Anybody in there?

To round out my year in Neural Systems, we concluded class with a discussion on consciousness.  It's the heart of our existence, yet something that can only be experienced individually.  Consciousness is a private experience.  Poets and scientists for decades have tried to express the world they see through their "inner theatre" but words and algorithms will never be enough.  Each experience is unique to the individual in terms of thought.

In terms of this subject, it's extremely difficult to conduct research.  How do we define the mind?  Is it the same as the brain? Or does the brain act as a conduit?  And where does all this leave free will?  The truth is, this realm is better expressed through the help of philosophers.

Descartes opens the dialogue with the view dualism.  That the mind (or moral spirit) is separate from the physical body.  His original view was designed to support the existence of God and was accepted as the dominant philosophical view until a Scottish philosopher by the name of Hume.  He posited the opposite- that the brain is both necessary and sufficient for consciousness.  His theory of physicalism or materialism has since dominated the field.  But modifications on both go far beyond their basic premises.  If you have the time to read some about these two legendary philosophers, I suggest you do so.  They are giants in philosophy and still relevant in neuroscience today.

Two more prominent figures who I'd like to direct my thanks at are the two professors who made my experience in Neural Systems so memorable.  Professor Mauk has been with us for the full year and brought a deep understanding of the chemical and voltage changes involved with the most basic unit of neuroscience- the action potential.  Not to mention, he really tried to bring our learning to something higher than usually experienced in undergrad classes.

I also want to thank Professor Drew.  HE was a recent addition to the staff at the beginning of this semester but made the course engaging and relevant.  I believe this was his first course taught at UT and I'd say it was a complete success!

So thanks so much to Neural Systems!  Both the staff and the fellow students made it an experience which will shape the rest of my career.

Science is Hard!

Remember back in the good old days when teachers said "Here's how this works! Just learn the process." and that was it?  I wont disagree that there's a certain element of boredom involved with that style of learning.  But this semester is teaching me that performing real science is so far beyond rote memorization.

It's not easy to get access to up there, huh?

Currently I'm working in a lab on my college campus.  I'm just an undergraduate research assistant but our project is relatively small so I get to handle all aspects of the actual research.  When I first volunteered for the position, I thought all the procedures and general direction of the project were pretty obvious.  We're doing a longitudinal study so it breaks up into neat little chunks.

But halfway through the semester I'm seeing all these sources of error!  I have a bit of OCD and sometimes I wonder whether that's a blessing or a curse for doing academic research.  Let's start with the fact that I do human research.  So we had to start by getting a big enough sample size.  We didn't have grandiose expectations yet you'd be surprised on how difficult it is to even get 10 people to it your research criteria.  There are all sorts of things that can eliminate a person from a psychology study.

And even when they do make it past initial screening, you have to remember that these are people you're dealing with.  People, unlike lab rats, have schedules and plans and can't be kept in a cage in the lab.  So you have to keep an eye on your participants and make sure they keep up with the requirements of the project.  This is particularly important for longitudinal studies.

Ah, and we must also remember the fallibility of technology.  For all the good its done us, our tech is never perfect.  You can have faulty wires or computer programs that wont run or even run out of materials.  Just today, my lab ran out of circular adhesives to use with the EEG and had to run a makeshift version of our preferred methods.  And I've had times when batteries nearly died and the electrical leads on the EEG decided to stop working.  There's just so many little places for a slip up to affect your data.

Obligatory cute baby picture!  Though really I meant to
say I'm still young in my training.

Yet, in a weird way I love that variability.  It makes science hard, but it also keeps it interesting.  You're always striving for the perfect run and the most accurate results.  And a truly good scientist learns to compensate for all the possible external factors.  Trying to design the cleanest. most efficient, most reliability study appeals as an interesting study for me.  But for now, I hope to continue to learn in my current position.

Memory Trace Theory and What it Means to Remember

Here at the University of Texas, there's a whole department devoted to the study of learning and memory.  There is constant ongoing research regarding the subject of memory consolidation and other similar topics so we are by no means close to understanding the full processes.  However, just going over the current theory for memory caught me as a bit sad in a strange way.

Memory trace theory holds that when we first experience an event, it is recorded as a declarative memory in the hippocampus.  But with further recall (aka- reliving or remembering the event), it turns into a set of semantic information and is stored throughout the neocortex.

Your memory isn't like storage space in a computer.  It's a
constant organic process.

But memories are just memories, right?  Nope.  Our brains aren't a recorder or a photo album.  When we make the jump from declarative memories (life instances) to semantic (collection of facts), so much is lost.  We will never hold the full memory ever again.  And over time, the semantic facts we've collected can shift and change.  This explains when you and a friend tell the same story from a year ago but with very different details.

Maybe I'm excessively attached to my recollections.  As I've said before, I am the product of my memories.  My life experiences have made me who I am.  Just the past year and a half of college have given me numerous experiences that have radically altered my view of the world- some for the better and some...not. But when I realize I will never be able to keep the stories of my past unaltered by my own neural processes, I'm aware of how much I have to lose.

These are my 17 journals which I have filled with my life
experiences.  I'm currently on number 18.

I suppose it's a good thing I'm such a avid writer.  I keep a journal and every night for the past 9 years (approximately) I've written two page entries.  Sometimes they lean towards the dull side but more often than not I have a nice little story to tell.  So even if my brain can't keep the facts straight, at least I'll have these journals to serve as my window into the past.