Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works

["John Clement" <clement@hal-pc.org>]

Is there anything to be learned from any science writer's accounts?  One
really does not have time to trace down all of the references, and read all
of the first hand accounts.  Actually textbooks are mainly hearsay and many
of the authors never read the first hand accounts, but merely took
information they found in other sources and repeated it in texts.  This is
one reason why there are many common misconceptions repeated in texts, and
this has been detailed in some Physics Teacher articles.

The article is compelling and challenges the conventional view of memory
which was held before around 2000.  The report does point out the
experiments and evidence which can be looked up, so it goes beyond mere
presenting the new model for memory.  One can learn from popular articles,
just as one can learn from a lecturer.  Most teachers are presenting hearsay
and have actually never looked at any first hand accounts of what they are
teaching.  Actually most teachers have not even seen experiments which
confirm most of the things they are saying.  So one must be careful and look
around to see if the article is legitimate.  In the case of this article you
can trace down the individuals and when doing this you find that they are
researchers in the field.  Also the evidence on these researchers web sites
corroborate some of the things in the article.  I did this.

Now if you do not wish to believe what it is saying, that is your
prerogative.  But if you read it, and have evidence that what it is saying
is false, it would be nice to let us all know.  Just being dismissive of a
particular unknown science writer is not an argument against the article.  I
would also like to point out I have heard privately from someone who is
working with one of the scientists mentioned, and did not get any negative
feedback about the accuracy of the article.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

> But, is there anything to be learned from a journalist's presentation of
> someone else's work.  This is striclly hearsay testimony - someones's
> unverifiable opinion about what someone, purportedly a neurologist wrote.
> The PER community bases its opinion of current scientific developments on
> journalistic rumor?
>  			Regards,
>  				Jack