Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!sdcc6!koko!pluto From: pluto@koko.ucsd.edu (Mark Plutowski) Newsgroups: bionet.neuroscience Subject: Re: Current flow in neurons (was Re: Auditory Impulse Travel and Distance) Message-ID: Date: 25 Jun 91 01:05:56 GMT References: <9106171949.AA20716@genbank.bio.net> <1991Jun18.033141.11511@agate.berkeley.edu> <13584@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> Sender: news@sdcc6.ucsd.edu Distribution: bionet Lines: 17 bjones@uhunix1.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Bradley R. Jones) writes: >While correct in a general sense, this description is not technically >accurate. Passive electrical conduction in neurons does not occur at >the diffusion rate of the ions in the cell. Electrical conduction in >neurons occurs just as in wires: at the speed of light. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Not to pick nits, as I get the point you are making, but is the portion marked with "^^^" approximately true in practice? Even in wires, since current occurs by movement of charge associated with massive particles, (for example, as carried by electrons,) it will be very fast, and, may be taken to be close to the speed of light in vacuum, but will not equal it due to the mass on the charge carrying particles. My question is, is the electrical conduction speed in neurons fast enough that assuming it to be close to the speed of light causes negligible error in the analysis?