from Bekesy to cochlear implants

Science > Physics > from Bekesy to cochlear implants

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 2

Topic:	Science > Physics
User:	"maestro"
Date:	05 Mar 2006 03:19:37 AM
Object:	from Bekesy to cochlear implants

May 11 2004 5:44 am, alt.sci.physics.acoustics
Re: Basilar membrane mathematics of place theory
Eckard Blumschein wrote:

Whole Stephen Norris asked me for a reply, I am reluctant do continue
the discussion here. Just a brief hint:
The highly complicated structure of the inner ear gives rise to many
wrong speculation by laymen.

Because of the work of Bekesy and others, it is known that the inner
ear responds to different frequencies at different places along the
length of the basilar membrane, by sending electrical impulses along
the aural nerve into the brain. This principle is at the basis of
'cochlear implant' technology, which is used to help deaf people in
situations where the ear is severely damaged but the aural nerve is
unimpaired. A cochlear implant is in effect an 'artificial ear', which
replaces the functionality of most of the ear and the cochlea: a
microphone earpiece transforms sounds into electrical signals
corresponding to the frequency bandwidths of the 'formants' of human
speech, and a thin wire inserted into the cochlea stimulates the
basilar membrane at places along its length corresponding to these
frequency bandwidths.
For some reason, the performance of cochlear implants has been
disappointing. Recipients often report that the implants only help
them distinguish between sounds and silences - if the implants are
're-tuned', sounds seem higher or lower for a while, but the effect
soon wears off. Although recipients are encouraged to persevere, on
the principle that their brain would gradually learn to make sense of
the input noise, many of them prefer to leave their implants switched
off most of the time because they are too noisy.
One could suggest that these patients were unlucky - perhaps their
aural nerve was too damaged for cochlear implants to work for them.
However, one does not also hear of lucky successes in cochlear implant
operations, where patients who were previously deaf have become able to
hear speech relatively clearly. The idea behind cochlear implants is
correct (from Bekesy), today's technology is certainly capable of the
speed and precision necessary to transform sounds into the required
electrical signals (a normal cochlea sends only a few thousand signals
per second along the aural nerve), and technicians can tune the
frequency response from different places along the cochlear implant to
a very high accuracy for any particular recipient - sufficient that one
might expect the technology to be not only adequate for human speech
(which is the focus of cochlear implant research these days), but also
for sounds as varied as thunder, Beethoven symphonies, and birdsong.
So why aren't cochlear implants more successful? The answer must be
that the 'place theory' model of hearing is incomplete - but there is
of course no point in finding faults in the place theory (as many
laymen do) without being able to suggest a better theory.
My interest in the subject came about as a composer of music, with
normal hearing. I was trying to construct a filter which would
stimulate the inner ear in patterns which are unlikely to occur in
nature, in the hope that interesting and unusual sounds would result,
and I developed a computational model of the ear which takes Bekesy's
observations into account, but is independent of any specific mechanics
of the ear. Using this model, I was able to theorise about sounds
which would frequently cause unusually large numbers of electrical
impulses to happen at the same time, or which had abnormally large
micro-silences between impulses, or which consisted of rearrangements
of small slices of an input signal, perhaps partially reversed, or out
of phase, or with pre- and post- 'micro-echoes'. I came to the
conclusion that the effect I was hoping for would be equivalent to
subliminally tricking the ear/brain into hearing something in a sound
that wasn't there to begin with - rather a waste of time from a
composer's point of view. More importantly, if it were possible to
trick the ear like that, much of the animal kingdom would already have
evolved the ability to psychologically control their prey by producing
various 'unlikely' clicks and buzzing sounds, and hearing would be
worse than useless - the ear must in fact have evolved to make such
subliminal tricks impossible.
So I discarded my computational model of hearing, and continued instead
with another compositional avenue I was exploring. The idea was to
spectrum analyse speech, transcribe the output for performance on an
acoustic microtonal player-piano, and then 'sculpture' the result by
cutting out the more discordant notes and leaving in the more musical
elements where possible, to produce interesting 'talking piano'
effects. I was looking for some formant analysis of typical speech,
and discovered that a lot of the necessary work has already been done
by cochlear implant reseachers, but also, that cochlear implants have
fallen a long way short of their theoretical potential. It naturally
occurred to me that my discarded model of hearing might in fact be
useful, but in the context of curing deafness rather than in composing
music. I myself have neither the resources nor interest in cochlear
implants to pursue the ideas, but as I haven't been able to find
anything similar on the internet, I am presenting them here in the
expectation that they will find their way to whoever's job it is to
look into such matters. In the unlikely event that the model has not
already been considered and properly evaluated by researchers, I hope
that it will enable clinical technicians to program cochlear implants
more effectively and improve their success rate with deaf patients, who
will then be able to hear my microtonal piano compositions!
The model is as follows:
Consider the ear/brain connection as a large number of (conceptual)
synapses, equivalent to the cilia inside the cochlea. The point of the
model is that it doesn't matter precisely where in the ear or the brain
these conceptual synapses are, or even if they have exact physical
counterparts, but because sounds are caused solely by air pressure
varying over a period of time, it is computationally valid to deal with
the problem as though pressure were the only physical variable.
Synapses corresponding to cilia nearer the centre of the cochlea are
less sensitive to variations in air pressure, they have a lower maximum
repeat firing rate and need more energy to fire - those at the other
end of the basilar membrane are more sensitive, they have a higher
maximum repeat firing rate and need less energy to fire.
Conceptual synapses are like miniature batteries, which are charged up
by a combination of continued pressure above an ambient, and increases
in pressure. When a battery is fully charged, it discharges its
contents (fires) onto the aural nerve, and then starts to recharge
according to the subsequent sound pressure variations. There might be
a short delay after a synapse fires before it can recharge efficiently,
and the other computational variables are: the capacity of each
battery/synapse; the time it takes to charge a synapse (which is
related to the maximum repeat rate for that synapse); the dependency of
the charging rate on continued pressure and increases in pressure; and
the ambient pressure. The values of all these variables are likely to
be slightly different for each synapse/cilium, but it is assumed that
the differences increase gradually from one end of the basilar membrane
to the other in some reasonably linear manner which can be discovered
by experiment.
The conceptual synapses behave like thousands of individual primitive
ears, each sending their own coarse interpretation of the sound
pressure variations along the aural nerve and into the brain, and
together they form electrical impulse patterns which the brain attempts
to interpret. It is important to realise that these patterns contain
temporal information because of the time between firings of different
synapses, so the brain can deduce frequency information from the
distance between the electrical impulses corresponding to these
firings. Amplitude information is deduced from the quantity of firings
occurring for a particular pattern. While the impulse patterns are
travelling in the brain, they are matched against patterns from
previously-heard sounds which have been stored in the brain's auditory
memory. During this process, neural pathways in the memory are
strengthened, resulting in the brain deciding on what the sound 'is'.
I could go into considerably more detail, but I assume that anyone who
is familiar with the problem will understand what I am getting at, and
will be able to adapt or add to the model where required. Many
clinical trials would be necessary to decide on realistic values for
the computational variables, but once that has been done, the synaptic
firings predicted by the model for an input pressure waveform, should
be spread out along the cochlear implant according to the distribution
of the corresponding cilia, to produce patterns of electric signals
similar to those produced by a normal ear, for all types of sound. It
should not be necessary to pre-analyse sound into formants to make the
cochlear implant especially responsive to human speech, because the
distribution of the sensitivity of the synapses/cilia along the basilar
membrane already performs that function.
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	05 Mar 2006 07:10:46 AM

On a sunny day (5 Mar 2006 01:19:37 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141550377.841722.213380@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
I find the system you propose very interesting, but will have to read this
some times to make sure I grasp exactly what you mean.
I have my own idea, and have been attacked for that (here).
I come from an electronics background, and have quite a bit audio experience
(recording studio).
From an electronic perspective, the little (wound tube) with fluid sort of
is a serial to parallel converter.
The sound comes in, is lead to the membrane at the start of that tube.
Because of the fluid in the tube, the pressure variations now move much
faster (then in air).
(Think if we originally came from the sea as species, we took the water with
us).
Then the little vibrating actuators along the fluid filled tube will see the
'top of the waves' pass, they are in fact looking at a section of the
waveform as we look at the top of the waves on an oscilloscope.
These actuators could then try to hold [the] pressure constant (neutralise)
at their position, the required energy would represent the amplitude, and
that transmitted to brain for further processing.
The frequency is NOT there!!
When a sine wave is applied (whistle) actuators will alternately with a
distance set by the frequency display a signal (proportional to signal
strength).
. .
. . . . . .
.. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
. .
wave pattern in tube
/-----------------------------
| fluid filled tube |<-------------- sound pressure serial in
\----------------------------- membrane
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * hair cells
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
nerves to brain
parallel out
So the theory that one hair cell only responds to one frequency
could well be an illusion, it COULD in a test setup because of the
form of the tube, but is highly unlikely and physically impossible
as those hair cells are all the same size.
But a neural net could likely do a lot with the parallel input holding
the wave pattern.
The tube is conical, and reflections may or may not occur at its end,
leading to a standing wave pattern, in which case indeed some points
along the tube would be active for some frequencies more then others, but I
say: serial to parallel converter (shift register in electronics).
Every single piece of communications equipment uses these to process fast
serial data, even the mouse and keyboard on your PC.
I say nature took the easiest and logical way.
.

User: "Hero"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	05 Mar 2006 08:48:49 AM

Jan Panteltje schrieb:

.............

The tube is conical, and reflections may or may not occur at its end,
leading to a standing wave pattern, in which case indeed some points
along the tube would be active for some frequencies more then others, but I
say: serial to parallel converter (shift register in electronics).

Here are my 2 cents to this.
A flood wave running into the mouth of a river is steeping up, so the
sine-wave-form of the tides change to a sawtooth-like form. Something
similar happens in waves, which are not surface-waves, when they move
into a narrowing opening

The tube is conical....

Have success
Hero
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	05 Mar 2006 03:00:37 PM

On a sunny day (5 Mar 2006 06:48:49 -0800) it happened "Hero"
<Hero.van.Jindelt@gmx.de> wrote in
<1141570129.579455.298170@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>:

The tube is conical....

Have success
Hero

mmm
As for the people who somehow may think that a 'running' pattern cannot
be sensed, here is a simple test you can do yourself:
Take a hair comb, one that has fine and gross tooth.
Take you finger, it has many many pressure sensors all over the top.
Close the eyes, and hold the gross teeth of the comb on the finger.
Now the fine teeth.
You can clearly feel the difference.
Now move the comb sideways (any side) with the fine teeth so it brushes
the finger.
Remember the feeling.
Now do the same with the gross teeth.
You will notice that *independent* of the movement you can tell gross from
fine teeth, and pressing strongly and lightly.
Imagine a high pitched sound for the fine teeth, and a lower pitched sound
for the gross teeth.
For the neural net -that the brain is- what sensors are where, and connected
to what, makes no difference (look up rat brain neurons steer flight
simulator in google).
People seem to think that the inner ear does a frequency to time transform,
a Fourier transform.
As the interface is to a neural net, this transform is not needed.
In fact the net will 'filter out' the frequency component over time, as it
only wants RATIO.
That is why those implants will never work that way.
The way to go would be use an ADC, many small (digital) delay lines), DAC to
trigger the hair cell nerves at regular intervals, and a lot of them.
FPGA would be nice to try a prototype.
When we (possibly) were still small multi-cell creatures, swimming in the
sea, we wanted to know where the food was, where the pressure wave came from,
when an enemy approached, also from the back.
The neural net (nervous system) can use skin pressure sensor cells to
feel direction (as in what direction the comb moved too).
It all likely evolved from simple sensors to 'hearing' more and more.

.

User: "maestro"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	06 Mar 2006 04:13:47 PM

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (5 Mar 2006 01:19:37 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141550377.841722.213380@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
I say nature took the easiest and logical way.

and:

When we (possibly) were still small multi-cell creatures, swimming in the
sea, we wanted to know where the food was, where the pressure wave came from,
when an enemy approached, also from the back.
The neural net (nervous system) can use skin pressure sensor cells to
feel direction (as in what direction the comb moved too).
It all likely evolved from simple sensors to 'hearing' more and more.

I definitely agree that to arrive at an understanding of how hearing
works, one has to consider how the ear has evolved. However, in my
opinion ears did not evolve from primitive 'direction/movement'
sensors, but from primitive 'pressure' sensors, so that hearing can be
thought of as an extremely evolved form of the sense of touch.
In my simple model of the ear, the cilia respond to pressure variations
in the cochlear fluid. All the cilia are sensitive to pressures over
the whole audible frequency range, but some are more responsive than
others. Whenever sufficient pressure has been applied over a period of
time to a cilium, it sends a signal along the auditory nerve into the
brain. The cilia are arranged inside the cochlea from least responsive
to most sensitive, so the brain knows from which part of the cochlea a
signal is coming from because of its lateral position on the auditory
nerve. Although I am at present a music composer, my professional
background has been as a software engineer in the audio and AI
industry, and I claim that in the simple model I gave, the brain
receives sufficient information from the cilia to explain all facets of
hearing.
I'm not sure (from your diagram and explanation) that your 'movement
sensor' model copes with the fact that the maximum firing rate for a
cilium's synapse is between 50 and 150 ms - that is, it takes at least
that amount of time for the synapse to charge up with electrical
potential sufficiently for it to fire. The signals that you represent
as being sent in a neat order into the brain would actually happen in
no particular order because of these delays. Also, your model would
result in each cilium in turn sending identical information to the
brain, which would be extremely wasteful of nature - wouldn't one
cilium be enough?

People seem to think that the inner ear does a frequency to time transform,
a Fourier transform.
As the interface is to a neural net, this transform is not needed.
In fact the net will 'filter out' the frequency component over time, as it
only wants RATIO.
That is why those implants will never work that way.
The way to go would be use an ADC, many small (digital) delay lines), DAC to
trigger the hair cell nerves at regular intervals, and a lot of them.
FPGA would be nice to try a prototype.

Yes, you are right, there is no need for the ear to be as clever as
some people seem to think - if you consider the neural pathways in the
brain as delay lines along which the signals from the ear travel while
the brain is 'understanding' them, timing/frequency information is
given by the distances between the signals on the delay lines.
Allow me to put the problem into a perspective. The fundamental idea
behind cochlear implants, that different parts of the cochlea are
sensitive to different frequencies, cannot be ignored. Direct readings
of the electrical output from different parts of the basilar membrane,
when stimulated by sinewaves of different frequencies, show that for
each frequency, there is a maximum output at a corresponding part of
the basilar membrane.
Unfortunately, there is these days no credible 'causal explanation' for
the above fact. Bekesy (1961) gave an explanation, based on vibrations
of the basilar membrane, which satisfied scientists of his time. The
reason for Bekesy's basilar membrane conjecture, was that individual
cilia are so simple biologically that it is just not possible that they
could be some sort of 'sound frequency' detectors, which send a signal
to the brain whenever they detect a particular sinewave frequency from
the pressure variations in the cochlear fluid. If individual cilia
could achieve such a miraculous feat, why would nature ever have needed
to evolve intelligent brains at all!
Since then, the mathematics behind Bekesy's explanation was discovered
to be too simplistic in the area of 'frequency dispersion', and
Lighthill et al. produced an improved mathematical model which covered
the fault. More recently however, it was discovered that the cochleas
of patients whose basilar membranes had been 'solidified' by a fungal
disease, so they could not be vibrating, still produced the frequency
dispersion characteristics of the Bekesy/Lighthill model. From this it
has been deduced that movements of the basilar membrane are irrelevant,
and that no matter how unlikely it might seem, the hairlike cilia must
be the elements in the ear which detect frequencies, as they are the
only other candidate for frequency detection within the ear.
When experimenters test the cochlear response to validate the 'place
theory' (that each cilia responds to a specific frequency), they input
a pure sinewave of a particular frequency to the ear, and then observe
the place in the cochlea which gives the maximum output.
My model explains the place theory observations as a resonance effect
which happens because the input which experimenters use is a sinewave
at a single frequency. Although all the cilia respond to all
frequencies, a simple wave frequency will resonate with the cilia whose
maximum firing rate/recovery time is a multiple of the frequency.
According to the model, the place theory is correct for simple
sinewaves and squarewaves at a single frequency , but for more
complicated signals, the ear does not behave 'additively' - that is, if
several sinewaves were presented simultaneously to the ear, there would
not be several corresponding output maxima from the cochlea at the
places predicted by the place theory for each sinewave, instead, a more
complicated pattern of signals would be sent from various parts of the
cochlea, which the brain interprets by pattern-matching with previously
heard sounds. This pattern of signals is not difficult to predict from
my model, and I claim that the performance of cochlear implants could
be dramatically improved if the implants were programmed to stimulate
the basilar membrane according to that pattern rather than that given
by the currently-used 'place theory', which has pretty much been
disproven.
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	06 Mar 2006 05:23:06 PM

On a sunny day (6 Mar 2006 14:13:47 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141683227.652976.272640@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>:

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (5 Mar 2006 01:19:37 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141550377.841722.213380@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

I say nature took the easiest and logical way.

and:

I say exactly the same actually.
I will now try to address the frequency issue a bit, make it more
understandable.
This is what I described before:
. .
. . . . . .
.. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
. .
wave pattern in tube
/-----------------------------
| fluid filled tube |<-------------- sound pressure serial in
\----------------------------- membrane
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * hair cells
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
nerves to brain
parallel out
Now let's look at a detail when a wave pattern is there, but please also
read my other reply in this thread / subject with the comb test.
This is the pressure pattern, and it is actually moving side ways (likely):
. .
. . . . . .
.. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * hair cells (pressure sensors)
0 + 0 - 0 + 0 - 0 + + 0 - - 0 firing
+
* * * * * * * * * first layer of pre-procesing neurons
* * * next layer
* next layer
* nerve to brain
You can see there is some pre-processing 'on location'.
Extensive research has been done to the pre-processing in the eye to show
a lot of detection happens in the first layers, reducing the bandwidth of
the signal in the optical nerve to the brain.
I think it is important that you had some software experience with neural
nets perhaps, that makes it easier to work with configurations like that.
Now what I am getting at (trying to convey) is this:
The neuron in the second later is connected to several in the first.
Mainly the ones close to it.
If the frequency is low, there will be many groups of neurons in the first
layer 'active', then 'inactive', then active again.
++++++------++++++-----+++++++------
layer 2
neuron says:
I see all left, and all right -
I am layer 2, so freq must be < then (name it).
For a high frequency;
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
layer 2 neuron says:
I see +- to my left and +- to my right,
so the frequency is between (name it) and (name it).
As you can see already at the second layer is there
a precise knowledge of the frequency and amplitude.
When the wave moves (it normally will, as there is no sync mechanism)
past the sensors, it has no effect on the outcome of the second layer.
Indeed somebody probing past the second layer would find specific
frequencies lead to more activation (more firing) then others....
Depends on the layer and neuron.
As for the reaction time of these sensors, I dunno, I think they are
probably a lot faster, I looked at an electron microscope picture of
the 'hairs' and given size and form I'd say microseconds.
And there are many models about the modulation of the firing position
in time.
So -not the firing rate- but the RATIO of the pulses is the key.
You will find a few things from the above model:
Long time ago I worked with this person making audio tapes.
One point he said to me: 'Jan, what I find strange is that if I play a tape
backward, then I get the same feeling from the tape as I get when playing
forward'.
He expected if playing forward good feeling, then playing backward bad
feeling.
I thought it was a funny thing, thought about it, tried a few things, and
of course playing slow and half speed ALSO gives the same feeling.
It is the RATIO that makes the feeling (impression), the RATIO of the number
of +++ and --- the second layer neurons see (left right).
For it, it will note the lower frequency (or higher), but if the ratios
stay the same, then the information content was the same.
Bit philosophical OK, but now take that comb, move it with the fine teeth
over the top of your finger, then with the gross teeth.... You can feel the
difference between the fine and the gross teeth moving or not.
In fact you look through a grid (of sensors).
It is a bit late, so I leave it at this for now.
Hopefully it makes sense to you. for those in that research, it is your
opportunity to get something working, it will never work the way they do
it now.
If there really WAS an absolute frequency sensor we would all have absolute
hearing.
I have never met somebody that did.
Maybe somebody wit ha defect in the ear would get standing waves and could
then feel [a] absolute frequency. just guessing.

.

User: "maestro"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	06 Mar 2006 06:50:30 PM

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (6 Mar 2006 14:13:47 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141683227.652976.272640@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>:

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (5 Mar 2006 01:19:37 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141550377.841722.213380@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

I say nature took the easiest and logical way.

and:

I say exactly the same actually.
I will now try to address the frequency issue a bit, make it more
understandable.

This is what I described before:
. .
. . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
. .
wave pattern in tube
/-----------------------------
| fluid filled tube |<-------------- sound pressure serial in
\----------------------------- membrane
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * hair cells
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
nerves to brain
parallel out

Now let's look at a detail when a wave pattern is there, but please also
read my other reply in this thread / subject with the comb test.

Yes, I did read that. I was slightly concerned that you were rather
vague about the difference between travelling waves and standing waves
- on the other hand I think we both agree that the hydrodynamic aspects
of 'waves' in the cochlear fluid and basilar membrane are irrelevant.
I'm glad you avoid discussing 'sound waves' - although the pressure
variations can be analysed mathematically into component sinewaves,
there is nothing particularly wave-like about typical sound signals,
which actually consist of a stream of rapid and visually very arbitrary
wobbles of the air pressure, unlike your neat sinusoidal picture which
you give again above and below:

This is the pressure pattern, and it is actually moving side ways (likely):

Can you give an estimate of the speed of the pressure pattern movement,
and the distance it travels?

. .
. . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * hair cells (pressure sensors)
0 + 0 - 0 + 0 - 0 + + 0 - - 0 firing
+
* * * * * * * * * first layer of pre-procesing neurons

* * * next layer

* next layer
* nerve to brain

You can see there is some pre-processing 'on location'.

Extensive research has been done to the pre-processing in the eye to show
a lot of detection happens in the first layers, reducing the bandwidth of
the signal in the optical nerve to the brain.

I think it is important that you had some software experience with neural
nets perhaps, that makes it easier to work with configurations like that.

Whether this sort of processing is done in the ear or the brain is
irrelevant to cochlear implant design - the implant connects to the
nerve bundle called the auditory nerve and the workings of the nerve
itself don't matter. The layers of nerves (neurons) you describe
correspond to a neural network - there is no need for more than two
layers in a computational model.

Now what I am getting at (trying to convey) is this:
The neuron in the second later is connected to several in the first.
Mainly the ones close to it.

If the frequency is low, there will be many groups of neurons in the first
layer 'active', then 'inactive', then active again.

You said you were going to address the frequency issue, which is 'why
do different parts of the cochlea respond to different frequencies?'.
So you need to explain WHY a low frequency will have the effect on
cilia/synapses that you describe.

++++++------++++++-----+++++++------

layer 2
neuron says:
I see all left, and all right -
I am layer 2, so freq must be < then (name it).

For a high frequency;
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

layer 2 neuron says:
I see +- to my left and +- to my right,
so the frequency is between (name it) and (name it).

Again, WHY do high frequencies do that? Without an explanation, it is
not obvious why the neurons would form a +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-,
particularly as in practice they all fire independently in no
particular order, because of the 50-150ms minimum recovery time between
synaptic firings.

As you can see already at the second layer is there
a precise knowledge of the frequency and amplitude.

What happens when a high pressure frequency sinewave and a low pressure
frequency sinewave occur together?

When the wave moves (it normally will, as there is no sync mechanism)
past the sensors, it has no effect on the outcome of the second layer.
Indeed somebody probing past the second layer would find specific
frequencies lead to more activation (more firing) then others....
Depends on the layer and neuron.

A neural network learns sensible connection details by itself, what you
describe are particular hard-wired connections which might or might not
be present in the ear or the brain.

As for the reaction time of these sensors, I dunno, I think they are
probably a lot faster, I looked at an electron microscope picture of
the 'hairs' and given size and form I'd say microseconds.
And there are many models about the modulation of the firing position
in time.
So -not the firing rate- but the RATIO of the pulses is the key.

I think the reaction time of the sensors is a critical factor. The
most surprising thing about the ear is the low amount of electrical
impulse information which it sends along the auditory nerve, compared
to the 40,000 16-bit words per second required for digital audio. The
several thousand cilia each have a maximum repeat firing rate of
between 50 and 150ms, so that during loud sounds most of them are
incapable of firing more than half the time because they are
'recharging their batteries', and typically only a few thousand impulse
signals (all pretty much the same magnitude) are sent per second into
the brain.

You will find a few things from the above model:
Long time ago I worked with this person making audio tapes.
One point he said to me: 'Jan, what I find strange is that if I play a tape
backward, then I get the same feeling from the tape as I get when playing
forward'.
He expected if playing forward good feeling, then playing backward bad
feeling.
I thought it was a funny thing, thought about it, tried a few things, and
of course playing slow and half speed ALSO gives the same feeling.
It is the RATIO that makes the feeling (impression), the RATIO of the number
of +++ and --- the second layer neurons see (left right).
For it, it will note the lower frequency (or higher), but if the ratios
stay the same, then the information content was the same.

Bit philosophical OK, but now take that comb, move it with the fine teeth
over the top of your finger, then with the gross teeth.... You can feel the
difference between the fine and the gross teeth moving or not.
In fact you look through a grid (of sensors).
It is a bit late, so I leave it at this for now.
Hopefully it makes sense to you. for those in that research, it is your
opportunity to get something working, it will never work the way they do
it now.

If there really WAS an absolute frequency sensor we would all have absolute
hearing.
I have never met somebody that did.
Maybe somebody wit ha defect in the ear would get standing waves and could
then feel [a] absolute frequency. just guessing.

It seems to me that your ideas are more relevant to what is happening
within the brain beyond the auditory nerve, than to what is going on in
the cochlea. Your description of how frequencies can be encoded by
neuron activity on delay lines (there are similar concepts in digital
audio filters) is very likely to be precisely what is happening within
the brain, but as such, I'm not sure it is particularly relevant to
cochlear implant technology.
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	07 Mar 2006 11:12:43 AM

On a sunny day (6 Mar 2006 16:50:30 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141692630.929100.39640@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>:

Now let's look at a detail when a wave pattern is there, but please also
read my other reply in this thread / subject with the comb test.

Oh, they are not!
I have read your post first, so I will jump ahead a bit, first there is the
speed the wave (as a pressure zone) now travels in the fluid.
This is different from air speed.
Look it up for water.
You seem to have some 'mystic' ideas about what happens as far as I can make
out, referring to audio sampling frequencies and bit depth etc.

I'm glad you avoid discussing 'sound waves' - although the pressure
variations can be analysed mathematically into component sinewaves,
there is nothing particularly wave-like about typical sound signals,

This is also wrong.
If you put a microphone at any point in the air, and connect an
oscilloscope to it, you will see a wave pattern representing the movement
of the membrane, or if it is a pressure zone mike, the air pressure on
the sensor.
In this case we interface to a fluid, not air.
In the simplest way: You must have swimmed under water, and heard noises?
If not, take a tube (or metal can) filled with fluid, and tap it at one side
(membrane).
The pressure front will travel to the other end in some given time.
At any point along the tube you can have pressure (or motion) sensors
that will activate in sequence, yes a tapped delay line.
If the membrane is activated by a tone (sinewave), so will the signals
at the 'taps' look like that sinewave (assuming no reflection at end of tube).

which actually consist of a stream of rapid and visually very arbitrary
wobbles of the air pressure, unlike your neat sinusoidal picture which
you give again above and below:

No way, very precise see microphone.
The signal at the microphone is the SUM of all these components, and
if you are using a test tone of say 1000Hz, (as I recommend because it is
easier for you to understand), the mike will give a 1000 Hz sinewave, no
kidding.
If it did not then it was kaput.

This is the pressure pattern, and it is actually moving side ways (likely):

Can you give an estimate of the speed of the pressure pattern movement,
and the distance it travels?

Look up speed sound in water (as I mentioned before).

This is also wrong, not every individual hair cells has its own connection
to the brain, the pre-processing is local, and even under a microscope
it would be a big challenge to get to probe layer 2 from 3.
OF COURSE it is important how the system works!!!!
Are you joking [edited from sensored]? You want to repair a radio without
understanding how it works? Chances are a zillion to 1 you will fail.
You want to help those people? Learn how it works!

See below again:

At this point I always like to mention the Alien (yes I am one sure)
case.
It will explain something to you about [en]coding.
I love this example so much, so plz :
Alien lands on earth with his little flying cup and saucer.
He stays a while, finds everything very interesting, and decides to take all
that knowledge with him back home, he wants to take the Encyclopedia
Britannica.
But his spaceship is too small and the weight too much.
So he writes down the whole Encyclopedia text in ASCII numbers as one long
number.
Then he does 1 / that number on his (Alien) calculator.
This gives him a ratio.
He takes a stick, and puts a mark exactly so it is from one end at that
ratio from the length, and takes the stick back home.
What I am saying is, that given infinite granularity (say time was not
granular, not 'quantised') by tapping on the table 3 times
tap tap tap
I can describe the whole universe in all detail by the time ratio of
the three taps.
3 (three) info points is all you need to encode any amount of info
*in time* that you want.
So the story of 'firing rate' is just that: firing rate (of a neuron).
faster - slower faster (called frequency modulation).
The clue is more likely the RATIO between 2 firings, carrying that hidden
info :-)
Look a bit at this:
http://www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/4829.html
http://www.usc.edu/ext-relations/news_service/real/real_video.html
Link may still work, was from 1999, was classified immediately (NAVY funded
and submarine use for detecting other subs).
Anyways in the original paper and diagram (that I must have somewhere)
he describes real measurements on real neurons, and how the firing rate
system is not the right one.

As you can see already at the second layer is there
a precise knowledge of the frequency and amplitude.

What happens when a high pressure frequency sinewave and a low pressure
frequency sinewave occur together?

This is called superposition, the pressures at any point simply add up.

A neural network learns sensible connection details by itself, what you
describe are particular hard-wired connections which might or might not
be present in the ear or the brain.

A neural network will 'grow' connections, but already has a physical form
when you grow up that has interconnections (else you would never hear).

Ah yes... see my Alien example and the references above....
There are other factors too.
I am quite familiar with sampling, both audio and video, I designed these
things.
It is in fact possible to 'subsample' a wave, say you have 10kHz sine
and sample it exactly 100 times per second for a very short time.
Your output will exactly be a sinewave! Same amplitude too.
And if the original was a sawtooth (ramp) so will your output be.
This effect is used in sampling oscilloscopes.
These days however they go for giga Hertz sampling there, and oversample
many times.
The other way you can solve the problem is how I did with video in the
seventies.
Then the memories were really slow , so how do you store 10 mega samples
per second in a memory that only can store 3 (because of access time)?
You 'stagger' the memory, so you use 4 (in this case) and store sample
1 in the first, sample 2 in the second, and sample 3 in the third.. etc.
All memories are clocked a few nano seconds after each other.
In the electron microscope picture I did see, small groups of hair cells
were present.
So it is perhaps possible these work time shifted, 10 would increase speed
by ten.
There is something else that occurred to me this morning.
Neurons, being highly non-linear, could perhaps use a system to store
info very much like the old 'bias' frequency used in old tape recorders.
Here the bias frequency (above hearing, say 40kHz) was ADDED (so
superimposed) to the audio to make the field at the recording head go trough
the magnetic curve of the tape repeatedly, when the tape moved away (from
the head) it was left magnetised at exactly the right point (of the curve),
right strength.
We all know about that high whistle in the ears.....
Who knows, maybe it is part of the neuron sensor system.

It seems to me that your ideas are more relevant to what is happening
within the brain beyond the auditory nerve, than to what is going on in
the cochlea.

There is no difference, nature made a clever decision where to split
the 2, to allow for reasonable signal transport (bandwidth).

Your description of how frequencies can be encoded by
neuron activity on delay lines (there are similar concepts in digital
audio filters) is very likely to be precisely what is happening within
the brain, but as such, I'm not sure it is particularly relevant to
cochlear implant technology.

But it is...
.

User: "Hero"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	07 Mar 2006 05:30:52 PM

Jan Panteltje schrieb:

On a sunny day (6 Mar 2006 16:50:30 -0800) it happened "maestro"
<StpNrrs@aol.com> wrote in
<1141692630.929100.39640@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>:

Now let's look at a detail when a wave pattern is there, but please also
read my other reply in this thread / subject with the comb test.

.........................

But it is...

On the sideline (of this thread) some more:
http://www.sinnesphysiologie.de/proto02/sinntops/hoeren/preview/
and
http://www.sinnesphysiologie.de/proto01/index.htm
Success
Hero
.

User: "Hero"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	08 Mar 2006 03:30:33 AM

Maestro wrote

...a thin wire inserted into the cochlea stimulates the basilar membrane
at places along its length corresponding to these frequency bandwidths.
..
...So why aren't cochlear implants more successful? The answer must be
that the 'place theory' model of hearing is incomplete - but there is
of course no point in finding faults in the place theory (as many
laymen do) without being able to suggest a better theory.
it is assumed that the differences increase gradually from one end of the=

basilar

membrane to the other in some reasonably linear manner which can be disco=

vered

by experiment.

Jan Panteltje wrote:

..So the theory that one hair cell only responds to one frequency
could well be an illusion, it COULD in a test setup because of the
form of the tube, but is highly unlikely and physically impossible
as those hair cells are all the same size.
...The tube is conical, and reflections may or may not occur at its end,
...People seem to think that the inner ear does a frequency to time tra=

nsform,

a Fourier transform.
As the interface is to a neural net, this transform is not needed. In =

fact the net will

'filter out' the frequency component over time, as it only wants RATI=

O=2E That is why

those implants will never work that way.

Maestro wrote:

...on the other hand I think we both agree that the hydrodynamic aspects =

of 'waves' in

the cochlear fluid and basilar membrane are irrelevant.

And with both he means Jan and himself,
but Jan answers:

Oh, they are not!

He gives a woderful story (see in the appendix)
and concludes:

...The clue is more likely the RATIO between 2 firings, carrying that h=

idden info :-)
As this is de.sci.mathematik here some more math to it:
As Jan pointed out the RATIO is important. Just ordinary feeling of the
skin discovers
Druck, Ber=FChrung und Vibration, that is pressure (with intensity), the
speed of change of pressure or the first derivate and also the second
derivate as vibration.
This is not ,,hidden info", but it is highlighted by differentation
(the derivate contains less info, but highlights an important aspect).
Also the info of all nerve cells along the skin will be compared and
calculated
(Offset pressure - lower and higher pressure, speed of moving along,
form of wave).
Now my thought:
The form is important: it's conical - this results - looked at from
one point or hair - in quick increase in pressure and slower
decrease-- the more, the farther inside the cone.
But more important is this: it's coiled up, it's a spiral.
Imagine the front end of a wave coming in and having everywhere the
same speed. But in a ductus, spiraled up, the angular speed of the
pressure on the wall of the ductus, which is farther away from the
center is less than along the wall, which is closer to the center. And
after a while moreover, most of the front end of the wave travels along
the wall, which is closer to the center and thinning out (this
thinningout is countered to a certain amount by the conical form). So
one has a whole intervall of pressure moving along the ,,inner"
wall.
Are these thoughts reasonabel and can they be confirmed and made more
precise by experiment?
Enjoy
Hero
PS. I can't stop me, i like Jan's story very much, so i just add it
here:

Alien lands on earth with his little flying cup and saucer.
He stays a while, finds everything very interesting, and decides to take =

all

that knowledge with him back home, he wants to take the Encyclopedia
Britannica.
But his spaceship is too small and the weight too much.
So he writes down the whole Encyclopedia text in ASCII numbers as one long
number.
Then he does 1 / that number on his (Alien) calculator.
This gives him a ratio.
He takes a stick, and puts a mark exactly so it is from one end at that
ratio from the length, and takes the stick back home.

What I am saying is, that given infinite granularity (say time was not
granular, not 'quantised') by tapping on the table 3 times
tap tap tap
I can describe the whole universe in all detail by the time ratio of
the three taps.
3 (three) info points is all you need to encode any amount of info
*in time* that you want.
So the story of 'firing rate' is just that: firing rate (of a neuron).
faster - slower faster (called frequency modulation).
The clue is more likely the RATIO between 2 firings, carrying that hidden
info :-)
Look a bit at this:
http://www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/4829.html
http://www.usc.edu/ext-relations/news_service/real/real_video.html
Link may still work, was from 1999, was classified immediately (NAVY fund=

and submarine use for detecting other subs).
Anyways in the original paper and diagram (that I must have somewhere)
he describes real measurements on real neurons, and how the firing rate
system is not the right one.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	09 Mar 2006 05:49:27 AM

On a sunny day (8 Mar 2006 01:30:33 -0800) it happened "Hero"
<Hero.van.Jindelt@gmx.de> wrote in
<1141810232.944605.296420@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>:
OK, lets look at life for a moment.
First I will take you to the studio, and what we will do is take
an amplifier and connect a microphone and speaker to it.
Now we move the speaker next to the microphone, and turn the volume up.
Some terrible howling noises will happen.
Now take a second amplifier and mike and do the same.
The both will interact now too.
Turn it off, if somebody did not already use the power switch.
Now you will ask: What has this to do with life?
Well it is clue 1.
When I say life, I mean 'communicating life forms',..
So now lets go to the sea.
Nice, we dive underwater and find all little one celled creatures that
can divide so there is more and more of these, some will be eaten by
higher life forms, some will die of age, population will stabilise.
They do not communicate a lot with each other and us, maybe chemically
in some way, but not a lot.
There are some that divided, and stayed together and organised,
sort of could communicate because they were connected together, say
by electrical and chemical signals.
So electrical and chemical signals happened between these cells.
Some cells were sensitive to pressure, some to light, some to temperature,
all of them to all these influences a bit.
But then something changed, something important.
We had this:
***
******** multicellular
**
When enough cells formed chains, the ends connected together again:
* *
* * multicellular with feedback
* *
Now the exchange of signals from one cell to the other went full circle to the original one
as a firing rate RATIO change from all previous ones.
The system was, by all definitions, oscillating (see clue 1).
Now lets draw our oscillating system a bit different, to show how this happens:
( ) sun
----------------------------------water surface

<<<<<<<<<<<<<< direction of cell eating entity
light shadow
**********************
* 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 *
* *
* *
**********************
^
scope probe
As NORMALLY (when nothing happens), the chemical reactions
in those individual cells would take the same time, and
the creature was at 'rest', you would see [for example] this electrical signal:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | firing pulses (not to scale)
bottom right, top light bottom dark
dark
But when some 'animal' some 'object' comes between it and the sun, the pattern
changed like this:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | firing pulses (not to scale)
Although on average the frequency changes, the information is in the distance between 2 spikes
relative to the previous.
Now about synchronising oscillators.
Oscillators have this tendency to 'synchronise'.
That is because oscillators are in essence amplifiers (clue 1) with feedback.
They will pick up any signal and amplify that too, and it will affect and
trigger timing in their own circuit, so they [end up] display[ing] the SAME pattern.
For a SIMILAR creature at some distance from this, that is in any way sensitive to electrical
pulses, mechanical pressure (contraction expansion of cells in the first proportional to
these ratios as caused by the the first one reacted to), it will start displaying
that pattern in its OWN chain of cells.
It sees what the other 'sees'
Quite exactly actually.
The person told you:
Hey I can see what you just described, visualise it.
So life, and communication... here we are.
What leaves when a person dies?
The organs are not dead ;-) These stay alive for a long time and can
be used for transplants, and then will live for even longer.
We, (the doctors) look at the brain patterns, and when those patterns are
no more detectable, they say: This person is dead.
The brain stops working and needed signals (control) to maintain the body will fail,
heart may stop, and the body will start to fall apart.
When we look at brain waves, there are so many theta, alpha....
**When the feedback path fails***** is when life (communicating life) stops.
When the microphone is moved away from the speakers in clue 1, or the
amplifier gain is set so low the feedback gain is < 1, the amp becomes quiet.
It is for this reason life stops at one point.
Many times people are treated with highly poisonous chemicals that also kill nerve cells.
Chances are the ones responsible for the feedback path are hit, and that person is no more.
Statistically....
So, here is your 'secret of life' if you please.
We are the oscillator.
We listen that way, we see that way, we interact that way, and when the loop is cut,
we die that way.
End message from alien.
How do I understand bird language?:
I see what the bird sees when I hear it.
Do not listen for the song.
Visualise the impression.
You will see what the bird sees.
The Yogi
(Well you know, I play there rolls, some of the ones I play).
.

User: "Hero"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	10 Mar 2006 06:45:06 AM

Jan Panteltje schrieb:

Sorry, i tried hard, but i don't grasp, how Your ,,answer" relates
to my posting.
Hero wrote, that for simulating the cochlea one has to take into
account it's form:
conical and coiled up into a spiral. (And i must add, size is important
too). My question
for experiments is answered by Jan with a message, in which he shares
with us
'the secret of life' (one of the messages many people will print out,
because of it's value).
Is there anyone, who has knowledge, how to do these experiments with a
model-cochlea, in which one can measure pressure-waves or make them
visible, f.e.with dyes or with polarisation-filters or else?
Jan wrote:

So, here is your 'secret of life' if you please.
We are the oscillator.
We listen that way, we see that way, we interact that way, and when the loop is cut,
we die that way.
End message from alien.

It sparks my associtions. But okay, i restrict myself.
Interaction between life forms, that's also: one form eats the other.
Although i think the compassionate ( a form of induction and
oscillation too) are more among the fittest (which survive with
Darwin), fitter than the most greedy and brutal ones.
Where do You find oscillations in the theory of hearing?
Let's compare to seeing with our eyes. The input is also waves,
inputted into five different types of cells. But the first and most
important step is not to analyse for frequency and
strength(energy-brightness), it is pattern-recognition. The first step
of this is modelled in a matrix-form by ai-people:
Step 1: input of light into cells (positions, knots in a matrix)
step 2: Every cell recieving light will forward an impulse to the cell
matching in
a second sheet/layer of cells - AND to it's direct neigbours
step3: these cells will forward the impulse to a third layer only with
the input above a certain level "a" of input impulses. (Changing "a"
leads to different contrast and silhouette pictures)
The actual model is more advanced with cells split into center and
peripherie and can be studied with the ai-people.
Now, if we have results from experiments, how sound (which is not only
waves but an ensembel of differently moving molecules) is moving
through the cochlea-ductus, we have a model for the input in the first
layer/sheet of cells, the ones directly connected to the hairs (do
these hairs have tiny muscles too, like the hairs on the skin, when one
shivers with cold?).
Hero
PS I can't suppress this one, Jan. Music ( by composers and birds..) we
enjoy, oscillates with the universe we experience in the way You
describe in Your 'secret of life'. Thanks anyhow.
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	10 Mar 2006 07:30:49 AM

On a sunny day (10 Mar 2006 04:45:06 -0800) it happened "Hero"
<Hero.van.Jindelt@gmx.de> wrote in
<1141994706.442838.92700@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>:

PS I can't suppress this one, Jan. Music ( by composers and birds..) we
enjoy, oscillates with the universe we experience in the way You
describe in Your 'secret of life'. Thanks anyhow.

High,
OK, well, I understand your pre-occupation with the data-acquisition
mechanism.
I can assure you that I am VERY familiar with visual and audio data
acquisition mechanisms, as I design hardware and write software for that, and
have been in that field for almost 40 years.
What I was trying to make clear from the multi-cell creature just below the
sea surface, is that each cell is sensitive (each neural cell in the
simplified example) to ALL sorts of influences, and changes its firing
position (recharge time changes) in response to local influences.
Sure in evolution cells 'specialised' to respond more to say one colour then
an other, one sort of event more then an other.
But is essence the mechanism is the same.
I will not go QUITE as far as saying: take finger skin with pressure sensors,
fold and fill with water, add membrane connected to amp output (as in
speaker), and connect outgoing nerve to hearing nerve to brain, but it is
very close.
Would probably work better then what they do now.
It is essential to get the overall picture to decode.
Because it is the decoding that fails if you code wrong.
Nothing wrong with wanting to know in every detail how a microphone works,
There are many types, many better ones have been designed over the years,
from old carbon to modern electret, but all give a similar wave output when
exposed to a sinewave for example (apart from many % distortion in older
designs).
But that interface expects a signal proportional to sound pressure variations.
Now what do you think that nerve to the brain wants for signal?
This is what you first should know (or at least ALSO should know) before you
have a go at the sensor.
Never mind, some work on the sensors, some on the processing after that.
Much like NASA not using metric symbols and losing a spacecraft to mars
resulting in a wrong insertion burn.
Now we will try again with metrics right..
Anyways, we will see, check again after WW3, Dr Sarfatti predicts it will
start this month.
I think my previous posting was indeed a stroke of genius insight, and
posted it on my blog too.
You will find I am right, if you live that long, dear oscillator.
.

User: "Hero"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	11 Mar 2006 07:35:01 AM

Jan Panteltje schrieb:
..=2E..

I think my previous posting was indeed a stroke of genius insight, and
posted it on my blog too.
You will find I am right, if you live that long, dear oscillator.

The problem is, when a genius thinks, that he is a genius (like in the
cartoon Charlie Brown dressed like a surgeon thinking aloud :"... and
here is the world-famous chirurg on his way to the OP and all th nurses
admire him"), that this includes his thought, that everybody else is
just a Watson (of Sherlock Holmes) or just a belittled oscillator (or a
nurse)
Now, Your oscillation-theory in Your previous post is great, indeed -
only it matches to the nose, to smell. Does it match to hearing - i
doubt this and You bring no prove of this.
Sound is not composed of sinus-waves with Fourier-coefficients. These
superpositions of sinus-waves is an important part, especially in
harmonic music, but regard just a solitron ( a wave with just one half
period), how can there be oscillation and R=FCck-Koppelung? And there
are so many other movements of air-masses and - more important :
movement of movements of air ( The scond one like the ,,wave" in a
sport-arena. Not the people move forward, just the up-and-down movement
is propagating). The pressure movements can have so many forms in 3D,
like Deep and Low in the weather-picture, this means rotations, there
can be eddies, or to get a 2D-picture of this 3D sound, sitting in the
bathh tube and playing around will teach a lot.
Still everything is a sum of sinus-waves?
My question is still open, to anybody:
Is there anyone, who has knowledge, how to do these experiments with a
model-cochlea, in which one can measure pressure-waves or make them
visible, f.e.with dyes or with polarisation-filters or else?
Now i go outside, the last days with snow
and so beautiful sun
hope for You all the same
Hero
PS Jan, You have long experience, so why your predecessors choose the
snail's shell-form for the first phonographs and how the sound came
out?
PSPS.
Luca Turin opposes the simple theory of smelling and odour, which can
be characterised
by lock-and-key. He has a theory and lots of experiments with his
molecules being differed in the nose by their vibrational properties.
He writes in the Neue Zuericher Zeitung (Folio), as he is also a good
parfumeur
http://www-x.nzz.ch/folio/curr
He has a company, flexitral
http://www.flexitral.com/index.html
and under this link You'll find enough material, which for sure will
convince You.
Hope You'll like this guy Luca as much, as i do.
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	11 Mar 2006 09:47:40 AM

On a sunny day (11 Mar 2006 05:35:01 -0800) it happened "Hero"
<Hero.van.Jindelt@gmx.de> wrote in
<1142084100.951760.188010@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>:

Jan Panteltje schrieb:
....

I think my previous posting was indeed a stroke of genius insight, and
posted it on my blog too.
You will find I am right, if you live that long, dear oscillator.

A realized soul like me knows when a genius idea manifests,.
If you had the slightest clue, even the most minute, had spend many hours
in deep meditation, understanding the self (so how your head works),
what can be understood (I DO speak bird language), and spend many years
in electronics education, then many years in electronics design, in
industry in many fields, in a nuclear physics research lab, learned many
languages, can write in many programming languages.. it is indeed a rare
thing, yes I am the synthesis of eastern and western knowledge, and some
more even more important that every person should know, but does not.

Now, Your oscillation-theory in Your previous post is great, indeed -
only it matches to the nose, to smell. Does it match to hearing - i
doubt this and You bring no prove of this.

It matches to any life, that is the beauty of it.
Proof you can see with the eyes closed by hearing (like those birds)?
For you (as creature) to be able to do this, your neural net has to become
still.
This is what happens in meditation, like a pool with no ripples.
Then and only then, when the storm of YOUR ideas does not disturb the
waves, will you perceive the slight pattern in the water caused by the normal
invisible and inaudible.
All creatures are build the same, all are universal, and all can communicate
that way.
The only time you will be convinced is not by anybody demonstrating it to you.
You will be convinced only when YOU experience it.
Then if you [also] have the knowledge of systems in the world that we created,
you can carry it there, but a Yogi will not normally tell you, it is for you
to see.
Secret knowledge, or at least alien to the western world, and rare in the
eastern world.

Sound is not composed of sinus-waves with Fourier-coefficients.

But it is, really it is.
Get some sound editor (maybe cool edit in MS windows), and do a Fourier
transform.
Take any wave file and do a Fourier transform.
Ever used an spectrum equaliser on a mp3 player?

These
superpositions of sinus-waves is an important part, especially in
harmonic music, but regard just a solitron ( a wave with just one half
period), how can there be oscillation and R�ck-Koppelung?

Well, a person with only one period brain wave is [considered] dead after
that.
Such waves can be created though, about 30 years ago (seventies) I used
these sort of wave generators to test speakers.
If the half sine is a pure sine..... it is one frequency component, if it is
not a sine, but for example a sine square, or parabolic function, then it is
composed of more then one frequency.

And there
are so many other movements of air-masses and - more important :
movement of movements of air ( The scond one like the ,,wave" in a
sport-arena. Not the people move forward, just the up-and-down movement
is propagating). The pressure movements can have so many forms in 3D,
like Deep and Low in the weather-picture, this means rotations, there
can be eddies, or to get a 2D-picture of this 3D sound, sitting in the
bathh tube and playing around will teach a lot.
Still everything is a sum of sinus-waves?

Any point in space, if you measure pressure at x,y,z then yes, the pressure
is the sum of all the pressures arriving at that point at that time.
P @ x,y,z,t (t = time)
It is not: 'everything is the sum of sinewaves'.
It is: Every waveform can be thought of as the sum of sinewaves'.
This is very different, Fourier learns us that even a square wave can be
composed out of many many sine waves (quite a long long series actually ;-) ).
Of course everything is not the sum of sinewaves, but mathematically can be
'represented' by the sum of n sinewaves with amplitude U and phase Phi

Draw a sinewave on a piece of paper, now cut in two, and shift over each
other.
At any point in time the new wave (pressure in your case) is the sum of the 2.
Now shift these past each other.
At one point they will cancel each other, at some other point add up to 2 x.
Now draw an other sinewave with a different frequency, and combine that
by adding.
You will see the result is no longer sinewave.
So you have made an other wave form by adding 2 sinewawes of different
frequency.

My question is still open, to anybody:
Is there anyone, who has knowledge, how to do these experiments with a
model-cochlea, in which one can measure pressure-waves or make them
visible, f.e.with dyes or with polarisation-filters or else?
Now i go outside, the last days with snow
and so beautiful sun
hope for You all the same
Hero
PS Jan, You have long experience, so why your predecessors choose the
snail's shell-form for the first phonographs and how the sound came
out?

I dunno, they did not write anything down,. but it seems reasonable that if I
had a long tube with fluid as serial to parallel converter, and minimum space
available, I would roll it up, like a garden hose.....
Simplest explanation.
As to the 'conical' I think this is to prevent standing waves, but am
not sure.

PSPS.
Luca Turin opposes the simple theory of smelling and odour, which can
be characterised
by lock-and-key. He has a theory and lots of experiments with his
molecules being differed in the nose by their vibrational properties.
He writes in the Neue Zuericher Zeitung (Folio), as he is also a good
parfumeur
http://www-x.nzz.ch/folio/curr
He has a company, flexitral
http://www.flexitral.com/index.html
and under this link You'll find enough material, which for sure will
convince You.
Hope You'll like this guy Luca as much, as i do.

Would be nice maybe you could smell one day via radio and TV.....
Headphones, smellphones (on the nose).
:-)
.

User: "Hero"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	12 Mar 2006 04:27:13 AM

Hero wrote:

Sound is not composed of sinus-waves with Fourier-coefficients.

Jan wrote:

And

Of course everything is not the sum of sinewaves, but mathematically can be
'represented' by the sum of n sinewaves with amplitude U and phase Phi

An articial nose can be build which analyses the atoms of the
odour-molecule and the 3D structure.
But that's not, how the nose works. It analyses the vibration pattern
of the molecule and the proof was given by Luca Turin, two molecules
with nearly the same vibration pattern, but different in it's chemical
structure, that is its composition of atoms, can smell the same.
Here are the links again:
http://www-x.nzz.ch/folio/curr
http://www.flexitral.com/index.html
Now with hearing. You shouldn't hang around in the web discussing, when
You have the knowledge (secret or not) to fix the apparent noise
problems with artificial hearing by cochlea implants. As pointed out
here, also by You, there's only a limited amount of hairs sensitive to
pressure movements and these have quite a long recharge-time.This
doesn't give enough bits to analyse down to the ,,constituent"
sinus-waves. Even using math like the RATIO and differencing (first and
second derivate for location or/and for time), as this is done by the
cells in the eye, does not reveal enough of the Fourier coefficients.
This might be a major part in hearing, but the patients still
experience too much noise.

...

Calculate for Yourself: how many sinus-waves one can add up by
analysing with this hardware (cochlea), twenty? Is this enough for
differing between a birds song and the news on the radio, when they
both input into the ear at the same time? But we can switch our
attention between both.
The ear is going another way of analysing sound and this can only be
part of it.
Sound can be produced by vibes, air streaming along telegraph-wires or
vocal chords but there are other sounds, not produced by adding sinus
waves:
try to speak the klick-sound of the word ,,!Kung" like the San in
the Kalahari, hear the ,,gluk, glof" of water in the harbour, the
snip-snap of a scissors,. or the sound of a campfire
It's meditation against experiment
Friendly greetings to all readers and contributors
Hero
PS:

(I DO speak bird language)

There are birds who can speak our language.
Now try on bees. They talk math, they tell each other the polar
coordinates of food with a dance.
There are people who can dance with the bees, You know how to do it
too?

Proof you can see with the eyes closed by hearing (like those birds)?

Can't You train blind people, so they don't need their stick anymore?

yes I am the synthesis of eastern and western knowledge, and some
more even more important that every person should know, but does not.

If we should know, better tell us (or provide a link to this knowledge).
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	12 Mar 2006 09:57:46 AM

On a sunny day (12 Mar 2006 02:27:13 -0800) it happened "Hero"
<Hero.van.Jindelt@gmx.de> wrote in
<1142159233.444248.46430@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

Sure man..

Now with hearing. You shouldn't hang around in the web discussing, when
You have the knowledge (secret or not) to fix the apparent noise

So you do not want it fixed?

problems with artificial hearing by cochlea implants. As pointed out
here, also by You, there's only a limited amount of hairs sensitive to
pressure movements

True.

and these have quite a long recharge-time.

Says YOU

This
doesn't give enough bits to analyse down to the ,,constituent"
sinus-waves.

Stop thinking in bits and stuff you know apparently little about,
Look at my first replies.

Even using math like the RATIO

Pulse position, alien problem remember, see how much info you
can transfer in 3 neuron firings (or 2 since the last)?
You took a wrong turn, look up that link I gave for reality.

and differencing (first and
second derivate for location or/and for time), as this is done by the
cells in the eye, does not reveal enough of the Fourier coefficients.

????
Dunno what you are on about here, in the eye it was found considerable
pre-processing is done, especially to detect EDGES of moving objects.
It is not just sensor cells, these are connected to each other, it is
in fact the first neuron layer (only these are more sensitive to some
frequencies of light and highly specialised).

This might be a major part in hearing, but the patients still
experience too much noise.

Patients cannot even follow a normal conversation, if you stick a
temperature sensor in the mike input you will also hear noise if
the temp changes... but no speech.
If your coding is wrong the brain cannot decode, and it will only
hear more or less noise, which it will try to cancel in the long run
as unwanted.

...

Sentence makes no sense to me, twenty WHAT?
Draw a model for yourself and use your brain.

The ear is going another way of analysing sound and this can only be
part of it.
Sound can be produced by vibes, air streaming along telegraph-wires or
vocal chords but there are other sounds, not produced by adding sinus
waves:
try to speak the klick-sound of the word ,,!Kung" like the San in
the Kalahari, hear the ,,gluk, glof" of water in the harbour, the
snip-snap of a scissors,. or the sound of a campfire

Actually I have some nice music by Meriam Maceba 'click song' etc.....
Good, now you get what I wrote: Sound is not 'produced by sinewaves'.
Fine.
I can make a nice sound, well electronically any sound, from a lookup
table in a memory, any form you like.
PRODUCTION of sound has NOTHING to do with Fourier analysis in its
components.
Fine, at least you understand that? (Not betting).

It's meditation against experiment

Nope nothing against nothing, it is you versus reality,
and reality will not give in.

If we should know, better tell us (or provide a link to this knowledge).

www.maharaji.org.
Want a teacher?
You already disagree with me, now have fun.
.

User: "Hero"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	13 Mar 2006 02:07:04 AM

All i know about this, i put down here. I still ask for
experiments.
Just an add-on, i found some words about the snow-owl.
Jan Panteltje schrieb:

Proof you can see with the eyes closed by hearing (like those birds)?

"Savia und die Schnee-Eule" (Savia produces hearing-aids)
"Weshalb wurde die Schnee-Eule als Motiv f=FCr Savia gew=E4hlt? Die
Schnee-Eule gilt weltweit als Symbol f=FCr Weisheit. Zus=E4tzlich passt
sich die Schnee-Eule auf verschiedene Arten =E4usserst gut an ihre
Umgebung an, beispielsweise dank dem aussergew=F6hnlichen H=F6rverm=F6gen
und der F=E4higkeit, ger=E4uschlos fliegen zu k=F6nnen. Diese F=E4higkeiten
sind f=FCr das =DCberleben der Eule =E4usserst wichtig.
Savia imitiert mittels modernster Digitaltechnologie die besonderen
F=E4higkeiten von biologischen Systemen, sich an die Umgebung anzupassen
- wir nennen dies Digital Bionics.
Einige Fakten =FCber Schnee-Eulen
Die Schnee-Eule ist in den arktischen Regionen ans=E4ssig.
H=F6he des Weibchens: etwa 64 cm, H=F6he des M=E4nnchens: knapp 60 cm
Fl=FCgelspannweite: bis zu 1,5 m
Durchschnittsgewicht Weibchen: etwa 2 kg, M=E4nnchen: etwa 1,7 kg
Die folgende Beschreibung gibt Ihnen einen Einblick in die Art und
Weise, wie sich die Schnee-Eule an ihre Umgebung anpasst.
Farbe
Im Sommer sind die Schnee-Eulen zimtfarbig mit dunklen Flecken, im
Winter sind sie praktisch weiss. Dank dieser jahreszeitabh=E4ngigen
Farbe der Federn k=F6nnen sie sich beim Jagen gut verstecken. Im warmen
Wetter fallen sie auf dem Boden nicht auf und im Winter sind sie im
Schnee fast unsichtbar. Ihre Eier sehen wie der Tundra-Boden aus.
H=F6rverm=F6gen
Schnee-Eulen k=F6nnen die f=FCr sie wichtigen T=F6ne - das Piepsen und
Rascheln ihrer Beute - viel detaillierter wahrnehmen als Menschen.
Sie lernen schon fr=FCh, Kl=E4nge zu identifizieren, damit sie
absch=E4tzen k=F6nnen, ob sich eine bestimmte Beute f=FCr sie lohnt. Ihr
rundes Gesicht mit den reflektierenden Federn dient ihnen als
Schallsammler und lenkt den Schall zu den Ohr=F6ffnungen. Diese
Anordnung verst=E4rkt die Schallwahrnehmung so stark, dass ohne sie die
Schnee-Eule doppelt so laute Ger=E4usche f=FCr die genaue Ortung der
Beute ben=F6tigen w=FCrde.
Sehverm=F6gen
Dank ihrem Sehverm=F6gen k=F6nnen sie ihre Beute aus einer grossen
Distanz erkennen.
Jagdverhalten
Schnee-Eulen jagen normalerweise am Tag, manchmal in der Nacht, indem
sie auf ihre Beute sitzend warten. Sie fangen die Beute auf dem Boden,
in der Luft
oder auf der Wasseroberfl=E4che.
Migration
Schnee-Eulen sind Nomaden. Ihre Bewegungen h=E4ngen vom Vorhandensein
ihrer Hauptbeute, den Lemmingen, ab. Wenn der Bestand der Beutetiere
abnimmt und es sehr kalt wird, zieht die Schnee-Eule in Richtung
S=FCden.
Diese Aspekte - die nat=FCrlich nicht vollst=E4ndig sind - zeigen,
wieso die Schnee-Eule ein passendes Symbol f=FCr Savia ist. Die
adaptiven F=E4higkeiten und Pr=E4zision widerspiegeln die Qualit=E4ten,
die Savia einmalig machen. "
And they describe some aspects of their products:
"Savia Phonak
Das neue H=F6rger=E4t Savia setzt die gesamte Weisheit der Natur
technologisch perfekt um. Es sorgt bei h=F6chstem Komfort f=FCr
entspanntes, nat=FCrliches Verstehen in allen H=F6rsituationen.Die Natur
hat die Schnee-Eule mit der besonderen F=E4higkeit ausgestattet, sich
kontinuierlich an die Umgebung anzupassen. F=FCr Savia ist die Natur das
Vorbild. Es ist das erste H=F6rsystem, das einmalige Eigenschaften von
biologischen Systemen in digitale Hochtechnologie umsetzt - wir nennen
dies Digital Bionics. Savia Digital Bionics: entspannntes nat=FCrliches
H=F6ren in allen Umgebungen.
Technologisches Herzst=FCck des digitalen bionischen H=F6rsystems ist der
weltweit kleinste und leistungsf=E4higste
Signalverarbeitungsprozessor(Chip).
Einige Vorteile:
Echoblock (SoundCleaning)
St=F6r- und Windger=E4usch-Unterdr=FCckung (SoundCleaning)
Gegenphasige R=FCckkopplungsausl=F6schung (SoundCleaning)
SoundNavigation (AutoPilot)
EasyPhone (AutoPilot)
Nat=FCrliche Schallortung (AutoFocus)
Informationsmaterial anfordern:

"
Link:
http://www.hansaton.at/ccha/consumer_ha/individual_ha/products_ha/ha_consum=
er_individual_products_savia_phonak.htm
------------------------------
Jan wrote:

yes I am the synthesis of eastern and western knowledge, and some
more even more important that every person should know, but does not.

and i asked:

If we should know, better tell us (or provide a link to this knowledge).

Jan answered:

www.maharaji.org.

Want a teacher?

This maharaji is all about giving to the poor people, like the
tsunami-victims.
What i do not comprehend, why shall i give to him, the professional
found-raiser,
and not direct to these people. When i donate direct, they will get the
full 100% of it.

You already disagree with me, now have fun.

Up to now, this discussion didn't offer any substantial help to te
deaf.
We can have fun in this and enjoy,
when we make progress.
Hero
.

User: "Jan Panteltje"
Title: Re: from Bekesy to cochlear implants	08 Mar 2006 05:10:30 AM

On a sunny day (Tue, 07 Mar 2006 17:12:43 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in <dukeuh$5s4$1@news.datemas.de>:
I want to add something about the 'ratio' coding.
Suppose the alien (I talked about in the other post) encoded the word 'cool'
using that method I described as a ratio between 2 points.
Or , if you are on the other end of the spectrum, use the word 'sucks' in this
example.
The alien this time uses a long paper tape, several meters, and puts 3 marks
on it.
section A section B
--------*-----------------------------*----------------------*---------- tape
O observer
The decoding requires getting A first and then dividing it by B.
The number is a word number in a list to look up a text for example.
Now this paper tapes moves towards the left, and you, the observer,
see the 3 marks pass by.
You time the difference between the marks (in clock ticks on your clock)
You find A ticks and B ticks, divide and have the answer.
Now the alien speeds up the paper tape.
You still get the same ratio, you decode 'cool' (or sucks).
Now the alien plays the tape slower.
Still the same result.
Now the alien plays the tape backwards, it moves towards the right.
You now get B first, divide it by A, and number not in list!
See how this relates to the audio tape forward at any speed with no
problem for you to 'decode' the words?
But if the tape is moved backwards, in reverse, can you still make out
what is said? No way, 'syllable' not in list (not learned).
So 'ratio' is the issue, not frequency, frequency is what we WANT TO GET
RID OF.
Now look at nature, that bird, that dives (Jonathan Livingstone Seagull)
and screeches to the bird below that comes in its way to change direction,
has a HUGE Doppler effect.
If communication was in any way *frequency* based, no meaning could be
conveyed.
So, what they are doing now is like connecting a temperature sensor to the
mike input of the amp and expecting sound.
How do you detect RATIO? You could do it by measuring one point, and watch
the pressure variations. What is A and what is B?
ABABABAB
BABABABA
ABCDEFDE
where to start?
You could do it by serial to parallel conversion and looking at a section of
the total, as the ear does.
Nothing frequency related.
Plenty of questions to be answered.
But consider RATIO.
End message from an alien.
.