Paul Nicholls Books

I'm a 3rd year graduate student in neuroscience, currently studying synaptic transmission with an electrophysiological approach. With biotechnology as an undergrad, let's just say my neurophysiology background was far from being strong. My PI recommended me this book a couple of weeks ago and I'm just loving it. The part on synaptic transmission (chapters 9 to 11) is simply great. I find things that I've read about MANY times before, on books like Kandel's, Fundamental Neuroscience, and many of the classic big textbooks, but none of them deals with this part as this one does. It's kind of the same issues but with a slightly different perspective, a perspective that I think you're able to appreciate more as you gain some experience in the field. Little details, certain experiments that you might have overlooked as a first year student, suddenly make all the sense. I don't think this is an overly simple book. It is really well written, and that's what I think makes it kind of reader-friendly but again, somehow it gets to deal with classical issues and concepts in a much deeper and USEFUL way (particularly for people actually working on this) than the great majority of other textbooks in this area. As I said in the title of my review, I wish I had learned about this book before, and that's the reason I'm writing this. Hope it helps :)

I realize that Amazon uses different shippers and stuff but I would not recommend buying this book from Amazon b/c, first of all, it took 6 days for it to ship to me when I have 2 day shipping and because I paid for a new one(direct from Amazon) and the copy I was shipped already had scratches and water damage on the inside pages although it was wrapped in clear plastic and supposedly new. This is not the first time where things like this have happened but I think this will be the last time. I am canceling my 2 day shipping and have decided to use other sources for my textbook and other book needs after my vouchers are used up.

I am a physics graduate student who happen to become interested in neuroscience. I had been searching for an introductory book when I stumbled upon this one. Although I am only half-way through the book right now, I could already tell that it is exactly what a newcomer to this field would need. With the terminology clearly defined, the book gives a very concise, clear, and logic description on the fundamentals. It further keeps one's interest high by relating the fundamental knowledges to everyday experiences. What I like most about this book is that it does not shy away from pointing out what is not yet known. With the last chapter devoted to "open questions", it presents the real questions to be answered. This book is really perfect. Highly recommended.

Neuroscience is generally considered a very dry area of research where people do research for years together to discover some meager facts. Still, even to a person who is averse to Neuroscience, this book might seem appealing. This speaks about the lucid, simple way of explanation in this book. This book is well written and explains the basics of Neuroscience better than any other giant books in market. Buy this book irrespective of your discipline to know the intricacies of Human Brain and have a pleasant reading.

I am a first year graduate student "accidentally" entering the field of neuroscience. I needed a basic text to help me "catch up". This book has been wonderful! The authors' have a great writing style- easy to read. More importantly, the authors are expert at choosing and presenting important, basic aspects of neurobiology to inexperienced neuroscientists without bogging the reader down with unnecessary and confusing detail. In particular, the authors thoroughly discuss ion channels and their role in neuronal communication, presenting electrophysiology as a valuable tool for studying these channels. This text was "just right" for me. However, if you are an advanced "neuroscientist", this text might be a bit on the "simple" side.

Wish some one could update this valuable handy book.

The knowledge of evaluating electronic resources, though advanced since the year this book was published, it still has many basics.

Librarians, information specialists, and other information content evaluators can surely benefit from this book.

Nicholl probes the connections between Shakespeare's King Lear and alchemy in this entertaining book. First he discusses the alchemical milieu of the late 16th century in Europe and especially in England, analyzing the most influential books and pamphlets of the time. He then shows how the plot of Lear can be regarded as describing an alchemical transformation of the King.

Is he correct? I have no idea. But with his characteristically graceful writing, Nicholl brings to life the world of Renaissance alchemy and puts forth an interesting case for his thesis. Even if Lear is not an alchemical allegory, Nicholl points out several passages in Shakespeare's plays and sonnets with alchemical connotations.

Even if you're not interested in Shakespeare, this book is worth reading just to understand what exactly the phenomenon of alchemy was.

This book uses both sound research and imaginative intelligence to reconstruct the life of the writer Thomas Nashe, active in London throughout the 1590s.

Nashe was a friend of Marlowe and probably knew Shakespeare, he made an important contribution to the development of English prose and the novel, and at a time when government controls on publishing were strict he attempted to comment on abuses of power and political affairs in general. Too often, because of his notorious feud in print with Dr. Gabriel Harvey, he is dismissed as an amusing but lightweight pamphleteer. Reading 'A Cup of News' will correct any such impression. It shows Nashe as an eager participant in the growing intellectual and literary life of the nation at a time when English culture was at its most interesting and creative.

No-one who has read Nashe or takes any interest in the late Elizabethan period can fail to enjoy this book.

A good if somewhat dated book on telephone survey methodology.

No library of a serious survey methodologist is complete without this work. Groves and Khan laid the scientific groundwork for telephone surveys in "Surveys by Telephone" in 1979, and Groves, et. al. then held a conference in Charlotte in 1988 to bring together the state of the art in telephone survey methods. This book is the edited collection of papers presented at that conference, and some additional editoral material.

Yes, 18 years later the material is a little dated, but much is still applicable, and all is necessary for an understanding of how telephone surveys developed.

Be on the lookout for the upcoming Wiley volume of the 2006 Telephone Survey Methods II Conference held in Miami in January, edited by Clyde Tucker, where these subjects are all revisited.

This moviw was a gift for my husband and at first I thought it was just weird! However, after watching the whole mive I've got to say it is at least entertaining. It is full of stars, some before they were very famous. It is very creative and fun to watch.

When I was 18 or so I listened to The Who's music and I also listened to the album Tommy. I can agree that it's not so great, unless you have seen the movie. I finally had the chance to see it recently and I enjoyed enormously.

The movie is a great wink and attempts to laugh at everything, including stardom itself. Nice that it features some performances of the 70s most famous popstars, like Eric Clapton, Tina Turner and Elton John.

Every shot in this movie, from starting with a picknick somewhere in the countryside until Roger Daltrey climbing the same mountainous countryside, is full of nostalgia if you've grown up in the seventies. I can agree with some other reviewers; this movie should not be watched completely sober nor should you be to serious about the plot or characters.

But I don't recall The Who being such a serious band anyway. :-) Enjoy!

I am thrilled that this is finally affordable and on DVD! One of my favorite movies, Tommy captures the lost feeling we all felt in the 70's. We were not sure what we had to hold onto, and music saved a lot of us from drowning in that nothingness. Pete Townsend's opera says it all.

Hard to sum up or interpret the meaning of this film or the motivations of the story composer/writer Pete Townsend, but it's recommended for a look even if not a fan/familiar with the famed rock opera.
Another star would have been awarded had the movie not featured the unwatchable and less than listenable Oliver Reed in the role of Tommy's(Roger Daltrey)stepfather. Mother Ann-Margaret is a little easier on the ears and eyes and shines in a don't-miss scene with beans and soap suds that must have been conceived on strong hallucinogenics.Be warned however that with the exception of "Eyesight to the Blind" "Acid Queen" and maybe another, the majority of songs here are far inferior to the 1969 album versions.
Frankly the music is not as good as the album, even for the all-star cast of Tina Turner, eric Clapton and Elton somebody. First 15 minutes or so are weak and show-tuney, but starts to rock when Clapton appears. There's a message here but who knows what it really is. It's a tale that may be about false prophets, religion or self-awareness, but remains ambiguous enough to be a good topic of discussion. Visually imaginative sets and backgrounds make a feast for the eyes as well as the ears. Save your drug money and see this instead, kids. It is weird!!

I saw this movie when I was young and absolutely loved it. Not a word is spoken, only sung to the Who's rock opera by the same name. I would call this a "modern day silent film". Innovative for its time. Pete Townshend shows that he is one gifted writer and musician.

Briefly, the movie is about a boy who lost his father during World War II before he was born and suffered a tramatic shock when he saw an event. He lost his ability to see and hear and then regains it after a long journey. This is the journey we witness.

When I saw this again the other day, it still had the same impact on me, visually perfect. Since no words are spoken, the story must be conveyed through sight and sound (music), something Tommy is lacking. I grew up in a photographically minded family and remembered my dad liking this movie for the cinematagraphy (he didn't like the Who's music).

This film has a great cast. Roger Daltry, Ann Margret, Tina Turner, Jack Nicholson, Eric Clapton, Elton John and even Keith Moon. It was great to hear Nicholson try to sing, and Elton in those big boots.

You have to like the Who's music to totally enjoy this film, but it still is a visual and musical feast after all these years. Buy and enjoy. This version sounds great on a home theater system!

Oh, if you're too young and don't think you remember the Who's music, think again. All three of the CSIs use the Who's songs as their theme songs. "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" ("Who are you"), "CSI: Miami"("Won't Get Fooled Again") and "CSI: NY" ("Baba O'Riley"). All written by Pete Townshend and performed by the Who.

Yeah, it's got some completely over the top Olivia Newton John "let's get physical" moments, but then again, this WAS the 80s and I lived through this era. "Perfect" is a pretty accurate and literate look at America's obsession with physical beauty, and along the way addresses the major ethical and creative issues that separate hack journalists and great writers. It's a pretty good story!

I am kind of amazed at how quickly a film like this will be dismissed out of hand as plain goofy or some guilty pleasure. I know a lot of journalists, and many of them drive me nuts with their shallow take on the things they are supposed to be elucidating. That's exactly why Perfect works so well with the apparent superficiality of sexual culture and what painful truths it masks. It's got believable characters, a good plot, and is pretty entertaining to boot! How this film can have a 3-star rating and "POC: At World's End" have a 4-star rating is beyond me.

This movie is really good. First off, I am a fan of John Travolta and Jamie Lee Curtis, and upon finishing this movie for the first time, I felt that they work well together. Jamie shows off her killer bod in many scenes throughout, and can really motivate you to work out yourself. It's got a good meaning to the storyline. The soundtrack is phenomenal, with upbeat 80's hits, which makes the movie even better. I could relate with Jamie Lee's character, Jessie, because she likes to be perfect, in everything she does. "What's wrong with wanting to be the best that you can be? What's so wrong with wanting to be perfect?" is a famous line of Jessie. It's one of my favorite quotes -- and, really, what IS so wrong with wanting to be the best that you can be? Check it out. Some scenes I would label "iffy" (i.e. the strip tease scene), but overall the movie is great.

Just the idea of John Travolta portraying an "investigative journalist" is more than enough to start most Bad Movie buffs tittering, but get set for some serious guffawing when you learn that he's cast here as Rolling Stone's top reporter, hot on the trail of an important story: "Health clubs are turning into the singles bars of the '80s," Travolta says, "inflated bodies, airheads..." Of course, he should talk since, two years before this movie was made, Travolta helped define the term "airhead" by flaunting his near-naked, newly "inflated body" -- shaved to the skin and oiled to a sheen -- to promote STAYING ALIVE on the pages of (yes, that's right) Rolling Stone.

The magazine's real editor/owner Jann Wenner, inexplicably agreed to essentially play himself in this flick, the jerk who's certain Travolta is proposing a major cover story: "Hot tubs, alfalfa sprouts." Wenner practically cackles, "we haven't done L.A. in a long time." No parodists need apply to "do" Wenner for, unintentionally, he offers up a definitively hilarious character assassination on himself, whether he's telling us, "Rough night! Mikey Douglas was in town," or being "just folks" while cooking up pasta with Lauren Hutton, or noisily barking over the phone to Travolta, "Eat sh-- and die."

What saved Wenner from having to kill himself after this movie came out (and died) is the fact that the rest of the cast is every bit as embarrassing (talk about ensemble acting). Travolta, working "undercover" at West Hollywood's Sports Connection club but calls it the "Sports Erection," tells aerobics whiz Jamie Lee Curtis, "I think we've come full circle, almost back to Emersonian America," and reveals his reporter's trade secret: "Always treat a famous person as if they're not, a person that's not famous as if they were, and think of your interview as a seduction."

Does it work? Curtis types onot Travolta's computer the immortal entry, "Wanna f--k?" When Laraine Newman, playing "the most used piece of equiptment in the gym," fails to score Travolta, she gets off an unforgettable aside, "I'm gonna go see if I can scare up a gang bang." When Curtis's scandalous past is regurgitated in print, Travolta calls to apologize from Morocco (played none-too-authentically by the L.A. restaurant Dar Magreb) but the unforgiving Curtis rages, "You're a sphincter muscle!" Travolta then wins the biggest laugh in the movie by remarking to a passing waiter, "When Mr. Bowles comes, tell him I had to go back to the States."

Happily, return he does, in time for the "We-don't believe-our-eyes" finale when the whole cast (the chubby Wenner included) dons form-fitting sweats for an aerobics workout.

With Marilu Henner, Anne DeSalvo, and Mathew Reed (as a tough pretty boy who snarls at Travolta, "Just don't call me a male stripper -- I'm an exotic dancer, and don't ever forget it")

This is a godawful movie, a waste of several million bucks by Universal and whoever else was responsible. They could have paid my salary for my entire career for what it cost them to make this moronic notion to capitalize on what some executive must have decided was the "sexy" health club craze of the 80s. Actors doing calisthenics in tights do not a feature film make. Lucas or Spielberg or a mailroom clerk could have told them so.

I saw this film for the first time in the 80's on Cable and found it a bit cheesy. The writing was a bit stiff and the story was a slow moving train ride at times and didn't know where to go. It either wanted to be an overview of the potential dangers of investigative Journalism or a mellow drama about the California Healthclub social scene. It did neither of them well but what it did was take a snap shot at what was trendy about the decade we love to hate. I LOVE IT!
Ms. Curtis is so good for this and even thought she is given horrible dialoge to utter, she is totaly believable as a "Arobic Guru". Buy it for her and her alone. Travolta ia just a folding chair as far as this film is concerned. He adds nothing to the mix other then offering a body for Jamie to emote to.
The basic transfer is good and the price is right.

My daughter loves magnetic books. I was disappointed that this one has such tiny magnets. Of the 26 magnets, maybe 5 were appropriate for a young child. I put the book away until she's much older.

Also, the idea of making letters of the alphabet into animals is really cute, but some of the shapes of letters were so obscured that it's hard to tell what letter it's supposed to be.