Content uploaded by Ken Ware
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ken Ware on Jun 25, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
June 24-26, 2019 I Paris, France
‘Hypothesizing the Central Nervous Systems Genius to Trigger and Self-
organize to Higher States of Complexity as Epitomized in the Case of Noah
Wall, the Boy Born With Only 2% of His Brain’
Ken Ware, NeuroPhysics Therapy Institute, Gold Coast, Australia
https://www.neurophysicstherapy.global/
3rd Edition of International Conference on
Neurology and Brain Disorders
1
‘Hypothesizing the Central Nervous Systems Genius to Trigger and Self-organize to Higher States of
Complexity as Epitomized in the Case of Noah Wall the Boy Born With Only 2% of His Brain’
Author presenter; Ken Ware, NeuroPhysics Therapy Institute, Gold Coast, Australia
https://www.neurophysicstherapy.global/
Noah was born with an estimated 2% of his brain as the result of a cephalic disorder, with the remainder
of his cranial cavity being filled with cerebrospinal fluid. This signifies an extreme case of
Hydranencephaly. Hydranencephaly is a condition that affects under 1 in 10,000 births worldwide. Infants
born with Hydranencephaly may appear quite normal at first but commonly begin to display significant
irritable symptoms after a few weeks which develop into a host of physical and intellectual impairments.
The prognosis for children with hydranencephaly is generally quite poor, however many children live for
several years into adulthood.
Noah’s brain however redeveloped to an estimated 80% within 3 years, defying all medical predictions
for his future. Now at 6 years of age, Noah’s psychophysical development continues to systematically
evolve and he has become an interactive international media personality. Yet the case of Noah Wall
challenges us in many ways as there are many questions that beg to be answered scientifically. Well in
advance of the required expression of vital regions of the brain historically deemed to be absolutely
necessary for sensory motor processing, expression of needs, emotions, associative memory, verbal and
non-verbal communication, Noah was able to physically and emotionally respond to environmental cues
with the extreme sensory motor deficits that our present scientific wisdom predicted would have left him
severely mentally and physically disabled.
While we ponder possible answers to explain such extreme compensatory sensory motor phenomena,
we must also determine what inspired Noah’s brain to grow. In this presentation, I will firstly share what
my experiences were in assessing and observing Noah and the rapid transitions which took place under
controlled therapeutic conditions. I will then provide a hypothesis referring to a variety of scientific
disciplines and theories attempting to reverse engineer and express the unprecedented growth of Noah’s
brain from a mere 2% to 80% in 3 years, and why he could respond to his environment so well despite the
absence of developed brain regions.
Key Words; Complex Adaptive Systems, Cellular Automata, Chaos, Environment, Fractal Physiology, Self-
organization, Neural Nets, NeuroPhysics Therapy, Perception.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human-body/baby-born-without-a-brain-learns-to-count-and-surf/news-
story/598c265d3ba3e3728e705c7033352293?fbclid=IwAR1I_1iCmIHbRIbvAV7CZih-5WYlX6gm2wOiYT1dEgG2I1fmFXi-FEkQUoU
2
How I came to meet the incredible Noah Wall and his family
At this conference last year, I was discussing the exploitation of the natural chaotic dynamics of the human
central nervous system to significantly optimize restorations of functions below the lesioned spinal cord
(Video demonstration) and in the treatment of other complex neurological diseases and disorders at the
NeuroPhysics Therapy (NPT) Institute in Australia. In particular, I was highlighting the incredible outcomes
for one particular well known patient from the UK, ‘Martin Hibbert’. Martin was a victim of the
Manchester bombing and incredibly survived having 22 bolts pass through his body, one of which severed
his spinal cord at T 10, rendering him a complete paraplegic. However, despite the prognosis for Martin
and the state he presented on day 1 at the NPT institute, within just 6 sessions over a 2 week period,
Martin was able to voluntarily move both legs, self-support from the waist up, stand with minimal knee
support and was able to peddle a stationary bike, as highlighted in the feature story in the Daily Mirror
below.
Noah’s mother ‘Shelly’ had read this article, along with a corresponding story on Good Morning Britain
and decided to contact the NeuroPhysics Therapy Institute to seek therapy for Noah to enhance his
walking capabilities. We had to inform her that we were not able to work with children as young as Noah,
as the equipment we use during therapy is far too big for children to use and the therapy requires a lot of
cognitive processing and a sustained ability to remain relaxed and composed while imposing a stressor on
one’s system. However, she insisted that we at least assess Noah and provide them with some ideas on
activities that they could do with him as he was growing up, to speed things along. I agreed to this and as
a result we were privileged to meet this incredibly devoted family who surrounds Noah with love, care
and incentive to work hard at making all the improvements he can every day. I became highly fascinated
by the fact that Noah had regrown his brain post birth and thought this was something I would like to
share and discuss with this audience and hopefully inspire more thought into how this phenomena
occurred, along with processing how Noah was able to do so many tasks in the absence of the standard
models requirement for relative brain regions to be developed. However, it was not until I actually met
Noah and the family that it really sank in, as to how incredible this story really is.
3
Defying the Odds:
Acknowledgement: For any contribution to the information below identified as content from the following publication: ‘The Boy
Who Grew a New Brain: Understanding this Miracle from a Neuro-Quantum Perspective’; NeuroQuantology | July 2018 |
Volume 16 | Issue 7 | Page 39-48 | doi: 10.14704/nq.2018.16.7.1687; Pereira C., J. Shashi Kiran Reddy 1, Contzen Pereira 2.
And from several private discussions and physical interactions with Noah and his parents Michelle and Rob Wall.
Noah’s parents Shelly and Rob Wall, knew well in advance of Shelly giving birth to Noah that he was going
to be born with only a small percentage of his brain (a disorder known as Hydranencephaly) and with a
Spina Bifida that would need closing off as soon as possible post birth. They were given no hope that Noah
would survive post birth and that they should be prepared to accept this and arrange for his funeral. Scans
at various stages of pregnancy revealed the effects the cephalic disorder that caused the Hydranencephaly
was having on Noah’s brain and the resulting porencephalic cyst it left behind as a result, which was filled
with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Scans showed that initially there was a full brain, which later had reduced
to ¾ brain and then to ½ brain. The end result being that Noah was born with an estimated 2% of his brain
as observed in the left image above.
Knowing that Noah was going to be born with only a small percentage of his brain, the attending medical
staff at Noah’s birth were amazed when Noah’s responses at delivery were normal. It is however quite
common for infants born with severe Hydranencephaly to display normal behaviors at birth; such as
crying, sucking and normal limb movements and in some cases infants display no obvious symptoms at
birth and live for several months before obvious signs and symptoms begin to emerge, which can then
lead to a confirmed diagnosis of hydranencephaly. ‘In some cases severe hydrocephalus, or other cephalic
conditions are misdiagnosed’ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydranencephaly (contains many
references).
The initial behaviors that all newborns display are orchestrated from the brainstem. Newborns are
referred to as brainstem beings. Therefore, in the absence of any pre-birth scans for any concerning
reasons, there may be no way of knowing that there is a malformation of the infant’s brain for the first
few weeks of life, until obvious signs and symptoms such as restlessness and hypertonia begin to emerge,
which only then promotes investigations.
4
After several months, more traumatizing signs and symptoms such as seizures may emerge and the infant
may develop hydrocephalus, if this was not already present at birth. Intellectual deficits, impaired growth,
paralysis, sensory motor impairments such as blindness and deafness, poor thermoregulation, respiratory
problems and myoclonus (outbursts of rapid jerking of the limbs, neck and body) may also emerge over
time for a child born with hydranencephaly. However, there is apparently a lot of variability in signs and
symptoms from one hydranencephaly case to the next, even in cases where roughly the same degree of
Hydranencephaly exists across multiple infants. I.e. there are no linear effects relative to the degree of
hydranencephaly between one infant and the next. Symptoms and quality of life seem to vary
enormously. As stated earlier, some infants display no obvious symptoms at birth and live for several
months before more minor signs and symptoms begin to emerge.
If post birth there is a suspicion that the infant may have Hydranencephaly due the emergence of
signature symptoms, or there is prior knowledge that the infant has hydranencephaly pre-birth, an
accepted reliable method to assess the infants brain mass in these cases is by the shining a strong light
through the cranium, as seen in the image below.
Transillumination of a newborn's head!
This case is an example of a condition called Hydranencephaly, characterised by destruction of the cerebral
hemispheres which are transformed into a membranous sac containing cerebrospinal fluid and the
remnants of cortex and white matter. Transillumination is the shining of a light through a body area or
organ to check for abnormalities. The room lights are dimmed or turned off so that the area of the body
may be seen more easily. A bright light is then pointed at that area. This test may be done along with other
tests to diagnose hydrocephalus in newborns or infants. In general, trans illumination is not an accurate
enough test to rely on. Further tests, such as an x-ray, CT, or ultrasound, are needed to confirm the
diagnosis. Ref: https://medizzy.com/feed/796256
5
Image courtesy of thesun.co.uk
The existing medical paradigm suggests that an infant born with only 2% of a brain, would not survive long
term without artificial intervention, or at least without acute human life support and would be severally
disabled physically and mentally during the supported lifespan of the individual. For it is anticipated within
the existing paradigm, that there would be no future increases towards normal brain topology and that
at birth the infant basically has all the neurons it will ever have. Comparatively, at 3 months a normal
infant’s brain is fully developed, doubling in size by 12 months and by 36 months should be 80% of the
volume of the adult brain. Up until now it has been a standard observation that severely diminished brain
size at birth does not increase in topological percentage towards normal brain topology post birth.
Historically these standard observations and prognosis have held up and are supported by such cases
identified in the videos below, where these children were born with approximately 20% of their brains.
Typically, in these cases the topological percentages of normal brain topology did not alter and as
predicted the heads of these children are notably small and they are significantly physically and mentally
disabled and fully dependent. The existing paradigm also suggests that at least 80% of the full adult brain
and corresponding neural correlates are required for the individual to become fully conscious.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfh_syLeozs Boy Missing 80% of Brain Beats the Odds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5aUfoyb1yw The Hartley hooligans https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHzr0G-qZgo
Microcephaly
6
The 2 female children shown in the previous images on the left, are aged 9 and 4 and the boy shown on
the right at age 2, are all severely physically and mentally handicapped. They were all born with
approximately 20% of their brains. These are babies born with Microcephaly, however the question
remains; why was Noah’s brain able to compensate for a far greater brain mass lesion to produce normal
behaviors and regrow as well?
The scans of Noah’s brain showed that there was a brain stem and midbrain present at birth and it is
therefore feasible that he exhibited the normal behaviors he did at birth and post birth. However, when
Noah progressed on to maintain normal developmental behaviors, with the exception of the severely
impaired lower body functions affected by the Spina Bifida, the totally isolated and special case of Noah
Wall emerged.
A series of videos dating back from when Noah was a new born infant to present day, are testament to
Noah’s progressive development as a normal infant and in particular reveal his capability of performing
normal tasks and responding normally, both physically and emotionally to environmental cues in the
rightfully assumed absence of cortical tissue that gives rise to these cognitive abilities and functions.
‘If anyone of us were at a gathering of non academics and were asked; how was Noah able to funtion and
behave normally and emotionally express all that he was able to only having 2% of a brain; what would one
say in order to satisfy this audience? As we know there is a public expectation that as the experts we should
know’.
‘Hypothesizing the Central Nervous Systems Genius to Trigger and Self-organize to Higher States of
Complexity as Epitomized in the Case of Noah Wall the Boy Born With Only 2% of His Brain’
Caveat: Expanding upon the *accepted Ross, Ware, hypothesis to the extent required for Noah’s case is
totally unchartered waters and any hypothesis, or expansions of a hypothesis need to be verified through
experiments to become a proven theory. However, in a case as rare as this, we can only refer to existing
knowledge from a broad spectrum of the sciences, along with perhaps some computer modelling, or some
form of ‘computational equivalent’ of what occurred, as analogous to the actual phenomena. Therefore,
the caveat is; I am not suggesting in my references and or modelling examples in here that this is what
Noah’s brain did, I am simply pointing out the similarities there are, or there seems to be within the
7
references and or modelling examples to what Noah’s brain did and did allow for in the presence of
incredible lesion and possibly how this corresponds to other well-known theories and phenomena.
Hopefully this will provide the platform for a forum for future discussions and continuing development of
a more precise testable hypothesis relating to this phenomena through collaborations. With the case of
Noah Wall comes the evidence that biology in general is not as constrained or dependent upon structure
and function as we lean towards determining it is, but in fact, in the presence of incredible lesion to
structure and function, be quite able to impersonate normality. Several impact lesions and knockout lesion
studies performed with mice also verify this to some degree. * ‘Hypothesizing the body's genius to trigger and self-organize
its healing’; Ross, Ware, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2013.00334
The Present Day Rapidly Bifurcating Evolution of Creativity:
It seems it does not matter where you look, one cannot deny that there has been some significant
bifurcations in human creativity and performance over the last couple of decades. Even in the last few
years, children in particular are displaying increasingly incredible and profound talent and intelligence at
younger and younger ages. Advances in technology seems to be almost following Moore’s law also;
Moore's Law is a computing term which originated around 1970; the simplified version of this law states
that processor speeds, or overall processing power for computers will double every two years.
http://www.mooreslaw.org/ and to this, extreme computing is also right up there in terms of creativity and
performance. From design to installation, to exploring the many uses and innovative applications of
supercomputers. The advanced level that this is all operating at today, was totally unimaginable just 20
years ago.
8
Generally speaking, there is a competitive, creative and innovative vibe out there in the world, that has
powerful multipliers and multiple feed-forward/feed-back loops, such as social media and YouTube,
where people can immediately post, or have their latest achievements posted, which instantly inspires
others in their field to improve their performances. This is what enhances creativity and performance and
assists in creating the rapidly increasing bifurcations we are witnessing today. There seems to be no
restraints or critical breaking mechanisms to dampen this exponential growth.
But what about the creative and innovative vibe in the biological and psychological sciences to the
betterment of humankind? How would we rate the biological and psychological sciences in terms of a
competitive, creative and innovative vibe, compared to the creative and innovative vibe witnessed in
freeform society? What are the restraints and critical breaking mechanisms that are dampening
bifurcating growth? Some of the glaring traits of individuals and children who are instrumental in creating
such exponential growth in human creativity and performance over the last decade are that they are more
than prepared to work hard and expose themselves to ‘big challenges’ that have not been accomplished
before and they are not afraid to expose themselves to their peers and most importantly take big risks.
We are not seeing similar patterns of creativity and outcomes in the biological and psychological sciences
because it is often seen as a bad career move to take innovative risks, be prepared to expose oneself and
put oneself on the line in front of one’s peers by moving too far away from existing paradigms where it is
safe and popular. Reviewers of relative publications mostly tend to play safe and often dismiss new
information for the sake of comfort and keeping in step with fellow reviewers. Unless these attitudes
change dramatically, the biological and psychological sciences won’t be much further down the track in
solving some of the big health problems in another decades’ time – let alone keep abreast of the ever
growing range of challenges and performance pressures there are from the public, as rates of and
classifications of neurology and brain disorders escalate in the bigger, stronger, faster world that we live
in today. It is going to take bold exploration, ‘out of comfort zone’ risks and being prepared to fail at times
without fear of what peers think, if we are going to provide any kind an antidote to the apparent global
physical and mental health crisis.
The case of Noah Wall cannot be fully understood, let alone explained with the existing knowledge within
the biological and psychological sciences, and this perhaps relates to why there was no interest in making
a credible study of Noah’s brain, when it was obvious that this was an unprecedented case. Perhaps by
making a proper progressive study of Noah’s brain, a lot of new knowledge could have already been
established regarding the brain’s incredible potential to compensate for gross lesions, and to actually
regrow. Now we have to look back retrospectively and creatively consider what the most logical
explanations are, based on comparative observations in nature and biology.
So the big questions remain; ‘how or why was Noah able to respond normally from day one without a
fully developed cortex and cerebellum’? Even at age 3, the scans of Noah’s brain exhibited a significantly
underdeveloped occipital lobe, temporal lobe and cerebellum. Yet he was able to see, hear and display
normal behavioral motor responses and demonstrate normal emotional responses to emotionally
arousing environmental stimuli, with what appeared to be a significantly compromised thalamus and
limbic system, inclusive of course of the hippocampus, amygdala, hypothalamus, and pituitary gland along
with an incomplete and fragmented corpus callosum in reference to the images below.
The second obvious question is; what inspired Noahs brain to begin to ‘regrow’ again and to grow to
where it is today and why was this necessary if he was seemingly doing just as well without it?
9
Therefore the overarching objective in expanding upon the existing hypothesis is of course to address
these big questions and express analogously, in the absence of progressive developmental evidence, how
or why Noah could respond to his environment quite normally, in advance of the emergence of [and] the
development of regions of the brain deemed vital for normal functions and behaviors [and] what created
the sets of initial conditions for his brain to ‘regrow’ to the extent it has – given he was apparently
physically and mentally progressing quite well with only a very small part of his brain. As stated earlier, it
is envisaged from the onset that this is not going to be possible to explain away this phenomena, just
within the confines of neuroscience, neurology and biology, as there is no comparative data available
within these confines to do so; so far as my discoveries revealed when researching the literature at the
time of preparing this presentation. However, neuroscience, neurology and biology are slowly and
cautiously beginning to break tradition and embrace other areas of scientific inquiry that will be very
useful in this case, such as chaos theory and complexity, complex adaptive systems sciences, systems
sciences, network science and neurophysics. The biological and psychological sciences are subsequently
gaining an appreciation of these relative theories within these other areas of science to the full extent of
their value in generally assisting the combined sciences to develop a more encumbering theory of life -
top to bottom. This panoramic, combinational knowledge enables us to appreciate that anomalies can
randomly emerge in biology - for no apparent reason, and in fact these extra degrees of freedom (levels
10
of plasticity) are intrinsic to complex adaptive systems and are of necessary value to the survival of and
adaptability of living complex adaptive systems. These degrees of freedom assist a living system to
maintain adaptability, competitiveness, creativity and robustness. Unexpected anomalies even emerge in
simple predatory prey models for example. The level of affordance of Noah’s brain is certainly an
unexpected anomaly.
Nominating a few key theoretical domains to underpin the expansion of this hypothesis:
By definition, all living systems are ‘Complex Adaptive System’ (CAS)’s. They are also non-equilibrium,
nonlinear dynamical systems that have many degrees of freedom. Within this domain we can explore the
known characteristics of such systems in relationship to the events I am attempting to expand the
hypothesis around. Emergence is a term that basically describes the emergence of new and sometimes
unexpected, or unpredictable properties in very small or very large complex systems. Phase transitions in
context here, relates to when a perturbation to a complex adaptive system [or] when certain internal and
or external environmental influences combine to cause a reaction within the system that surpasses a
critical accumulation point or threshold, a notable shift in the systems behavioral dynamics is observed,
which can enable unpredicted, anomalous behaviors, or unpredictable characteristics to emerge. Self-
organization; under the right sets of initial conditions CAS’s will naturally self-organize to higher states of
complexity. Fractal physiology; similarity at every scale in structure and or function. Scale free systems;
scale free systems display self-similar structures and or dynamical behaviors that repeat themselves at
every scale throughout the system. The main premise of scale free systems, is that what occurs at one
scale occurs at all other scales of the system simultaneously. In other words, there is no privileged point
of observation that describes the scale free system and its behaviors as a whole. There are some examples
of scale free systems further below. The system is greater than the sum of its parts. Cellular Automata
modelling will be used to express emergent unexpected phenomena from some simple rules and
nonlinear, unpredictable patterns of development in relation to the regrowth of Noah’s brain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_adaptive_system
Addressing how, or why Noah could respond to his environment quite normally in advance of the
emergence of [and] the development of regions of the brain deemed vital for normal functions and
behaviors:
From when I very first became aware of Noah and from conversations I was having with his mother
‘Shelly’, who had told me of all the things Noah was able to do within the first 12 months of his life (against
all odds), my immediate thoughts were; here is one of the greatest arguments for fractal phenomena in
physiology and yet challenges at the same time. It seemed to me that the only explanation here was that
each neuron within the remaining 2% of Noah’s brain, at some fractal scale, must have been able to
exhibit all of the behaviors and do all of the jobs the brain has to do, and it was only through a series of
phase transitions over time, that neurons began to differentiate into specific and or combinational roles,
as his brain progressively regrew towards 80%.
An even more of a philosophical question was; what inspired (?) the neurons that were present from birth
to collaborate as a whole and in such a highly dimensional and highly compensatory manner, to extract
sensory information from the inner and outer environments and as an example, display adaptive,
emotionally appropriate and specific ‘goal orientated behaviors’ – such as gesturing for food and
attention, the recognition of and pointing to objects of discrete interest and personal satisfaction, making
decisions and choices, the recognition of faces, the ‘mirroring’ of the behaviors of others in order to learn
11
new skills, paying attention, listening and saying words and coordinated movements. Particular classes of
neurons found in various regions of the brain have been identified as playing major roles in an individual’s
ability to facilitate all of these perceptions, actions and cognition. Yet these regions were not present in
Noah’s brain, needless to say, nor were the specific classes of neurons when he was able to exhibit all of
the behaviors above by age 1.
In particular, mirror neurons, the fusiform gyrus, spindle (Von Economo) neurons are all found in
differing, or overlapping regions of the brain that certainly were not developed in Noah’s brain at a time
when he was able to perform and exhibit all of the behaviors and emotions mentioned above. For
example, the fusiform gyrus, which is associated to the recognition of faces in particular and other
recognitions that promote actions and emotions, is part of the temporal lobe and occipital lobe in
Brodmann area 37. Lesions to the fusiform gyrus have been linked to various neurological phenomena
such as synesthesia, dyslexia, and prosopagnosia. Mirror neurons, which are associated to the mirroring
of behaviors and emotions, have been found in the premotor cortex, the supplementary motor area,
the primary somatosensory cortex and the inferior parietal cortex. Whereas spindle neurons, which have
been associated to how we emotionally connect to the world and others, are found in two very restricted
regions in the brain; the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the fronto-insular cortex (FI) and they have
been found in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.
The scans of Noah’s brain revealed that even at age 3, Noah’s brain was in large extremely under
developed in these regions, or they simply were not present at all. So in an excessively compensatory
heave, the neurons that were present from the beginning, as well as new neurons being born and
participating in this developing society, all needed to be following some sets of deterministic rules in order
to propagate the level of self-organization required to systematically orchestrate all the perceptions,
behavioral responses, actions and cognition and to provide the initial impetus and sets of initial conditions
required to systematically regrow Noah’s brain. The society of neurons that were in existence in Noah’s
brain at birth, were most likely using some form of encoded, or abstract memory of an original full brain
and what it’s purpose was, as a kind of rudder or algorithm if you wish, to steer the process. Let’s now
delve into the similarities there are to this phenomena and to other phenomena observed in nature and
or biology.
To begin, I will restate and refer to a comment I made above; It seemed to me that the only explanation
here was that each neuron within the remaining 2% of Noah’s brain, at some fractal scale, must have been
12
able to exhibit all of the behaviors and do all of the jobs the brain has to do and it was only through a series
of phase transitions over time that neurons began to differentiate into specific and or combinational roles,
as his brain progressively regrew towards 80%. Put simply, this is to suggest that a very small part of any
particular complex adaptive system is a micro version of the system operating as a whole. This also says
that there is no privileged point of observation within the system and that the system is greater (in this
case much greater) than the sum of its parts. I will provide a metaphoric example for this further below
using a ‘flocks of birds flying in unison’ model.
Ex amples of Fractal Ge ome try i n N ature and Fractal Behav ior s as Com parative Models for
th e ' Org ani zed’ E volution of N oah ’s Brain in both B ehavior and Development:
Fractal Physiology:
One of the fathers of Fractal physiology was Ary Goldberger (Fractals in Biology and Medicine) 1995).
Goldberger and others, the likes of Bruce West Ph.D. have focused on the ‘self-similar aspects’ of fractal
physiology; being the fractal geometry observed in biological structures and the fractal qualities of the
nonlinear dynamics of biological systems. This knowledge is applied comparatively to health and the
identification of pathological conditions extending to the structure and function of the human brain. A
well-known classic example to express this is heart rate dynamics in health and disease, as shown in the
image below. Fractal physiology is very fascinating indeed and there are numerous credible journals that
are devoted to this field of science. Eg: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/all/sections/fractal-
physiology#: The heart rate time series below identifies heart rate dynamics in health and disease. The
variable nonlinear dynamics displayed in the (B) time series are the signature of a healthy heart and (A),
(C) & (D) are the time series relating to pathological conditions of the heart.
13
The broccoli image directly below, is a classic example of fractal geometry in nature. The image reveals
patterns that keep repeating down and up at smaller and smaller and larger and larger scales, where one
very tiny piece of broccoli is similar in structure to the whole broccoli. There is no privileged point of
observation, as all points in this system are similar at every scale. Comparatively, if we consider the
relatively small cluster of neurons that were in existence in Noah’s brain at birth, in relation to the number
of neurons there are, along with the workings of a healthy newborns whole brain, the mere fact that with
only a very small percentage of the neurons a normal healthy newborns brain contains, Noah could
impersonate the behaviors of infants born with a full complement of differentiated and specialized
neurons, suggests that all of the neurons in Noah’s brain were operating in a scale free fractal kind of
manner, similar to the brain as a whole. Was the saved memory of Noah’s whole brain pre-lesion
maintained in the unaffected brainstem and midbrain, empowering them to be the primary contributing
agents to this fractal type organization and behavior? I suggest that this would be the most likely scenario.
I will expand upon this using other examples in nature to support this notion further below.
Above: Fractal Geometry in nature showing similarity at every scale.
Flock of starlings flying in unison exhibit high levels of complex interconnected fractal behaviors across all
the agents in these systems. Every agent is similar in structure, function and ‘behavior’ and contributes
equally to the overall nonlinear dynamical behaviors of the system. These systems display deterministic
chaos; defined as a system that is governed by some deterministic rules, but behaves in an unpredictable
chaotic manner. We can use ‘flocks of birds flying in unison’ as a kind of ‘metaphoric equivalent’ to
demonstrate how; ‘the remaining 2% of Noah’s brain, at some fractal scale, must have been able to
exhibit all of the behaviors and do all of the jobs the brain has to do. ‘Put simply, this is to suggest that a
very small part of any particular complex adaptive system is a micro version of the system operating as a
whole’ (purposeful repeated sentence).
So in using a ‘flocks of birds flying in unison’ model to express the similarities there are to the
combinational behaviors of the remaining neurons in Noah’s brain, we confirm that there is no privileged
14
point of observation within a system such as a flock of birds flying in unison. This allows us to also refer to
these systems as scale free systems; be it that regardless of what point that you observe this system, what
is happening at that location is very similar to what is occurring at all other parts of system. However, you
cannot just look at one small part of the system and know how the system is behaving as a whole. This is
a very important point to behold. Likewise, you cannot understand the neuron in isolation to the organism
it inhabits and you cannot understand the organism in isolation of the environment it inhabits. If you were
to zoom right in at various random locations within the flocks of birds flying in unison below, you would
not see say any 5 birds anywhere within the flock exhibiting behaviors that were any different to all other
birds within the flock, but you still would not know how the system as a whole is dynamically behaving
and responding to the environment.
Relativity to the behavior of each neuron in Noah’s underdeveloped brain:
The deterministic rules that govern flocks of starlings flying in unison are that each bird in the system is
only communicating with its nearest neighbors (as in nearest neighbor principles), via an electrical field
that is generated by the activity of the flock itself. By each bird simply communicating with its nearest
neighbor’s, tiny feed-forward-feedback discrepancies rapidly accumulate to enable wave propagations to
emerge, producing the wonderful nonlinear unpredictable (chaotic) behaviors of the flock as a whole
system. There needs to be a relatively high ‘signal to noise ratio’ to enable this kind of phenomena to
15
occur. If the signal to noise ratio was 1:1 the flock would behave in a very linear predictable manner.
Waves of excitement propagate through the system in approximately 16 milliseconds.
Comparatively, we know that neurons generate an electrical field in the brain and the brain as a whole
displays chaotic behaviors due to the discrepancies there are in firing velocity and frequency of individual
neurons. Unpredictable wave propagations are also observed in the resting brain and this basically
confirms that each neuron is also simply communicating with its nearest neighbors for this phenomena
to be observed, regardless of where their individual axonal projection terminate. There also needs to be
a high signal to noise ratio to enable this phenomena to occur. It is when the brain becomes less chaotic,
over-orderly and synchronized with a low signal to noise ratio that seizures occur and many other
neurological pathologies are the result of higher degrees of orderliness and a breakdown of complexity in
the brain (CNS).
In Noah’s developing brain it could have only been the collective wisdom of all the neurons he did have,
all working in unison, similar to our flocks of birds flying in unison that enabled him to display normal
behaviors and respond to environmental cues in a normal manner, heavily compensating for regions of
the brain that were not there, or very underdeveloped. Hence, there could not have been a lot of scope
for differentiation and specialization in the early phases of regrowth. With no privileged point of
observation, excitatory and inhibitory processes would have needed to maintain a more unified seamless
flow state to enable new behaviors to emerge. Panoramic *‘Ephaptic coupling’ would enable such
phenomena. Whereas in the normal brain, inhibitory neurons need to inhibit some actions to enable other
actions to occur and to maintain acuity of excitatory processes. In a dynamical flowing chaotic system like
the flocks of birds flying in unison, there is not inhibitory birds and excitatory birds and the birds
themselves are not voluntarily deciding which way to go to follow some leader, so their neurons must also
be in a spontaneous seamless flow state, acting as a scaled down fractal version of the overall dynamical
system. You cannot see any behaviors in one system that are not applicable to all other nonlinear
dynamical systems. If phenomena is apparent in flocks of birds flying in unison, then it is a given that it is
possible for other living systems to produce similar phenomena. *Ephaptic coupling; neurons communicating with
each other through an electrical field, as Identified by Costas A Anastassiou Rodrigo Perin, Henry Markram & Christof Koch in
their publication in Nature; Ephaptic coupling of cortical neurons; https://www.nature.com/articles/nn.2727
It is however highly unfortunate that none of the medical professionals attached to Noah, saw
opportunities to initiate a refined monitoring of and study of Noah’s brain activity and the nonlinear
pathway of regrowth that it took. In particular, identify what forms of stimuli seemed to produce the most
‘perking up’ of the processes. What dynamics did his brain display when it was compensating for the most
difficult tasks, which typically requires areas of the brain to be developed that simply were not there? Or
was Noah’s brain responding holistically in the early phases of regrowth, as I suggest it was above, or was
it discriminatively responding in a micro manner to certain stimuli? This is all very important to know in
developing an equivalent model within a hypothesis.
Animal Models:
Several researchers have identified that Mice are able to recover and compensate remarkably well from
intense knockout/blockade lesions to their brains, or induced gross brain impact trauma, seemingly far
beyond the capability of the human being - so far as we know. Perhaps there would be some value in
comparatively observing the lesioned brains of mice, as their brains compensate for theses lesions when
they attempt to and perform complex tasks again that the lesion initially inhibited and compare these
16
findings to the brains of non-lesioned mice performing the same tasks. Does the lesioned brain behave
more holistically when compensating rather than in a specialized manner? Specialization allows for energy
to be conserved, which is a law of thermodynamics, whereas if the lesioned brain behaves in a holistic
manner then this would be a non-energy conservative state and consequently fatigue comes much faster,
which is the case. This may indicate that the lesioned brain does behave in a very holistic manner, which
would explain the rapid onset of fatigue as energy must be conserved.
So where was the abstract version of Noah’s pre-lesion brain stored that the
regrowth of Noah’s brain referred to for its guidance?
To answer this question purely through the lens of DNA, we have to complement each and every
remaining neuron for all working together to orchestrate this unprecedented regrowth. Surely though
regrowth of the brain is a self-activating process, or it would be observed all the time. There needed to be
the right forms of environmental signals to inspire this process. For example, a pine cone decorating a
coffee table has all the potential to become a magnificent pine tree in accordance to its encoded DNA,
but will always remain a pine cone in this environment. When it is exposed to the right environmental
stimuli/stressors (soil, sun, heat, rain) the picture of the pine tree encoded in its DNA will begin to emerge.
Classic ‘nature V nurture’ debates will possibly go on forever, however we simply have a relative problem
to solve here that we would like to form some logical opinions on. We know that Noah’s innate system
has the recipe of a normal human being encoded in his DNA, but as we know from many studies performed
on abused and neglected children, normal physical/emotional growth can be severely inhibited. A lot of
the neglected children that were found in an orphanage in Romania were very small and underdeveloped
for their age. Even the administration of growth hormone and proper nutrition did not restore normal
growth. However once these children were adopted and cared for in a loving supportive environment
they began to grow towards normal heights, structure and emotional development. These children by
large had normal sized functioning brains at birth or else they simply would have died, or been disposed
of. Whereas Noah did not have a normal sized brain at birth, so if a rule is that a loving supportive
environment stimulates and contributes to normal growth and behavior than is known that Noah was
surrounded by lots of love, care and nurturing. We can draw from this that these factors contributed to
and supported the emergence of normal behaviors encoded in his DNA, even in the absence of a large
proportion of his brain.
17
What was it then that inspired the unprecedented regrowth of Noah’s brain towards
normal size?
‘Given the right sets of initial conditions, complex adaptive systems will naturally self-organize towards
higher states of complexity and the human brain is certainly the most complex of all complex adaptive
systems known to humankind’
For some kind of modelling to refer to analogously, we need to be able to first identify that similarities do
exist and crossover in the natural world between phenomena observed in nature, in both the plant and
animal worlds for example, based upon some of nature’s simple rules. Based upon these observations, it
is reasonable to suggest that if something can naturally occur in the plant kingdom in terms of
spontaneous regrowth or restoration/repair post the effects of severe environmental conditions, then
there is also scope for similar phenomena to occur in the animal kingdom. Survival of the species in all
cases is the primary motive for all regrowth, or restoration/repair in all living systems. Based upon this
postulation, we need to then identify an equivalence in nature that is ‘similar’ to the regrowth phenomena
that took place in Noah’s brain; post extensive lesion during gestation in Noah’s case [and] post
environmental trauma in other systems. So to firstly identify that similarities do exist and crossover in the
natural world between phenomena observed in nature, in both the plant and animal worlds, I have chosen
the similarities there are between vegetation patterns found in arid regions and the patterns found on
animals native to these regions.
The similarities between vegetation patterns found in arid regions and those found on
animals native to these regions:
Tiger/Zebra/Leopard Bush vegetation patterns found in arid regions around the world, reflect the
environmental conditions at any time of the year. These are complex adaptive systems and the formation
of the patterns are the result of the system pruning back to minimize the need for nutrients to survive in
harsh times. As the environmental conditions improve, the metabolism of the overall system increases,
uniformity returns to the landscape and the patterns become less obvious as branching out occurs. In a
similar manner to a single bird embedded within a flock of birds flying in unison, individual bushes
themselves are complex adaptive systems and act as agents embedded within the larger system that ‘self
18
organizes’ to adapt to changes in the external environment. Every bush complies with the same rules. If
one bush somehow decided to steal more nutrients than its allocated share so to speak, then this could
cause a domino effect that could destroy the balance of the whole system, making it more vulnerable to
disease and disorder. Each bush is finely calibrated to the environment and the adaptive needs of all
constituents within the system overall, as one large complex adaptive system.
Each bush only communicates with its nearest neighbors, via what scientists have identified as
sophisticated lateralized communications networks, involving their root systems communicating to each,
other similar to axons stimulating neighboring neurons, as well as through the air; by releasing odorous
chemicals called volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and through the soil, by secreting soluble chemicals
into the rhizosphere and transporting them along thread-like networks formed by soil fungi. However
collectively, the system as a whole benefits, maintaining maximum complexity under critical times and
optimal growth and sustainability during better times. https://www.the-scientist.com/features/plant-talk-38209
https://interestingengineering.com/study-reveals-plants-communicate-through-root-secretions Based upon these findings
I feel it is naïve to maintain that neural networks only use one form of communication. Do glia cells play
a similar transporting role as the thread-like networks formed by soil fungi?
It is by no means a coincidence that the same patterns can be found on animals that are native to the
same environments, such as Zebras, Tigers and Lions, demonstrating how nature uses simple rules over
and over to generate the patterns, such as the ones we observe above, in both the plant and animal
kingdom. Similarity phenomena such as this is also observed in the likes of the structure and arrangement
of the blood vessels and the capillary system of the lungs, being similar to the root systems of trees. Both
arrangements serve a similar functions also in that they are both transport systems.
ABOVE: The blood vessels and capillary system of the lungs are similar to the root system of a tree.
The main point here is that scale free similarity is intrinsic in nature, from the very micro to the extreme
macro. That is, micro structures and assemblies identified in a very small system can be similar to the
structures and assemblies identified in very large systems. Not only geometrically but also in functionality.
In essence, there is nothing special about human beings as their systems are following the same rules and
laws of nature that all living systems emerge and evolve from. There is nothing about the underlying
geometrical architecture, or functional underpinnings of the human system that is not duplicated in
some manner in other living systems.
19
Regrowth, recovery and repair phenomena in living systems post extreme environmental
insults or lesion.
Generally speaking, the healing of their bodies is not something humans and animals need to consciously
contribute to, as this is a ‘self-organizing’ process. However both systems can only ever be in one of two
(2) possible scale free states. They are either in a state of growth, or they are in a state of protection at
any moment in time that you observe living systems. They cannot be in the middle, this would be like
trying to be happy and sad at the same time. What we do know for sure is that long-term states of
protection, established by perceived (or real) long term environmental threats, initiates and incubates a
very large majority of acquired psychophysical diseases and disorders in human beings, or makes other
living systems large and small more susceptible to the onset of disease and disorder if they cannot adapt
fast enough.
Regeneration of natural vegetation on land that has been severely affected by long term
single crop farming as a simulation reference model to the regrowth of Noah’s brain.
It is a given that it requires optional environmental conditions and percepts to initiate optimal growth,
regrowth or repair, whether this be in relation to the regrowth of Noah’s brain, or in relation to the
regeneration of natural vegetation on land that has been severely affected by long term single crop
farming for instance. We will never know the precise biological mechanisms and evolutionary trajectory
that the regrowth of Noah’s brain emerged from and followed, nor the neurochemical/hormonal
processes that were involved, so we can only refer metaphorically to other regrowth phenomena
observed in nature to simply say; ‘given the rights sets of initial conditions, natural order enables lesioned
systems to self-organize to higher states of complexity - to be able to mirror previously acquired states of
complexity as an example’. During environmentally fertile times, regardless of whatever that means to
any particular living system, natural order enables the system to self-organize to reach its optimal
evolutionary potential.
20
Below: The image on the left portrays railway land that had been previously extensively cleared and
maintained for a little more than a century. Now left to its own resources, the land is self-organizing and
regenerating. In a few decades time this land will begin to mirror its neighboring landscapes. On the right
is land that had been long term single crop farmed and as a result the land was very poor in nutrient
content. Initially only noxious weeds and grasses grew but this established the sets the initial conditions
to put nutrients back into the ground as they died off, which is now enabling this land to keep increasing
in complexity until it too will begin to mirror its neighboring landscapes.
Keeping in theme, we now turn our attention to the images below of Noah’s brain compared to the normal
brain of an infant. It is reasonable to assume that Noah’s brain had from the very onset, aspired to
normalize. Similar to the landscapes above, the right sets of initial conditions, combined with a
stimulating, enriched environment, enabled Noah’s brain to self-organize to higher states of complexity.
This is simply another example of natural order taking over.
21
A question might be; why does this not commonly occur in other children born with only a small
percentage of their brains? What was different about Noah’s environment that established the initial
conditions of regrowth? We know Noah was nested in a highly supportive and loving environment, as
mentioned earlier, however this is required for the healthy mental and physical development of any child
- also elaborated on earlier. We cannot say the other children with similar physical restraints are less loved
and supported and therefor they did not regrow, or grow a normal brain post birth. So in order to express
the phenomena of Noah’s brain’s regrowth, we may just have to settle on the simple overarching theme
here, which is; ‘given the rights sets of initial conditions, natural order enables lesioned systems to self-
organize to higher states of complexity and to be able to mirror previously acquired states of complexity.
I.e. during environmentally fertile times, regardless of whatever that means to any particular living system,
natural order enables the system to self-organize to reach its optimal evolutionary potential’.
Cellular Automata
Some of the intrinsic features of complex adaptive systems are; interconnectedness and their ability to
adapt to changes within the environment and or to new information entering the system by some means
or process. Interconnectedness simply implies that all the agents within the system are intimately
interconnected in some way, or by some common mechanism. The stock exchange and social media are
some examples of large global networks that are themselves complex adaptive systems. Whereas in
biology, the living organism as a whole is a complex adaptive system. The immune system for example, is
a subsystem within this macro system and is also regarded as a complex adaptive system playing a major
role in maintaining stability of the organism and adapting to changes within the organisms’ environment.
This enables the system to remain stable as it holistically adapts to constant changes within the
environment. This intrinsic ability is referred to as ‘Allostasis’. [The concept of allostasis, maintaining stability
through change, is a fundamental process through which organisms actively adjust to both predictable and unpredictable events...
Allostatic load refers to the cumulative cost to the body of allostasis, with allostatic overload... being a state in which
serious pathophysiology can occur... Using the balance between energy input and expenditure as the basis for applying the
concept of allostasis, two types of allostatic overload have been proposed (Wingfield 2003)]
The brain of any animal certainly represents the highest forms of complexity and adaptability, with the
human brain being regarded as the most complex system in the known observable universe. However an
individual neuron is also regarded as a complex adaptive system, when and only when it is connected to
a minimum number of 4 other neurons to make a total of 5. Otherwise it will die of isolation. 5 is the
minimal number of agents required to be interconnected to form a complex adaptive system. Less than 5
and the system will not take in new information, adapt or evolve. It will only ever function in a linear and
highly deterministic manner when extrinsically stimulated.
Noah’s brain, being a complex adaptive system comprising of a much less than the optimal number of
agents at birth, was not only quite capable of adapting to changes within the environment, Noah’s brain
was also able to increase in complexity and regrow from these minimalistic sets of initial conditions, as
determined above. There always needs to be balanced positive and negative feedback loops that inspire
and propagate organizational growth (opposed to rogue growth patterns where there is too much positive
feedback that will self-destruct the system).
So now we need to refer to some form of computational equivalence that simulates the incredible
adaptability and regrowth trajectories of Noah’s brain, factoring in and supporting the complementarities
and complexities above. I have chosen ‘Cellular Automata’ modelling to analogously express these
phenomena
22
The Emergence of Order from Chaos
Back in the early 80’s when Stephen Wolfram was experimenting with cellular automaton, he
serendipitously discovered chaos emerge from the deterministic initial conditions of simple cellular
automaton.
Computer science, mathematics and theoretical physics guru Stephen Wolfram discovered that when he
allowed self-replicating cellular automata algorithms to keep running (such as *rule 30) that they would
begin to produce chaotic behaviors, which over time would lead to the emergence of new patterns and
when certain programs were left run longer, patterns we see in the natural world began to emerge such
as snowflakes and the patterns we see on shells and leaves for example.
Computer science, mathematics and theoretical physics guru Stephen Wolfram
‘In all of Wolfram's elementary cellular automata, an infinite one-dimensional array of cellular automaton cells with
only two states is considered, with each cell in some initial state. At discrete time intervals, every cell spontaneously
changes state based on its current state and the state of its two neighbors. For Rule 30, the rule set which governs
the next state of the automaton is:
current pattern
111
110
101
100
011
010
001
000
new state for center cell
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
The corresponding formula is [left cell XOR (central cell OR right cell)]
23
The following diagram shows the pattern created, with cells colored based on the previous state of their
neighborhood. Darker colors represent "1" and lighter colors represent "0". Time increases down the
vertical axis.
RULE 30 cellular automaton showing how chaotic behavior emerged as the program kept running.
Wolfram based his classification of Rule 30 as chaotic based primarily on its visual appearance, but it was
later shown to meet more rigorous definitions of chaos proposed by Devaney and Knudson. In particular,
24
according to Devaney's criteria, Rule 30 displays sensitive dependence on initial conditions (two initial
configurations that differ only in a small number of cells rapidly diverge), its periodic configurations are
dense in the space of all configurations, according to the Cantor topology on the space of configurations
(there is a periodic configuration with any finite pattern of cells), and it is mixing (for any two finite
patterns of cells, there is a configuration containing one pattern that eventually leads to a configuration
containing the other pattern). According to Knudson's criteria, it displays sensitive dependence and there
is a dense orbit (an initial configuration that eventually displays any finite pattern of cells). Both of these
characterizations of the rule's chaotic behavior follow from a simpler and easy to verify property of Rule
30: it is left permutative, meaning that if two configurations C and D differ in the state of a single cell at
position i, then after a single step the new configurations will differ at cell i + 1.[5] ; All the above text and
images are courtesy of; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_30
Above: A midsection slice of Rule 30 showing 100% deterministic predictable behavior. Below: The same
midsection slice showing Rule 30 producing chaotic behavior as the program was allowed to keep running.
Below: The typical shapes of leaves found in nature.
25
Below: The various shapes of leaves similar to the ones found in nature (as above) emerge from simple
cellular automata rule 110. The shapes increase in complexity as the program keeps running.
Further below are patterns that are observed on shells in nature - on the left. On the right, are similar
patterns that emerge and increase in complexity from a simple wolfram cellular automata rule. The
patterns increase in complexity over time and as you can see in the case of the natural cells, some natural
shell patterns resemble patterns that are in the early phases of the cellular automaton output and some
natural shells resemble the cellular automaton patterns at other stages, increasing in compelxity as does
the cellular automata patterns over time. From some very simple rules complex patterns (complexity in
general) can emerge. This has stategically important and supporting value to the hypothesis here. By
starting with some simple rules of known values, under the right sets of initial conditions, the human
nervous system will increase in complexity, with more and more complex behaviors emerging that can be
visibly observed and measured.
26
Left slide:The incresingly complex patterns that emerge on shells in the natural world, compared to the
similar patterns that emerge and also increase in complexity from a cellular automaton; Right slide.
Wolfram also discovered that by altering any rule very slightly that these new sets of ‘initial conditions’
would give rise to vastly different patterns on the other side of chaos, thereby demonstrating sensitive
dependence upon initial conditions. In essence cellular automaton *rule 30, simply demonstrates that
very complex patterns in nature can emerge from some very simple rules; i.e. you do not need very
complex rules to propagate complex behaviors. The macro emergent structure and nonlinear dynamics
of the human nervous system is considered to be a function of some simple rules [or] its sets of initial
conditions if you wish. Therefore, if you wish to alter the systems emergent structures and functions, then
there is a requirement that you tweak the simple rules [or] adjust the sets of initial conditions that the
systems features and functions emerge from and to which it is very sensitively dependent upon.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_30 - A New Kind of Science; Stephen Wolfram: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eC14GonZnU
Identifying Cellular Automata models that are more closely related the regrowth of Noah’s brain
Below: Experiments in Urban Growth simulation using Cellular Automata 07 in processing language to
simulate urban biological growth behavior based on a terrain map of water boundaries and contours.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ7LNtmVEAM
28
Below: The simularities there are to the cellular automaton models to ‘actual urban growth seen here in
Las Vegas Urban Growth, Satellite Timelapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdxHAggOmB4
In actual urban growth, you cannot predict with any degree of certainty what the growth map will look
like in 20 years’ time, as there are too many influential degrees of freedom or variables. Likewise you
cannot predict with any degree of certainty what the outcome will be for a cellular automata model of
urban growth. You can only start with simple rules and run the program and see what happens over time.
Urban growth will traditionally favor certain conditions that relate to proximity , prestige, sameness,
water, elevation and views. In a cellular automata model you can only program growth to favor water,
elevation and views as prestige and sameness of culture tribe etc. are based on human emotions and
preferences.
Not having the benefit of being able to retrospectively look over time lapse images that portray the
regrowth of Noah’s brain over the first 3 years of his life and up to the present day, we can only refer to
simulations based upon credible science that firstly demonstrate that all systems are governed by similar
rules and are subject to the same laws of nature. And therefore if similar phenomena occurs, or is
observed in any large or small complex adaptive living system, than there is high probability that when
studying and trying to understand the behavior of any large or small complex adaptive (living system)
phenomena that has quite large unknown qualities and quantities, you can then refer to previously
observed phenomena where there are some basic similarities to assist in answering problems your having
with understanding the nature of the phenomena you are studying. Our relative problem here is; how did
Noah’s brain evolve from
29
As stated, in attempting to make accurate predictions for urban growth, there are far too many variable
influences that could amount to surmountable errors in your predictions emerging over time from the
initial conditions you projected from. Even the effects of global warming, sustainable energy crisis, rising
water levels on beachfront land, terrorism etc. are all modern day variables that interfere with reliable
future predictions. In the case of the regrowth of Noah’s brain, there are many variables also that would
have influenced the growth trajectory and rate that regrowth took place. We can assume that being
nested within a loving, supportive and stimulating environment would have had a highly positive influence
on normalization and regrowth, however many other children born with similar pathologies do not
prosper as well and their brains do not regrow post birth. With Noah comes evidence of possibilities
thought to be impossible and this should arouse curiosity to explore and delve more and more into the
mechanics of such possibilities and most importantly discover what we have been overlooking, missing or
not considering.
The need for more dedicated research
The case of Noah Wall begs for much more dedicated research into certain phenomena relative to how
Noah was able to respond to his environment so normally in the extreme absence of cortical tissues
expected to be vital to express the degrees of normalization Noah displayed. I feel that more emphasis
should be placed on research into Ephaptic coupling (or communication) in the CNS for instance. High
dimensional chaotic phenomena is observed in the CNS that cannot be explained away by only allowing
communication between neurons though the synapse. This would be too cumbersome and iterated to
match the time scales of global chaotic dynamics observed in the CNS under prescribed conditions.
I feel confident that by studying the lesioned brain in mice that you will see much less specialization and
more global activity, being the signature of Ephaptic communication when brain lesioned mice are
performing tasks compared to the controls. The very reason the flocks of birds are flying in unison is
because they are all in a protective state and the display of unplanned systems wide chaotic dynamics are
performed as an evasive strategy to avoid a predator from eating any one of the birds. Pre collaborating
with all the other birds in the flock to fly in unison, each bird is busy functioning as an individual entity,
choosing what to eat and where to go looking for food, digesting and eliminating, grooming, mating
perhaps and so forth. The nervous system of Individual birds in this free roaming state would function in
a specialized manner relative to each movement and task. However once they spontaneously join the
flock to fly in unison, their nervous systems would open up to communicate ephaptically, as a fractal micro
version of what the flock is exhibiting as a whole.
My postulation is that the lesioned CNS is in a state of protection also and opts for a similar means of
assessing and responding to the environment across all neurons in the CNS. If metaphorically we replaced
the flocks of birds flying in unison with neurons collectively communicating in unison in the same manner
in the CNS via an electrical field, then similar to the flocks of birds responding collectively and rapidly to
fluctuations in their environment at very fast time scales, neurons in this state would also be able to
respond collectively to environmental cues in the best interest of the system they inhabit. This is very non
energy conservative, which helps to explain why fatigue takes place much more rapidly in the lesioned
CNS then when a control performs the same task. I feel that researchers would witness global activity in
the lesioned CNS when performing tasks, opposed to the controls where they would witness
specialization.
30
I feel that our stream of consciousness would also be better understood and explained through an
Ephaptic communication model as an added value to research undertakings into this area.
Summary of:
‘Hypothesizing the Central Nervous Systems Genius to Trigger and Self-organize to Higher States of
Complexity as Epitomized in the Case of Noah Wall, the Boy Born With Only 2% of His Brain’
Through the lens of a complex adaptive system comes the knowledge that intrinsically, all complex
adaptive systems large and small, when given the right sets of initial conditions, will naturally seek to
increase in complexity over time. Lesioned complex adaptive systems also transition into higher states of
complexity and gravitate towards the normalization of that system, given the right sets of initial
conditions. It is observed in studies with lesioned mice that by enriching the complexity of their
environment, lesioned mice will quite quickly compensate for lesions. We also referred to large living
system that have been lesioned, either by harsh environmental conditions, or by aggressive farming or
grooming by man. When these systems are left to their own resources they will naturally return to optimal
complexity over time. We used this knowledge to support the hypothesis on the regrowth of Noah’s brain,
even though this precise phenomena has never been observed before in any brain studies.
We then explored Fractal biology to support the hypothesis on how Noah was able to respond normally
to his environment in the extreme absence of cortical tissues expected to be vital to express the degrees
of normalization Noah displayed. The relative hypothesis is based upon other fractal biology phenomena
observed in the natural world, suggestive that each of the remaining 2% of neurons in Noah brain at birth,
must have behaved as a scale free version of the whole brain. It is anticipated that this phenomena was
still occurring up to the point of 80% regrowth, as the scans showed that there were vital regions of the
brain still absent that we previously believed to be required in order for a human being or animal to
function normally.
We then introduced flocks of birds flying in unison as a relative metaphor to express how a system,
comprised of many individual agents, can combine to perform and function as one unified whole. The
hypothesis here is that all the neurons in Noah’s CNS operated in a similar manner via Ephaptic coupling
or communication, further suggesting that this phenomena maybe witnessed in any lesioned CNS to assist
the system to compensate for lesion.
Cellular automata urban growth modelling, was explored as the computational equivalence for the
unpredictable patterns of regrowth of Noah’s brain. Cellular automata demonstrates that from some very
simple rules (algorithms), unpredictable behaviors and patterns emerge over time, despite the seemingly
deterministic initial values of the automaton rule. We may suppose then that all the neurons that made
up the initial 2% of his brain all followed some simple rules of certain deterministic values and from these
simple rules, Noah’s brain regrew in an unpredictable manner towards its destiny.
Final say:
It has been challenging indeed to form a hypothesis relating to the regrowth of Noah’s brain and how he
was able to function normally in the absence of so much cortical tissue. There is no way of testing the
hypothesis and establishing facts, rather the hypothesis may simply be used to ease public curiosity
relating to this phenomena, until we can somehow establish in the future a much more fine grained
analyses that is based upon yet to be determined discoveries that brain researchers may make.
31
The pink elephant in the room here is; how did extensive media and public awareness of the Noah Wall
phenomena slip beneath the radar of Neuroscience. How is it that a Phineas Cage or a HM can be studied
extensively for many years as far back as the mid 1800’s yet in our modern world, no one in neuroscience
came forth and insisted on making a long term study of Noah and his brain regrowth. This is another case
in the UK of a teenager who was a victim of the Manchester bombing in May 2017, who had a bolt pass
right through her frontal lobes from the left to right side of her head. Her parents were told that she would
be a complete vegetable and not be able to see, hear, talk, swallow, recognize them and be more or less
in a permanent state of akinetic mutism. However I am aware that this young woman has recovered all of
the abilities that the parents were told would be impossible to recover. Yet there is no dedicated study
into how her brain has compensated and again a unique opportunity to understand much more about the
brains incredible potential to recover similar to the study of Phineas Cage, is going to be lost.
Thank you for expressing your interest in this unique presentation based upon unique phenomena.
Ken Ware
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage Dr. J. M. Harlow, studied extensively from 1848 – 1860
HM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Molaison The surgery took place in 1953 and H.M. was widely
studied from late 1957 until his death in 2008 H.M., was an American memory disorder patient who had
a bilateral medial temporal lobectomy to surgically resect the anterior two thirds of
his hippocampi, parahippocampal cortices, entorhinal cortices, piriform cortices, and amygdalae in an
attempt to cure his epilepsy. Although the surgery was partially successful in controlling his epilepsy, a
severe side effect was that he became unable to form new memories. Molaison's brain was kept
at University of California, San Diego where it was sliced into histological sections on December 4,
2009.[4] It was later moved to The M.I.N.D. Institute at UC Davis.[5] The brain atlas constructed was made
publicly available in 2014.[6][7]
https://www.neurophysicstherapy.global/
https://vimeo.com/user20254671
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ken_Ware/research
https://www.neurophysicstherapy.global/research/
32
NOTES