> In a message dated 97-05-23 10:57:40 EDT, you write:
>
> [ extropians: fools'R'us ]
>
> It makes my heart sink that u speak of this. Extropians are for new ideas
> no? Well here is one, quite an intriguing one too, for Anders wrote a great
> response about symbiotic systems. Why limit ideas?
I came across two books today: a recent one (1997): "Head Mounted Display
-- designing for the user", James E. Melzer & Kirk Moffit, McGraw Hill,
ISBN 0-07-041819-5.
It is expensive, but has one intriguing, albeit brief, chapter in it:
"Brain-Actuated Control (BAC) & HMDs". Accurate, and in-depth. Almost
bought it. Anyone interested in fringe GUIs should check it out.
The other one (from 1991, or so) is to remain anonymous, as I haven't
written up the title. It was about the role molecular modelling in
investigation of cellular signalling, neurotransmitters/receptor
interaction included. I was thinking ab initio upoading when leafing
through it, but designing symbiontes from scratch is about as adequate in
its scope.
Talking about simulating cell development, and operation in a computer run
is pretty ridiculous, nowadays. However, from HUGO data & wet context we
can progress very far, if we use stringent simulation validation by the
underlying simulation layer, all the way up the overlapping systems
ladder. (I think Nippon has a project with one of its many focuses on it
now started. Nippon likes to spend lots of money on dumb projects, but I
think this one is a good investment on their part).
Even given our delicately prying experimental techiques, ab wet initio
might provide us with crucial information unavailable from experimental
data alone. We should definitely look into it. Imo.
ciao,
'gene