Last Call…

Just a little shout out to the Neuroscience community. Dementia and Alzheimer’s are invading the lives of our senior communities.

We need a fresh start, that is that we need to go back to the drawing board so to speak.  Its time to begin anew and approach the real meaning and mechanisms of cognitive impairment, and how it is more that just a loss of memory.

It is only considerate to consider what we are really dealing with and how we have been approaching this topic in reverse – and that can be interpreted two ways, but for now we will deal with just one of those.

It is high time to reconcile that Dementia is – originally – non-neurologically and non-genetically based, even though there’s plenty of scientific evidence to show us that there are neurological and genetic implicating factors that can hardly be ignored.  More than anything Dementia is cognitively based and it is this cognitive lack of development that causes Dementia more than anything else.  Cognition is such a powerful force that it can undoubtedly affect us neurological and genetically – particularly because genetics are so flexibly affected and influenced by our environments, and for humans our environments are definitely connected to our cognitive processing.  Find out more in our upcoming literature, soon to be released.





TO CHOOSE OR AVOID CHOOSING… TO DECIDE OR AVOID DECIDING – that is the question, sooooo what are the options?

It’s pretty simple, although it is complex – – it’s uncomplicated.

If you really want to be smart, the smartest thing you can do is know how the human brain really works, so that you can really make your brain work for you.   —–~COGNITIVOLOGY

Most people are sadly disinterested in real brain development.  Some dislike it altogether and there are others still who are deeply afraid of this topic. But for those who want to have an actual option, that is, have the CHOICE to choose between the traditional version of brain development, (which has been the only one available so far the past thousands of years) VS. those who literally want to know the authentic version of human brain potential, and all of its genuine capabilities, such as providing the actual mechanisms for generating full brain potential for today’s young children and all future generations, then it makes sense that people ought to receive the alert that such an option is available.

Enter COGNITIVOLOGY. Where does Cognitivology or anybody find the answers to the formula for full human brain potential?  The only place they can be found – in and from the brain itself.

Having real choices is a human birthright~ brought together by plasticity imprinted by parenting, that incorporates a standard system of cognitively correct language, because without language, cognition is, at best elusive, and at worst inaccessible. Furthermore, without language coding that supports full brain potential then cognitive development will always remain limited – i.e., stuck on the version we’ve been using for the last 50,000 years.


The most essential ingredient for human cognition is nothing other than the plain and simple ingredient of “cognitive development“.These complex but uncomplicated cognitive ingredients include (among many other elements): Emotional Literacy, multi-dimensional senses, an intuitional acquisition of the Fundamental Principles of Mathematics, the basics of Natural Science, and the flexibility of communication & collaboration – – all of which must be fundamentally meshed together in the 1st five years of brain development. Why? Because that’s when 90% of the brain’s dominant neuronal wiring is set for a lifetime of learning, which requires plasticity ~ ~ That is to say that the plasticity program or version that you will retain for a lifetime is set, when all of these factors are set and meshed together in early cognitive development.  Patterns, predilections and proclivities imprinted during this time are the most influential and subsequently, make those traits the hardest to alter – – including the fundamental tensile strength of your own plasticity flexibility.

The first truth about real human brain development is that the 90% rule of plasticity is established during that stage when 90% of the brain is developing.  The plasticity you experience and apply now and/or after the first 5 years of life is the 10% latitude or margin that will still give actual flexibility ranges to the plasticity features of the brain. Historically, human brain development has been approached in reverse. Cognitivology is unveiling the unadapted correct order for fulfilling full human brain plasticity. Simply put — does it make sense to establish the 90% part so that it is fully engineered to fully support the 10% part for a total of 100% elasticity for your lifetime learning plasticity?

Unlimited Flexible lifetime Neuro-plasticity is only as usefully applicable as the original ingredients of cognitive development that would have been installed during the foundational functions (original switchboard) of cognitive development capabilities. If there are basic cognitive functions that were missed being implanted or imprinted into the original hardware, software or switchboard of any of the authentic capabilities of human cognition, it is impossible to have that function for which to exercise any flexible plasticity, as well as any cognitive processing for a function that missed being laid.  This is the truth about true cognitive processing

The smartest thing anybody can do is know how their brain really works and thus make it really work for you.  For thousands of years people have sought spiritual nirvana, highly intellectual genius capacity, the golden seal of compassionate care for other humans, beauty in art, mastery in music, ideal political systems, advance economic strategies or programs for world peace – – all of which require the use of our brains, all of which either independently or together have negligibly changed humanity on a unifying or global scale.  The most unifying of all elements is our brain, and it therefore, should be given the chance, indeed put at center stage for addressing the underlining issues that keep us disunited.  We look for the highest orders of all other things that require the use of our brain yet we have yet to reconcile that we should actually  unveil and implement the highest order of our brain’s capacities. For everything that humans seek and desire to create, true brain development is the definition for it!

–C. A. Woolf


Human Cognition IS EMOTIONAL COGNITION:     Reprint, updated, copyright COGNITIVOLOGY (R), a registered Trademark of Cognitively Correct ~ overhauling and filling in the gaps of Neuroscience to define it as a genuine field of Science via the rigorous requisites, properties and parameters of the Standard Model for Scientific discovery as best described by the principles of e=mc2. Copyright Cognitivology books & Literature, 2009, 2013, 2017, 2018

EVERYTHING IS MATH / COGNITION is a Mathematical function, Nothing is exempt from the definitions of the Fundamental Principles of Mathematics / the Human Brain is an emotionally developed instrument / Emotional Cognition is the very first cognitive process, and the basis of all subsequent cognitive quotients of intelligence / Cognition & Math can never be based on “non-math” ;  therefore, Emotional Cognition must also be mathematical — otherwise the final process of “cognitive development” i.e., REASONING, would have zero basis in mathematical logistics.

Human Cognition IS “Emotional Cognition”, and it is properly defined as the emotional and instinctual ability to acquire a full literacy and knowledge of TRUST based on the TRUTHFUL principles of knowledge that are derived from the ORIGINAL resource of ALL Knowledge, i.e., the Natural Universe, which coherently represents and reflects the Fundamental Principles of Mathematics, defining EVERYTHING and substantially interconnecting the basis for all forces and elements as best defined by the properties of e=mc2, therein providing a PROSPECTUS for the fullest intuitive-cognitive potential of the microcosmic human brain, in conjunction with the full development of multi-dimensional sensory tools, via the exploration of the Natural multi-dimensional Universe, and altogether coded and ensured by the intuitive acquisition of Cognitively Correct/Mathematically correct language skills, when all skills are intuitively learned and formulating the baseline configurations for a lifetime of “plasticity” and unlimited patterns of integrative learning/memory-Intelligence/behavior, in accordance with the human brain’s 100% hard-wired Compassion-Optimism structure.

Hence, the definition for “Emotional Intelligence” is:  The ability to treat any & all expressions of verbal communication with any types of accompanying emotions – as information processors – to be converted into knowledge and communication via a full spectrum of emotional literacy, thereby, giving all emotions the same equal value index and credit that should be applied to all emotions.

For more information or the schedule a talk, counsel, consultation or LECTURE please contact Bryce Conway at;

Lecture topics for High Schools and College/Universities ~ “Fully defining ‘Cognition’ – redefining Neuroscience”  /  “I.I.” vs. “A.I.” – human Intuitive Intelligence as the precursor for Artificial Intelligence, Computational thinking in both humans and computers, The relationship between Critical Thinking Skills and the STEM/STREAM fields of knowledge.

EARLY EDUCATION TEACHER TRAINING;  Mastering Early Educator skills to efficiently activate the “Pre-K” brain: The literal PROSPECTUS for Full Human Brain Potential.


We’re constantly barraged with rhetorical statements – concepts it seems, that we are supposed to just accept at face value, to believe, have faith – – and this is supposed to be good enough and therefore, required of us to accept without question?  On the other hand, we are equally promoted with the notion that we ought to ask the right questions.  So, should we question the most rhetorical and unchallenged statement of all time, the question being, “Is Life Really Worth Living”?

Okay, now it’s asked.  Let’s explore it.

It may be a matter of pure philosophy, or a mere personal opinion, or a firm belief.

“Be curious”, “ask the right and unasked questions”, “be open-minded”, “You never know where the next big idea will come from”, “keep your eyes and ears alert”, etc.  That’s what they say, “they” being the leaders, scholars and masters of the universe.  But do they really live up to practicing what they preach?  Do they keep the lines of communication open?  Do they shut down when it comes down to exchanging conversations with the common folk of society?  Why is twitter designed to be a one-sided conversation?

Scientists especially love to tell us to question everything – – does everything include life and death?  It’s a delicate topic, but whatever topic we do decide to engage in, guess what? – we need our brains to do it ! ~  WHICH brings us to the true nature of THIS conversation. because as much as it seems controversial, i’ts nothing of the sort.  The real sentimental debate here is that the topic of pure brain potential is nothing short of provocative,  even more so than the topic of death itself. 

Somewhere within the happily contagious plethora of J.K. Rowlings literature, there is the statement: “To the well-organized mind, death is but the next adventure” .  Although these tales are fictional, this particular statement stands in truth, because death comes to us all, and a well organized logical intelligent mind ought to contemplate its arrival at some point in the timeline of life.

“Is life worth living” is as identically profound as asking the question “What is our PURPOSE in Life”?  That consummate question, that at some point, most of us ask either in our moments of silent despair, or most adverse challenges, or even when the excitement of something grand has taken place.  ‘Is life worth living’ & ‘what is the  purpose of life’ go hand-in-hand – and its time we put our heads together to challenge its singular answer.  The current narratives, trends and therapeutic philosophies of life are dominated by the headline of mindfulness — a quaint and comfortable approach to dealing with “life” and “consciousness”, “balance” and “harmony”, a combination of heart-mind-body-spirit, heart and emotions — all wrapped together in a tender and promising recipe.  [At a most recent presentation that I attended, I asked where was the ‘brain’ in this scenario, to which I received the answer, ‘well, we have the mind listed here’ — to which I said, ‘please, allow me to ask my question a different way;  Which of those traits, including the mind can be exercised and applied without the use of the brain’? For this I received a blank look and shrugged shoulders].

If ‘mindfulness’ and all the other pop-trends of life were so solidly substantial, fit and impervious, they would be capable of addressing and answering the dualistic questions of “how do we achieve full brain potential” and “what is the purpose of life” — Mindfulness will only last as long as, or until the next pop-trend comes along.  the question of full brain potential and purpose of life can only be answered by each other.

The purpose of our lives, at least in the most essential, fundamental and primordial sense is to fulfill the full cognitive potential of our brains. It is within this context that we’ll discover any additional reason and purposes for living and the life giving element that authentically define “living life to the fullest”.  We have yet to achieve tapping into the human brain’s fullest potential.  We utilize only a mere 10-20% of our multi-sensory-intuitive-cognitive potential (give or take some numerical percentage, but still very far off from the 100% potential we ought to use in the same ways that we naturally expect to use 100% potential and purpose of all of our other bodily organs). And yes, although our brains ‘power system’ is 100% switched on, the switched on system includes the ability to perform wireless communication, the ability to access unlimited knowledge and information from all dimensions of the universe, behave 100% of the time in accordance with the human brain’s hard-wired predilection to operate all of our intelligence capabilities with the cerebral hardware values and algorithms of Compassion and Optimism, intuitively understanding and practicing reasoning and computational thinking skills and the most basics of common sense, judgment and critical thinking — all so we can put our heads together, be on the same page and do what humans really do best of all ~ Collaborate! ]

Altogether, these descriptions define the exact reason for describing the brain as the most complex entity in the universe, and more succinctly why the human brain is a microcosmic version of the universe, capable of understanding and deciphering the knowledge and information of the universe.  Furthermore, it is a realization that the knowledge of the universe is a requisite set of ingredients for the full potential development of the human brain, and a set of configurations that begins with “Emotional Cognition”  which has now also been fully and rigorously defined, even while experts in the field of Psychology and Neuroscience are still scratching their heads over it . . .

So to finalize and conclude the consummate question — Is Life Worth Living?  That is to say, is life worth living without the access and ability to the unlimited usefulness of our full cognitive potential – so that we can surmise and reason all the other worthwhile, creative and unlimited  purposes for living that we have yet to discover, because for those that feel that life is disdainfully unworthy of living, they may be feeling ahead of discoveries yet to come.  And while we are at that juncture of thinking, there’s value in believing and living by the philosophy that the cup is half full, but our cups should be full so that we have plenty to share, give and collaborate with others.

Perhaps those that crave the end of life have the right idea, perhaps intuitively or deep down inside they are asking the right questions and the rest of us have it all wrong and are acting blissfully ignorant, either consciously or unconsciously.  Without the full operational potential of our cognitive abilities, how can we honestly say that we are fulfilling the purpose of our lives, how can we genuinely propose to be “living life to the fullest”?

So, does this mean we ought to be a justification bulletin for those that want to get out of dodge, or say “goodbye cruel world”, when they may be the most qualified to understand how to make life, and the world, more manageable and worth living in?   Is death meaningful if the life lived preceding it, was also meaningful?  There are those who love life and fear death, and there are those that fear life and love death.  Together and collaboratively, we are called to face the most provocative concept of fulfilling brain potential — a mental and emotional task that is even more frightening that death itself.

. . . Oh, and by the way, if you are actually curious enough to want to know the fundamentals of full human brain potential, or essentially what the undeniable definition of what EMOTIONAL COGNITION is, then YES, we CAN provide it for you.  Be courageous and simply ask, we will reply!!!

Until next time… Cheers, Carla


It would hardly be the first time we’ve taken advantage of the phrase “truth is stranger than fiction”, because the truth of the matter about truth is that it is uncompromising, un-bendable, inflexible, non-negotiable and unyielding ~ perhaps this is why we also subscribe to the saying that “the truth hurts”.

If our beliefs are consistent with truths, then there’s never any way that the truth can be hurtful.  Maybe because the truth about anything can be hurtful is why we go through painstaking efforts to avoid it – a literal exercise in contradiction in and of itself. But, if our beliefs are designed to protect us from actual truths, then it is understandable why folks would protect and abide by their beliefs, and even make their belief systems unyielding so as to ensure having to face truthful premises.  Essentially, what does this mean if we are making value comparisons, such as the way we do at the supermarket when we are deciding to buy one particular product versus a competitor version of the same product.  Do the principles change if we are asking the daring question of which is more important — the truth or one’s personal (or cultural) beliefs? !!  The principles of learning and knowledge are unilateral, they remain consistent whether one is learning in foresight or hindsight, by artificial knowledge or natural knowledge.  Knowledge, like all natural elements of the universe — where knowledge originates from the forces and elements and building blocks of the universe — is governed by one set of unifying laws (which govern all forces and elements).  Why then, it would be one and the same as trusting the truth of knowledge, or understanding that truth is one and the same as the origins of knowledge.

Okay, now what?

What is the consensus of truth vs. beliefs – – – why the introduction and mental foreplay on explaining the mechanics and definitions of knowledge?

Because the upcoming example being presented here is somewhat harsh – rather, it is a lesson of tough love for adults.  We live on the cusp of the age of reasoning, which has already pretty much transformed into the age of information and which is now beginning its transformation into the age of quantum information processing – –  and the future of information is depending on this standard, both for humans (intuitive intelligence) and for computing systems (artificial intelligence).  However quantum information processing depends on the virtues of trust, (a necessary trait that can actually slow down the oncoming paradigm and dispensation of quantum information processing).  This is significant because, trust and truth are inseparable and if we do want to move into the age of quantum information processing, then the elements of truth and trust only ever come as a package deal.

The truth is that in order for quantum information processing to make its genuine mark in the age of intuitive computers, means that humans must also become more intuitive (the human brain definition for quantum information processing).

So, what is the crux of understanding and establishing truth? It unfortunately means we have to undo some of our beliefs.  If there was any way to explain to adults, especially Parents, that “parenting” is actually “brain development” – and be able to explain this without offending any parent, then TRUST that it would be done — and done so that the things we desire most for making life prosperous and peaceful for everyone  would also be changing advantageously at an uncontrollable rate.   Real brain development would and could spread like the wildest-out-of–control fire.

Scientific proof is staying afloat and computational thinking is silently gaining ground…

Parents can wait for the next generation to take advantage of the future’s information processing providence, or they can jump on the gravy train now and be part of the paradigm shift. So what is the question that parents need to be asking themselves? The question we ask of them – – is – – Are you the kind of parent who is willing to walk through fire for your children, the kind of parent who is willing to do anything to ensure your child(rens) health, happiness, safety and success? are you the type of parent that is willing to sacrifice anything for your children???  If so, does that include sacrificing your beliefs (and belief systems), or are your beliefs more important than your children???

Parenting IS brain development AND there is a truth to how the brain develops.  If our beliefs were more consistent with the truths of knowledge and cognitive development, then we’d already be on board and on the way to developing higher knowledge and using more of our brain’s potential than we have been using for the last 40,000+ years of human history. We are either on the side of truth and the future, or we are in the present, which is one and the same as being in the past.  For the sake of children and their future, we need to choose, whether we are parents or just the voyeurs of parents, all of us play some role of responsibility for the future citizens of our planet.  Join the side of truth, if you please. Give your brain a real chance at living in the future.

‘Til next time friends, yours TRULY, Carla, here at Cognitivology.

See our new video on our cognitivology facebook page (soon to be posted on youtube) and send us your comments and questions (only comments and questions will be answered, spams will be ignored, but thanks in advance for reaching out anyway spammers).  Cheers everyone

. . . ABOUT ZERO. . .

[Excerpted by Author from various parts of book “THE DOTS CONNECTED – What Does Childhood Really Have to do with Adulthood, PLUS Intuition’s Role in Fulfilling Total Brain Development and the Unlimited Potential of the Human Mind” / How the Principles of e=mc2 are fully relevant to full human brain potential. (copyright 2013, 2018)       by C.Woolf & B. Conway

PART  I      “…ABOUT ZERO…” 

ZERO, yes that thing that the Mathematical Genius Pythagoras struggled with and rallied so forcefully against – – that thing your average 7 year old already automatically and intuitively understands – – are we missing something here?  Have we forgotten to properly define the meaning of “genius”?  Lo and behold, what that thing really does have something to do is Intuitive Intelligence — but we’ll let that part go for now.

Rumor has it that many Scientists and College Professors dislike and even disbelieve in the concept of Zero – just like Mr. Genius Pythagoras.  In the book, Origins by Dan Brown, he tells the story of one particular (Science) professor, having posted a note on his class or office door telling students that if they really wish to discuss “point zero”, they should immediately head to the Philosophy Dept.  Apparently he is (either under orders from University protocol, or) doing his best to avoid any conversations about point zero or anything that has occurred before point zero.  This seems to be relative to the “facts” that he disbelieves in a Creator and wants to deflect any discussions about an Intelligent Designer or Students trying to bring up the topic of a Deity.

Like other Folks and Physicists, this Professor is sticking to the story that all Matter and Energy, which sprung into being at the moment after the “Big Bang”, when Time and Space also started,— this is the substantially, visible, available evidence that we have to work with and that is all that matters.

But it’s unnecessary to believe in a Deity in order to understand the validity of POINT ZERO, and of all people in the world, Physicists should understand this best !! – Without Excuse !!

Imagine, there was nothing existing regarding Zero: What would The Financial Market do without 0’s ?  Then of course, there’s technology and especially computers — do the math you Physicists — that is what YOU do, right? What on earth would computers do without zeros and ones? – and hey, the future of all computing and coding is eventually going to be built on the strategies of quantum information processing — you might want to tell zeros to get lost, but Particles need their partnerships ~ one would get pretty lonely and limited without its zero companion.

What’s most revealing here is that non-sensible tendency to try leading information in the direction that you want it to go, for whatever reason, rather than follow the natural trail of information and seeing where it really leads.

This is where Physicists ought to give themselves their own Math test. It’s true, Math is Everything, and Math took off when Zero was discovered.  Actually, we should really say that “Arithmetic” and all of its related categories and sub-divisions (Algebra, Geometry, Calculus, Trigonometry, etc. took off when Zero was discovered) — Arithmetic, is a field of knowledge based on the Fundamental Principles of Mathematics (or the “Language of the Universe”, as Physicists like to affectionately call it – and all classifications of knowledge get their definitions and descriptions from the Fundamental Math Principles, nothing is exempt, and the most fundamental Principle is a Pattern and the most fundamental pattern of a pattern is POINT ZERO…. are Physicists still the smartest people in the world and are they smarter than a 7 year old …. ?

But where is the real contest dispensed and delivered ?  Well, well, that is decided by the Language of the Universe: one and the same as the Fundamental Principles of Mathematics.  And for posterity’s sake, it should be noted that since Math gives everything its definition (even when Arithmetic falls short of doing the numbers), it is therefore unnecessary to produce “scientific evidence” for something if the Math works.  Math is superior to Science because Math gives everything its definition, even Science.  People think that e=mc2 was true because it was scientifically proven, the fact is that it was scientifically proven, because relativity was true and Einstein computed this in his head with Math, before he started doing the Arithmetic.

Conclusively, let’s just put the Math and the Science together. Physicist, better than anyone (we hope) understand that all knowledge is derived from Energy and Matter.  All energy and matter is derived from the Universe’s elemental building blocks which are distinctively constructed with molecules, atoms, and its smallest parts – particles.

Since Physicists have to be involved, or at least interested in energy and matter and knowledge, the smallest part of which is a “particle”, it would seem that they ought to be interested in particles – that’s where the breadcrumb trail would seem to be leading — make sense so far?

Well then, if they’ve been properly and appropriately interested in Particles [even if they are a strict Physicist, as opposed to being a Particle Physicist or a Theoretical Physicist], how can a Physicist of all people deny the obvious fact that Particles have been observed and known to jump orbits in 0.0 seconds, and by some measurements, it even seems as though the particle jump is happening in even less than 0.0 seconds.  The question is how do Physicists justify wanting to ignore Point Zero AND still look like some of the smartest people on earth, and dismiss doing the real proof, which is THE MATH ? !! ?

PART II     ZERO belongs to EVERYTHING, whether the “experts”  like it, or dislike it.  By C. Woolf

Now, it gets a little harder…    (some of this information is recap from previous blog entries)

Some people believe that the ultimate debate is between Darwinian Evolutionary Biology VS Intelligent Design Creationism — this probably is the consummate debate among both scholars and laypeople alike, so it’s highly likely that this could steal the prize for heated discussions from a party room to a board room, and from the classroom to the symposium tables of leading world think tanks.

So again, while these factions debate with each other, each trying to scientifically outsmart the other, let us use the ultimate criteria for everything, once again, we are to do the Math !!! 

Both Darwinism and Creationism have much to answer for when it comes down to explaining full human brain potential, and the relevance of Point Zero, as well as the principles, properties and postulates of e=mc2, with regards to the development of the Microcosmic human brain.  This tale of two towering theories, of which most people either deliberately or inadvertently stand on either side of, means that apparently non-ignorant folks can hardly ignore the role of point zero in general human progress, which we must credit “math” with.

Either we must admit that Pythagoras was ignorant, or an idiot, or we ought to recognize Point Zero in the endeavors and echelons of general knowledge, advanced reasoning skills, and the requisite diverse elements defining the newest scientific fields of Computational Thinking and Quantum Information Processing (both Mathematical skills – – lol).  These new fields serve as the parameters for the future of Human Progress and ever greater technological development as technology partners with every part of our work, living, livelihood and recreational routines.

Until either of these opposing twins of faith can rigorously include the human brain’s involvement in EVERYTHING we do and understand, then neither faction holds the right to demand and direct the course of distributing and designing Knowledge & Educational standards for anybody in any culture.

The race to disseminating “purpose” vs. “purposelessness” has to be recalibrated, redefined and set in accordance with a definition of full human brain potential, particularly because we need our brains, we hope, to engage in a debate.

THEREFORE, both sides must rise to the occasion  – – Darwinism must fully explain the full potential of the human brain so that they may fully justify the purposelessness of our human brains AND the Creationists must also be able to fully explain the design of the human brain that will explain and justify its full purpose.

The human brain is the proving ground for this debate, since we need our brain to conduct this seemingly uncompromising debate, once and for all.  The future of the newest fields of Computational Thinking and Quantum Information Processing are depending on the outcome….

——————————-so long, until next time ——————————-



To be podcasted, and/or reprinted for Publication in due time !

This Broadcast is a call-out to the fields of Neuroscience and Cognitive Neuroscience; 2 fields that should be fully united and equal in the pursuit of advancing Brain Sciences.

YOU HEREBY, stand in contempt of Fraud for operating under the guise and allure of being legitimate Scientific Disciplines, and for failing to comply with the explicit intention of working together for the betterment of human progress.

The STANDARD CRITERIA, namely Einstein’s e=mc2, as the basis for scientific modeling and discovery, has gone entirely unheeded for definition in this crucial field of Neuroscientific knowledge.

Relative to an article published in the NEW YORK Time,s a few years ago, describing HOW “Neuroscientists are still trying to get the back of the brain to shake hands with the front of the brain.” – – For this, there has been little traction, if any at all.  Nothing in the way of advancement has been accomplished or achieved on this matter — that is, until NOW:

For CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, it must be known that the one set of universal laws governing all forces, elements and entities throughout the universe, are also, equally relevant and applicable to the MICROCOSMIC HUMAN BRAIN..  There is nothing exempting us humans from this same DISTINCTION – and we need our brains to understand and abide by these parameters.

So it should go without even saying so – that there is that one same set of laws defining Emotioning + Reasoning as one identical process, the same goes for Intelligence + Behavior, for Truth + Trust, and the list goes on….

All human attributes have now been fully re-defined for COHESIVENESS in accordance with the principles, properties and postulates of e=mc2 by none other than COGNITIVOLOGY.

As a field striving for authentic professionalism, Neuroscience has, albeit inadvertently, led the Public astray by circumventing and therefore MISSING the bulls-eye mark of genuine Cognitive Development; that particular stage which, fully reveals the actual platform and hence, the natural clause for higher, and indeed FULL HUMAN BRAIN POTENTIAL, consequently stunting real human progress !

The promise of a better future for today’s children hangs in a precarious balance between Technological Artificial Intelligence and Human Intuitive Intelligence.  Only real Brain Sciences can make good on the promise to deliver realistic hope and distinctly directed advancement to the children of today and to future generations.

Neuroscience ought to be in the position of leading every field of knowledge, because we all need our brains for EVERYTHING we do, BUT first and foremost, Neuroscience must advance itself by taking on the rigor of e=mc2.

THE DOTS DISCONNECTED — Cracking the Cognitive Code of Alzheimer’s and Dementia, continued… “DON’T FORGET vs. PLEASE REMEMBER”

e=mc2as the standard formula for full brain potential is rendered by injecting it into the early intuitive-cognitive processes of early brain development == The “Standard Model” for understanding and knowing how all forces of the universe are united and functioning as one unified set of laws governing all forces.  This standard model is of course naturally and logically necessary to apply to the microcosmic human brain.

We interrupt this program to bring you a special bulletin . . .

What exactly is COGNITIVOLOGY? – – Cognitivology is a new field of intelligence defining all fields and disciplines of knowledge and information, as well as the Humanities: All in the name of reconciling that the principles of Full Human Brain Potential, from beginning to endlessness, and how our intelligence and behavior traits  are fully consistent with the principle properties of e=mc2 — which has rigorously defined how all forces of the universe are governed by one set of unifying laws.  As the human brain is a microcosm of the universe, then it, and all of the endeavors of human development, are also subject to the same universal governing laws.  PRESS RELEASE on it’s way….

Now, in the meantime, let’s turn to the subject at hand ~

Is the brain a “mystery” or a “microcosm”?  If it is a mystery, then we should be content for it to be a never-ending enigma to us – and as already touted, we have to choose between mystery and microcosm. Mystery implies lack of knowingness, and microcosm implies understanding knowledge and information.

So what is the big mysterious challenge facing Neuroscience when trying to understand the “mysteries” of cognitive processing?  Is this really Rocket Science, and if it is as complicated as Rocket Science, well, we’ve actually figured out Rocket Science, because the logical tendency to figuring out something means following where the trail of information will actually lead, rather than trying to lead the information in accordance with assumptions that merely support what we WANT TO BELIEVE.

By the way, after presenting a long letter to LIFE magazine, and alerting them that the information they’d seek and want to know for uncovering the trail of REAL human brain potential, has been answered in the form of distributing the same “Brain Issue” with “newly revised information”.  It may seem sympathetic to apologize to this publication, as a matter of probity and austerity, BUT, what is the lame excuse?  The information is available!!!  To claim to have only certain information or that “scientists have yet to understand why something is still mysteriously incomprehensive to them” only endorses the reality that these publishers and scholars are failing to do the “research”.  The real problem of course is that they want to be the ones to uncover the information and put their names on it – – the last thing they want is for some obscure persons or other organizations’ name to be on that discovery.  Too bad LIFE magazine – zero apologies – but I do feel sorry for you, because you’re still failing to get it… still missing the bullseye. But hey, if it makes them feel better, they could feel sorry for me for being so bodacious enough for telling them what they really need to know.   Between the lack of flexibility and lack of humility possessed by these authorities, in addition to the countless gatekeepers they have around them, it’s a miracle, or a mystery, that they have learned anything new at all.

Let’s get down to business…

Does it really take 25 years to figure out so much about so little, regarding the few discoveries of cognitive impairments, specifically, Dementia and Alzheimer’s ?!!?   Scholars and wise men would say we must learn from our pasts – but does that only mean we learn from the “mistakes” we make from the past?  How about the things we consider to be great successes.

War is hardly consistent with the authentic rules of genuine brain development, but that may be exactly why we are so successful at warring, because we are using a ridiculously low threshold of authentic brain development.  World War II started and lasted ‘4’ years — only four years !  In just 4 years, look what the British managed to accomplish when first getting involved in the war by helping the allied efforts in France.  In less than four years actually, they rigged all kinds of shenanigans, successfully; spy networks, couriers, informants, wireless operators, weapons deliveries, paratroopers, “clerks” at Bletchley Park using computers to decode the German’s marching orders, entertainment schemes, such as outlandish on-deck vaudeville partying of naval officers to fool enemy ships, as well as the British entertainment Industry efforts to influence American citizens to finally join the war when the government was determined to remain un-involved.  JUST 4 YEARS, and that with the American’s helping only one year.  Oh, and then of course, the Allied Powers won the war.

So what’s up with the timeline and efforts for defeating Alzheimer’s?  Further investigation would probably reveal that the British exhausted every possible tactic in the schemes of war, never a stone left unturned, never an idea or opportunity left ignored or neglected.  It is too obvious, yet again to restate that the most important element in the war against Alzheimer’s is the one that is the most neglected.  That element is the cognitive element.  That is to say, that the word “cognitive” is discussed in conjunction with “impairment”, but “cognitive” is rarely, if ever discussed in terms of its process from beginning to end.  Until “cognition” takes center- stage in the effort to defeat Dementia, and is literally upstaged much more so than pharmaceuticals and neuro-technologies, then it’s battle can only be expected to go on ad infinitum.

Yes, Dementia and Alzheimer’s will manifest as differently with individuals as there are individual personalities, but there are several traits that are very consistent with patients suffering from this “dis-ease”.  Officially, it is accepted that Alzheimer’s generally damages the parts of the brain that control speech and communication.  BUT, IS IT REALLY THE OTHER WAY AROUND ? ~ We’ll discuss this in a moment…

It must be reiterated that the other general parts of Dementia include, a severe loss for understanding time elements, which of course are tied into spatial judgments (double duh, since even the theory of Relativity denotes that space and time are interdependent and inseparable).  The greatest impediment is the inability to trust. Which is the cornerstone of all cognitive processes, defining early emotional cognitive development that creatively becomes mistrust.

As a moment has passed, here’s the 411 ~ Truth and Trust, or T ‘n T is an explosive combination — Cognitively Incorrect speech is the nightmarish mutation hidden deep in the tiny trenches of early speech development.  The young brain is technically incapable of processing negations and all knowledge and information must be dispensed in non-negated formats.  Heavily negated commands, knowledge and information, disguised as “guidance” is, and has been transcendent throughout generations and is completely unprejudiced when it comes to national boundaries — that is why it plagues more generally than any other features of this disease.  Well, until next time.  Be well, and please remember to tune in.

Language must be coded with the algorithms and configurations of all math principles as the basis for information processing and continual knowledge advancement.  Language must reflect open-ended patterns for continually connecting new patterns, sequences and arrangements of information that fit into a system capable of accommodating the principles of infinite knowledge properties — THAT is the difference between “Don’t forget to…” and “Please remember to…”

Technically speaking, what happens is that the brain is recognizing and using the verb as its cue for information processing that will then be used to decide on performing a task or action or intent or otherwise.  It may seem frivolous and superficial to the pragmatic mind, but negated very language codings are severely and profoundly detrimental to the preschool intuitive-cognitive mind.  The basic tenet here is that all knowledge and information must be treated by the same verbal syntax in order for all knowledge and information to make significant connections, which properly reflect the fundamental math principles defining all aspects, entities, skills, abilities and fields of knowledge.  if it were possible to dispense all aspects of knowledge and information with negated verbs, then that could likely be just as preferable a mode of learning and connecting all knowledge factors, but that is most likely impossible AND on the more misfortunate angle of this algorithmic processing is the inadvertent and cynical consistency of relaying the consequences of knowledge, information, actions and decisions as opposed to the advantages and benefits of knowledge, and the optimal configurations of infinite creative thinking.

Every type of cognitive reserve is fundamentally constructed during the early years of brain development and their explosive transference compounds during the later stages of life’s learning cycles, particularly after age 30, when intuitive intelligence processing must lead all cognitive processes.  In other words, while cognitive processing was in the lead for ensuring the development of intuitive intelligence, after age 30, intuitive intelligence takes the lead for all cognitive processing. If the algorithms for intuitive-cognitive processing during the preschool are damaged, essentially if the intuitive and cognitive properties that are one and the same during that stage are treated differently, then the eventual counter-intuitive implication and strained pattern of cognitive processing later on will resemble that disconnected set of patterns — which is why Alzheimer’s and Dementia can develop anytime after age 30-ish.




Cognitive Times, Cracking the Alzheimer’s cognitive code and understanding how the principles of e=mc2 are relative to all cognitive processes

VOLUME I, Part 3 – – The same things that go awry with cognitive impairments are exactly the same things that were improperly formed in the early years of ‘cognitive development’.

It’s been said that “laughter is the best medicine”.  Nobody really disputes this abstract anecdote, yet it’s probably never be scientifically proven.  However, real scientific proof is done by trial and error and most importantly, can be done by anyone with the right equipment.  But the most important piece of equipment any of us can ever use IS OUR BRAINS, and that is precisely WHY Intuitive reasoning, Computational Creativity, and Quantitative Thinking are far more superior than basic proof requiring only the crude matter of our 3-D world.

Let’s divert for a few moments — HERE’S WHY: 

Your brain is like a little electrical unit. It is a small resource of electromagnetic energy and activity that packs the power to light up your life.  You may be unaware of this, but “electromagnetism” is actually invisible light, never to be confused with darkness.  Whenever you feel something, it’s completely linked with thought and brain activity, and whenever you think something, it is also entirely linked with your emotions, and together, your MIND, i.e., the combination of your thoughts & feelings, fire-up your brain’s activity system in a dance of wiring & firing choreography.  This dancing routine is an invisible abstract process completely affecting the brain’s design to pave the way for information to flow without being impeded, but more significantly, without even this abstract process, we would be unable to perform the concrete process of trying to perform a scientific experiment that would provide us with “proof” about something or anything.

The brain is naturally designed to accommodate and interconnecting flow of knowledge that can constantly be imbedded with new forms of information.  The brain was never meant, or designed to operate on flaws of information that would clog and damage flowing information activity.  The impulses of electromagnetic activity, operating by neurotransmitter pulses, like a fiber optic telephone system transmitting information across the wires at light speed, means that your thoughts & feelings are also traveling, at least closely enough, to the speed of light and quite possibly, at the actual speed of light.

This wiring & firing light speed choreography is dependent upon the physicality of the whole brain.  We may believe that that feelings and thoughts are two separately independent systems that quaintly cross path like two ships in the night, or that truly mature reasoning skills are conducted with the absence of emotions, but this notion, prominent in so many cultures, especially western thought for the past 2,000 years, describes the biggest stumbling block we’ve had for understanding the human quest to have our “hearts and minds united”.  Electromagnetism is ground zero for the fusion of several forces; “heart” and “mind” / “feelings” and “thoughts” are as inter-braided as electro–magnetism, or energy–matter, or space–time, or light–speed.  These dualing forces can never be pulled apart or be capable of operating independently of its counterpart – – – so why, even though we all profess the “unity of heart and mind”, do we insist that there are different and separate definitions for ‘heart’ and ‘mind’, or for ‘thoughts’ and ‘feelings’.

Building a wiring and firing system is a task that ought to be constructed full, formidably and securely during the foundational stages of brain building, in order to stand firm and work at full capacity.  The initial fundamental construction of these paths and pathways – to connect all the forces of brainy activities are dependent upon the emotioning factors that get plugged into our brains during infancy, meaning that it is the first layer of a constructing a foundation, and every type of construction has its first layer or foundation built before anything else. The human brain is an emotionally developed organ, so it is only fitting and logical that the emotions are properly constructed first.

Understanding this can be a scary realization, because it requires some of our own individual reconciliation, meaning that we must face some of the beliefs that we’ve held so dear. In other words, some of our own life’s constructions are built on flimsy or false foundations, and long-time traditionally-held beliefs that are inconsistent or contrary to the natural development of the brain — elements of which were around long before we cultivated any sort of belief systems. All brains are a standard piece of equipment, and nobody is born with a stamp or icon on their brain designating their culture or parents’ and ancestors’ belief systems.  The other related reconciliation taking place here is that the initial wiring & firing construction is constructed by an outside contractor, i.e., our parents (and/or ancestors + other influential elements), and this initial construction is done without our own willful efforts, without our consent, and without our ability to make choices and decisions while we are in the tender stages of infancy — when this initial emotional construction is laid.

The (deliberate or inadvertent) flaws built into the early emotional foundation – or the early construction of a wiring & firing Neuro-net system, is much the same as any electrical system that might have been poorly constructed, protected and connected.  This can cause both unrequited and irreversible damage – to any kind of electrical/electromagnetic system – and this is WHY the Universe itself rigorously guards its one and only way to produce electromagnetism.  An ideally wiring-firing system of human brainy fiber-optics, is the best protection against a faulty electromagnetic system that would grate with the actual mechanics of free & open information pathways. In human brain terms – this is the process of cognition itself, cognition is the power produced by our little electromagnetic brainy units, and cognition itself reciprocates, or returns the favor of, keeping the electro-magnetic system powered up. When this relationship runs into blocks, challenges, poor wiring & firing, short-cuts, or any other attempts to short-circuit its power, then the exchanging process and relationship between cognition and brain becomes subject to the danger of cognitive impairments, which in turn will impair the biological material of the brain itself.

So, now to get back from our diversion. Now that we understand the electromagnetic power of the human brain and its symbiotic, and concrete, relationship with cognition, we can now have a basic understanding about what the power of thought really is.  First an idea, or hypothesis or computed thought must be devised, or intuited, before any idea can be tested for its proof and applications. Then of course, throughout the process — from igniting an idea to creating undeniable evidence — there is a reasoning element that we either apply, or in some cases, that just naturally unfolds, telling us a story that might be different from what we originally intended to know.  Typically, we may define this as a good mistake and welcome it as serendipitous — however, “mistakes” should really be redefined as hidden knowledge and information that we were previously unable to notice, because that’s exactly what it is.  We only define it as a “mistake” because we missed including, observing or reasoning it into the precognitive planning, hypothesis or reasoning stage of our choices, decisions, and experiments. When we stick to authentically natural elements that are part of reasoning a process – whether it is a scientific procedure or a thought-feeling procedure – then genuine information will unfold and present itself.  In other words, if we insist on throwing in superficial elements in either of these procedures, we must be WILLING to throw them out at the end of the procedure when it’s clear that it fails to combine or connect to the whole outcome.  If you should ever feel inclined to investigate Einstein’s story, and his struggle with establishing e=mc2, you will find these precise steps to be evident.

Life and learning, like time&space, are inseparable entities.  Learning should be fun, so life should be fun.  “Work” and “Recreation” should be identical features of human activity and progress, just as there is zero difference between “life” and “learning”.  People should never have to suffer from the stresses of work, particularly because the contradictory relationship, stemming from our separate definitions for “work” and “recreation”, is only consistent with a poorly-powered electro-magnetic brainy system, processing knowledge and information, in ways that clearly represent damage to the human brain’s real capacity to function at a much higher and more empowered system.

But our brainy electro-magnetic neuro-nets that connect information — and is capable of connectivity processes that we still only imagine, but are actually capable of performing, naturally — are only one part of the whole system of humans interconnecting together and forming the electromagnetic system of telepathic/wireless communication.  That is to say that the intuitive intelligence wireless system that we are all capable of plugging into is significant for humans’ most effective and necessary tool for both surviving and thriving.  This means that we ought to be able to have access to contacting any other human who may be able to share significant information with any other person, if it will help and benefit us and one another, because that is what humans do best, and want to do best.   Every person’s contribution to knowledge and learning is significant in the progress of our whole species.

Technological wireless communication only exists because Natural wireless communication already exists — that is to say that we can only imitate, produce, or reproduce what the universe has already provided, especially with regards to all things invisible.

As foretold, promised and briefly mentioned, in this section, it is to be properly detailed, the cognitive traits that go awry in the elder years, most prominently, under the conditions of Alzheimer’s and Dementia.  The features that rigorously describe the impairments of Alzheimer’s and Dementia are:

Lack of TRUST, loss of TIME CONCEPTS, and askewed understanding about the BASIC properties, laws and mechanics of PHYSICS (and basic spatial reasoning), the misuse of LANGUAGE and coherent communication skills – altogether – resulting in and manifesting as memory loss. Most frightening of all, is that emotional ties are often also damaged, a direct effect of early foundational development that relied on the proper construction, and first layer of emotional-reasoning intelligence.

These EXACT traits are essential to fundamental learning and general knowledge and information processing.  Just as in performing a process of proving something , or doing a scientific experiment, these (aforementioned) features must be concisely established.  In other words, since they are the basis for all learning, and are all necessary as reasonably connected aspects of good electromagnetic units, then the memory-ability of them — memory relying on the mechanics of connectivity (which is the basic feature of intuition) is severely compromised. In other words, the ties that bind them – the memories – and the wireless system of information processing (intuition) all breaks down because the connectivity system was compromised in the first place.

Just as the universe has one way to produce electromagnetism, which must function and travel at the speed of light, whether it is visible or invisible, then there also must be ONE same basis of reason-ability to TRUST, to judge TIME&SPACE (laws of Physics), and LANGUAGE usage for knowledge purposes — if all these are to remain tied together, thereby supporting memory, which is merely a by-product of authentic Intuitive intelligence processing.

These features are firmly founded and built into the early FOUNDATION FOR LIFE, and only during that early foundation for life — wherein, they are coherently and intuitively tied together.  Anything done to fix that broken foundation after building it is always going to be a remedial and superficial measure.  The more loose and flimsy and unreasonable these connections are in the early stages of cognitive development, the more the pathology for Dementia will be possible.  And keep in mind (from VOL I, Part 1) that this pathology is more of an abstract pathology, then a purely biological one — rather, actually, it is an electromagnetic pathology.  When these elements are administered in early life, without a matching or parallel consistency for the brain’s early requirements, for genuine lifetime learning, then it all eventually falls apart unless, the actual mechanics of intuitive intelligence are minimally maintained throughout the course of lifetime learning; thinking, feeling, reasoning, creating, building significant emotional bonds that are capable of exchanging wireless contact without prosthetics (such as cell phones and internet), ALL OF THESE, fundamentally define cognitive processing.  The proximal or complete absence or abandonment of any of these skills can be particularly significant to any one person, depending on what his or her most prominent abilities actually are.  If these unique abilities have never been nurtured or addressed, while the natural environment actually provides the means and information for nurturing those skills, then this would define the invisible pathology that would generated brain degeneration.

If there’s a cure for Alzheimer’s, then it lies entirely in its prevention.  If it should happen that a Pharmaceutical company devises a remedy for reversing or even eliminating the clogging plaques and tangles in the brain’s neuro-net information pathways, thereby restoring some or even all of the freedom of knowledge and memory processing, this would be grandly welcomed, particularly if there are few to zero side effects.  But anticipating the possibilities of Dementia and memory loss without worry, just because there is a magical pill on the market, does little to change the rampant spread of disadvantages associated with cognitive impairments.  Certainly, it does nothing to annihilate such a debilitating disease — and that’s without even mentioning the economic and societal costs on a National scale.

But the most difficult challenge of all has to do with the emotional strains and quality of life that are so severely imposed on immediate family members — who are usually younger and have had nothing to do with influencing the early emotional-building of the person suffering from the Dementia, but who now must carry the burden of caring for a cognitive disease.  This has yet to still reveal the sacrifices that are now being made on today’s children who will receive less quality care for their own cognitive development – as families care for elders even more than they may be caring for their own children – thus, continuously perpetuating an evermore devastating cycle generating the degenerative disease of cognitive processing.

Everything starts at point zero, what goes into, or fails to go into early cognitive development, comes out in the final years of cognitive processing — because the ingredients for comprehensive cognitive processing are built into the Early Foundation for Everything.  Cognition is a mathematical function, Everything is Math, and the Math never lies.

The only sure cure for understanding that Alzheimer’s & Dementia is ultimately eradicated, is to understand that ultimately, this disease, at its core, is a cognitive issue, and that it is overall, and most dominatingly, a cognitive problem.

Einstein declared that “Intuition is Everything” and what that really means is that Intuition is the most rigorous math of all.  If we choose just one trait of our potential to be our guiding light for life learning – it should be the fiber-optic version of invisible light; electro-magnetic information, which is the same as the impervious mechanics of intuition.  This would be the best judgment we could make and gain, because intuition is applicable to every behavior skill and every knowledge ability, especially language — which we use for everything and which is intuitively learned in the early foundational stage of life.

CONCLUSION for Part 3, VOL I  ~

The “Cognitive Reserve” describe by Dr. Bennett (as told of in Part 1, VOL I), ought to be properly defined as “Intuitive Intelligence”, or at least intuitive-cognitive-intelligence-reserve — or the mechanisms that fortify and maintain the best information connections possible, making lifetime learning a process that is authentically built upon.  This would be best defined, classified and described as feeling or intuiting the capability of TRUST, as children do, therein, keeping our ability to learn as children learn throughout our lifetimes.  What that really means is that the way we learned during the foundational years is the system we will spend the rest of our lives learning by — the upgrade for learning better and more multi-dimensionally means that the program for higher learning must be coded into the early stages of life, because it is that coded foundation that determines how we will learn for a lifetime.  The only possibility for transposing and refining that foundational platform is to deliberately and firmly apply the mechanics of intuitive intelligence processing. In this way, TRUST becomes a process that is individually owned by one’s own CRITICAL THINKING skills; the ability to question, the ability to judge, and knowing the sequential connections between instant gratification and delayed gratification (relative to TIME-SPACE knowledge elements).  “Cognitive Reserve” goes back, way back to the building of cognition during the foundation for everything.  The features of Dementia are best told by the one simple description of an ‘inability to do the math’ and intuitively connect the basic processes of information needed for any notion, intent or event.

Every matter of the human condition from Adversity and Alzheimer’s to Innovation and Inquiry, all require and thrive on the need for improvement.  To do that, we need to massively improve on our brain’s greatest and highest potentials, because we all use our brains for everything.  Using our brain with the same 2.0 version of limited knowledge attributes will never do the trick of transforming us.  We need to upgrade to a 10.0 version.  To do that we need to understand the fundamentals — and this natural assumption should never have to be reiterated so much, but when it comes to cognitive processing, it seems to be so underestimated for its importance.  In any process, it is the only option, it’s either that, or reverse engineering, which still leads to the fundamentals of a process, either way, there will never be any escaping the math of everything, which means that everything begins at point zero.   Until next time, and next chapter —

THE COGNITIVE TIMES – Cracking the Cognitive Code of Alzheimer’s, Volume I, Part 2

How do we know if we are getting something right or wrong – in particular, how do we know if we are getting something all wrong, especially in the fight against Dementia and human brain development in general ???

Well, because if we were getting it mostly right, then we’d be mostly defeating it. When a doctor in London discovered that Cholera was spread through bad drinking water, rather than being airborne, then it was defeated. When another doctor realized that infant mortality rates were due to medical students going from autopsy to the maternity ward without washing their hands, he was severely ostracized by his medical peers.  Eventually, he was proven right and infant mortality rates dropped dramatically, as the simple concept of hygiene was introduced into standard medical practices.

The day should come – sooner than later – when we apply the same deductive reasoning skills to everything, in much the same ways that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle did (vicariously through Sherlock Holmes) and understand that cognitive degeneration (aka, “Dementia”) will be logically observed as a process, pointing to, and at least providing partial proof that the FUNDAMENTALS of cognitive development were improperly or inefficiently installed.  In addition to applying the logic of Sherlock’s deductive reasoning skills, which means collecting ALL of the variables and facts, we ought to also employ the principles of e=mc2 to solve the mystery about Alzheimer’s, in the same way that the “theory of relativity” solved the major mysteries of the foremost forces of the universe. And more importantly, contrary to popular belief systems, we humans have never been exempt from the laws and forces of the universe.

This chapter entry examines how, how much, and exactly what we are getting right and wrong in the pursuit to fight the varying forms of Dementia. The official community believes we are right on the heels of gaining insight into the mystery of Alzheimer’s and Dementia – or rather they may actually believe they, and we along with them – are on the right heels of uncovering this mystery. There are countless organizations and research teams around the world doing their part, effectually, competing to decode this little beast that is causing monstrous conditions, robbing the quality of people’s lives and their relationships.

Pharmaceuticals of one type or another seem to be taking the lead for fighting , or at least halting  Dementia.  The more ambitious teams are certainly looking for a way to prevent it, or reversing the major memory loss ailments that define the conditions of Dementia.  None of the Pharmaceuticals thus far are showing any promise,  There was one that worked successfully on mice, while it failed in humans. (There’s a reason for that which will be discussed later),  For all we know there might be some neuro-technology works in progress, but any real official word on that front is basically silent or generally unknown, for now.

Typically, credible resources about any topic, and especially one as sensitive as Dementia, will be full of formal studies and references about one piece of research or another, until the resource itself becomes a mutual admirations text of scholars, and scientists “in the field” of their expertise — leaving common folk befuddled as to whose research is most valid, and what measures would be most advantageous to pursue. But there are a few efforts worth pointing out for officiality’s sake.  However, we will omit names and credentials, because anyone can look those up with the right search engine words, and this resource is to help people get to the heart of the matter.

So let’s make some unofficial and informal references to the leading contenders in this fight against Alzheimer’s.  Firstly, there’s the award-winning team of Neuroscientists who’ve uncovered the bio-chemical compositions of “tau” going off the reservation of its proper position and purpose, and subsequently forming “plaques” and “tangles” in the brain, thereby, clogging neuro-net activity (within the synapses) and thus imposing on memory, and generally debilitating “normal” cognitive processing skills.

Then there’s the genetic researchers. This area has revealed a particular gene know as APoE, (which deductive reasoning would tell us, must be operating as a mutation. Mutations can be good or bad, in the case and cause for supporting good cognitive processing, APoE is a bad mutation). This gene is generally evident or directly connected to the development of Dementia, but is also linked to wider sets of conditions and circumstances linked to Dementia, including the effects and parameters of diet, exercise, cholesterol, insulin/energy effects on brain, stress, and exercise.

But this APoE gene is hardly a sure thing in the development of Dementia. [This will also be discussed further]  There is apparently another particular gene that is more directly and rigorously distinctive, but relative to those that develop “early onset of Dementia”.  This specific set of cases is far less escapable( than the elusive APoE gene), and is suspected to be carried and genetically passed on within familial lines — but then again, so are the traditions of “Emotional Cognition”, which can affect epigenetic switches that turn genes on or off.  [This will also be discussed further on in another entry]

Moving on – –  there was a ten-year study done in Finland that showed that those with more cynical and narcissistic mindsets and impulses, tended to experience a compounding effect of the symptoms of Dementia as time went on.  This is more revealing than most would realize, because these features are consistent with close-mindedness, and the brain is naturally designed for open-mindedness, making lifetime learning a realistic process (especially considering the brain’s hard-wired postulates of “compassion” and “optimism” as the most vital factors for full human cognitive-brain potential). [These definitions will also be further detailed as we progress in this mini-series]

Alas, the more unrecognized but definitely leading contender with the official arena in the fight against Alzheimer’s is a Neuroscientist and his team at Rush University, investigating the features of what they’ve termed as “cognitive reserve”.  If you’re banking on  understanding the pathology of Alzheimer’s and Dementia, this is the team to place your bets with.  This team would e the only one on a truthful and honest trajectory for uncovering the pathology toward Dementia.  Essentially, what they have observed is the fickle nature of the APoE gene. What they have discovered is that some individuals possess the ApoE gene, and may also show a pathology of plaques and tangle, but have escaped suffering memory loss or cognitive impairment.  on the other hand, there are individual who may have neither the APoE gene, nor excessive plaques and tangle, yet have still developed and exhibited the degenerative traits of Dementia, and hence, memory loss as well as various other cognitive impairments.

The interesting factor in the studies conducted by the researchers at RUSH is that they’ve cast a net over other significant factors contributing to “cognitive reserve”.  They have looked into, and compared, educational backgrounds and social structures/interactions/tendencies of several of these individuals.  While similar educational backgrounds can essentially be ruled out — it is the social connections that shine more of a light on their “cognitive reserve”.  This is an indisputable feature, particularly, because the human brain is an emotional-cognitive developed organ processing knowledge and information and fully dependent upon relationships, which in turn depend on communication and language (both requisite parts of cognitive development) – – and altogether, are intrinsically, inextricably and directly tied to the human brain’s ultimate capabilities.  That is to say that all human cognitive processing, as already mentioned, are built on the brain’s hard-wired elements of Compassion and Optimism, and EVERYTHING we do, think, feel, learn and create are designed to operate on the reasoning logic of these two naturally hard-wired skills.

This seemingly abstract and perhaps elusive concept of “cognitive reserve” can hardly be examined under a microscope, so naturally it is going to be subject to lots of scrutiny in the science community. But while we’re on the topic, deductive reasoning is more rigorous and reliable than pure scientific proof or evidence, after all, things are only scientifically proven because they are true.  And, let’s of course keep in mind that Einstein himself knew this to be true otherwise he would have waited around for scientific evidence to confirm what he surmised about light and gravity. In line with true innovative thinking, the idea came first and the proof only proved the deductive reasoning process.  Remember, whatever Neuroscientists say, Dementia in all of its varieties is fundamentally a cognitive-degenerative issue, and therefore its constitution and constructs must be based on the general mechanisms of genuine cognitive processing.

The RUSH University researcher believe that this “cognitive reserve” is most likely rooted in some earlier stages of life’s cognitive processing abilities.  Their intention is to investigate “how far back” they need to look to identify where and when this “cognitive reserve” is established and secured.  Keep in mind that cognition is a mathematical function and therefore deductive reasoning is fully applicable to demystifying the degenerative-cognitive processes of Dementia. Cognition is indeed a math process, but so is EVERYTHING,, So, if they were doing the math in order to find out “how far back” they need to go, then the logical math reasoning process would say, let’s go all the way back to the beginning, more specifically at point zero.

Why they have missed this calculation is somewhat incomprehensible, but this is where this series steps in….

We’ve all heard it exclaimed that the elderly demonstrate a sort of second childhood stage of life.  It is undoubtedly a quaint and empathetic way of describing the naïve innocence capturing the senior years of life.  There is definitely an attitude of carefree-ness and even a partially liberated removal from a lifetime of expectations and protocols that were imposed upon them for a whole lifetime — very  much reflecting  the way children behave in their everyday exploration of life.

However, for the most part, this second childhood is more un-childlike than it is childlike.  The reason for this assumption? Simple!  Childhood is predominantly hallmarked by the remarkable way in which children learn and absorb new knowledge and information with positively alarming rates. Our foremost predilection as humans is to learn.  Aside from the fact that (in many western societies) we give the elderly far more license and sympathy to act like children than we allow children to act like children, the elderly fail to show any signs of learning at the rate that young children learn.

Moreover, the majority of the ways we learn for a whole lifetime, i.e., are capable of applying the traits of brain plasticity, these flexible cognitive processes are established during the early foundational stages of cognitive development — indeed they are established during AND ONLY DURING the 3 – 5 year old stage of intuitive-cognitive brain development.

Unbeknownst to these well-intended researchers is that the “cognitive reserve” that they have rightfully uncovered or stumbled upon, is really the impervious attributes and aptitudes of intuitive intelligence capabilities defining the true hallmark of human “integration”. When “emotional cognition” and “intellectual cognition” and “willful/volitional cognition” are on the same page and operating by the same cognitive principles, then the intuitive development of deductive reasoning becomes the most powerful tool for lifetime learning (and giving rise to the more advanced paradigm shift concept of “Quantitative Reasoning” and “Computational Thinking”, relative to both humans and computers).

Again, as previously mentioned (in Part 1of Vol I) , the precise cognitive impairment skills that go awry in the senior years are the exact fundamental cognitive development skills that are imprecisely developed during that famous “foundation for EVERYTHING” stage of life — and this skills set, which we should all possess, regardless of our particularly individual talents and abilities, literally ties together the early stages of cognitive development with the latter life stages of cognitive applications.  There can never be any de-centralizing these features or disconnecting them as though one has nothing to do with the other – – the early stages ARE the foundations for everything in life.  And that is why there are certain elements and milestones that are requisite and relative to ALL young children during the early stages of cognitive development.

The ultimate outcome of the intuitive-cognitive process — that certain “cognitive reserve” as the central exploratory focus of the RUSH team –can only be fully uncovered by having a genuine comprehensive look into the “preschool brain”.  unless children learn in pure cognitively correct contexts, then intuitive-cognitive capacities are going to break down somewhere, somehow, sometime.  But even if a minimum flow of the basic elements for critical reasoning, across the dimensions of every fundamental cognitive function are established, then this could easily guard against the debilitating traits of Dementia (causing a lack of deductive reasoning even with our most celebrated skills — but more significantly, deductive reasoning skills that would have been infused into our emotional cognition during the first three years of development).

But this is more than most folks can bare to delve into and understand, even for some of the most advanced cognitive neuro-science researchers in the world.  So let’s talk about something that most people do understand – WAR, more specifically, let’s look at World War II. And by the way, of all the things to study in school so intensely – war? – seriously? War is totally inconsistent with genuine brain potential, yet, most schools offer zero courses in the ways that the human brain authentically learns and develops – is that absolutely moronic or what?

This is the end of Part 2, Vol I – – Part 3 of Vol I will return