Why do magnetic feilds not affect the brain?

[cameron marical]

Why do magnetic feilds like say from a magnet on top of your head not affect the brain? It would alter the current up there, but obviously doesnt.

 

Or any part of the nervous system in fact, why dont magnetic feilds affect?

 

The only thing that I can suggest is an outer layer of insulation to stop, but wouldnt just stronger magnets affect it eventually?

 

thanks.

[John Cuthber]

If you use varying magnetic fields they do affect the brain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_magnetic_stimulation

[iNow]

It's just the magnets from your fridge are too weak for any noticable impact... So, don't buy into the whole "these magnetic bracelets will cure what ails ye." That's a bunch of hogwash.

 

You might want to google the term "transcranial magnetic stimulation." It achieves similar results as electroshock therapy, accept using magnets placed perpendicular to the skull. Neat stuff.

[ydoaPs]

It's just the magnets from your fridge are too weak for any noticable impact... So, don't buy into the whole "these magnetic bracelets will cure what ails ye." That's a bunch of hogwash.

 

You might want to google the term "transcranial magnetic stimulation." It achieves similar results as electroshock therapy, accept using magnets placed perpendicular to the skull. Neat stuff.

 

I learned about that watching Mental.

[iNow]

Right on. I've never tuned into that one, but I'm glad to hear they are discussing actual technology with the audience. That's always a plus.

 

 

As an aside, I was always pretty interested in SQUID technology. Instead of using magnets to change brain function, this allows you to measure brain function by detecting its own magnetic fields. It's a form of magnetoencephalography, since the chemoelectric impulses travelling through our nervous system generate minute magnetic fields. We can detect those and use them as a means for detecting and interpreting brain function.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQUID

[Bishadi]

Why do magnetic feilds like say from a magnet on top of your head not affect the brain? It would alter the current up there, but obviously doesnt.

because living structures are not electronics or running on the standard chemical frame but more of a quantum chemical frame.

 

 

Or any part of the nervous system in fact, why dont magnetic feilds affect?

some do but for the most part you are being real smart in identifying a flaw.

 

ie.... if life was running on electrical impulses putting your head into a 3 tesla magnet (MRI) would just rip it all apart (memories)

 

see polaritonics and get an idea of how a wavelength can be affixed to a structure and recalled (perhaps how memories work)

[swansont]

because living structures are not electronics or running on the standard chemical frame but more of a quantum chemical frame.

 

some do but for the most part you are being real smart in identifying a flaw.

 

ie.... if life was running on electrical impulses putting your head into a 3 tesla magnet (MRI) would just rip it all apart (memories)

 

Um, what?

 

The brain does not run on standard chemistry? Nerve impulses are not electrical?

 

You will need to cite some sources to back these assertions up.

[John Cuthber]

Bishadi,

as I pointed out, magnetic fields do affect the brain. Your word-salad attempt to show why they don't is, therefore, rather silly.

[Bishadi]

Um, what?

 

The brain does not run on standard chemistry? Nerve impulses are not electrical?

 

You will need to cite some sources to back these assertions up.

 

what would you like over and above what you can experience and comprehend yourself

 

if the brain,

was running on electrical impulses putting your head into a 3 tesla magnet (MRI) would , do what?

 

from the most basics of eletronics to a paper clip; what happens when either is close to a magnet of such imposition (gauge theory)?

 

so just because the 'common sense' is not going to be found in the 'normal' publications........... does not make the opening post and his questions unanswerable.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Bishadi,

as I pointed out, magnetic fields do affect the brain. Your word-salad attempt to show why they don't is, therefore, rather silly.

 

 

another post with the ad hominen attacks

 

why not quote what i posted

 

 

some do but for the most part you are being real smart in identifying a flaw.

 

so i noted the same as you shared while offering a consistant truth to the OP inquiry

 

let's be fair;

 

 

you will create a real difference between us if your comments persist without having the capacity to articulate your concerns

Edited August 4, 2009 by Bishadi
Consecutive posts merged.

[Mokele]

if the brain, was running on electrical impulses putting your head into a 3 tesla magnet (MRI) would , do what?

 

Nothing. We're not talking about wires and circuits, we're talking about a soup of ions flowing in all sorts of directions with lots of random motion.

 

What happens to salt water in an MRI? Nothing. Same for the brain.

 

If you want to claim the brain operates in any sort of quantum way, anything more than a chemical soup, you'll need to cite empirical evidence.

[Bishadi]

Nothing. We're not talking about wires and circuits, we're talking about a soup of ions flowing in all sorts of directions with lots of random motion.

 

not much random about life (my opinion) (otherwise show me random in a living system)

 

What happens to salt water in an MRI? Nothing. Same for the brain.

so you are suggesting that salt water aint electrical either

 

 

If you want to claim the brain operates in any sort of quantum way, anything more than a chemical soup, you'll need to cite empirical evidence.

 

are you ready?

 

are you familiar with feshbach or stochastic systems?

 

what about even schroadingers 'what is life' and how HE claimed 'neg-entropy' (have you read his book?)

 

but of all items; life is what i know best

[CharonY]

Examples of how strong magnetic field affect the nervous system (e.g. TMS) have already been given. Sprouting random gibberish is annoying, btw.

[Mokele]

not much random about life (my opinion) (otherwise show me random in a living system)

 

When was the last time you were able to predict every single aspect of an organism's behavior for it's entire lifespan?

 

Oh, that's right, never.

 

are you familiar with feshbach or stochastic systems?

 

Both are mere math. Empirical evidence is what matters. Show me an actual nervous system displaying evidence of something more than just action potentials, membrane ion gradients, and synaptic transmission. Not in math - an *actual* experiment, on an *actual* animal with *actual* nerves.

 

what about even schroadingers 'what is life' and how HE claimed 'neg-entropy' (have you read his book?)

 

What does that have to do with this specific topic?

[Bishadi]

When was the last time you were able to predict every single aspect of an organism's behavior for it's entire lifespan?

that is strawman

 

as it is like asking "show me evolution at the molecular scale"

 

(the math is off, not the phenomenon)

 

 

Both are mere math. Empirical evidence is what matters. Show me an actual nervous system displaying evidence of something more than just action potentials, membrane ion gradients, and synaptic transmission. Not in math - an *actual* experiment, on an *actual* animal with *actual* nerves.

see

 

Solitonic effects of the local electromagnetic field on neuronal microtubules

 

http://cogprints.org/3894/1/Tubulin_tail_solitons.htm

 

but i have bunches more

 

 

 

What does that have to do with this specific topic?

 

the brain is not running on electricity like some binary computer (my opinion)

[swansont]

the brain is not running on electricity like some binary computer (my opinion)

 

Who said that it was? But this is a very different claim than saying that the body isn't "running on electrical impulses"

[Bishadi]

Who said that it was? But this is a very different claim than saying that the body isn't "running on electrical impulses"

 

 

what is the difference? kindly asking

[Mokele]

that is strawman

 

as it is like asking "show me evolution at the molecular scale"

 

(the math is off, not the phenomenon)

 

No, it isn't. If you claim life doesn't have random processes, you need to prove it. Offer evidence. Not equations, *experimental* evidence.

 

Solitonic effects of the local electromagnetic field on neuronal microtubules

 

http://cogprints.org/3894/1/Tubulin_tail_solitons.htm

 

but i have bunches more

 

That paper is purely hypothetical. I asked for Experimental Evidence.

 

Show me a paper in which someone has actually done real experiments on actual neurons.

 

the brain is not running on electricity like some binary computer (my opinion)

 

Strawman. Nobody claimed it was. All currents in neurons are flows of ions, all voltages are ion imbalances across membranes. There are no 'sparks', just ion flows and gradients.

[One of the Few]

I believe that after a sufficent amount of magnetic force one would experience some effect to the nervous system but note this, one's body is mostly comprised of carbon and water both of which have very little magnetism. That's my opinion.

[Bishadi]

No, it isn't. If you claim life doesn't have random processes, you need to prove it. Offer evidence. Not equations, *experimental* evidence.

 

Mokele,

 

eating is not random! (instinct is not random)

 

ie.... if life evolved from a weee little cell a billion or so yrs back, and that living cell divided and combined and finally made a man/women; then the FACT is, that life has not equilibriated for billions of years. (breaks "the law", at each reproduction)

 

there is no greater evidence than life itself.

 

so the evidence is apparent, as it is the current 'law' (math) that has blinders over the comprehension.

 

That paper is purely hypothetical. I asked for Experimental Evidence.

 

Show me a paper in which someone has actually done real experiments on actual neurons.

 

now above (on life) shares just how different reality is in comparison to the science and how mankind has come to believe in the uncertainties of the current paradigm.

 

So what that means is many of the published items will not reflect in the words and posture that will contest the 2nd but i do and why it seems so esoteric.

 

But if you are truly serious, then i will finish this request

 

what it requires is combining a few disciplines of math, evidence and common sense; not law abiding crap just to make 'steam engine' ideology work. (that is the period the 2nd was incorporated) (see planck's 1901 pub)

 

All currents in neurons are flows of ions,

may seem like that but it isn't so.

 

in fact, that 'flow' is what i contested many moons ago and is what prompted the my first paper on the subject (photon neuron conduction, 83') (just to give yu an idea of 'how long' i have been in this game)

 

let's start with this pub and note the 'actin'

 

this pub shares the use of energy in frequencies (laplace; autocorrelation (from the combining energy)), the non-equilibriation, the 'active forces' of the cytoskeleton (energy/signaling(my opinion))

 

By performing active and passive microrheology on the same micron-sized probe bound to the cell membrane, we were able to infer the precise amplitude and frequency dependence of the fluctuating forces spectrum exerted on this probe, bringing evidence that these forces are generated by active, out-of-equilibrium, biological processes.

 

http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0901/0901.3087.pdf

 

now be fair... because we are starting at the basics while answering your question. This pub is just one of hundreds that will build the pyramid to assist any who are really interested in making a difference.

[Mokele]

eating is not random! (instinct is not random)

 

ie.... if life evolved from a weee little cell a billion or so yrs back, and that living cell divided and combined and finally made a man/women; then the FACT is, that life has not equilibriated for billions of years. (breaks "the law", at each reproduction)

 

there is no greater evidence than life itself.

 

so the evidence is apparent, as it is the current 'law' (math) that has blinders over the comprehension.

 

You claimed there was nothing random about life. Then predict mutations.

 

The ugly fact is that, whatever goes on at quantum levels, the end result is random.

 

Rolling a pair of dice is technically entirely within the realm of physics too. But even still, you have a 1/36 chance of rolling snake eyes, and you cannot predict it. Ergo, random.

 

may seem like that but it isn't so.

 

Bullshit. Google "patch-clamp electrode" and "ion channel". Enjoy catching up on the last 60 years of neurobiology, since you've evidently read NONE of it.

 

in fact, that 'flow' is what i contested many moons ago and is what prompted the my first paper on the subject (photon neuron conduction, 83') (just to give yu an idea of 'how long' i have been in this game)

 

Bullshit. Show me the paper. And your wild speculation, even if published, is irrelevant with EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE

 

this pub shares the use of energy in frequencies (laplace; autocorrelation (from the combining energy)), the non-equilibriation, the 'active forces' of the cytoskeleton (energy/signaling(my opinion))

 

Your pub is about material properties of one cytoskeletal element, NOT about the function of nerve cells as a whole.

 

 

Cite a damn source that actually supports your claims.

[Bishadi]

You claimed there was nothing random about life. Then predict mutations.

 

your child may look like you! (predicted)

 

Mokele, face it!

 

It's that time, wake up!

 

The ugly fact is that, whatever goes on at quantum levels, the end result is random.

this thread is not on you defending QM or 2LoT

 

i posted physical evidence, not the math in QM at the planck scale

 

you wanted something to hold in your hand and now you have it on every front but the only and i say ONLY thing, is that for you to cross the line, you know you have to break the law

 

Bullshit. Google "patch-clamp electrode" and "ion channel". Enjoy catching up on the last 60 years of neurobiology, since you've evidently read NONE of it.

chaneelomics.... is that new to you?

 

you are suggesting that proves the ion channels are conveying electrically charged particles across the membrane.

 

M, your getting yourself lost

 

remember, if you EVER have a charged particle, whether positive or negative; a magnetic field can affect it.

 

Bullshit. Show me the paper.

Why?

 

you just said it was BS without a chance

 

And your wild speculation, even if published, is irrelevant with EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE

 

and what the last 30 years of compiliation was for.

 

Your pub is about material properties of one cytoskeletal element, NOT about the function of nerve cells as a whole.

weren't talking about the function of the cells

 

it was offering you EVIDENCE to see what REAL scientist have performed in observance to specifics

 

Cite a damn source that actually supports your claims.

 

 

on what

 

"Why do magnetic field not affect the brain?"

 

 

i guess only you can answer that

[Mokele]

You're evading question and refusing to provide evidence.

 

Consider this your last warning.

[Psycho]

not much random about life (my opinion) (otherwise show me random in a living system)

Chemotaxis in bacteria is random, they move in tumbles and runs sensing whether the concentration of the chemical has got lower or higher and then they randomly rotate and do the same process slowly getting to there desired destination, but the direction they go in when they rotate is entirely random.

 

The runs are just longer when they sense the concentration of the substances is changing to their advantage whether it be moving away from a toxin or towards nutrients.

 

as it is like asking "show me evolution at the molecular scale"

Mutations that create resistance to antibiotics that change the same of the rRNA molecules blocking the binding site, that is evolution at a molecular scale due to in some cases single amino acids changes and therefore single triplet code changes within the DNA.

[CharonY]

Actually there is the entire branch of molecular evolution.

Also not all bacterial chemotaxis work that way. Especially in gliding motility the "tumbles" (they are somewhat different than most flagellate dependent movements) are slightly more directed. But this is rather beside the point.

I am not sure what either has to do with the question at hand though. Of course by now it is pretty much a mess anyhow.

[bascule]

because living structures are not electronics or running on the standard chemical frame but more of a quantum chemical frame

 

Quantum chemicals! Umm, wrong. The brain is a classical physical system.

 

Based on a calculation of neural decoherence rates, we argue that that the degrees of freedom of the human brain that relate to cognitive processes should be thought of as a classical rather than quantum system, i.e., that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the current classical approach to neural network simulations.