The theory has had many peer reviews and was last reviewed in depth publicly by Juan Carlos Kuri Pinto. You will need to be logged into facebook to read the review.
Juan is an ESPOL postgrad studying for PHD in computational neuroscience and the founder of the Strong Artificial Intelligence Facebook group, along with Ai philosophy group, surprisingly for such groups, they have attracted some of the worlds leading researchers with many strong debates over the past couple of years.
ITS NOT A DIPOLE, ITS A LEAST ACTION PRINCIPLE OR FRACTAL ETC :
Before any of the above developments were so clear, common objections by reviewers like Juan (facebook link above) to these dipole like cortex morphology images are there could be other solutions for such a dipole appearance. i.e. The least action principle of wiring and/or fractal principles. My most previous paper actually utilized the least action principle for the cortex, but if anything least action implies EM forces. I hope it is clear with the above statements, that all of the primary cortex morphogenetic (not just the field lines) features have both magnetic structure correlation as well as a magnetic mechanism for their production.
The least action principle primarily derives from the field of quantum mechanics itself, and is a sub explanation within the hierarchy of electromagnetism and gravity i.e. Its still a principle of something larger. Which is a better description of a dipole ? maxwell's simple equations which produce the depth of field lines, or a larger massive database full of casual action principle vectors that still requires a dipole like template to put them together just to look like one ? Calling Dipole structures a collection of action principles may be true, in that it can be achieved mathematically, but that is not the parsimonious response to the problem.
The fractal idea is simpler to reply to as a fractal is a mathematical description describing (n) recursions in geometrical space. There is also nothing incompatible with electromagnetism and fractals either, these fractals are common when EMF is forced through phase transitions in confined spaces and changes in matter. i.e. Lightning bolts are a common example. Also we have the recursion of the brains signals well defined and know self similarity applies more to the limbic system than cortex. Calling the cortex a fractal or a least action principle product is then just a mathematical version of denial analogous to calling a chair a random co-incidence of atoms that looks like one. I am not complaining, about these objections. It is far better to have critique to consider than none (if its reasonable and honest).
SUMMARY: Bear in mind maxwell's equations produce radial symmetry, when we know a dipole has broken symmetry. So this cortex dipole part of the brain is more complex in its production mechanics than any dipole known to us, so requires an explanation to match. Thats why this is not an easy theory to present. I can try to make it simple/general to get in one take (as in the poster) and then it is critiqued for its lack of detail. I can go as complicated and deep at all angles (as in the paper) and then it is easier for the concept to be misrepresented via many details. as it is to prove any general theory for a massively complex system.
It has always been vital for me to invite/ deal with these points, many which have helped me develop the work, and get rid of any mistakes (and sometimes delete entire large parts of it). Conversely sometimes they often they lead me into more exciting new areas. So If you have any new scientific points which you think illustrate an error, or can even destroy the premise, please send to me at Lanzalaco"@"gmail.com. I always credit such critics for their role in stimulating me in this manner, either at the end of publications or online as here.
Current progress with the Dipole Neurology theory of brain structure and function is increasing its scope. This is due to the obvious large top down principles as well as the theory applying back to the development of bilateral nervous systems. This requires concentrating on splitting up the work into several main areas covered by a paper for each.
1. Cortical EMS (Electromagnetic Multipole Solution)
2. Limbic EMS and Cortical EMS
(1. and 2. are currently in one paper just now)
3. Neurodevelopmental mechanisms
(got the go ahead to submit end 2012)
4. Evolutionary implications for the theory
(long way off but touched on here )
6. Application to Artificial General Intelligence
(started a paper on that here - "just" passed the first round review)
7. Application to whole brain simulation.
(some posts here and here on this site)
UPDATE: Since the 2009 spate of peer reviews the theory now has increased verified evidence. The images below are a fast hit intro and shows the cortex Dipole, both human developed and track marking in chick cortex neurodevelopment (from an independent lab). Another lab has also duplicated these results. These labs are not in agreement with me over my magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) mechanism. i.e. The model i propose for Ca2+ waves through radial glia Connexin/Pannexin yet, but it will be interesting to see what happens over the long term. HERE I point out why its unlikely to be electro-osmosis dipole/multipole (unless they adapt it be MHD).
Far left and Right, From V. Fleury, 2011. A change in boundary conditions induces a discontinuity of tissue flow in chicken embryos and the formation of the cephalic fold Eur. Phys. J. E (2011) 34: 73 Top middle, Cortical Dissection (Mirrored) Williams and Glunbegovic.,1992. Bottom Middle, Dipole simulation (Belcher., J., 2005 MIT education). Note that the MIT magnetic simulation is relatively simple maxwell plot. The cortex is more complex dipole (poster here), developing in the closed space of the skull by radial glia, so feeds back on itself, giving rise to broad domain wall, magnetic domains (which are surface folds and cortex columns), as well as clear asymmetrical (Yakovlevian) torque Asymmetry was taken out cortex image above by sagital mirroring to make more clear the toroidal lines in cortex. All the above is consistent with majority of neurodevelopmental mechanisms and models known (to me) so far.