Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T15:46:35.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Hodgkin-Huxley Equations and the Concrete Model: Comments on Craver, Schaffner, and Weber

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Jim Bogen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I claim that the Hodgkin-Huxley (HH) current equations owe a great deal of their importance to their role in bringing results from experiments on squid giant action preparations to bear on the study of the action potential in other neurons in other in vitro and in vivo environments. I consider ideas from Weber and Craver about the role of Coulomb's and other fundamental equations in explaining the action potential and in HH's development of their equations. Also, I offer an embellishment to Schaffner's emergent unifier conception of the HH model.

Type
Where Neuroscience Meets Physics: Laws, Explanation, and the Hodgkin-Huxley Model of the Action Potential
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 75 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2006 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers. Edited by Cristina Bicchieri and Jason Alexander , December 2008 , pp. 1034 - 1046
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

Thanks to Carl Craver, Ken Schaffner, Marcel Weber, and audience members who joined the discussion at our session.

References

Bogen, J. (2004), “Analyzing Causality: The Opposite of Counterfactual is Factual”, Analyzing Causality: The Opposite of Counterfactual is Factual 18 (1): 3–26..Google Scholar
Bogen, J. (2005), “Regularities and Causality: Generalizations and Causal Explanations”, Regularities and Causality: Generalizations and Causal Explanations 36:397–420.Google ScholarPubMed
Cartwright, N. (1983), How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craver, C. F. (2007), Explaining the Brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutkin, B., and Ermentrout, G. B. (2006), “Spikes Too Kinky for the Cortex?”, Spikes Too Kinky for the Cortex? 440:999–1000.Google ScholarPubMed
Hille, B. (2001), Ion Channels of Excitable Membranes. 3rd ed. Sunderland: Sinauer.Google Scholar
Hodgkin, A. L., and Huxley, A. F. (1952a), “Currents Carried by the Sodium and Potassium Ions through the Membrane of the Giant Axon of Loligo”, Currents Carried by the Sodium and Potassium Ions through the Membrane of the Giant Axon of Loligo 116:449–472.Google Scholar
Hodgkin, A. L., and Huxley, A. F. (1952b), “The Components of Membrane Conductance in the Giant Axon of Loligo”, The Components of Membrane Conductance in the Giant Axon of Loligo 116:473–496.Google Scholar
Hodgkin, A. L., and Huxley, A. F. (1952c), “A Quantitative Description of Membrane Current and Its Application to Conduction and Excitation in Nerve”, A Quantitative Description of Membrane Current and Its Application to Conduction and Excitation in Nerve 127:500–544.Google Scholar
Jiiang, Y., Lee, A., Chen, J., Ruta, V., Cadene, M., Chait, B. T., and MacKinnon, R. (2003a), “X-Ray Structure of a Voltage-Dependent K+”, X-Ray Structure of a Voltage-Dependent K+ 423:33–41.Google Scholar
Jiiang, Y., Ruta, V., Chen, J., Lee, A., and MacKinnon, R. (2003b), “The Principle of Gating Movement in a Voltage-Dependent K+ Channel”, The Principle of Gating Movement in a Voltage-Dependent K+ Channel 423:42–48.Google Scholar
Machamer, P., Darden, L., and Craver, C. (2000), “Thinking about Mechanisms”, Thinking about Mechanisms 67:1–25.Google Scholar
Naundorf, B., Wolf, F., and Volgushev, M. (2006), “Unique Features of Action Potential Initiation in Cortical Neurons”, Unique Features of Action Potential Initiation in Cortical Neurons 440:1060–1063.Google ScholarPubMed
Sterrett, S. (2002), “Physical Models and Fundamental Laws: Using One Piece of the World to Tell about Another”, Physical Models and Fundamental Laws: Using One Piece of the World to Tell about Another 3 (5): 51–66..Google Scholar
Weber, M. (2005a), “Indeterminism in Neurobiology”, Indeterminism in Neurobiology 72 (5): 663–674..Google Scholar
Weber, M. (2005b), Philosophy of Experimental Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. C. (2000), “Emergence as Non-aggregativity and the Biases of Reductionisms”, Emergence as Non-aggregativity and the Biases of Reductionisms 5:269–297.Google Scholar