116
H. Schmid-Schönbein
only cooperating in a transient fashion. Expressed in the words chosen in 1990 by
Haken and Koepchen, when referring to neurodynamic systems, the topological term
“attractor” thence should not be used, but the logic behind this metaphor should be
applied, the transiency notwithstanding. They state in 1990:
In biological systems a rather complicated network is established in which control parameters
of one subsystem may order parameters of another system or vice versa. This lead to a
phenomenon in which a system does not stay in… (the scope of) … specific attractor all
the time but may change between … (the influence of) … one attractor. Instead of attractors
one has rather to speak of quasi attractors which exist for a while but the disappear or are
replaced by new attractors.
It is this straightforward statement (corrected by short insertions in normal font)
which terminated the futile attempts of “chaos theoreticians” to detect “deterministic
chaoticity” (in the strict sense of this unfortunate word paraphrasing “quasi-chaotic
coordination) in central nervous systems and/or their efferent outflows in the form
of macroscopically detectable, periodically modulated activity. The term “quasiattractor” thence means “transiently operational attractors” or transiently consensualised activities of many subensembles of functional determinants for a given
fluctuating activity. There microscopic and mesoscopic causes have been clarified
by reductionist research during the last decade (or for that matter during the entire
twentieth century): neuronal activation in actual fact always means short-lived disinhibition and passive release of previously stored energy. This sweeping statement
holds water for the simple reason that all neuronally controlled activities are tonically inhibited and are only transiently disinhibited: phasic activity thus reflects the
sequentiality of disinhibition and reinhibition, where the latter is accompanied by a
phase of refractoriness (Schmid-Schönbein). As detailed in the latter communication, this follows from a theory concerning the “Integrative Action of the Nervous
Systems” , which was originated in 1906 by Sir Charles Sherrington: after almost
a century, his basic assumptions are generally accepted (see any textbook of neurophysiology, especially the popular monograph on “Essentials of Neural Science and
Behavior” edited by Eric R. Kandel, the Nobel laureate in physiology (2000). As
detailed in the secular work by Sherrington who must be considered to be the founder
of physiological synergetics, one must start from the straightforward assumption that
neuronal cells as well as neuronal cell pools (“dynamic ensembles”) are indeed being
permanently inhibited and only therefore only transiently can become disinhibited.
All analysis of cardiovascular and respiratory activities in awake human subjects
must, therefore take notice of the well-established “fact of life” that “Phasic MacroActivity”(PMA) is always reflecting the consequences of “self-limiting” evasion
from tonic microinhibition (TMI evasion), which, expressed in the terms of contemporary systems analysis, reflect not only the truly microscopic events associated with
transmembranal and/or neuronal currents, but the mesoscopic activity taking place
in pools of neurons (which are sometimes paraphrased as “hyperneurons”). This
abstract logic has highly significant practical consequences, which are quintessential for the correct interpretation of non-invasively obtained data from effectors of
the autonomous nervous system. Exclusively under conditions of prolonged physical activity (which is a state rarely monitored in basic physiology), a prolonged, but
H. Schmid-Schönbein
only cooperating in a transient fashion. Expressed in the words chosen in 1990 by
Haken and Koepchen, when referring to neurodynamic systems, the topological term
“attractor” thence should not be used, but the logic behind this metaphor should be
applied, the transiency notwithstanding. They state in 1990:
In biological systems a rather complicated network is established in which control parameters
of one subsystem may order parameters of another system or vice versa. This lead to a
phenomenon in which a system does not stay in… (the scope of) … specific attractor all
the time but may change between … (the influence of) … one attractor. Instead of attractors
one has rather to speak of quasi attractors which exist for a while but the disappear or are
replaced by new attractors.
It is this straightforward statement (corrected by short insertions in normal font)
which terminated the futile attempts of “chaos theoreticians” to detect “deterministic
chaoticity” (in the strict sense of this unfortunate word paraphrasing “quasi-chaotic
coordination) in central nervous systems and/or their efferent outflows in the form
of macroscopically detectable, periodically modulated activity. The term “quasiattractor” thence means “transiently operational attractors” or transiently consensualised activities of many subensembles of functional determinants for a given
fluctuating activity. There microscopic and mesoscopic causes have been clarified
by reductionist research during the last decade (or for that matter during the entire
twentieth century): neuronal activation in actual fact always means short-lived disinhibition and passive release of previously stored energy. This sweeping statement
holds water for the simple reason that all neuronally controlled activities are tonically inhibited and are only transiently disinhibited: phasic activity thus reflects the
sequentiality of disinhibition and reinhibition, where the latter is accompanied by a
phase of refractoriness (Schmid-Schönbein). As detailed in the latter communication, this follows from a theory concerning the “Integrative Action of the Nervous
Systems” , which was originated in 1906 by Sir Charles Sherrington: after almost
a century, his basic assumptions are generally accepted (see any textbook of neurophysiology, especially the popular monograph on “Essentials of Neural Science and
Behavior” edited by Eric R. Kandel, the Nobel laureate in physiology (2000). As
detailed in the secular work by Sherrington who must be considered to be the founder
of physiological synergetics, one must start from the straightforward assumption that
neuronal cells as well as neuronal cell pools (“dynamic ensembles”) are indeed being
permanently inhibited and only therefore only transiently can become disinhibited.
All analysis of cardiovascular and respiratory activities in awake human subjects
must, therefore take notice of the well-established “fact of life” that “Phasic MacroActivity”(PMA) is always reflecting the consequences of “self-limiting” evasion
from tonic microinhibition (TMI evasion), which, expressed in the terms of contemporary systems analysis, reflect not only the truly microscopic events associated with
transmembranal and/or neuronal currents, but the mesoscopic activity taking place
in pools of neurons (which are sometimes paraphrased as “hyperneurons”). This
abstract logic has highly significant practical consequences, which are quintessential for the correct interpretation of non-invasively obtained data from effectors of
the autonomous nervous system. Exclusively under conditions of prolonged physical activity (which is a state rarely monitored in basic physiology), a prolonged, but