Comments about:  The Origin and Function of the Cerebral Electric Wave and Clinical Implications

Yes this is an interesting theory but not new (re:).  It was has been established theory in sleep research since 1995 when Fishbein and Gutwein (1977), as well as several other authors (see Giuditta et al., 1995 for references; Karni et al., 1994) hypothesized that sleep (particularly REM sleep) serves to facilitate learning and memory.  More recently, Krueger and colleagues (1993, 1995) hypothesized that sleep "results in the use, and thus maintenance, of synapses unstimulated during wakefulness" but "which are potentially necessary for adaptability to environmental challenge," thereby "serving to reserve a constancy of a synaptic superstructure important to brain organization" (Krueger and Obal, 1993). A vaguely similar theory has been proposed by Kavanau (1994) who postulated that a dynamic stabilization of the synapses in infrequently used circuits occurs during REM sleep.  All of these hypotheses postulate or presuppose modifications at the synaptic level.  Modification of synapses possibly involves changes in synaptic vesicles, shape, size and number of synapses, receptors, channels, activity of enzymes involved in signal transduction and second messenger levels, etc. Whether these changes occur only at synapses used, or at those not used during waking (or maybe alternatively to a subset from both groups?) is what differentiates these hypotheses.

I like to think of REM sleep as the state in which certain synapses or neurons in the whole brain are somehow identified and labeled by processes like phosphorylation-dephosphorylation (for example), while SWS would be the state in which long-term modifications due to changes in gene expression actually occur at the places tagged during REM sleep.  These same neurotransmitters may also be implicated in the genesis of other behavioral states, such as hypervigilance, coma and dementia.

Maria Pompeiano   <nstn4219@fox.nstn.ca>

Dipartimento di Scienze dell' Uomo e dell' Ambiente University of Pisa. Pisa, Italy)

* * * * *

Response from Robbie Zhiping Xie: 

Yes Maria Pompeiano's comment is very reasonable. The theory in sleep research is not a new topic. Since several decades ago, many scientists have been guessing the origin of dream and the function of sleep in physiological usage. However, it is pity that their thought is still is some sorts of guess without strict theoretical basis. We know many scientists have been getting a series of empirical data, which has shown some correlation between the sleep state and some physiological phenomenon.  But, the outward phenomenon isn't identical to inevitable logical correlation; I think it is necessary to establish the relevant strict theory to interpret the inner logical law.  

The interpretation related to sleep is only an accessory of my theory in research into the origin and function of brain wave. I believe my theory is strict enough to analyze the inner logic of the physiological actions in cerebral cortex concerned with brain wave. In fact, this logic must be a key link of life mechanism, by which the mechanism of memory can be discovered, and my theory about memory mechanism had been released in Chinese publication, although maybe there is no body can understand it so far for it is too difficult of its inner logic.  

I have never got enough experiment condition in my work, so I have to following the way of Albert Einstein to depend mainly on my brain. My undergraduate majored in nuclear physics, but I'm interested in psychology and economics. Because I have to make my economic theory based on human physiology and psychology, I have spent a lot of my effort to study the biological foundation of nervous system. However, I'm now charmed by it and hope to discover some inner logic.  

I honestly hope someone can give me his hand to check my theory, especially that some materials which are indispensable during neuronal metabolism, specially during new processes and synapses growing, possess higher permeability of passing through into or out of the neurolemma during depolarization state than during resting state. If it can be verified, I can say I have already discovered the mechanism of our memory. 

By the way Dr. Siepmann, thank you very much for your offering me those very important data. I have recently finished my important paper in economic theory, which I think must be able to have the world amazed because it is based on the strict human physiological and psychological basis.  

Again best luck to you!

Sincerely,

Robbie Zhiping Xie   < zpingxie@public.cs.hn.cn >

Editor’s note:  While I agree with M. Pompeiano, that the concept of sleep having a purposeful function has been previously expressed, but a physiological understanding of this and its clinical implications have been lacking.  Z. Xie has been able to put forth a theoretical model based on the physiologic activity the cortical neurons with clinical implications which includes a better understanding of the clinical EEG.  This article surpasses a recent article that Science considered cutting edge but was basically just a focused and narrow analysis of dendritic physiology (Distal Initiation and Active Propagation of Action Potentials in Interneuron Dendrites, M Martina et al; Volume 287, Number 5451 Issue of 14 Jan 2000, pp. 295–300).  

Dr. Siepmann,

In the heart of my theory is "dedication and love."

My theory and now published article (The Polymerization of Ethylene under High Pressure using the Semiconductor Model, Journal of Theoretics, Vol.2, No.1) is the result of more than ten years of investigation in the field of high pressure polymerization. The supercritical state is the last state of matter which has not been investigated enough.  The reasons are technical.  It is hard doing experiments at high pressure.  Leakage, explosions, burst of equipment, and more... I have had the luck to learn about LDPE and work at the LDPE plant to see enough for construction of this theory. Some things though are not visible at the laboratory but they can become visible when using large equipment.  From this standpoint, the universe is best laboratory.  At the universe level, we can see everything. 

Another important thing is logic. Humans are the only species which accept "no-logic,"  I found myself in this position many times. Most of my life has been a fight against no-logic.  Nature is logical, mankind is not.  Even when things in nature appear illogical, when we find the answer, it is beautifully logical.  Our challenge is to find that answer.   My article is such an example. Of course, in the heart of this and every theory is "love."  Our love of science and the logic that exists in nature so wonderously. 

Many regards to the Best Journal in the World,

Zeljko Prebeg   < zeljko.prebeg@zg.tel.hr >

Croatia

* * * * *

Response from Dr. Siepmann, Editor:

Like so many of us, Dr. Zelijko Prebeg searches for some of the answers to mysteries that nature presents... not for money or prestige but to appease that inner drive of discovery that some of us have.  It is this unselfish desire that has produced the greatest advances in science.  The worst suffering for such as he, is to be ignored by those who hold the keys to the ivory tower of scientific knowledge and its dissemination.. 

It is now through publications such as the Journal of Theoretics, that truly original articles of logic and science may now see the light of day, even if the author does not have the clout to be published on his/her credentials alone.  By letting these original articles such as these see the light of day, we allow them to rise or fall on their merit.   To a scientist such as Dr. Prebeg, publication at least keeps their knowledge from turning to dust.  The greatest discovery in the world is useless if it is not communicated to others. 

We have met such an academic need and we are now having to turn away or delay the publication of viable articles due to lack of funding to hire the people necessary for us to publish on a monthly or more frequent basis.  Each article requires at least 40 hours of editor/reviewer time and over 10 hours additionally to do the actual publishing.  We are running about 2 months from receiving the article to publication which is unheard of for any printed journal and most electronic ones. 

Some of the articles are amazing in content but barely understandable due to language barriers or the way that the article is organized, causing us to spend over 100 hours for many of the articles.  While these articles would have been refused out of hand elsewhere, we try to see through the language just So please, allow me this blatant request for funds to help with our mission.  Please consider sending us a tax-deductible to help us out.  We have been running on the sweat of a committed group of volunteers (staff and reviewers), along with the gracious financial assistance of others.  We are a 501c3 non-profit organization and tax-deductible, so you can get two rewards "for the price of one."

It is the thanks that we get from our authors and readers that keep us going, along with knowing that we are doing something for the greater good...for the advancement of Scientific Knowledge.

On Holding One’s Tounge:

Dear Editor,

I am totally amazed that your journal would characterize a paper as "Having Nobel Prize Winning Potential". You have managed to insult every author who you do not dignify as having Nobel Prize winning potential. I am certainly not willing to publish in a journal which passes out value judgments about the papers it publishes. This is for me to do as a reader. Your attitude towards scientific publication seems no better that my local tabloid newspaper or financial publication which tells me that by buying their newspaper I will get rich. I do not buy these publications at all.

Barry McCoy  <mccoy@insti.physics.sunysb.edu>

Winner of the 1999 Heineman Prize in mathematical physics but probably not of "Nobel Prize winning" potential.

* * * * *

Response from Editor:

Then I have insulted myself as I too have been published without such accolades from the reviewer.  An honorable and confident person would not be insulted that another got extra praise.  The Journal of Theoretics has been honored by authors whose only goal is to improve the state of science.  They are not caught up in who got the most accolades but rather put the advancement of scientific thought far ahead of their own personal ego.  Your view is like that of the person in the old testament parable who was more than happy with the pay he got for his day's work until he found out somebody got a better deal.  It is nothing else but pettiness.

You obviously did not read the article because if you did, you would realize the impact his research can have in medicine.  It is because of the rarity of such an accolade, that this paper is so important.  Would you say that one should not have characterized Einstein's paper on special relativity as being of Nobel Prize caliber for fear of insulting all of the other authors of that time?  I wish somebody would have had the guts to do just that because Einstein's paper was virtually ignored for about a year.

Normally, I do not respond to emails that are based on ignorance (such as not reading the article as it is obvious you did not) or pettiness because I have found it is virtually impossible to open up such closed minds.  Being an eternal optimist, I have tried to intellectually address your email in the hope of trying to change the pervasive atmosphere of one-upmanship, which has become so ingrained in academia today.

Sincerely,

JP Siepmann, Editor 

Journal of Theoretics   < archive@journaloftheoretics.com >

P.S.  "Even the greatest of all thoughts will be for naught if unheard."  If we are guilty of anything, it is trying to get people to read these important works and if takes a little bragging, then so be it.  Please take your feelings out on me but not on these remarkable works, as it is the message not the messenger that is of import.  Also FYI, we are a nonprofit organization run by volunteers, and we obviously are not getting financially rich (albeit being intellectually enriched every day).

Though Abortion Defies Logic, Personal Viewpoints Persist:  

Dr. Siepmann: 

You said:

"I personally feel that abortion is based on racism (Margaret Sanger) and that even though some may be able to point out a benefit or two, its acceptance diminishes the value of life and contributes to the moral decay of society.  Who are we to say someone should live or die?" 

I feel that you are leaving out a great deal of the timescale and the social context.  For consider:  to do away with abortion, all that we need to do is design a society in which no woman suffers any disadvantage  -  any economic disadvantage, or educational, or financial or social disadvantage  -  through being pregnant or having a child or children.  In such a society, what motive would she have to seek an abortion?  Arguably, for some millions of years that is how things were.  However, the introduction of organized society and agriculture (not necessarily in that order) has led to severe disadvantages to such women.  I have met many women who had had abortions, aged from 15 up to about 40 at the time of the abortion, and in every case it was because their lives would be wrecked otherwise.  They could not have coped.  Desperation leads to unusual reactions, and abortion in one form of another is old.  The ancient Greeks knew of a plant that was an abortifacient.  It's extinct, presumably hunted to death.  Gin was called "mother's ruin," especially if combined with hot baths.  Pennyroyal is also well known in the folklore.  I cannot blame women for this.  Even now there are some people, in some parts of this country, who would throw a pregnant teenager out of her home into the streets. 

Add that most teenagers make poor parents, despite their being excellent breeders, and it seems clear to me that the fault is in us adults for refusing to accept responsibility for all children.  Arguably, for millions of years we did accept all children.  Why have we changed?  This, it seems to me, is a far more significant moral question than mere abortion. 

Roderick Rees   <roderick.a.rees@boeing.com>

Reliability, Maintainability and Testability

* * * * *

Response from Dr. Siepmann: 

Thank you for your well thought note.  I agree with you that the problem goes much deeper than the symptom of abortion.  It goes to the moral decay if our society as a whole but that is another subject.  I do disagree with you that abortion fixes a problem or "frees" the woman.  Rather it enslaves her.  By society condoning abortion and making it easy to obtain, it makes the event seem trivial.  But later when that woman starts to have children, she comes to realize what she has actually done, taken the life of her previous child.  Post-abortion syndrome is real.  I thought it was an overblown made-up thing until I saw how prevalent it was in clinical medicine and read some of the studies (which were not publicized in the press as the pro-abortion studies have been). 

Abortion is also used by a large segment of our population not because the woman is poor or disadvantaged but rather because the pregnancy is inconvenient (interferes with their educational plans, not wanting a child yet, etc.) and not because the woman was poor or disadvantaged.  Our yuppie culture is the classic example of this.  In fact, less than 8% of abortions are for medical reasons and the majority of them are done because it is not desirable or inconvenient.  Even in those cases of social, financial, or other disadvantage, that woman can have her living needs not only met but improved, get a GED, go to college classes, and more for free and also having the choice of bringing joy to an adoptive family or continuing on her new path.  These options to abortion exist in virtually every city and the one here is called "Labour of Love."  The number of adoptive parents greatly outweighs the number of abortions done annually and contrary to what some say, they are not necessarily waiting for a healthy white child but rather any child they can love. 

I would not advocate the doing away of abortion if there was not such a beautiful alternative.  By going through a pregnancy support group or group home, the lives of these disadvantaged women can be improved and rather than destroying a life, they can bring much joy to the world.

Sincerely,

JP Siepmann, MD  < archive@journaloftheoretics.com >