Hi,
> Just FYI, MEG's (Magnetoencephalography) is a good step in > providing temporal precision, but is still a long way from > discerning individual neurons. It can basically give us EEG > measurements from deep inside the brain without using > electrodes(which obviously opens alot of doors for human experimentation) I actually have a big MEG datafile on my hard drive, which I haven't gotten around to playing with. It consists of about 120 time series, each with about 100,000 points in it. It represents the magnetic field of someone's brain, measured through 120 sensors on their skull, while they sit in a chair and perform an experiment of clicking a button when they see a line appear on a screen. (Pretty exciting, huh?) I got the data from my friend Barak Pearlmutter at UNM, who has spent a few years working on signal processing tools (using "blind source signal separation" methods) designed to clean up the raw data (basically subtracting off for noise caused by repeated reflection of magnetic fields off the inside of the skull). I guess that MEG can be used, over time, for stuff subtler than clicking buttons when lines appear. But using it to track the dynamics of thoughts seems a long way off.... Basically, one needs a lot more than 120 sensors!! ... and then one needs to hope the signal processing code scales well (it probably can be made to do so) Hmmm... I just looked up Barak's web page to cite in this e-mail and I discovered he very recently left UNM and moved to Ireland. Cool !!! ;-) http://www.cs.unm.edu/~bap/ -- Ben G ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
