“AT EINSTEIN’s autopsy in 1955, his brain was something of a disappointment: it turned out to be a tad smaller than the average Joe’s. Indeed, later studies have suggested a minimal link between brain size and intelligence. It seems brain quality rather than quantity is key.
One important factor seems to be how well our neurons can talk to each other. Martijn van den Heuvel, a neuroscientist at Utrecht University Medical Center in the Netherlands, found that smarter brains seem to have more efficient networks between neurons – in other words, it takes fewer steps to relay a message between different regions of the brain. That could explain about a third of the variation in a population’s IQ, he says.
Another key factor is the insulating fatty sheath encasing neuron fibres, which affects the speed of electrical signals. Paul Thompson at the University of California, Los Angeles, has found a correlation between IQ and the quality of the sheaths (The Journal of Neuroscience, vol 29, p 2212).”
Read more at New Scientist
"
Daniel Coyle’s “The Talent Code” is pretty much entirely about the sheaths (myelin) and how its buildup affects performance. His thesis is that talent is an illusion, and that’s its entirely a result of repetition in practice building up layers of myelin around important connections in the brain. Pretty interesting book.
This is interesting, as any comment on cognitive function intrinsically is. However, it doesn’t seem to offer any further incite into brain development than that available in established biological and psychological texts. Gerald Edelman’s work on neural plasticity is enlightening, particularly Neural Darwinism, if you can get past his slightly florid style. A wealth of other writers also offer authoriative comment on the subject.
that better be a picture of derren’s hand…if youse guys are smart…
I haven’t read The Talent Code but it sounds fascinating. Does he disucss at all child prodigies, such as Mozart, who surely would not have had time to develop the skills they displayed at such a young age through repitition alone?
I suppose this goes to show that it’s not what you’ve got, but what you do with it & how you use it that matters.
LC x
I got a facebook IQ test result of over 140 though I know it’s more to do with familar questions from team training and realizing the answer is often opposite like QI. I lack common sense at the best of times let alone apparent measurable intelligence, my brain must be in knots. I believe women have the brain tighter so the mass isn’t less but looks smaller. I assume this for survival of the fittest.
“smarter brains seem to have more efficient networks between neurons – in other words, it takes fewer steps to relay a message between different regions of the brain” does seem like an interesting theory
‘Another key factor is the insulating FATTY sheath encasing neuron fibres’
Yet more proof that those on a low fat diet are not very bright.
Mmmmmm fat
There is no such thing as ‘smart’ and there is no such thing as ‘intelligent’. These concepts of the human brain are negative self limiting beliefs, and accept them without question at your own peril. I would even go so far as to say they are destructive.
The only concept of any relevance is training. Some people have trained their brains in better ways than other people. It’s as simple as that.