If a human being knows that a chair is a chair? Is that memory stored by a neuron or by a group of neurons? Or, by their synapses?
In the specific ways that the human-organism lives, experiences, and survives, all that is encountered in the real world is interpreted — or attempted for interpretation — by memory. Such that several things in the external world are familiar. How exactly does the memory separate so much data, of different input modes, towards near accuracy?
Are neurons directly responsible for human memory? This means that there is a neuron for a chair or a table? Or, are there neurons for a chair or a table? If not, are there synapses for a chair or table? The key reason for these questions is to look directly at the assumption and explore why it would be unlikely. If a group of neurons would store a memory, would it be by their shape or by the shape of their synapse? If so, is it stored by the cleft or by the vesicles, or what exactly? So far, what is it about synapses that says that they can store and differentiate a large amount of memory?
While long-term potentiation [LTP] and long-term depression [LTD] are sometimes correlated with memory, what is the design of synapses for a chair or for a table? How is it different for a type of smell, other external sensations, and internal senses? Why should they [synaptic designs] be different for respective memories? How flexible would they be given differences in memory needs, across eras, locations, and age groups? If memory is by synaptic specificity, how efficient would the brain be, given necessary [unique] physical changes?
Neurons are said to communicate through electrical and chemical signals. Why would signals be able to communicate synaptic designs or memory stored by neurons? Would signals take a summary of the shape and communicate it, to replicate the shape elsewhere, or what would signals communicate?
There are several obvious questions against the dominant view — that neurons or their synapses store information — to unravel it. It is possible to continue on that path to explore, but if problem-solving in psychiatry and neurology is the concern, it is beneficial to take a different turn. There is no way to model [specific architecture] of memory for now, via neurons and synapses, in spite of all the advances in imaging techniques. What is the exact [neural or synaptic] representation of a chair in memory, different from a table and others?
It is theorized that electrical and chemical signals are the basis for memory in the brain. Neurons are not signaling to other neurons or communicating by signals. Signals are the build, the specificity, and the transport for memories in the brain. The same applies to emotions, feelings, and the regulation of internal senses. Neurons are in clusters, so conceptually, electrical and chemical signals are in sets or loops. They interact. Their states at the time of their interactions determine their attributes [or the grades or measures to which they interact].
It is possible to explain all mental disorders by these interactions [for functions] and attributes [as measures]. It is also possible to explain the outcomes of most brain disorders by these, as well as learning. Neurons or synapses for memory may not be present much, simply as the direct structures for memory.
Non-Neural Cells
Chemical signals can be assumed to be the basis for information and transportation, theorizing from brain science. Electrical signals as well. This means that when bioelectricity is noticed in non-neural cells, they configure and transport information. Also, for non-neural cells, chemical signals, traces, gradients, patterns, cues, reminders, and so on, are configurators and transport for functions, not simply that cells store as physical structures. Bioelectricity and chemicals configure and transport memory in non-neural cells, conceptually.
To make progress in biology, the answer is simply not about whether neurons store or non-neural cells store memory, but what it does, how, and its implications for learning, conditions, and diseases.
cAMP response element, or CRE
There is a recent [July 30, 2025] feature in Quanta Magazine, What Can a Cell Remember?, stating that, “The prevailing wisdom in neuroscience has long been that memory and learning are consequences of ‘synaptic plasticity’ in the brain. The connections between clusters of neurons simultaneously active during an experience strengthen into networks that remain active even after the experience has passed, perpetuating it as a memory.”
“In neuroscience, Kukushkin writes, the most common definition of memory is that it’s what remains after experience to change future behavior. This is a behavioral definition; the only way to measure it is to observe that future behavior. Behavior tells us that a memory has formed, but says nothing about why, how, or where. Further, it’s constrained by scale. In these cases, how an organism reacts is a clue that prior experience left a lingering trace.”
“Acellular slime molds, foraging for food, lay down chemical traces that remind them where they’ve been. Bacteria compare present and previous conditions as they move through chemical gradients towards more favorable environments. Their key innovation was a way to measure these cells’ internal responses to chemical cues by using a DNA sequence that’s part of many cell-signaling pathways, including those used by neurons, called the cAMP response element, or CRE. For the experiment, this gene was a proxy for memory. By engineering both the cell lines to produce a glowing protein whenever CRE was activated, they were able to measure when the cells formed a memory, and how long that memory persisted.”
This article was written for WHN by David Stephen, who currently does research in conceptual brain science with a focus on the electrical and chemical configurators for how they mechanize the human mind with implications for mental health, disorders, neurotechnology, consciousness, learning, artificial intelligence, and nurture. He was a visiting scholar in medical entomology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL. He did computer vision research at Rovira i Virgili University, Tarragona.
As with anything you read on the internet, this article should not be construed as medical advice; please talk to your doctor or primary care provider before changing your wellness routine. WHN neither agrees nor disagrees with any of the materials posted. This article is not intended to provide a medical diagnosis, recommendation, treatment, or endorsement.
Opinion Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of WHN/A4M. Any content provided by guest authors is of their own opinion and is not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual, or anyone or anything else. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.
