NicoleCRust

NicoleCRust, 3 days ago to random

Fact check gem of the day: On Karl Popper's contribution to neurotransmission

In the early 1950s, neuroscientists were arguing about whether neurons communicate with one another via electricity (sparks) or chemical neurotransmissions (soups). It was known as "The War of the Soups and the Sparks" (Big reveal: It's mostly soups).

The experiment that put the debate to rest (at least for the spinal cord) was performed in 1950 by John Eccles and colleagues. In that experiment, they demonstrated that their own hypothesis (sparks) was wrong.

What inspired them to do a "disproving" experiment as opposed to the type that would gather support for their favorite theory? In 1944, Eccles met Karl Popper, and they began corresponding. Per one historian,

"The association with Popper made Eccles reformulate his experimental questions in accord with Popper’s philosophy that apparent ‘‘authentication” is no proof at all. It is only the clear-cut ‘‘falsification” of a theory that carried intellectual weight."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18617413/

NicoleCRust, 4 days ago to random

Fact check gem of the day: An update to the Evolutionary Computation Bestiary website:

"If you send us a message asking to have your own recently-published paper included here, you are publicly acknowledging that you have absolutely no idea what you’re doing with your academic life, and that you’re too distracted to even realise that we’re making fun of you. You have been warned."
http://fcampelo.github.io/EC-Bestiary/

For the CliffsNotes on the Evolutionary Computation Bestiary and all its brilliance:

https://neuromatch.social/@NicoleCRust/110655965657588931

Facts check out: bachelors, bacteria, barnacles, bats, bees, beetles, the big bang, birds, bison, black widow spiders, blind naked mole rats, bonobos, butterflies, and buzzards ....

@caranha, @fcampelo

NicoleCRust, 4 days ago to random

On the joys of fact checking and the diameter of Phineas Gage's rod ...

How thick was the rod that pierced Phineas Gage?

Some reports say that the diameter was 1.25 inches = 3.2 cm.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Phineas-Gage

Others say the diameter was 6 mm = 0.25 inches.
https://www.bmj.com/content/317/7174/1673.2

Some say it was tapered:
"It was 1 1/4 inches in diameter at one end (not circumference as in the newspaper report) and tapered over a distance of about 1-foot to a diameter of 1/4 inch at the other."
https://www.uakron.edu/gage/story.dot

That might resolve the discrepancy!

NicoleCRust, 8 days ago (edited 7 days ago) to random

Those trixie admins hid it under flavors. Fixed!!! Rest assured, sanity has been restored to the universe. Whew; close one.

Sleep well tonight, everyone.

https://neuromatch.social/@NicoleCRust/112555253950259224

NicoleCRust, 15 days ago to writing

On fact checking: ugh. Tips?

I wrote a book and now I have to wrap it up. In that effort, I have many! facts to check. I think I can plow through the bulk of it at ~60 facts per/day for ~30 days (spread across ~10 sources). My new hobby, I guess?

This type of tedious, detailed work is not my favorite thing. I have the source material, but I need to go back and scrutinize what I wrote in detail to make sure it's correct.

On one hand, it may have been easier if past Nicole did a better job at documenting details along the way. On the other hand, it was really unclear what would make it through the final filter and documenting every little thing would have been even more tedious (and would have disrupted the process of connecting it all together).

Any tips for how to make this new hobby of mine easier or more pleasant?

#writing #nonfiction

grimalkina, 18 days ago to random

Extremely typical of @analog_ashley that she is capable of giving a talk in a bar that's both a full stand-up comedy routine that has people shouting with laughter yet also teaching how to engage with open datasets in neuroscience

Lord do I wish tech conferences had more talks like this

Ashley stands in front of a large projector screen on stage at a small bar. She gestures expressively in front of a slide that shows a picture of a dopaminergic neuron. The neuron is shown on a phone as if it is a tinder profile and it is described as having the hobby of making others feel good and the toxic trait of making a lot of others feel good

axoaxonic, 18 days ago to random

I have a weirdly good memory for number strings, getting 100% of them right on the WAIS forward digit span test, which the examiner said they never seen before. This is helpful mostly because I can memorize license plates of cars that seem like they're about to hit me while riding my bike, and it's dangerous because I remember all my credit card info and can buy stuff online really fast lol

elduvelle_neuro, 20 days ago to academia

Are there any grants that you can apply to at the #postdoc stage to do data analysis?

#Academia #Neuroscience

NicoleCRust, 23 days ago to writing

First book revisions. Tips?

(Academic press) book pre-publication reviews are back. Really positive. YES!!!!!!!!!!!! 🎉​🎉​🎉​.

So now I'm moving onto final revisions. It feels good to slip back into that headspace again.

My big question for anyone who has sent a book off to the world: What was your strategy for those last steps? There's addressing the feedback, of course. But after that? It will never been perfect. But it has to be great. How do you know when to let it go?

#nonfiction #writing

jonny, 27 days ago (edited 27 days ago) to random

Students for divestment at #UCIrvine have taken a building and riot cops are staging

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/pro-palestinian-protesters-occupy-building-at-u-c-irvine/

edit: unclear whether riot cops have live ammo or just rubber bullets

NicoleCRust, 27 days ago to science

When should one call themselves an X researcher?

There are so many different types of researchers. Weather researchers, climate researchers, brain researchers. And within those categories, the nuances (like memory researchers).

When someone says they are an X researcher, what does that imply to you? In other words, what qualifies? Does it just imply that they are curious about X? Or perhaps that they know a bit more about it - perhaps they've mastered some scholarly literature or they've done at least one experiment? Or maybe even published a paper in a peer reviewed journal? Or maybe even more - perhaps they have a body of work on the topic; maybe they even run a lab (and have grants to support X research).

On one hand, no one should gate keep curiosity! On the other, certain terms imply knowledge and qualifications. I'm a "researcher". But just because I know a lot about memory doesn't automatically mean that people should listen to me about climate or economics. And I once read a very good book about ecosystems, but I don't think that means I should quality as an ecosystem researcher. So what, then, might instead?

#science

APBBlue, 28 days ago to random

I think I'm going to need reading glasses soon. ::squints::

jonny, 28 days ago to random

Just got chased out of a lab by a PI while doing a Union walkthrough. I feel bad for people in labs like that man, for your boss to be so tightly hovering over you and actively hostile to your rights as a worker must suck a lot.

NicoleCRust, 1 month ago to random

On making the anticipation bifurcation collapse ...

At the final stages of pulling together a big proposal where I'm really sticking my neck out, I feel like I'm torn between two states: I can be nervous about woulda-shoulda-coulda, or I can be really happy with the delta from start to finish.

After musing for a good while on the first (Did I do everything I possibly could, given what I know?), I'm going to opt for the latter.

While it feels a bit dangerous to be hopeful and excited, I'll say it: I'M EXCITED!!!

And instead of being superstitious, I'm opting to invite the universe to join in. Hey universe: working together could be fun. Want to collaborate?!

neuralreckoning, 1 month ago to random

Three grant rejections in one week. Sigh.

NicoleCRust, 1 month ago to random

Many know about amyloid, the gene APP and its relationship to Alzheimer's. But how many know the backstory? It all began with a letter from Carol Jennings to John Hardy .... Wonderful tribute and retelling here in @thetransmitter.

Much gratitude, Carol Jennings. RIP.

https://www.thetransmitter.org/alzheimers-disease/carol-jennings-whose-familys-genetics-informed-amyloid-cascade-hypothesis-dies-at-70/