4 ms·

I didn't miss that point, and I didn't say neuron. What set of neurons in a bee's brain is the ODE solver? Can we provide our own inputs and experimentally show

I didn't miss that point, and I didn't say neuron. What set of neurons in a bee's brain is the ODE solver? Can we provide our own inputs and experimentally show that that specific set of neurons actually occurring in nature do what is described? Again, all we have is a theory with no more evidence than the original article. Models that match our observations in the world are our means to reason about the world. But they are not the world, this why our models constantly to change or have to be refined. In fact the cited papers below are quite clear about that. This paper is illuminating on the usefulness and limitations of the H-H model: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12392930 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12392930

yummyfajitas 16y ago
What set of neurons in a bee's brain is the ODE solver? I didn't claim to have evidence for my theory. All I claimed is that it was simpler and more plausible than Shipman's. Look, if you flick a switch on the wall, and a light goes on, the simplest explanation is that some configuration of electrical wires inside the wall caused the production of light from an electrically powered light bulb. You can postulate all sorts of other exotic mechanisms, e.g. levers snapping the glass in a chemical light. But the "occams razor explanation" (which is all I attempted to provide) is electricity in wires. Same thing with bee behavior - you should postulate some configuration of neurons with behavior modeled by an ODE solver long before you invoke quantum field theory.