, Thanks for the intriguing presentation. Maybe it is difficult to make sense in depth of these curious topological views applied to nervous systems function. In an offline exchange with the authors I was arguing that the countless mappings among cerebral areas, both cortical and subcortical, are almost universally described as "topographical" and that the information related to deformations, twisting, gradients, inversions, bifurcating "duplications", etc. is not considered much valuable for the explanatory schemes. However, just watching any of those traditional "homunculus" described for both motor and somatosensory mappings, the extent of deformations and irregularities becomes an eloquent warning that something else is at play beyond the strictly topographic arrangement. Now, what we are being proposed --in my understanding-- is sort of an extra-ordinary cognitive role for crucial parts of the whole topological scheme. Somehow, the projection of brain "metastable dynamics" (Fingelkurts) to higher dimensionalities could provide new integrative possibilities for information processing. And that marriage between topology and dynamics would also pave the way to new evolutionary discussions on the emergence of the "imagined present" of our minds. Our bi-hemispheric cortex so densely interconnected could also be an exceedingly fine topological playground with respect to the previous organizational rudiments in the midbrain (in non-mammalian brains). Therefore, couldn't we somehow relate emergent topological-dynamic properties and consciousness characteristics?... In what follows am trying to respond the initial questions posed: 1) Could we use projections and mappings, in order to describe brain activity? **Yes, quite a bit; in my opinion, they are an essential ingredient of complex brains. 2) Is such a topological approach linked with previous claims of old “epistemologists” of recent “neuro-philosophers”? ** At the time being I am not aware of similar directions, except a few isolated papers and a remarkable maverick working in late 1980s (Kenneth Paul Collins), with whom I could cooperate a little (with his help, I prepared a booklet in Spanish) . 3) Is such a topological approach linked with current neuroscientific models? ** I think Collins was a (doomed, ill-fated) precursor of both the topological ideas and the quest for dynamic optimization principles, somehow reminding contemporary ideas, eg, the great work of Alexander and Andrew Fingelkurts, who are also inscribed in the list for this discussion. 4) The BUT and its variants display four ingredients, e.g., a continuous function, antipodal points, changes of dimensions and the possibility of types of dimensions other than the spatial ones. Is it feasible to assess brain function in terms of BUT and its variants? ** I think it should be explored. Future directions to investigate this aspect could also contemplate the evolutionary changes in central nervous system structures and behavioral/cognitive performances. 5) How to operationalize the procedures? ** Today's research in connectomics can help. Some very new neurotechnologies about cell-to-cell visualization of neuronal activity and gene expression could also help for future operationalization advancements. 6) Is it possible to build a general topological theory of the brain? ** Topology, Dynamics, Neuroinformation and also elements of Systems Biology and Signaling Science should go hand-with-hand for that crazy purpose. 7) Our “from afar” approach takes into account the dictates of far-flung branches, from mathematics to physics, from algebraic topology, to neuroscience. Do you think that such broad multidisciplinary tactics could be the key able to unlock the mysteries of the brain, or do you think that more specific and “on focus” approaches could give us more chances? ** In my view, both the disciplinary specific and the multidisciplinary synthetic have to contribute. Great syntheses performed upon great analyses--and which should be updated after every new epoch or new significant advancements. One of the founding fathers of neuroscience, Ramón y Cajal, made a great neuro-anatomical (and functional) synthesis with the elements of his time at the beginning of the past century. It was called the "doctrine of the neuron" and marked the birth of modern neuroscience... Finally, before saying goodbye, half dozen new Chinese parties from the recent conference in Chengdu have joined the list; they have ample expertise in neuroscientific fields and in theoretical science domains. At their convenience, it would be quite nice hearing from them in this discussion. Greetings to all, and thanks again to Arturo and James for their valiant work, --Pedro ------------------------------------------------- Pedro C. Marijuán Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0 50009 Zaragoza, Spain Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es<mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
