Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Reply to comment

bpyenson's picture

Valuation in Efferent Copies

One question that continues to perplex me from last week is the idea of the conductor-less corrolary discharge/efferent copy.  I understand that there seems to be no central organizer, but in fact several groups that coordinate the action of the whole (distributive organization). 

 

In thinking about how this system may work operationally, I began to wonder how well defined the small 'command centers' or pseudo-conductors were in relation to one another that were, in concert, coordinating the corrolary discharge.  In other words, we seemed to say that there was a distributive system, assuming that each node was of equal value to the system as a whole.  While Dr. Grobstein said this is true, that no one dominates another in terms of control of the system, couldn't it still be true that each node is entirely identical to each other one?  I suppose I am skeptical of the replicability of each node and want to believe that there exists some sort of variation (be it genetic or phenotypic) of each node that could provide variation over evolutionary time.  It might seem that the systems NEEDs to maintain this nodal identity if we are to assume that life ever achieved complexity in evolution.  From evolutionary theory, we think that variation in development (through phenotypic plasticity) could be exploited by natural selection to create adaptation, and ultimately speciation.  [See the work of Bryn Mawr's resident paleobiologist, Dr. Bruce Saunders on ammonoid suture complexity in evolution to learn about the evolution of complexity.]Assuming that each node is or could be unique, then it seems that some nodes would be inherently more valuable for the corrolary discharge than others.

Also, it seems that we assumed that the node (presumably at the level of a neuron or a few neurons) was defined.  This could explain why we would assume that each node could be equal to one another if they all exhibit many of the same properties as each other.  Nevertheless, I think it's important to question at what size level we define a 'command center' in the corrolary discharge so that we can better understand each node in they system.  Is the definition one of function (e.g. as soon as an area is able to stimulate an output it is a node)? or is the definition more arbitrary (e.g. a neuron or 3 neurons)?

Reply

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
3 + 9 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.