…and this is a 
New kid on the block
Category: Open Thread
Posted on: September 14, 2007 12:26 AM, by Bright_Lights
Hello! I'm a student of Dr. Myers here at the lovely University of Minnesota Morris and will be blogging weekly for the next few months about whatever I find or dream up that relates to Neurobiology.
This week I suppose the most interesting finding I have comes from 89.3 "The Current," an off-branch of the popular MPR radio station. There is a program called "Radio Lab," in which a couple show hosts review scientific work done in broad categories while they converse and explore the work of scientists who actually did the research. One of the categories for the week was on sleep; why do we need it? What does it really do? The show hosts revealed that very little research has been done in this field (despite its necessity to all living things) except for Dr. Allan Pack, a biologist at the University of Pensylvania.
Pack has been looking at sleep from a cellular level and has found some interesting activity with proteins in cells inside the brain. He found that when we don't sleep, proteins fold irregularly and lose much of their primary functions. However, when we sleep, the proteins are unfolded and allowed to work normally. Even more intruiging is that the folding of these proteins might be correlated to memory. For instance, when you memorize or think about a difficult math problem or guitar riff, you fold proteins. But that means that when you look at the grass and use your brain to determine the grass's color and shape you are folding proteins as well.
When we sleep this unfolding of proteins allows some of the garbage memory, such as shape and color of grass, to be disposed of in the unfolding of proteins, which also amplifies the things we truly scrutinized all day on such as the math problems or guitar riff as these proteins are left folded. This may be why when you're studying one day on a tough problem and can't quite get it but go to bed and look at it again the next, the problem sometimes comes much easier. I thought that this was a cool idea, and well worth looking into.
If anyone finds any of this interesting and does some further (or actual) research on the topic, you should respond and we can exchange ideas. But untill that day, take it easy and God bless.
~Bright Lights
Physical Science
Comments
Due to the many misspellings, I thought for sure that was a joke. Then I remembered back to when PZ warned us about these posts.
Content notwithstanding, Bright Lights, I suggest at least using spell check if you're going to literally write to thousands of readers.
Posted by: Caucasian Jesus | September 14, 2007 1:04 AM
I'd comment on what you said, but I forgot what you were talking about when you ended with a patronizing "god bless".
Posted by: qedpro | September 14, 2007 1:04 AM
Ah good. Now we have the canonical mis-spelling of Myers.
Bob
Posted by: Bob O'H | September 14, 2007 1:05 AM
Well Bright Lights, welcome to the vicious, vicious world of Pharyngula.
You've posted on an interesting subject. I'm intrigued at the idea that memory involves folding proteins. I've never heard anything of the sort before, my initial reaction is to question this concept, but at least it DOES seem to make sense of the sleep process. I've had a vague concept that sleeping somehow resets certain neural mechanisms, but I knew of no mechanism that would be in need of resetting.
And for the record, if I wasn't using Firefox (which has a built in spell checker) my typing would be typo laden as well.
Posted by: Nomad | September 14, 2007 1:19 AM
God Bless? OK, I'm in an alternate reality or was that humour? I can't tell, not enough unfolded proteins.....
Posted by: Brian English | September 14, 2007 1:42 AM
Welcome, and thanks for an interesting post. It's always a pleasure to find an introduction to yet another topic that illustrates the vastness of that which I don't know...
Don't worry too much about the spelling pedants, but you might want to fix the spelling of PZ's name. I gather he hates that ;-)
Posted by: Brain Hertz | September 14, 2007 1:43 AM
We do demand that you use complete paragraph breaks and spacing so as to make things easier to read, thanks. :)
Posted by: plunge | September 14, 2007 1:46 AM
What an intriguing possibility.
Perhaps it might be worth looking for differences with what goes on with proteins in the brains of mammals that don't sleep (such as cetaceans, supposedly). If the protein theory is right, they must (presumably) either have some protein-resetting mechanism independent of sleep (discovery of which would presumably go some way toward confirming the original idea), or some way of dealing with not being able to reset their proteins.
Posted by: Glen | September 14, 2007 1:47 AM
Well, since everyone else has already piled onto the spelling etc., I'll throw something else in instead: If you're interested in that kind of thing, and hadn't already noticed, PZ's co-ScienceBlogger Coturnix at A Blog Around The Clock should be of interest to you. Specializes in circadian kind of stuff.
Posted by: Randy Owens | September 14, 2007 1:47 AM
The Search for the Engram resumes...
IIRC, attention switched from 'protein' hypotheses of memory to 'synapse' hypotheses back in the 60's, probably under the influenece of 'neural network' computer models where structures built from artificial synapses were deemed capable of universal computation. (Might as well model the brain with a Turing Machine made out of cereal boxes and crayons, it doesn't matter from a certain point of view - i.e. that of Turing in about 1936 (but ?not in 1950)). And protein-folding is well-known to be a computationally hard problem to describe, so maybe for just that reason (i) it's not surprising it's taken a long time for it to be re-incorporated in general models of brain function, and (ii) it does actually have properties very useful for doing information-processing.
The process of sorting and reinforcing or suppressing daily memories during sleep is one that's been touched on recently over at Tet Zoo, getting from big-brained monotremes to the Crick & Mitchison theory of REM.
The role of protein kinetics in information processing might be important and its neglect in recent decades just as scandalous as that of the 'elephant in the occiput', i.e. the cerebellum.
Posted by: John Scanlon, FCD | September 14, 2007 2:00 AM
Hi Bright Lights, thanks for the post.
What an intriguing possibility.
Perhaps it might be worth looking for differences with what goes on with proteins in the brains of animals that don't sleep (such as cetaceans, supposedly).
You say that sleep is a necessity for "all living things". Leaving aside animals that appear not to sleep, is there a real sense in which living things without a nervous system (fungi, plants, bacteria, archaea) could be said to sleep? [I realise that they do have cycles of "activity" in some sense, but you were writing about protein folding in brains during sleep. Either sleep has nothing to do with brains OR it isn't a necessity for all living things. Certainly not all living things have those fatty lumps of nerve tissue.]
Anyway, getting back to the theory (on the assumption that sleep is a term we mean to apply to things with brains, and probably mainly to vertebrates, or even a subset of the vertebrates):
If the protein theory is right, non-sleeping animals must (presumably) either have some protein-resetting mechanism independent of sleep (discovery of which would presumably go some way toward confirming the original idea), or some way of dealing with not being able to reset their proteins.
Are there simple creatures (ones that are more easily studied than mammals) for which this distinction would be readily investigated?
Posted by: Glen | September 14, 2007 2:07 AM
Careful there kid. Usually when someone mispelles Myers name as "Meyers", that person is a creationist. At first I was afraid this site was hacked.
Posted by: Janine | September 14, 2007 2:07 AM
Sorry about the double post. I hit the post button accidentally partway through composing my comment, but I thought I'd stopped it going through in time. Apparently not.
Posted by: Glen | September 14, 2007 2:10 AM
...
...
Um, Bright Lights? You DO know you're talking to a bunch of atheists and rationalists, don't you? Tossing God Bless out in this crowd is like throwing cold water into the fireplace.
To each his own, yeah, but just brace yourself for some hissing, and great clouds of steam.
The research idea sounds fascinating. Knowing nothing at all about the subject, I'd always had some vague notion that connections between neurons somehow make our brains work. The idea that individual proteins (or collections of like proteins?) are the handmaidens of memory and thought is pretty amazing. I've had the impression that the "me" exists at the cellular level, and all that subcellular stuff was just housekeeping for the next level up. But now, hmm ... and wow.
I'll echo two of the suggestions above: Paragraph breaks. And spell Dr. Myers name right.
But I'll add a suggestion of my own: Both of those are details, worth some sweat, but only minor sweat. The main thing in this company (in my view anyway) is IDEAS. Presenting them, examining them, chewing them over, seeing where they lead, what they imply. Making connections in all our heads.
If you do that, the clouds of steam will quiet, the grammar-hawks will stop tearing at you long enough to listen, and all of us will grow a little bit closer together as we recognize a kindred spirit -- one of the fun people who Think.
Remember that word: fun. In the end, I like to hope you won't be afraid to be a little loose and playful here as you help us explore some of these new ideas.
And (from me, anyway) welcome!
...
(Oh, yeah: There are no such things as gods. If you're the person I hope you are, eventually you'll be unable to avoid knowing that. You won't believe how cool it will be, when you finally get there. :D )
...
...
Posted by: Hank Fox | September 14, 2007 2:24 AM
When I saw the post ended in what seemed like a sincere "God bless," I thought for sure that the universe had imploded on itself, because such a scenario is more likely than Pharyngula ever converting to theism!
Then I remembered he had commented not too long ago about an experiment involving his students. And when I noticed the different writing style, I figured that must be it. That's what I get for reading the end of a post before the beginning!
Anyway, welcome onboard the PZ express, Bright Lights.
Posted by: Saint Gasoline | September 14, 2007 2:28 AM
Oh for crying out loud; the "god bless" was extraneous and a bit jarring but it's not THAT big a deal. Using a spell checker program and reviewing organizational notes wouldn't be a bad idea, honestly.
On a more relevant note, the suggestions about sleep's function intrigued me. I'm wondering now how dreams figure into this...
Posted by: Azkyroth | September 14, 2007 2:42 AM
I find it had to believe a protein-based 'memory' could act with the speed and fidelity that is present in whichever system we use. When I remember what i had for breakfast, it is so fast it is essentially instantaneous. While protein-ligand interactions can operate on that timescale, you also have to differentiate between the proteins for every memory you had, ever.
Posted by: zwa | September 14, 2007 2:57 AM
Searching on Allan Pack, I think this might be the paper being referenced:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1471-4159.2004.02952.x
Pack certainly isn't the only one doing research into sleep.
Note the multiple authors of this paper, and the many names in the citations and references just on this one paper.
Posted by: Owlmirror | September 14, 2007 3:02 AM
Hi Bright Lights. One comment on this:
In fairness to the many sleep researchers out there, there are *way* more than just Dr. Pack. Nathaniel Kleitman and Eugene Aserinsky, William Dement, Robert Stickgold, J. Allan Hobson, and so many more researchers that it is almost unfair for me to just list a few names that occurred to me, particularly since I am not a sleep studies expert either. . And then there's related issues like REM vs. slow wave sleep, learning and sleep (of one stage or another), sleep disorders, circadian rhythms in mammals (or insects) and the pacemaker genes and brain centers that underly that, the neuropharmacology of caffeine and adenosine and histamine, and just tons and tons of stuff.
So the questions that you posed: "why do we need sleep?" and "what does it really do?" may in some sense cut down the sleep research field, but it is hard to make that cut, because at this point almost any new findings on sleep is going to add to our body of understanding and that will ultimately begin to answer those two questions.
And don't let the posters harry you: they're a fun lot.
Posted by: cm | September 14, 2007 3:11 AM
zwa said:
I'm not sure how either of these points tell against changes in proteins being involved in memory. As far as speed goes, recall is decidedly not all instantaneous; many memories requite some time to dredge them up (for example, what did you have for dinner two nights ago?).
But actually that's a red herring. The speed of processing is going to be given by networks of neurons becoming activated. The protein part of the story probably comes into play in how those neurons are structured. Specifically, the synaptic terminals which send the messages and the postsynaptic densities which receive messages get changed by the presence of proteins which have been somehow tweaked (folded, phosphorylated perhaps) due to a past experience. So it is as if the proteins "hold the memo" for that synapse to be a stronger one, but the heavy lifting of the synaptic transmission is still done by the structures of the neuron's terminals and dendritic spines.
And it may be that during sleep these protein "memos" are written. Or better to say, a nice clean copy of the memo is made in the nucleus (or, as some think, right down at the dendrite) from the scrap of napkin that was scribbled on when the memory first got laid down during the experience.
Posted by: cm | September 14, 2007 3:21 AM
Interesting post, but..."God Bless"? Here? Bright Lights, I think you were just responsible for one of the signs of the apocalypse...
Posted by: Kadin | September 14, 2007 3:53 AM
Whenever I hear "God Bless" these days I think of Thelma Richardson from Florida character who trolls over at Eschaton.
I don't do research on this topic but it is true and interesting that "taking a break" from a project often allows the best insights to occur upon returning. My work patterns tend to abuse this phenomenon: focus until exhaustion, sleep, and don't hit it again until I'm rested. That means (ideally) not the next morning but two days later.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | September 14, 2007 4:04 AM
Oh, I get it, this is framing, right? We stick it all in one big block of text with some 'endearing' spelling mistakes so they don't feel threatened, stick a 'God Bless' on the end, and we can sneak some actual science past those darned theists! Right?
Interesting science though.
Posted by: Ben D | September 14, 2007 4:22 AM
Welcome to the exciting comments section at Pharyngula.
Neurobiology is really a very interesting field at the moment, and you should find a lot of cutting edge research that has been done within the last couple of years. I am looking forward to see what you can dig up. I actually like Neural Network models, that John mentioned, but then I am doing my research in that field. Well, anyway, best of luck, a lot of fun and Aristotle be with you ;)
Posted by: TheJerrylander | September 14, 2007 4:36 AM
Hey everybody wallopping Bright Lights on the head for that "God Bless": I don't know whether that closing was heartfelt, pro forma or even perhaps ironic. But bear in mind what PZ wrote when announcing this project: he doesn't care what his students' religious or political views are. So engage Bright Lights, and the others when they come, on the science, and nothing else! (OK -- maybe on spelling/formatting as well.)
Posted by: Mrs Tilton | September 14, 2007 4:38 AM
#14: "Um, Bright Lights? You DO know you're talking to a bunch of atheists and rationalists, don't you? Tossing God Bless out in this crowd is like throwing cold water into the fireplace."
Actually, it might be more like tossing an ice cube in a fry vat. Bad idea. Unless it was a joke.
I can forgive most of the mispellings, but OMG!!1! YOU SPELLED 'GUITAR' WRONG!!! YOU MUST PAY!1!!!
Welcome! I'm no biologist, but the brain's fascinating. I hope you come up with some more good stuff. Makes me think that I'm about due for a nap (late afternoon in Japan now)
Posted by: Jeremy | September 14, 2007 4:49 AM
One of my first jobs was working at a Jack in the Box. Among the many other shenanigans fast-food workers get up to on the late shift, I HAVE tossed ice cubes into the fry vat.
It's like a slow grenade going off, only the shrapnel is specks of boiling-hot grease.
So, Jeremy ... why do I think you have some burger-joint experience in your past?
Posted by: Hank Fox | September 14, 2007 4:57 AM
I'm so glad someone explained what happens to an ice-cube in a fry vat, so I didn't have to ask.
But back to links between brain proteins and sleep, has any work been done on long-term sleep deprivation, the kind many of us live with? As a lifelong insomniac (since the age of about 5) I always thought that sleep deprivation was no big deal, but could there be damage that only shows later?
Posted by: Buffybot | September 14, 2007 5:18 AM
What an interesting idea. I'm surprised that little research has been done to determine why sleep is so neccesary. I assumed that it had been done and the knowledge was out there. Should be interesting to see what comes of Dr. Pack's theory. At face value, it seems to make a lot of sense.
Aside: I don't really care what your beliefs are and I am certainly interested in what you have to say, but to sign off in that manner when you know you have an audience of atheists is rather unnecessary. You might have been genuine, but it's a sentiment that's out of place. If I'm in a phone call with a Christian, I'm not going to end it with "God, What God?" am I? Your God had nothing to do with the post, so why bring him up?
Anyway, hopefully this first time hasn't been too discouraging for you. See you next week!
Posted by: Vikki | September 14, 2007 5:42 AM
I've come to the conclusion I hate the commenters on this site.
Comes a n00b, almost certainly very young, with no known prior experience of blogging, and he posts on a very interesting hypothesis he's discovered. So how is he received? Most people don't even address the content of his post, but attack him for using a wholly conventional and good natured sign-off. One person goes for the gratuitous personal insult. And then there are the spelling pedants...
Rationalists? I've seen more rationality on display at Free Republic. If this show of small minded nastiness is typical of American atheists, you've already lost. Moreover, nobody much will care, because who cares what becomes of such an ungenerous bunch of shut-ins?
It makes me grateful that, as a non-American, I can continue in my unbelief without being associated with this sort of thing.
Posted by: chris y | September 14, 2007 5:47 AM
Yes, it's bad for you - but so is sleeping too much! The optimum turned out to be somewhat less than the traditional 8 hours - more like 6 to 7. However, I don't know any URL for the study. It was within the last few years though.
Posted by: SEF | September 14, 2007 5:58 AM
Chris, can you see the irony in you writing a comment complaining about other people not commenting on the content of the post, while not mentioning the content at all yourself?
Personally I noticed quite a few commenter commenting on the content - one even took the trouble to dig out the article being referred to in the post, while others commented on the merit of the ideas presented.
Some also commented on the spelling etc. of the post, which is actually not a trivial issue if you want to present your ideas to others.
Quite a few also commented on the closing sentence, but it was few comments that only commented on it, and most just pointed out that it was perhaps not the best crowd to use that particular sentence on.
Now, personally I have little to add to the conversation about the subject at hand - I don't know anything about it, and it doesn't really fall within my areas of interest. Nevertheless I look forward to see what the discussion will bring.
Posted by: Kristjan Wager | September 14, 2007 6:01 AM
#32, is this the one?
http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/59/2/131
If not, you can just type in a few key words in Google Scholar and see what comes up.
I've also heard that you can make yourself more tired if you try to sleep too much. Something about it using up energy to make yourself sleep when you don't need to. But I digress.
#16 raised a good point: Where do dreams fit in with this theory? I wonder the impact of other lifestyle factors like diet and exercise as well.
Posted by: Vikki | September 14, 2007 6:23 AM
Bright Lights:
As a college instructor myself, I am a bit embarrassed by some of the remarks above; if you read this far, I hope you know not everyone is screaming at you, and I further hope you don't feel reluctant to post again. [It is, however, a good idea to use spellcheck and proofread before you post; if you think of this as being analogous to a short paper for submission to class it might help.]
But I am curious about one aspect of your article: exactly which proteins do not fold properly while the animal is awake? And are the protein(s) the same throughout the animal kingdom or does it vary between species?
Posted by: Taxorgian | September 14, 2007 6:55 AM
This is a very fascinating topic for me and I'm glad to see that Bright Lights brought it up. As a long term sufferer from insomnia (since grade school and I'm 28 now) I've always wondered how I was able to do so well in school and life without much sleep. On the other hand, I've wondered how well I could have done had I not had sleeping problems. Now that I mention it, I guess I have seen an improvement once I was prescribed a long-term medicine that really helps me sleep.
I started it about 5 years ago, immediately after returning to college as a junior (I had taken two years off between sophomore and junior year). As a sophomore I had tried taking organic chem, but ended up dropping it because a) I didn't feel I was learning anything and b) I would always fall asleep during that class (it was the only time in my life that I would fall asleep that easily). However, once returning to school I signed up for organic chem in my first semester back and aced the class. I really did find it easy. Part of me wonders if it I had been absorbing the info while asleep the first time around or if the credit was due to my improvement in sleep due to the prescription.
Anyway, sleep has been fascinating for me because it's so hard to get ahold of is the point I was trying to make.
I do look forward to more posts from PZ's students and I applaud Bright Lights for being the first guinea pig.
Posted by: Tanya | September 14, 2007 7:26 AM
Um...I'm an ecologist, and know nothing about neurobiology... but...
I hear prions (like mad cow disease or kuru) mess up protein-folding. Has there been much work looking at these diseases and the possible memory function of protein folding?
Posted by: katie | September 14, 2007 7:36 AM
For anyone interested in this topic, I recommend the two-part series "While you were out" from the CBC radio program Ideas. The first part in particular is about the natural history and anthropology of sleep and includes some surprisingly interesting observations.
Bright Lights, I've struggled for months trying to learn the gujitar, with only minor progress. Perhaps I ought to sleep on it.
Posted by: Craig | September 14, 2007 7:51 AM
Thanks for writing this Bright Lights; I have been watching my pc test protein folding while it is screensaver mode. Trying to make sense of it sure makes me want to go to sleep.
I had been blissfully unaware of protein folding's relationship to memory, so I appreciate you leading me to another subject for reading. And while the other commenters haven't been so gentle, keep doing this. It's good practice for writing for a tough audience and looks good on the ol' CV; and yeah, do a spell-check.
Whenever I see "God Bless" I think of Red Skelton; and he wasn't such a bad guy, but it isn't really an academic close.
Posted by: Mike Haubrich, FCD | September 14, 2007 7:52 AM
And the canonical misspelling of "misspelling"...
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Eh, no. They do sleep -- one brain hemisphere at a time. Albatrosses do that trick, too.
Last time I checked, there were large individual differences in what is necessary. Some people need 4 hours of sleep per night, others 10.
Posted by: David Marjanović | September 14, 2007 8:04 AM
Welcome Bright Lights!
"But that means that when you look at the grass and use your brain to determine the grass's color and shape you are folding proteins as well.
When we sleep this unfolding of proteins allows some of the garbage memory, such as shape and color of grass, to be disposed of in the unfolding of proteins, which also amplifies the things we truly scrutinized all day on such as the math problems or guitar riff as these proteins are left unfolded"
If I remember correctly memory consist of increasing synaptic connections. What is the relationship between this and the folding proteins? There would seem to be at least two types of memory - what one might call intellectual memory, then physical memory, how to ride a bicycle. How are both affected by sleep?
If sleep helps us get rid of those temporary memories in the form of folded proteins, how come I can forget a telephone number in two minutes?
Any theory of sleep is going to have to include the function of dreams. Experiments done years ago studied what happens if you let people sleep but stopped the dreaming. They suffered way worse thatn the group who were woken up and prevented from sleeping the same amount of time but randomly.
Given sleep is necessary, what mechanisms may be in place for allowing us to wake up in times of danger? Not very important for most of us now, but as a sailor, I have been attuned to a boat where the slightest change would wake me.
Thor bless....
Posted by: sailor | September 14, 2007 8:08 AM
Mmmm , I guess this will be the first and last post on PZ´s new experiment. Sorry PZ , but the mob around here is getting rougher and blood thirsty , I will humbly suggest to A) take your " boys and girls" to a quiter place , or B) Use your deep sea minions to wipe all the smartass and tough guys over here.
The ball is in your court . :D
Posted by: JJ | September 14, 2007 8:23 AM
Just to clarify - I take it that last word should be 'folded', rather than 'unfolded'?
Interesting stuff.
Posted by: Ian B Gibson | September 14, 2007 8:28 AM
#16 - "I'm wondering now how dreams figure into this..."
A recent article I read said that the parts of the brain that model the physical world during consciousness are the same parts of the brain that are active when dreaming. The point was that dreams are essentially just your brain trying to model the physical world without the benefit of input from the senses.
Ohh and #31
Yeah, you're right. Never mind all the positive posts, huh? I can tell from the tone of your post that you're obviously a much better, stronger, and more sexually potent person than anyone here...
Posted by: Saber | September 14, 2007 8:34 AM
First impressions -
* I know everyone is piling on about the spelling and formatting, but it was a distraction.
* Links are nice. People in these parts don't take kindly to assertions without references. PZ uses lots of links and snips of reference papers.
Posted by: No One of Consequence | September 14, 2007 8:35 AM
Bright Lights, this is not a site where readers wish to be greeted by "God bless" whatever the ^$%* that may mean. Nope, strictly enlightened heathens in these here blogging parts. SO I suggest you permanently unfold those proteins holding theist memories and fold new ones with memories of enlightenment and rational thoughts.
Re your theory, you write that "He found that when we don't sleep, proteins fold irregularly and lose much of their primary functions", what proteins, what function ? I think that misfolding of proteins may perhaps be a general consequence of disturbance of the circadian rhythm and may have little to do with storing memories.
PS I can tell you nothing lands my students in the proverbial purgatory faster than misspelling my name.
Posted by: Umilik | September 14, 2007 8:39 AM
You need a new god. Your god doesn't have a spell check and he/she hung you out to dry...
You typed: "gujitar riff", obviously it should be 'guitar riff'.
My advice to you is spend less time in church, more time in the real world.
Posted by: J-dog | September 14, 2007 8:44 AM
According to dictionary.com, a gujitar is a Spanish modification of the French guillotine that uses a thin metal cable to sever the head from the body instead of the traditional dropping blade.
A gujitar rift (not riff) is the initial gruesome cut that the gujitar makes on the neck. (it usual took 3 to 4 tries for the gujitar to completely sever the head.)
Posted by: No One of Consequence | September 14, 2007 9:10 AM
After reading his post, I think all of my proteins just unfolded.
Posted by: firemancarl | September 14, 2007 9:19 AM
I have to commend Bright Lights for his bravery in jumping into the shark tank first. I agree that spell check would be helpful, but I think he did make a good first foray. However I don't agree with those who took such exception to the "God Bless" statement. I appreciate the sentiment of wishing others well even if I don't believe in the entity being asked to bless me. We don't have to raise our hackles at every use of a traditional well-wishing-- it's okay to politely smile and nod sometimes.
Actually, now that I think of it, if Bright Lights knew the character of the elasmobranch crew here at Pharyngula then perhaps he was intentionally pulling our collective chains a little. That would take even more hutzpah than simply going first!
Posted by: Diego | September 14, 2007 9:21 AM
Bright Lights, it's an interesting topic, and really, most of the replies weren't too harsh (okay, a few were pretty harsh), and some contained good advice as well, such as spell checking and including links or at least references to books or papers. You're brave to take on PZed's blogging opportunity.
A small hint: if you really must bless this pack of heathens (among whom I count myself), I suggest finding a more subtle way of doing so: 'Goodbye', for instance, I think means 'God be with you', but is widely accepted as a generic sign-off. Save you no end of grief and make it less likely that PZed will have to rescue you with comment censorship.
Oh, and if you're going to misspell Myers, use something really obscure: around here, for instance, the name is spelled 'Meaghers'.
Posted by: Bee | September 14, 2007 9:22 AM
Concerning #47. You have heard the song by The Magnetic Fields, 'Acoustic Gujitar'?
Posted by: Janine | September 14, 2007 9:24 AM
I think it is important to keep in mind that this post is part of a learning process, so while constructive criticism is good, and I believe comments about spelling, linking etc. falls into this, there should be a heavy emphasis on constructive.
Posted by: Kristjan Wager | September 14, 2007 9:24 AM
"Actually, now that I think of it, if Bright Lights knew the character of the elasmobranch crew here at Pharyngula then perhaps he was intentionally pulling our collective chains a little. That would take even more hutzpah than simply going first!"
I am glad you noticed that Diego, it would take someone incredibly idiotic and naive to put that God Bless quote up unintentionally. I figured he was seeing what would happen if tried pushing that button, and the results were funny. Well done Bright Lights, your first experimental success!
Posted by: sailor | September 14, 2007 9:32 AM
Maybe the "God Bless" was the result of one of those folded proteins that was not adequately disposed of when the brain takes care of its "garbage" memory.
A good night's sleep and Bright Lights will be transformed into the atheist he/she is at heart.
Posted by: CalGeorge | September 14, 2007 9:35 AM
Interesting post, Bright Lights. Thank you. I'll echo No One of Consequence and ask for more links. PZ has spoiled us.
I've subscribed to the Radio Lab podcast, but I haven't started listening to the episodes I've accumulated yet. I'll look forward to running across the episode you refer to.
Posted by: Wicked Lad | September 14, 2007 9:39 AM
I'd just like to chime in to point out that when I was a Christian college student exploring the evidence for atheism, I entered a hardened, argument-weary atheist chat room that ran me out on a rail when I asked what they thought about faith. They seriously made me hate them. I didn't want to talk to them again for years. When I did become an atheist later, it was on my own.
That said, this is a hardened, argument-weary crows here, and probably no place for an unprepared opponent, however innocent and well-meaning. "Babe in the woods" springs to mind.
Posted by: speedwell | September 14, 2007 9:42 AM
Based on that first line, I'm almost inclined to think that this is a test post by PZ to see how well the regular commenters behave. Kind of like dangling a steak in front of a dog you've told, "Stay!"
If this is for real, then I'd have to say to Bright Lights: You wouldn't turn in a paper like this to Professor Myers, would you? I realize that blogging is an informal medium, but it's just common courtesy for your audience to spell check and make your formatting easy to read. Unless you composed this entry in Notepad or the like, it's hard to imagine how you could have done this without the errors being, frankly, deliberate.
Now on to the actual content...
I know almost nothing about biology or the neurosciences, but just based on the occasional articles I see in newspapers and magazines, I know that many researchers are working in the area of sleep. You didn't question this point? Perhaps the hosts meant the specific area of how protein folding/unfolding is processed during sleep?
These are both interesting points, and if you learn more about this during the term, I'd be interested in seeing you write more about this.
Not sure exactly what this means. Protein folding is also involved in other cognitive tasks such as perceptual processing, or that we inadvertently remember lots of "junk" details during the course of this other processing?
Well, any model of memory will have to account for this common experience of how memories are processed during sleep. Does the protein folding model give any clues as to how "junk" memories are distinguished from memories that should be retained? That would be something interesting to research further.
Posted by: Kurt | September 14, 2007 9:46 AM
I drink a lot of fabric softener, so that would probably explain why my memory is so poor. But, I'm April fresh and static free.
Posted by: Dan | September 14, 2007 9:47 AM
You guys crack me up! If some of you are so hot on spelling why the hell do you need spellcheck software? You can't even agree on "rift" vs. "riff"!
Why don't you give this kid a break? How about addressing his questions rather than bicker about peripheral issues? For example, if you just cared to look at your keyboard you'd realize that the kid hit the "i" and the "j" at the same time to spell "gujitar."
Some educators you are! Also, why not respect his belief in some god? As an anticlerical atheist, nothing offends me more than idiotic sarcasm in lieu of rationality.
Now Bright Lights, which proteins exactly "unfold" during sleep? It can't be all of them for sure. The area of protein folding is extremely complex. Before taking a critical look at "folding" and sleep I suggest that you learn some more about folding. BTW, some proteins don't fold yet they possess enzymatic activity. Many people now think that perhaps the folding business has been overstated.
Posted by: Paul Lurquin | September 14, 2007 9:55 AM
I agree that Bright Lights, should be commended for being the first student to post on Pharyngula. I think spelling does matter however. Scientists do a hell of a lot of writing whether they like to or not.
Posted by: PCS | September 14, 2007 10:04 AM
Just to clarify, for #59
If you are talking about musical instruments, it's guitar riff.
If, however, you are talking about the Spanish execution device, it's gujitar rift. I'm still not sure why anyone would want to remember something that grotesque, but it would be hard to forget.
Posted by: No One of Consequence | September 14, 2007 10:08 AM
'Zounds, Bee! I never knew that goodbye was a shortening of God be with you, but it makes sense (a la "adios" or "adieu"). It also fits in nicely with the philosophy of trying to work around explicitly saying the word God, especially when referring to his divine body parts, that was so important in earlier English culture (i.e. 'Zounds for "God's wounds").
Posted by: Diego | September 14, 2007 10:09 AM
Ooops, that last comment should have been for #60, not #59.
Posted by: No One of Consequence | September 14, 2007 10:12 AM
Back when I was in college, and a music student, the composition department used to throw its students on the mercy of the orchestra director. They'd submit their work, and instead of their advisors telling them they needed to get it togeter if anyone was going to play their pieces, the orchestra director would gleefully watch them crash and burn in front of ~everyone.~ And then point out exactly where they'd been laxy/fallen down. Thoroughly embarassing for the students, but they got a lot better idea of the nature of their chosen field.
This post and the delightful responses thereto takes me back to those days...
Posted by: Heather | September 14, 2007 10:16 AM
People, cool down a little. This is a post with some actual science content -- dig into that.
- Let the students ease into this business. I emphasized to them that this does not have to be an exercise in formal science writing. (I bet they'll be more careful about proofreading after this flamefest, though. I'd be far gentler with a student than you brutes are.)
- I don't get upset at my name being misspelled. It's so ubiquitous that it has become a standing joke.
- My students know my stance on religion, although it's not part of the classroom -- Morris is a small place. I have no problem with an ironic reference to something this blog is infamous for (and it certainly triggered a vivid reaction!), and I also would have no problem with a sincere discussion in favor of religious belief. I'm only going to evaluate them on the science content (and no, I won't be making my evaluations public at all.)
- These are NEW voices on the web. They will not sound like me. And that's for the best. Give them a chance to develop a little bit, will you?
Posted by: PZ Myers | September 14, 2007 10:23 AM
you guys crack me up.
i mean:
yoo gujyz krak mee uhp
Posted by: techskeptic | September 14, 2007 10:25 AM
I have to agree with "Heather" on this one. This is an excellent idea. They must have some really good teachers over there.
Posted by: 386sx | September 14, 2007 10:25 AM
As sleep and memory aren't my fields (I get little sleep, and have a terrible memory, tho', if that counts as a data point), I'm just gonna give some meta-level comments on writing and reacting to media:
1. Form-wise, I have to echo the spell checker suggestion. It's a courtesy to readers, and really does help with comprehension. Same with paragraph breaks. I figure a typo or two between friends is no big thing, but it really cuts into your readers' perception of your professionalism if you make too many.
2. Ditto re citing a reference. If you're referencing popular media like 'Radio Lab', and the program doesn't give one explicitly, I'd recommend you find it yourself. I don't think that's spoiling anyone. That's the nature of this technology, and that's one of the things that makes it worth using in the first place: that you can point people along the road, so they can follow it themselves more easily. Also, it shows you looked into it a bit more yourself, didn't just take the guest/interviewer's presentation of it as representing the whole story.
3. Speaking of which, be aware that popular media and the people interviewed thereon very frequently subtly or not so subtly pump up the significance of any story. Implying you or your guest is alone in a field, that it's terribly neglected apart from your/their work, that your/their research is more significant than it is are all very common motifs. It's not so much calculated, usually, as the fish story habit. As in: 'this story/my research is this big'. Carry around a grain of salt with you--to be taken, hearing anything of that form. Then go check the search engines, find out how many people really are doing sleep research, publishing on it, so on. I got 5406 hits on PubMed, searching on 'sleep deprivation', just as a matter of interest. Sleep, memory and mechanisms hit a few hundred.
4. Realizing this may not come off as entirely constructive, I, too, was actually giggling out loud by the 'take it easy and God bless' ending. It was a cringing 'oh, you magnificent bastard... you're really trying to wind us up, aren't ya?' giggle...
I'm still more than half convinced, like a few folks up there, that that was the intention. But on the off chance you weren't actually looking for that reaction, I'm just giving it to you straight: to a certain sort of mind (like mine), that sort of language essentially says: 'Lightweight; file under ignore.' Take said information where you will.
Posted by: AJ Milne | September 14, 2007 10:26 AM
Oh... But (seriously), thanks for the post. And kudos for sticking said toe in. And welcome to the blog.
Posted by: AJ Milne | September 14, 2007 10:28 AM
I found it hard to continue after the first sentence because of the typos.
If it were a cover letter with a resume, it would get tossed in the bin. That's the real world.
Secondly, unless he doesn't know his audience (which is quite possible) his dog bless sign off is a poke in the eye to most who read the blog.
OR he was being ironic and making a joke.
Posted by: Steve_C | September 14, 2007 10:29 AM
This was my thought as well: maybe the stress from sleep deprivation explains the misfolding?
Posted by: windy | September 14, 2007 10:34 AM
I too thought the protein-folding model was old and not widely accepted anymore, but there isn't anything that really replaces it, and almost no real data to support any of the "why we sleep" hypotheses. You really can get by saying, "We sleep to keep from getting sleepy."
The memory mechanism hypothesis I like involves quantum fluctuations in microtubules, amounting to the idea that memories are actually stored in another dimension. It's a bit fringey, but if true, the idea that significant parts of us are transdimensional could be used to explain a lot of paranormal phenomena. (That was just a comment, not a vote of confidence for the validity of the idea.)
Posted by: Darby | September 14, 2007 10:41 AM
This is why I tell people that learning to spell is important, even though the post was interesting, any focus I had was lost on the fourth mispelled word, trying to decode what the word actually was. Spelling is part of written communication as much as Punctuation; it's easier to read what you are saying when you spell and punctuate correctly.
And this isn't meant to be rude, but I wouldn't be surprised if Bright_Lights was dyslexic. Something to be tested for. These sorts of spelling errors i've seen several times in dyslexics.
Posted by: Willey | September 14, 2007 10:45 AM
Darby:
O...M...G... Are we that desperate for actual facts in this field?
Posted by: Wicked Lad | September 14, 2007 10:48 AM
The "God Bless" at the end twigged something for me, but I then immediately ignored it, realizing that it's common practice for many people and represents a habit more than anything else. The spelling mistakes, typos, and word-salad formatting were also distracting and annoying. Call me a pedant if you like, but I'm going to agree with a few others around here and say that such things do not make communicating an idea any easier.
But the part that really bugged me was here:
1. The show hosts revealed this? That's a very strange turn of phrase in this context, because if research in the field of memory, sleep, and proteins is rare, I'd be surprised, and because I don't normally like the word "reveal". Just a personal thing there, though.
2. Necessity to "al