…into the nature of consciousness and how it relates to measurable activity in the brain can be found here:

Deep Sleep Short-circuits Brain’s Grid Of Connectivity

In the human brain, cells talk to one another through the routine exchange of electrical signals. But when people fall into a deep sleep, the higher regions of the brain - regions that during waking hours are a bustling grid of neural dialogue - apparently lose their ability to communicate effectively, causing consciousness to fade.

Writing Friday, Sept. 30, in the journal Science, a team of researchers led by UW-Madison professor of psychiatry Giulio Tononi reports that the fading of consciousness during dreamless sleep seems to occur as the different regions of the cerebral cortex that mediate perception, thought and action become functionally disconnected.

Tononi and his team observed the disconnect when brief, magnetically generated pulses of electricity were directed to specific regions of the brain. The pulses stimulated an electrochemical response from the targeted cells, which, when the subject was awake, rippled across the brain, traveling along networks of nerve fibers to different cerebral destinations. But when the subject was in deep sleep, the same response was quickly extinguished and did not travel beyond the stimulated cells.

When consciousness fades, according to Tononi, “the brain breaks down into little islands that can’t talk to one another.”

The new findings are important because they provide the first direct clues about how the brain alters the state of consciousness during sleep. Consciousness is a scientifically murky realm as little research has been conducted on how the brain sustains and alters the various states of mind. Tononi, one of the few scientists exploring the frontiers of consciousness, has theorized that conscious thought depends on the brain’s ability to integrate information.

“Sleep is the most familiar alteration of consciousness,” he says. “It happens every night to all of us. Every night, when you fall into deep sleep, your consciousness usually fades.”

Indeed, research subjects woken early in the night frequently report little or no conscious experience. Later in the night, and especially in the morning hours, subjects report vivid dreams, indicating that the later stages of sleep can be associated with conscious experience, Tononi says.
But why does consciousness fade during deep sleep early in the night? “You cannot say that consciousness fades because the brain shuts off. That’s not the case. Scientists have long known that the brain remains active while we sleep,” Tononi says. “So what could be responsible?”

There are more details in the rest of the article.

This may seem obvious on the face of it, but take a moment to think about it…

You don’t need me to tell you the implications, nor of the potential of connecting something as insubstantial as consciousness with the real, measurable world.

Technorati Tags: science, science & technology, science and technology

…in not pointing out my agreement with the Commissar at The Politburo Diktat in his views on the reconstruction of New Orleans.

In a recent post, the Commissar writes:

Levee Reconstruction Will Restore, but Not Improve, Defenses in New Orleans

In the short term, the levees can’t be rebuilt to withstand a Category 3 hurricane. In the long term, New Orleans is sinking in the Gulf. Maybe we should think this over before we spend $200 billion.

In a variation of the lyric “ain’t no mountain high enough” it is fair to say that there ain’t no levee high enough to guarantee we will not see another flooding of large portions of the city after the assault of a major hurricane.

In an earlier post, he promotes the conversion (or rather more accurately, although he does not point this out directly, the reversion) of many of the flood-endangered areas into wetlands to serve as a buffer for the city (with a map!):

Here’s a proposal for the rebuilding of NewOrleans. Rebuild the city on a smaller footprint and leave large open natural areas to protect the city.

(go to the linked post to see the map)

The map, based on this map from the NY Times illustrates the proposal, with the new protective open areas outlined in bright green. These areas include the lowest lying areas of the city, which consequently suffered the worst flooding damage and would be the hardest to protect in the future.

The restored areas of the city would include the oldest parts of the city, the high-lying area along the Mississippi, the French Quarter, and most of the business areas (orange blotches - not flooded, dark blue blotches - flooded). With many evacuees already re-settling elsewhere, a smaller New Orleans may be in the future anyway.

An observation attributed to Albert Einstein notes, “Insanity is engaging in the same behavior repeatedly expecting different results.”

We need to avoid being insane over New Orleans for the sake of some notion of rebuilding it “exactly as it was.”

The oldest parts of the city were not flooded for a reason, a perfect example of a tautology, they have survived the centuries because they are not prone to being flooded.

Let us not behave as if we were insane, and instead choose to preserve what we can of this truly great city within reason while trying to avoid Disneyfying it.

To put it bluntly, remove the danger, but keep the sin.

That has been the allure of the city for decades, if not over a century, to the rest of our puritannical nation. If we lose that, we do lose part of our soul.

One suggestion, though… the businesses in both the French Quarter and the business district need people to staff them, yet the areas proposed to be reverted to wetlands are exactly where many of the support staff lived. Perhaps an investment in a good, high speed mass-transit system between the heart of New Orleans and a residential section built on higher ground is needed to maintain the vibrant vitality of the city.

We need to think, not just rebuild mindlessly.

Technorati Tags: hurricanes, New Orleans, science, science & technology, science and technology, technology

For the second time in less than a week, I’m surprised at some of what I am reading from those on the right side of the political spectrum. In this case, that “world turned upside-down” feeling comes when reading some of the reactions to the nomination of Harriet Miers as the replacement for the retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Conner.

Someone who in the past has described himself as “somewhat to the right of Attila the Hun” (I don’t know if he still uses that self-appellation), although I feel he is a wee bit more reasonable than Attila likely ever was, Donnie of Cadillac Tight, has expressed his disappointment over the nomination, yet I must confess I’m not exactly sure what particular criteria Donnie feels have not been fulfilled, other than President George W. Bush not appearing to be interested in the viability of the Republican Party. I will admit, the choice did not “play to the base”, but I am uncertain if Donnie’s concern is because the erosion of the base will cost Republicans votes in the next election, or because Donnie feels that he is a part of that base that is being apparently ignored. (UPDATE NOTE: Donnie has clarified his position and the reasoning underlying it)

My initial reaction to the nomination was along the lines of “here’s yet another crony” followed by “perhaps not… wait and think about it.” Then, I read what Stephen Bainbridge had to say about the nomination:

This appointment reeks of cronyism, which along with prideful arrogance seems to be the besetting sin of the Bush presidency. At this point, I see no reason - none, nada, zilch - for conservatives who care about the courts to lift a finger to support this candidate.

Rarely do I agree with Bainbridge on anything political (I often agree with him on wine, but that is a different matter); however, in this statement quoted above regarding both the cronyism and the “prideful arrogance” which “seems to be the besetting sin of the Bush presidency” I am in total accord.

Larry Bernard of Inside Larry’s Head has a list of why he is unhappy with this nomination that is pretty damning when considered from almost any point of view.

The Commissar of The Politburo Diktat, a right-leaning blogger who chooses to not drink the party kool-aid but instead makes his own decisions, looks at the nominee using his own particular light and expresses relief that she does not immediately appear to endanger his self-described “hot button issue” as some other possible nominees may have, which in itself illustrates some of the fissures within the “base”.

I have believed for a long time that the issues mentioned recently by the apparently newly-awakened right-wing, namely the cronyism and prideful yet baseless arrogance of President George W. Bush, would lead to the ultimate failure of his presidency, and to me these signs of potential failure were visible to those willing to set aside the partisan lenses as early as the lead-up to the Iraq War.

Has the Bush II presidency failed yet?

Not quite.

But when those nominally on your own side are calling you out (similar to what Representative Tom DeLay’s lawyer had to do last week), it does not bode well for what would be termed a “successful presidency” even in the light of history.

Of course, there are other interpretations as well…

Technorati Tags: commentary, right wing, right wing weblogs, right-wing, right-wing politics, right-wing weblogs, Supreme Court, Supreme Court nominees

…but this ruling is not good when it comes to common sense as applied to “who is liable?” and to the law in general.

Supreme Court Won’t Block Lawsuit Against Gun Manufacturers
Monday, October 03, 2005

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court refused Monday to block a lawsuit against gun manufacturers accused of negligence for firearms violence in the nation’s capital.

An appeals court had said that the District of Columbia government and individual gun victims, including a man who was left a quadriplegic after being shot in 1997, could sue under a D.C. law that says gun manufacturers can be held accountable for violence from assault weapons.

The high court had been asked over the summer to use the case to strike down the statute, which gun makers said interfered with their right to sell lawful products.

In the case of the tobacco companies, the legislation-by-lawsuit at least had a veneer of bad behaviors by the corporations involved, notably the internal suppression of data that showed their products were not as “healthy” as advertised.

In the case of firearms, however, even if what Judge Michael Farrell wrote is taken as given, “No due process issue is raised by legislation that seeks to redress injuries suffered by district residents and visitors resulting from the manufacture and distribution of a particular class of firearms whose lethal nature far outweighs their utility,” it fails the common sense test.

Just as McDonald’s should not be held responsible for obesity, the manufacturers of firearms cannot be held responsible for the actions of those who use their weapons. At McDonald’s, no one makes you eat the food, and the message IS out there that too much fat in the diet is unhealthy and usually results in you getting a fat ass (along with other parts of the body expanding as well).

The message is also out there for guns, which is that improper use of firearms WILL result in deaths and serious injuries.

This isn’t a secret, and it is not rocket science.

The person pulling the trigger is responsible, not the manufacturer, no matter how much local laws try to say otherwise.

Yes, there is a Constitutional question here, I am well aware of it after explaining to one of my French colleagues about how the government is divided between state and federal levels, with the states having a LOT of autonomy under our system.

However, judges are not there merely to split legal hairs regarding abstracts such as who counts the number of angels who are dancing on the head of a pin, they are called “judges” because they are there to place a balance between the abstract and the concrete, between the theory and the reality.

We have gotten too theoretical. This is not a liberal versus conservative issue. This is not a “judicial activism” issue.

This is a case of judges not judging.

Technorati Tags: judges, gun laws

Despite his bar-b-que heresy, Phin has discovered the one, true faith.

I guess he wasn’t around here in August when I saw the light…

Technorati Tags: humor, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Pastafarianism