# The Arm Again \[was RE: Reorganization and Trial-and-Error - WHOA!\]

**URL:** <http://discourse.iapct.org/t/the-arm-again-was-re-reorganization-and-trial-and-error-whoa/11233>\
**Category:** CSG2009\
**Created:** [August 28, 2009, 6:41pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/the-arm-again-was-re-reorganization-and-trial-and-error-whoa/11233 "2009-08-28T18:41:14Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tedcloak](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/ba8739/32.png) [@tedcloak](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/tedcloak)\
**Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 6:41pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/the-arm-again-was-re-reorganization-and-trial-and-error-whoa/11233/1 "2009-08-28T18:41:14Z")

</div>

[Ted Cloak (2009-08-28 1229 MST)]

> [Ted Cloak (2009-08-12 1334 MST)]
> 
> This week's PCT quiz:
> 
> "The Queen took a large spoonful of soup and displayed her fine person  
> and graceful manner, in alternately looking at the company in various  
> parts of the hall and ordering several kinds of seasoning to be brought  
> to her, by which she fitted her supper to her taste. When this was  
> accomplished, her Majesty exhibited to the admiring spectators the  
> magnificent spectacle of a great queen swallowing her royal supper in a  
> single spoonful, all at once. This was all performed like perfect  
> clockwork, not a feature of her face, nor a motion of any part of her  
> person, especially her arm and her hand could be criticized as out of  
> order."
> 
> Who was the Queen?  
> Who wrote this encomium?
> 
> Ted
> 
> [Ted Cloak (2009-08-05 1705 MST)]
> 
> [Tracy B. Harms (2009-08-04 15:37 Pacific)]
> 
> My finger points here: "Now imagine having to do it in reverse:  
> without looking at the shade, you must choreograph the sequence of  
> twists around each joint that would send the shade along a straight  
> path."
> 
> The error is the idea that the "frightfully complicated" trigonometry  
> is what is controlled, and that this occurs "without looking at the  
> shade." Instead, (the position of) the shade \*is\* looked at. Indeed,  
> it's the primary thing under control. The other angles are not  
> (individually) controlled, as would be seen by the way modest  
> interferences with any given joint would be compensated for by the  
> action of the arm as a whole.
> 
> Tracy
> 
> \> [From Ted Cloak (2009.08.04.1318 MST)]  
> \>  
> \>  
> \>  
> \> Whoa! I just flashed on the big mistake, PCT-wise, in Pinker�s  
> metaphor;  
> \> which I think beautifully illustrates the limitation of conventional  
> \> cognitive neuroscience as a behavior-explainer.  
> \>  
> \> �...
> 
> [From Ted Cloak (2009.08.04.1700 MST)]
> 
> That's exactly what I had in mind.  
> Ted

I tripped and fell on the sidewalk last Friday; suddenly found myself  
running, trying to get my feet under me, failing, and sprawling more or less  
face down.

Apparently I used my left hand and arm to break my fall. A few hours later,  
reaching for something, I felt serious discomfort in my shoulder (rotator  
cuff, probably).

As I repeated the reach several times, however, I could almost feel the  
low-level control systems reorganizing, although I noticed no difference in  
the trajectory of my hand or the angles of my elbow, shoulder, or wrist.  
After three or four iterations, I could do the reach without discomfort.

PCT at work.

Greets.  
Ted

> **···**
>
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Ted Cloak\<tcloak@unm.edu\> wrote: