/sci/ - Science & Math

>(F.unding O.pporitunity A.nnouncement) encourages Exploratory/Developmental Phased Innovation (R21/R33) grant applications to speed the translation of emerging findings on the neuroscience of mental disorders into novel intervention approaches that will ultimately reduce symptoms and/or restore function.


AND/OR? I would hope the goal would be to restore function and/or reduce symptom.

So basically if they treat the symptom but make you less functionable, thats OKAY!

HOW is that okay? Well... its not. BUT if they want to do ECT's and create siezures in your brain, its OKAY as long as it reduces a symptom. Doesn't matter you talk like a wee-tawd and can't remember things. Just as long as they treat the symptom. Functionality is an and/or biproduct.

The goal of these studies, is not to restore people back to functional society. Thats the 'good' studies. The rest, they're all about precluding and preventing, as we see here, and they can waive your need for consent too. JOY!

Hello, /sci/ !

Just reading over some information. I'm good at that. Anyways, for those of us here in the US or anyone in a country that may also be affected~
wx3 (dot) hhs (dot) gov/ohrp/humansubjects/
>How in particular would these changes enhance human subject protections?

>The changes under consideration will extend federal oversight to non-federally funded studies, i.e., those at institutions that receive any funding from Common Rule agencies for human subjects research.

>The changes under consideration would also give subjects the opportunity to decide whether their biological specimens may be used for future research and, if so, to specify types of research in which their biospecimens may not be used.

>If the risk-based framework for IRB review were more rationally refined, IRBs would be better able to concentrate their resources on the review of research that poses higher risk to subjects.

>>3605309

life on earth was KICKASS!!

+1

> highly reccomend dammit

>>3604977
you are ONE (1) google search away from viewing way more than I can type and lots of pictures I don't care to re-upload.

LET ME HOLD YOUR HAND :) GATHER AROUND KIDS TAKE MY HANDS! WE ARE GOING ON A MAGICAL TRIP TO THE INTERNET

wx3 dot lmgtfy dot com/?q=Plant+Neurobiology

>>3605008

Pretty incredible, what do you suppose the world looks like to the box jelly? Its my understanding they actually look through themselves quite a bit, and the eyes are positioned to see 360 degrees PLUS up/down angles.

Also, I noticed white people seem to get hit more. I know they have trouble seeing white but they may still have trouble seeing Caucasian *lol*

Racist lil guys. They'll move around a black something but if its white, you might be getting a headbutt and lil surprise.

I gave you the sources you need to go research to understand your question.

Your question is 'how do they... if they have no brain?'

The answer is already here man. They have neural networks, that network functions as the brain, it is not a brain, but it functions to a level that is sufficient for the box jelly and the plant as well.

They are able to do the things you think they can't do because they have no brain. You need to get over the concept that organisms MUST HAVE a brain to display intelligence, to practice predation or whatever. Communication stuff like that.

You obviously do not believe me yet, how do you expect me to teach you what you don't believe?

I can't, I just tried, you still insisted they need a brain.

So if you don't believe me, do you need help looking up sources or something? BOX JELLYFISH, PLANT NEUROBIOLOGY, and if you want you can grab the IMMORTAL JELLYFISH too.

Whatever man. You want sources or do you want to be stuck on your 'must have brain like I have' concept and we still haven't moved past it yet?

LAW OF CONCIOUSNESS/COMPLEXITY + PRINCIPAL OF SYNERGY

= Omega Point

> I don't really involve myself too much in this but its fun to imagine and think about, and honestly I think the Noosphere and Noosphere-like principals are ones we could adopt even if the Noosphere doesn't exist... after all the internet is pretty damn close to a thought-realm.

thats the job of the government and civil officer, OP

oh and scientists are suggesting that the 'retraction index' be released to them and the world

They claim that the rate of retractions differs on impact-basis (high impact reports get retracted more than low impact), but that since both get pulled for the same reasons, it suggests there is no system in place to check for plagarism or improper practice before the release, only a system of which how many will be recalled.

That got some attention.

(btw none of these are being prosecuted as criminal just 'incompetence')

My question: if they plagarized and faked so much and we find it now, what were they REALLY working on?

somebody wrote a book

>hmmm Scientology....

there is a LOT of truth in this and it is finnaly being cleared up and the science community is getting involved in revealing plagiarism (sp?) and improper practices.

Science reports and journals are FLYING back to their companies for retraction. Note all studies are involving humans.

no w3 just ht t pee

retractionwatch ~dot~ wordpress ~dot~ com

Sword of the Stars - its worth playing but maybe not paying more than, oh, a small amount for.

Eve Online - only if you are willing.

>>3601673
HAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS.

>>3601655

Oh yeah? Me? lol - what do they say about me in lit, I haven't been. I didn't think 4chan had any lit I'd consider reading, but do share I've never been in all my years ^_^

>>3601637
Basically, in a nutshell, Schrodinger's Cat was an illuistration (not experiement) used to show the problems with and the paradox with Superposition which is basically the 'we dont know until we know' idea being applied to atoms and things on a quantum scale. NOT cats.

So we don't know if the cat is alive or dead until we look, but the cat knows for damn sure. That in itself was one paradox.

So basically schrodinger's cat is an explanation of whats problematic and paradoxical in superposition. Its a very old illuistration so people tend to forget it doesn't 'prove' anything it just points to a bunch of problems and paradoxes (intentionally).

two identical twins

one develops schizophrenia

other does not

how possible, schizophrenia means 'split mind' so now we have 3 of the same person only 1 is healthy?

>actually its not lol schizophrenia is not dual personality or split personality

I suppose you can ask the immortal jellyfish about its cloning ability AND its ability to live forever.

> Related searches: turritopsis nutricula

Or you can re-adopt the Ding an Sich and head on over to the Global Conciousness Project / EGG Project!

> some sites are moving and are down but its cool to explore for your 'consciousness' experiments

>>3601599
dot dot dot yes in regards to Superposition - you're right I didn't want to drop 'the cat bomb' on everyone that SCHRODINGERS ISN'T AN EXPERIMENT ITS A FALLACY! and let them take a tiny bit of initiative to see he was actually showing the flaws and 'paradox' not trying to 'prove' anything.

>hence Schrodinger's cat is not able to prove anything and people look
>pretty stupid when they try to use the illustration for other things

>>3601504

Its not a problem, several organisms are capable of cloning themselves and several of those organisms are predatory animals. If you want go a step further, lets consider the possibility that we have a potentially immortal jellyfish species (we do). This jelly can revert to polyp stage, which we previously didn't consider to be a jellyfish because the eggs become polyps, the polyps clone themselves, and they form layered structures that separate off of them and float off to become little tiny baby jellies.

If that jelly comes back, re-polyps, it is officially a jellyfish AND a polyp - and if it clones, either of those clones can stay there and live for a very very (possibly foreverish) long time and technically the original jelly is immortalized as long as either of those two polyps lives. (Normally there is an unspoken 'disconnect' between polyp and jelly, but seeing one REVERT makes that one species potentially biologically immortal - it still can be eaten but has a chance not to be)

>>3601471
I know the definitions I even browsed over them, thats the best troll you'll get sorry.

/sci/ don't get Schrodinger's Cat wrong. It makes you sound like a real idiot to people who understand what the Schrodinger's Cat explanation is trying to do.


- Schrodinger's Cat is not about a cat and doesn't even need a cat. There was no real 'Schrodinger's Cat' experiment because we cannot replicate the results in a scientific and measurable way. Schrodinger did not sacrifice a cat for science or quantum mechanics.

- QM > > > CM - Schrodinger's Cat is an attempt to translate Quantum Mechanics to Classic Mechanics so that it can better explain the idea of 'Superposition' and also the problems and paradox it suggested. Superposition is a concept that exists on an atomic/molecular scale and it is a QM concept, not a CM rule.

In this sense, Schrodinger's Cat will never be and never could be an amorphous blurred representation that comes into focus as we look at it. Schrodinger's Cat knows perfectly well its in a box - CATS LOVE BOXES.

-What you don't know is perfectly capable of killing you without your knowledge or even perception.

Superposition = Quantum Mechanics
Cat = Classic Mechanics
Schrodinger's Cat = Effort to explore and explain the concept of Superposition (and whats wrong with it) by using Classic Mechanics.

So - don't get it wrong! Arguing Schrodinger's Cat viewpoints that have anything to do with something other than superposition is fun but its an exercise in stupidity and a dead giveaway you're not old enough to know what you are talking about but you're proud enough to defend it.

> Also implies you may not understand the differences between Quantum Mechanics and cool sounding words

>>3601422
>>3601429

So you guys better hurry up, if you are so opposed to the idea plants are living things with very basic but very real intelligence, you need to contact your government and tell them they need to close down the Neurobiology studies, and quit funding all those scientists with your tax money!

Because yes your government funds this research if you live in the USA ^_^

> Believe it or not, you're still gonna have to pay for the research to prove you wrong/probably already have paid

Kim JY, Henrichs S, Bailly A, Vincenzetti V, Sovero V, Mancuso S, Pollmann S, Kim D, Geisler M, Nam HG (2010) Identification of an ABCB/P-glycoprotein-specific inhibitor of auxin transport by chemical genomics. Journal of Biological Chemistry 285(30):23309-17

Mancuso S. (2010) Federico Delpino and the foundation of plant biology. Plant Signaling & Behavior 5 (9): 1067-1071

Baluska F., Lev-Yadun S., Mancuso S. (2010) Swarm intelligence in plant roots. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25: 682-683

Masi E., Ciszak M., Stefano G., Renna L., Azzarello E., Pandolfi C., Mugnai S., Baluška F., Arecchi F.T., Mancuso S. (2009) Spatio-temporal dynamics of the electrical network activity in the root apex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106: 4048-4053

Baluska F., Mancuso S. (2009) Deep evolutionary origins of neurobiology: turning the essence of neural upside-down. Communicative & Integrative Biology 2: 60-65

Baluska F., Mancuso S. (2009) Plant neurobiology: from sensory biology, via plant communication, to social plant behaviour. Cognitive Processing 10 (Suppl 1):3–7.

Baluska F., Mancuso S., Volkmann D., Barlow P. (2009) The ‘root-brain’ hypothesis of Charles and Francis Darwin. Revival after more than 125 years. Plant Signaling and Behavior 4(12): 1121-1127

Baluska F., Mancuso S. (2009) Plant neurobiology: From stimulus perception to adaptive behavior of plants, via integrated chemical and electrical signaling. Plant Signaling and Behavior 4(6): 475-476

Messina G., Pandolfi C., Mugnai S., Azzarello E., Dixon K., Mancuso S. (2009) Identification of eighty-four accessions belonging to Banksia genus by phyllometric parameters and Artificial Neural Networks. Australian Journal of Systematic Botany 22: 31-38

Mugnai S., Marras A.M., Mancuso S. (2011) Effect of hypoxic acclimation on anoxia tolerance in Vitis roots: response of metabolic activity and K+ fluxes. Plant & Cell Physiology 52(6): 1107–1116

Pavlovicˇ A., Slovakova L., Pandolfi C., Mancuso S. (2011) On the mechanism underlying photosynthetic limitation upon trigger hair irritation in the carnivorous plant Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula Ellis). Journal of Experimental Botany 62: 1991–2000

Wegner L.H., Stefano G., Shabala L., Rossi M., Mancuso S., Shabala S. (2011) Sequential depolarization of root cortical and stelar cells induced by an acute salt shock – implications for Na+ and K+ transport into xylem vessels. Plant Cell & Environment 34: 859–869

Cuin T.A., Bose J., Stefano J., Jha D., Tester M., Mancuso S., Shabala S. (2011) Assessing the role of root plasma membrane and tonoplast Na+/H+ exchangers in salinity tolerance in wheat: in planta quantification methods. Plant Cell & Environment 34: 947-961

Pavlovic A., Mancuso S. (2011) Electrical signaling and photosynthesis: can they co-exist together? Plant Signaling & Behavior 6: 840-842

Mazzolai B., Laschi C., Dario P., Mugnai S., Mancuso S. (2010) The plant as a biomechatronic system. Plant Signaling and Behavior 5(2): 90-93

Baluska F., Mancuso S., Volkmann D., Barlow P. (2010) Root apex transition zone: a signalling response nexus in the root. Trends in Plant Science 15(7): 402-8

>>3601314
>how do we define memory as a live typewriter?

You guys are silly sometimes. Okay, memory is record, a typewriter is a recording device, technically it records memory. I do not know where you understood that memory = life. I have 256mb of 'memory' on this old crappy machine.

And I would consider communication to be a sign of awareness between organisms. One must be 'aware' to recieve a message and translate that message into an action. I don't mean on an electrical level, I mean on an organism-to-organism level even at times not requiring physical contact.

And with the 'plants are not alive' thing... go look under a microscope lol.

Look guys, we like to think we already know it all don't we. Truth is you don't, you have to be open to suggestion, or else you are closed to correction.

The sum of parts will always be greater than the whole when it comes to life. I think people are missing that, they still think plants are a sum of their parts, they do not understand they've had a lot longer time to evolve than we have, and that time may have accumulated into more than just the sum of parts.

here I will get you some sources for hanging around this long

>>3601299

>implying I find all organisms need be aware


how about a Tardiagrade in ton stage? I bet they aren't very aware of anything except when conditions become livable again.

>>3601292

>implying I am your 'we' group
>implying I have never taken a fish off the hook before
>implying your feel-nothing not-aware communication-less fish is comparable to a real fish or even real plants

^__^ thanx for trying to believe for me in things that aren't true, does that mean you get to shoulder my disappointment now?

I ask your 'we' group and educate 'we' selves.