Scientists say nerves use sound, not electricity

[Asguard]

Firstly I admit I haven't read this whole thread so if someone else has said this I apologize.

The initial post is incorrect in that conventional wisdom is its electrical impulses, that's a layman's explination. There is a change in polarity in cells but this isn't caused by a flow of electricity, its caused by the movement of ions from the outside to the inside of the intervidual cell. In nerves the important ions are sodium (Na+) and calcium (Ca++). In heart cells potassium and chloride.

Now back to the initial post, whoever wrote this needs to explain how, if sound rather than the flow of ions is responsible, then why calcium channel blockers effect the flow of impulses.

 

[billvon]

This is a silly article.

Biologists do not claim that neural impulses propagate by means of electricity. They propagate by means of ion depolarization (along the nerve itself) and via release of neurotransmitters (at synapses.) That can be _detected_ via electrical probes, since depolarization results in a potential change across the cell membrane. But if the authors of this article really think that nerves transmit electrical impulses like they are copper wires or something, then they don't even understand the system they are proposing alternate explanations for.

 

[Asguard]

This is a silly article.

Biologists do not claim that neural impulses propagate by means of electricity. They propagate by means of ion depolarization (along the nerve itself) and via release of neurotransmitters (at synapses.) That can be _detected_ via electrical probes, since depolarization results in a potential change across the cell membrane. But if the authors of this article really think that nerves transmit electrical impulses like they are copper wires or something, then they don't even understand the system they are proposing alternate explanations for.

I belive that's what I sad

 

[Billy T]

I belive that's what I sad

and I too, even with more detail in post 19 (just before your post 21 - you did not go back much at all)

I was under the impression that nerve transmissions are 99% chemical reactions and 1% electrical transmissions?...

No. There are zero "chemical reactions," no chemistry at all as that is normally defined. - A transfer of at least one electron, totally (ionic binding compound like NaCl formed chemically from neutral Na and Cl atoms) or the sharing of electrons (co-valent bonding as when two H atoms join with another to form a hydrogen molecule). Nor is there even 1% electrical transmission as that is normally defined (free electrons flowing as the current)

The nerves have a mechanism that can rapidly move Na+ ions from the interior to the exterior, commonly called the "Sodium Pump" to restore the -70mV "resting potential.* The sodium pump is resisted by the very electric field it is creating and ceases to pump Na+ to the out side when the internal voltage (wrt to the out side) is -70mv. The firing of a nerve is as Pete (or I in more detail, at least for the myelinated nerves) described it, in post 19 (and Pete in post 13)

Your concepts are 100% wrong. All of the ions, which cross the axon wall to make the nerve fire retain their state of charge. - There is no transfer, even partial, of any electron i.e. no chemistry. Specifically the Na+ ions rushing into the interior as that section of the axon depolarizes (ceases to be -70mV) are still Na+ ions when inside the cell. There are no free electrons in the process of depolarization - all done by ionic flow. I.e. no electrical conduction or "transmission."

------------
* In some myelinated nerves that resting potential can be restored in 1ms!