of the folium. These parallel fibers are densely packed along the surface of the cerebellum.
Purkinje cells (purple) are the receivers. They're BIG and relatively sparse, and gridded in a tight layer underneath the parallel fibers. They pick up signals from the parallel fibers, do something with the signals, and send the processed or sorted signals back down to the spine to drive muscles.
= = = = =
Given that the granules are known to be resonant senders of modulated pulses, this image is irresistible:
Here the resonant dipole sending antenna (parallel fibers) is producing a tuned signal, and Polistra (Purkinje) is tuning her receiver to pick up this particular sender. In the real world, as in the real cerebellum, there are many sending antennas and many receivers, each seeking out its desired signal.
Pulling the metaphor to the breaking point: Since the transmitting parallel fibers are along the surface of the cerebellum, are they also transmitting externally to other brains? And past the breaking point, power of prayer? These neurons do a whole lot of monostable and astable multivibrator activity. When internal sync is gone, can external input resync?
The researcher behind the study, Jack Grieve at the University of Birmingham, analysed more than 980 million Tweets in total – consisting of 8.9 billion words – posted between October 2013 and November 2014, and spanning 3,075 of the 3,108 US counties.
From this huge dataset, Grieve first identified any terms that were rare at the beginning of the study (occurring less than once per billion words in the last quarter of 2013) but which had then steadily risen in popularity over the course of the following year.
Once again, the greatest creativity appeared to arise in the regions with the largest African American populations.
The author gets EVERYTHING right, unlike most writers or commenters on word formation.
New words and syntax always come from the proles. In England it's the Cockneys, not the nobles. In America it's the blacks, not the Ivy League academics.
Why? When you're immersed in a culture of personal connections, dealing directly with harsh reality, you need to describe new situations accurately. When you're immersed in an arid desert of pure orthodox verbal doctrine and theory, you need to adhere rigidly to the verbal formulas of the rigid doctrine.
In new research, however, Ivan Nagelkerken, a marine ecologist at the University of Adelaide in Australia, found that when he exposed captive barramundi larvae to acidified water, the fish fled from safe sounds and gravitated toward unsafe ones, a change that could have lethal consequences for wild fish.
Nagelkerken already knew from existing research that some fish, including the barramundi and clownfish, appear to change their preferences for sights and smells when exposed to acidified water, but he didn’t know the exact mechanism driving the apparent sensory impairment. He also didn’t know if acidification affected the fish’s hearing in the same way. If barramundi could still decipher danger by sound, they might still thrive in a changing ocean.
Normally a Darwinist would assume that a consistent change of behavior in different surroundings is adaptive. If these fish consistently alter their bias toward various sounds when the water is acidic, the alteration must have "evolved" to help them survive among the different set of plants and animals that are found in the acidic water.
But not here!
Why? Darwin is a recessive gene. All other explanations fade out when GODDESS GAIA demands to be obeyed. The fish behavior can't possibly be adaptive. The fish are DOOMED DOOMED DOOMED BY GLOBAL WARMING TRUMP RUSSIAN TROLL DENIER HERETIC TRUMP HITLER KKK TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP.
And now I'm the true Darwinian. I'm using a VALID evolutionary explanation for the altered behavior of scientists when immersed in Gaian grant-water. They pursue Gaian hypotheses because they have "evolved", through tenure selection, to seek the biggest grants.