 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> True - although muscle contraction is a cascade of chemical reactions
>> triggered by electricity.
>
> Not really. Nerve activity is a chemical process that dumps charged
> particles out of one end to start the chemical reaction at the other end
> of the next nerve cell. But it's primarily chemical as it travels thru
> the nerve, unlike electricity in wires.
>
> Novocain, for example, works by suppressing the chemical reaction in the
> nerve.
The way I read it, nerve conduction works primarily electronically
(i.e., along the length of the nerve cell body) and uses a chemical
stage to traverse adjacent nerve cells (i.e., the synaptic junction).
Electricity is the primary reason why nerves conduct fast - to the point
that mylinated nerves conduct faster due to the extra insulation.
(The part where the nerve connects to the muscle fiber is also chemical,
as is the process by which the muscle contracts.)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7-2-2010 22:06, Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> True - although muscle contraction is a cascade of chemical reactions
>> triggered by electricity.
>
> Not really. Nerve activity is a chemical process that dumps charged
> particles out of one end to start the chemical reaction at the other end
> of the next nerve cell. But it's primarily chemical as it travels thru
> the nerve, unlike electricity in wires.
No. It travels within a cell as an electrical signal. Although ions are
involved it is not a chemical process, except at the nerve endings.
Muscle is activated by cells originating in the backbone or even the
brain. Nerve cells axons can be a meter in length in human, in blue
whale slightly larger.
> Novocain, for example, works by suppressing the chemical reaction in the
> nerve.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7-2-2010 23:15, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> True - although muscle contraction is a cascade of chemical reactions
>>> triggered by electricity.
>>
>> Not really. Nerve activity is a chemical process that dumps charged
>> particles out of one end to start the chemical reaction at the other
>> end of the next nerve cell. But it's primarily chemical as it travels
>> thru the nerve, unlike electricity in wires.
>>
>> Novocain, for example, works by suppressing the chemical reaction in
>> the nerve.
>
> The way I read it, nerve conduction works primarily electronically
> (i.e., along the length of the nerve cell body) and uses a chemical
> stage to traverse adjacent nerve cells (i.e., the synaptic junction).
> Electricity is the primary reason why nerves conduct fast - to the point
> that mylinated nerves conduct faster due to the extra insulation.
>
> (The part where the nerve connects to the muscle fiber is also chemical,
> as is the process by which the muscle contracts.)
Actually also that is partly true. If the cell did not maintain an
electric field over the membranes (both cell and SR) it would not function.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> Actually also that is partly true. If the cell did not maintain an
> electric field over the membranes (both cell and SR) it would not function.
Yes, but I was under the impression that the depolarization happened across
the cell membrane, rather than having ions or free electrons moving *along*
the nerve like a wire.
In other words, unlike a few messages up, it's not "electrical power" that's
causing muscles to move and such. There's no electricity coming into or out
of the nerve, but rather a change of potential across the membrane.
I don't really know much about it, tho.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> No. It travels within a cell as an electrical signal.
OK. I had thought it was ions moving, rather than free electrons.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> (Although presumably it *does* make it significantly more expensive
>> than if it could by synthesized by a machine...)
>
> Hard to say. It's cheaper than ink-jet printer ink.
That ink isn't expensive to make though. ;-) It's just expensive for
marketing reasons...
[And typically you don't buy ink, you buy ink cartridges.]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Some of you may recall the strange affair of the Phantom of the Opera -
a mystery never fully explained. This, we are told, ladies and
gentleman, is the very chandeliar which features in the famous...
disaster. Our workshops have restored it, and fitted up parts of it with
wiring for the new electric light, so that we may get a hint of what it
may look like when fully reassembled.
Perhaps we may frighten away the ghost of so many years ago with a
little illumination, gentlemen."
*** A MINOR!! ***
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Perhaps we may frighten away the ghost of so many years ago with a
> little illumination, gentlemen."
> *** A MINOR!! ***
The ghost is a minor? How do you know?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> The ghost is a minor? How do you know?
*facepalm*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Perhaps we may frighten away the ghost of so many years ago with a
>> little illumination, gentlemen."
>
>> *** A MINOR!! ***
>
> The ghost is a minor? How do you know?
It appears I was wrong anyway...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'phantom1.png' (23 KB)
Preview of image 'phantom1.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
