The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
And the neat thing about this is that um we didn't have to do something like stick an electrode into these muscles because they're attached to the bones and attached to the eardrum. And so if they were being manipulated by a top down signal from the brain, they would tug these bones and that that would tug the eardrum. And when the eardrum moves, normally it moves in response to sound, but if it moves in the absence of sound, it's going to make a sound.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
these structures um get input from the brain. So we thought well if they're getting topdown input from the brain are they getting a top- down input from the brain that carries information about about the position of the eyes? You know that it seemed like it seemed kind of like a wild possibility but not completely out of left field like there was a a possible mechanism here that we could imagine.