Understanding Psychology With S/F Methods

Understanding the Brain;  AKA Using S/F Methods to Create Beyond the Limits of Psych, Maths & Qualia:
.
By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014
.
Essentially, this problem of psychology was created deliberately by behaviorism, which refused to look into the Black Box, the human brain, recognizing that was a tough problem, nearly intractable at the time. & Repeatedly stated by both BF Skinner and Watson. Father  Freud, who created those fields, largely and the psychiatrists have done much the same. So they mostly treated the outward appearances and functions of visible behaviors, organized them esp. in the extensively detailed DSM series, and ignored most of the other half of what was going on. The Structure which CREATED and creates the multiplicit, complex system brain functions, the totality of information processing, emotional systems, and their complex behaviors, in part.
.
That simplification took them a ways, but just. Now let’s look at what’s much more likely going on from a comparison process standpoint. We have in the clinical neurosciences the clinico-pathological correlations which are very, very deep, and show us a good deal of what’s going on structurally in the brain. Sometimes specifically and sometimes in a general way. Before CT & MRI brain scans, that was a very laborious process of making slides after preserving and formalinizing the brain (taking weeks).Then looking at the gross pathology by sections (often missing a lot of tiny lesions), then staining said often thin slices, & lastly microscopically examining them in detail. But this is what was found, grossly. When we find problems with speech and word processing we look in the well known speech centers, which about 97% of the time are in the left hemisphere, specifically the Wernicke’s post temporal, sup. temporal area & a bit forward, from there, too.
.
Those areas are Hardwired but only incompletely. Once they start to work about age 8-9 months when language starts being generated & processed, and the functions of the ideas are turned into words, and thus more stabilized, we get speech. This occurs by protein synthesis observed with puromycin studies, which create dendritic proliferation & synaptic lay downs. Those pathways are the well known memory tracings, as well as motor tracings of Dr. Wilder Penfield’s work in the 1950’s at McGill Uni, Montreal. These cortical columns then recruit locally to expand motor programs and memory, & then widely connect, as well. The latter mostly organized and set up by about age 12-14 when the logical reasoning becomes possible near puberty. This is Piaget’s well observed and confirmed logical development stage of personality.
.
& so created are Wernicke’s to Broca’s areas & the connections as well as other sites in the brain which for descriptive purposes can access the speech centers, to describe & create information about what’s going on internal and externally, too.
.
Thus, the clinicopath is more succinctly, more widely applicable & NOW known as the structure/function relationships of brain. When a problem is seen in brain output, or functions, we know there are parts of the brain which do that. And when we we see structural damage in many parts of the brain, visual, sensory, motor, speech, facial recognitions and so forth, we know what functions are highly likely to be abnormal, or even absent. These are the structure/function relationships which used to take a lot of time in the path department to find, which are Now very much easier to create information about, identify & confirm with a fast CT brain scan, or even better, an MRI of brain. Often in a very few minutes compared to weeks. These two scanning methods have resulted in a very great increase in our S/F relationships about how brain works. But the fMRI is even better. Those set off the current S/F revolution.
.
Further, S/F relations are very, very widely used in most all fields. Chemistry, esp. organic, biochem, neurophysiology and the functions of the cells are thus understandable, by these means. Kekule’s famous dream of how he found the structure of the benzene molecule with so lovely a correlation that is, compares with its functions, as a carbon bonded hexagonal ring, & so forth. We have the structural relations of the enzymes, of the mitochondria & the very basic functions of the chromosomes, the specific genes on each chromosomes, the DNA, polymerases; the endoplasmic reticula, the tubules, the nucleus of the cell & so forth. Even the nerves and muscles have S/F relationships which describe, delimit and largely give us an understanding of “how brain events” work.
.
In addition the fields of comparative anatomy, comparative linguistics, comparative ethologies, comparative theology, etc.; and the whole relationships of the vast tree of life are most all comparison process driven & created. These hierarchical arrangements of organized vast amounts of knowledge have already been treated. & This is no accident, because that’s what the cortical columns largely do in processing higher functions of brain. How info is carried by the sensory nerves and transmitted by the 90-95% white matter of the brain which is axonal, is yet another kind of information, which at this time remains a coding enigma, mostly.
.
And if we look at it, this is the problem with psychologies and psychiatry. Where are the S/F relationships for all of those behaviors? For brain functions of other types we have huge amounts of details. Yet, in psych We don’t have many of those. We have those detailed functions & diagnostic criteria, but very little idea where most of them come from and how those arise from the brain. What specifically in brain structures generates those functions? That’s the problem with behaviorism. It ignored the S/F relationships so necessary to a more complete understanding of brain outputs. The same with psych, And the same with the qualia. What do those correlate with? IOW, what do we compare those with? And we have very little, and thus very little understanding in those fields.
.
A similar problem is seen with the completion of the human genome. We have all of those 20K some genes, but not very much information about what they all actually do!! The structure is there, but how they interact with the other genes, gene products and the 1000’s of internal and external chemicals and what they do, that is the function half, is most often NOT there! & what of epigenetics, which can markedly modify gene expression? & to the discomfiture of the pharmacologists who thought the genetic information would give them a vast largesse of 1000’s of gene targets to work on, they find they must wait for most of that unknown functional information.  Which is proceeding by brute force of trial & error testing, sorting and trying to figure it out.  Proteonomics has helped, but simply complicated the sorting, and hardly solving the problems of regulatory genes, either. It’s still brute force T&E.
.
The same conundrum nearly exactly, is being created by the short sighted people who want to create the Connectome of the Brain. Fine. Do all that. But what do all of those masses of pathways do? What are their connections, their functions, their work and processing? Again, half the answers, and the not so important half either, because the Functions are the important outputs, not the detailed incomprehensible connections, utterly incomprehensible because of the billion billions of digits of possibilities from the 10’s of billions of interacting nerves, glia and brain modules. Which structure/pathways are important? We don’t know. So the cart once again finds itself in front of the horse. So Mother Nature once again skips aside, & once again eludes our understanding.
.
We have some basic pharmacology of the psycho-active meds, but not specifically HOW most all those are processed to emotional states. Those are S/F relationships, too, be it specifically and importantly noted. The structure of the molecules is often, but not completely related specifically to their functions, as well, to show ever more so, how important, and nearly universal are the S/F relationship and processors.
.
In the coming “Towards a Complex Systems Pharmacology”, those problems will be more exactly addressed to understand how and what’s going on.
.
That’s the problem. When we want to see recognition we look for evoked potentials in the brain. The brain compares the incoming sensory information with the LTM, largely visual, as that’s how the brain is organized, and it then decides if it knows or likely knows, that is, Re-cognizes what it’s detecting largely visually. Which handles a vastly greater amount of information than do the other senses, of which there are scores of them, not just the 5 the ancients so mistakenly believed.
.
So, we have this problem in psych. There is very little in brain structure which correlates very exactly with the psychological vocabulary, ideas & concepts used with real, brain functioning. It’s  why the field is so backwards, limited. & dreadfully incomplete.
.
However, with the newer fMRI we are getting better insights, and when we add the evoked potentials, auditory, visual, sensory, & cortical EP’s we get lots more information.
.
And when we do the baseline MRI scan, which we know is normal state, we Compare, massively that with the new MRI of each patient and then by these massive comparisons, “read” every image, to see if it’s normal, or not. By massive, developed methods/skills of “reading’ images, in most every case, comparison processing against the fixed, relatively stable descriptive, relativistic standards of normalcy.
.
CF: How Physicians Create New Information.
.
.
So we compare the baseline fMRI, against the changes in brain function to be studied, and those changes light up in the brain by contrast & in comparison. Thus we have created new information by CP, and have found a significant S/F relationship(s). That’s the beauty of the MRI method. When we combine/compare MEG CEP’s with the same fMRI, we see even more. and we know about where those CEP’s are going to arise by this very same comparison,  S/F  processing of information. Thus Information is created by the physicians in this way.
.
See article: The Praxis
.
.
Then we organize and process that info into our understanding. That’s basically how it’s done.
.
Now the qualia do NOT correlate, nor compare with ANY known sites in brain, either. Where does colour come from? We know it’s a construct of  the brain.
.
.
Where does numbness and tingling come from? We don’t know. Pain and Freud’s pleasure are from where? Then they call this the “hard problem” because they can’t figure out to use CP and S/F relationships where we compare structure to function & function to structure for additional information. Input/Output, and then again, and again. & we compare fMRI to CEP for ever more information, too. CP, CP, CP. S/F S/F S/F.
.
And that’s exactly how simple it is. But we have to do the work to sort thru the possibilities to find good, but rarely complete answers, plural, by trial & error, to find what’s going on in this rather largely complicated brain. It is as Gazzaniga so well states, brain is a “Modular complex system”. So are the cells and their organelles, the mitochondria, etc. So we have a virtually universally processing method, S/F, to find out more and more, too. And that’s what’s going on and how to problem solve, too.
.
A Neuroscience of Problem Solving, where the not polynomial descriptions become the linear, polynomial maths. That’s how it works, very likely.
.
& that shows how we take psych, psychiatry, neurochemicals, and neurophysiology to an understanding of brain.
.
Moreover and more deeply, we compare pain meds against the “morphine sulfate standard” of reports of good pain relief, compared to dosages in milligrams & duration of relief. Thus we have created a good standard about how much meperidine, AAP, codeine, tramadol and others are needed for pain control. & we can tell how well, relatively, by comparison, new pain meds work, too. The MS standard becomes the efficient, stable, useful standard to judge the pain relief powers of most the other pain meds, naturally occurring endorphins, and synthetic analgesics, of all kinds, too. It’s another yet again, Einsteinian standard to use. It’s relativity in Pharma.
.
Thus in the same way we use another comparison process using the most important and ancient  neurochemical, dopamine (DA) ,AND all its some 20 receptor sites, which by comparison as a stimulant, to the most ancient circadian rhythm, largely serotonin/DA balance, to figure out serotonin. By this larger, comparison process of what DA does compared to what the sedative, 5HT does. & then extend that model’s findings both to the rest of the neurochemicals, norepinephrine, adrenalin, GABA, neurokinins (for pain understanding) & so forth.
.
&  the article,
.
.
Using those relatively efficient verbal descriptions, which are limited and created by the epistemology of comparisons processes, that is relativity, we learn, more and more. Information is being created by comparison processing, as it most always is and does.
.
Now, how do we mathematize these?  Well, we understand the structure/function of math. It arises out of the Left post. superior aspects of the Left temporal lobe and related areas just above it, and extends forwards connecting to Broca’s area, too. Math interdigitates with that speech area. What damages that speech, damages math, as well. This is well worked out, already.  S/F relationships most all.
.
But please note this. We can speak & teach nearly all of math with ideas & words, but we cannot speak very much of words with math. Mathematize the semantics of “How sharper than a serpent’s tooth it is to have a thankless child.” Can’t do that with math. Because math is derived. & that’s how information is created, primarily by the sensory apparatus & sensory cortex. It’s comparison process all the way, against a relatively set, stable & efficient, least energy systems.
.
 Also the motor cortex sits right next to the sensory cortex for high efficiency (TD) & does much the same with closely rleating the anatomies of motr/sensory sites in the body. Those use the extension/flexion limits as the standards for motion, the abduction/adduction, etc., limits, all over the body, to comprehend, memorize via LTM and control movements, too.These summations of muscle movements details how those limits are memorized by the sensory system, to create learned muscle movements which we call the skills.The standard are how far the muscles and body parts can be moved in many directions & against those limits & standards, the entire muscle/sensory cortex is standardized.  That is simply kinesiology, is it not? So the fundamental insight into what creates that science, has a deeper application, therefor. Standards of the limits and kinds of movements of muscles create the basic motor programs of motion.  It creates the many set points of muscle movements which make skilled movements possible, and learnable.
.
That’s how it’s done. Ideas/words, descriptions come first & THEN we mathematize it. Which explains neatly, and confirmably what Newton did, what Einstein did with Minkowski, and we do every day when we convert words into math forms. Again, how we linearize temperatures compared to the water standard scale of freezing  (0 deg.) & boiling, 100 deg. C. How we measure length by hands, feet, & stepped off distances, & so forth. How we create color scales by comparing to the rainbow, ROY G BIV, from the refraction of light at sunrise and sunset, and the green leaves, the brown trees and other organics. This color is then combined with the black or white, lots of photons being white & black, almost no detectable photons. & the unlimited shades of the grays in between. There arises the hierarchical palette of the colors.
.
CF: The Structure of our Color Vision, comparing our visual color system to the EM scale of light frequencies.
.
.
This is how it’s done. the Moh scale of comparing to commonly found, thus efficiently found & used minerals, talc, limestone,, etc. to quartz, corundum (sapphire) and finally diamond for determining, measuring hardness. That creates the information of relative hardness efficiently. Then the GPa system came along which mathematized that further, and provided More information by creating a scale of the hardness data. by comparison processes, again.The creativity of mathematics, found by comparing a method to the senses of hardnesses. Sensory system becomes a workable system, and then is fully mathematized. That’s creativity in action, and the processes of T&E which create it by comparison processing of the sorting outcomes.
.
Those processes & events are all that simple. So in order to comprehend psych better, we MUST create comparison process scales & standards based upon structural events in the brain.THAT will create the correlations, the comparisons, the corresponding information. & thus more understanding of the emotional & personality functions & their disorders.
.
As Feynman stated, if I can’t generate an understanding, that is process according to some set, relatively efficient standard, I can’t understand anything. Generation to him meant processing information to us, using Einsteinian stable, efficient (least energy, TD) processes. & that’s how it’s done. That’s how to create progress in psych. Find the brain correlations for the emotions and feelings, learn how to first efficiently describe them and then mathematize the lot!!!
.
& how do we do that? We create a simple formal comparison logic of relationships, how specific processes show us the connections, the relationships, the associations between two events. This is Einstein’s “Physics  & Reality”. How we understand is by finding relationships by comparison processing standards, among events.
.
That generating creates the information and data which create the knowledge once its organized to types by comparison, creating the categories of Aristosteles, the foudnations of the hierarchies of our understanding, very simply.
So we create an expression: A double tilde ~~, “r” to B. & that is, A is Related to B. & what is the process going on there? Is it height, temp, is it change over time, is it velocity, density, volume, or weight? So we use the proper math in each case.
.
Is it higher or lower, or highest. Is it harder, or softer. is it taller, or longer? Does it take x seconds of time or hours, more time or less? Thus we linearize it to become mathematics, by the TYPES of processes, which have already been mathematized; and thus does the NP become P by adding information. And there that is, quite simply, & generally.
.
.
Ulam stated that in order to model events of complex systems, math must greatly advance. And THIS is a beginning way to do it. Within each hierarchic level of our understanding math can operate. But when we change the levels, the rules change. Those are the scale changes in physics. & so we use different descriptive methods to create, navigate and emplace the members of each scale, hierarchy/ Thus maths must change to acknowledge those differing processes at each hierarchy. And that’s how it’s done, simply.
.
 QM uses probability. Weather forecasting uses probability, scientific studies use a 95% probability of likelihoods, and we cast dice & to decide which actions to use by playing the odds, that is, the probability which we use to describe, generally, complex systems, which is most of everything there is.
.
A r B, & we define the processor, use the proper math within that processing method, and we have it, a general method to mathematize events. Or if needed, to create, as did Newton and Einstein/Minkowsky, the calculus, or the 4-D space/time, to more precisely measure what’s going on. Or as did Schrodinger, the Hamiltonian operators, that is logics/processors which created the QM wave equations.
.
Or again  as did Archimedes to create the comparison process, ratio of mass/volume, AKA density to handle that problem. Or Pi, the ratio of circumference, that is comparison of circumference to the diameter. But we note that we don’t use diameter over circumference, which is a tough fraction to use, but  but that C/D so as to have at least 3 and a fraction instead.
.
That’s how complex systems are mathematized, that’s how NP > P. That’s the basis of creativity visual, using Whiteheadian process thinking. It creates the S-curves of Einstein’s universe of light speed, at the top velocity end, exponential; to ambient temp of brownian movement; to the extreme low energy asymptote, again an exponential barrier, of the Bose Einstein maths. & we live within those,  the highest velocity of particles, light speed, or CEE, versus Zero K, neither of which are reachable & are exponential Wells of particles, fermion limits. Those are S-curves within which we must dwell.
.
Now, mathematize the complex system model of plate tectonics, next. Grin.
.
This is the system and where to go with it.
.
“Any society, which cannot break out of its current abstractions (that is, to grow), after a period of limited growth (the exponential aspect of the S-curve), is doomed to stagnate.” The top of the S-curve asymptote, of capabilities of the methods, which limit growth due to the things a method cannot do, either. Growth coming from TD process of least energy advantages, which create those same growths. Thus we taken the words and mathematize those to the cubic S-curves, noting the high similarity between Whitehead’s description and the maths of the S-curves. That’s how it’s done.
.
Stabilities of events within this universe. which are repeating. And stable because they are least energy. Thus by sorting we find the Lyapunov numbers which correspond to those, a la the redoubtable Dr. Friston, who found the math to describe the verbal events, and give us the fine math advantage of precision, & more information which descriptions verbal, tho efficient but alone cannot give us. Thus the advantages AND limits to maths.
.
.
That’s how it’s understood, organized, & developed. CP, LE, complex systems, and S/F which show us the complex system characteristics, and then the unlimited methods which we can develop to describe our universe of nearly unlimited complex systems.
.
Simple, elegant, highly fruitful & the essence of unlimited creativity, the wellsprings of human creativity, itself. Comparison process of the cortices driving the least energy outcomes of modeling events in existence.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s