PDA

View Full Version : RE: New (?) Finding on Einstein's Brain



John Jaksich
2012-Nov-17, 04:14 PM
To Moderators and Administrators: I am unsure where this post truly belongs?

I came across a posting on Einstein's brain--it seems that the *pictures* of his post-mortem brain have survived. The analysis is that he had an extremely developed cerebral cortex--that would be the *front* matter of his brain. To those who have speculated on the matter--->it seems that he was *true* genius----(for lack of better terminology)---

here are a couple of links:

http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/11/14/brain.aws295

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121115210457.htm



Maybe there is hope that humanity can evolve to a higher potential?

ShinAce
2012-Nov-17, 04:18 PM
The doctor who performed the autopsy said 'nothing unusual', but did try to preserve many specimens.

The only thing I saw was a hint that his brain used more energy than normal, which is usually a trait of intelligence. This hint was an increased number of glial cells.

All findings about Einstein's brain seem to be statistically insignificant. Except his theories, of course.

John Jaksich
2012-Nov-17, 04:24 PM
The doctor who performed the autopsy said 'nothing unusual', but did try to preserve many specimens.

The only thing I saw was a hint that his brain used more energy than normal, which is usually a trait of intelligence. This hint was an increased number of glial cells.

To ShinAce---> I don't know if read it but----> here is a quote---> (and please be somewhat courteous to my post? . . . I really don't understand your ?)


Although the overall size and asymmetrical shape of Einstein's brain were normal, the prefrontal, somatosensory, primary motor, parietal, temporal and occipital cortices were extraordinary," said Falk, the Hale G. Smith Professor of Anthropology at Florida State. "These may have provided the neurological underpinnings for some of his visuospatial and mathematical abilities, for instance."

ShinAce
2012-Nov-17, 04:29 PM
That quote, to me, looks like a case of reporting. It doesn't matter what the person was trying to say in the interview, the reporter simply prints what catches the eye. I give it no weight.

If Einstein's brain was so well preserved and made available for study, why aren't there entire communities for these theories? The material is sparse because the findings are always quite weak. A strong case for Einstein's ability to reason through theory hasn't been found. It's not much better than palm reading.

John Jaksich
2012-Nov-17, 04:35 PM
That quote, to me, looks like a case of reporting. It doesn't matter what the person was trying to say in the interview, the reporter simply prints what catches the eye. I give it no weight.

I am sorry you don't like my (may---or what seems to be a grudge????) Off Topic Babbling Post ---but as it makes no sense to dismiss it ---why can't you ignore it?

ShinAce
2012-Nov-17, 05:29 PM
I am sorry you don't like my (may---or what seems to be a grudge????) Off Topic Babbling Post ---but as it makes no sense to dismiss it ---why can't you ignore it?

It makes sense to dismiss it if you've wondered the same thing in the past and looked into it.

I do like it, have no grudge, and can't be told to ignore something. Just give time for other people to respond and make a thread before jumping on people for answering questions.

Gillianren
2012-Nov-17, 07:30 PM
I am sorry you don't like my (may---or what seems to be a grudge????) Off Topic Babbling Post ---but as it makes no sense to dismiss it ---why can't you ignore it?

Even in Off-Topic Babbling, it's perfectly acceptable to say that the science behind something is weak. We don't have to agree with everything a person says, just because they're in this section of the board.

John Jaksich
2012-Nov-17, 08:33 PM
Even in Off-Topic Babbling, it's perfectly acceptable to say that the science behind something is weak. We don't have to agree with everything a person says, just because they're in this section of the board.

I agree with your post---but my issue has been for the most part----(and I am willing to accept my faults for it!) --- many of us ---will question a post ---and it will seem as if it was posted hyper-critically to a point of not being constructive ????---I am unsure of how to word it. I happen to be thin-skinned where I would rather constructively criticize a post without a point blank: your arguments hold no merit.

Maybe I have not gotten enough sleep---but I do apologize to ShinAce--for my lack of patience.

Solfe
2012-Nov-17, 08:39 PM
I am pretty sure his brain is on display in Mutter Museum in Philly.

Gillianren
2012-Nov-17, 09:12 PM
I happen to be thin-skinned where I would rather constructively criticize a post without a point blank: your arguments hold no merit.

So what do you say if the arguments have no merit?

John Jaksich
2012-Nov-17, 10:08 PM
So what do you say if the arguments have no merit?

Ideally---I do read the other posts by the individual----that may be a tip-off that there is a pattern to their reasoning---(i don't always do it :(). I would like to *believe* that I can provide constructive criticism---and based on observations that the *individual-poster* can self-identify--and *possibly* modify their approach to the posting.

To me--i believe i can occasionally see faulty reasoning---and

I would preferentially not want to be confrontational---it seems counter-productive---no one really knows what *mood or feeling* that other poster is experiencing behind the computer screen.

I guess the bottom-line is that I do not like to be confrontational- there is a difference between a *bad-critic and good-critic* ----I participate *here* in the hopes gaining an understanding of science and also of myself--on occasion

Science is supposed to be self-correcting---but does it need to be brutal? I don't think so.

Gillianren
2012-Nov-17, 10:50 PM
It's hard to tell, because your grammar is confused, but I don't think you answered my question. It's not about feelings. It's about facts. What do you say if the facts aren't there?

John Jaksich
2012-Nov-17, 11:29 PM
It's hard to tell, because your grammar is confused, but I don't think you answered my question. It's not about feelings. It's about facts. What do you say if the facts aren't there?

I trying to say if the facts are not there then the poster should ideally be open to constructive criticism.

John Jaksich
2012-Nov-18, 04:35 AM
I am pretty sure his brain is on display in Mutter Museum in Philly.

I noticed the post at the Physician's college of Philly---One thing which is unfortunate--is the quality of the slides do not (obviously) meet today's standards. I am tempted to say that the photographs in the journal are what saved the slides from going completely unnoticed. I can recall how current scholars were dismayed by the condition in which the samples had become.

Gillianren
2012-Nov-18, 07:47 AM
I trying to say if the facts are not there then the poster should ideally be open to constructive criticism.

Yes, you should.