Originally posted by PawnokeyholeActually it is a gender problem.
Could there be a gender difference here? Dubious lore has it that females are better at multi-tasking. Don't tell me you find it equally easy both ways, do you?
(And you're rotating an arm and leg on the *same* side of your body in opposite directions, right?)
There is a link between both brain halves.
Most humans use the left half for logical purposes (right handed people) and the right half for creative tasks (left handers are more creative btw i am right handed).
This link is crippled in brains of men and well used in the brains of women. They are able to use both halfs where men only use one at a time.
Problem mathematics: Man use logical half. Women mix up and sometimes use the creative half for math (imagining the number not thinking logical). But women can do two thinks or more at a time (phone while ironing or mast... while thinking about the next weeks to do list or simply lie while telling us they love us.
Thats the reason while they always ask us for their mothers next visit while we are watching sports.
But we are leading this world and get more wage for the same job. So I am happy.
Also the EQ (emotional intelligence) is affected through this fact.
Originally posted by NemesioBy "rotate" I mean move ain a circle. Make the right arm and right leg straight, rotate the right arm clockwise, and rotate the right leg anticlockwise. You have no difficulty doing this?
I think I have misunderstood what you wrote, because I can do
what I think you're saying with no difficulty on both sides...
Can you explain what you mean by 'rotate an arm and leg?'
Nemesio
It's interesting that there may be some exceptions. Perhaps they are related to ambidexterity.
Originally posted by RochadeAre you sure you are not just regurgitating sexist, simplistic, pop-psychological humbug?
Actually it is a gender problem.
There is a link between both brain halves.
Most humans use the left half for logical purposes (right handed people) and the right half for creative tasks (left handers are more creative btw i am right handed).
This link is crippled in brains of men and well used in the brains of women. They are able to use both halfs ...[text shortened]... same job. So I am happy.
Also the EQ (emotional intelligence) is affected through this fact.
For example, could you locate a scholarly reference showing that the corpus callosum is "crippled" in men? As far as I was aware, there is only a slight mean difference in the mass of these connecting fibres, and that the functional significance thereof is moot.
I suspect you are being deliberately provocative. I hope so, as the alternative is less flattering.
Originally posted by Pawnokeyholei'm with nemesio here ...
By "rotate" I mean move ain a circle. Make the right arm and right leg straight, rotate the right arm clockwise, and rotate the right leg anticlockwise. You have no difficulty doing this?
It's interesting that there may be some exceptions. Perhaps they are related to ambidexterity.
i can do it in about 8 different methods which fit your description ...
i can do it by linking my hand and foot ...(link the "forwards" component, with arms and legs having opposite height components)
but easiest seems to be to just let them swing on their own and not know what i am doing.
i do not consider myself ambidextrous, but i do prefer to use my left on ocassions. (but my mother is left handed at some things and right at others, and my son is left handed)
Originally posted by NemesioMy guess is that it helps a lot to be a musician. We are trained to do different things with different limbs simultaneously. Many people also have problems doing different things with each hand, for example doing circles with your right hand and vertical lines with your left hand. I can do that easily. For tasks involving the arm and the leg, it might help more to be an organist than a cellist, although I found the circles quite easy, too.
I think I have misunderstood what you wrote, because I can do
what I think you're saying with no difficulty on both sides...
Can you explain what you mean by 'rotate an arm and leg?'
Nemesio
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeHere's a scholarly piece I think you will find interesting. It may not answer all your questions, but it's a start.
Are you sure you are not just regurgitating sexist, simplistic, pop-psychological humbug?
For example, could you locate a scholarly reference showing that the corpus callosum is "crippled" in men? As far as I was aware, there is only a slight mean difference in the mass of these connecting fibres, and that the functional significance thereof is moot. ...[text shortened]... pect you are being deliberately provocative. I hope so, as the alternative is less flattering.
http://www.bme.jhu.edu/~jdiedric/pubs/JNeuroPhys_2003.pdf
Originally posted by msteachThat's the sort of thing I'm looking for. Unfortunately, it has to do with the coordination of contralateral arms, not ipsilateral limbs. Still, definitely interesting.
Here's a scholarly piece I think you will find interesting. It may not answer all your questions, but it's a start.
http://www.bme.jhu.edu/~jdiedric/pubs/JNeuroPhys_2003.pdf
Originally posted by flexmoreEither RHP is a circus of neurological freaks, or my hypothesis stands in need of revision.
i'm with nemesio here ...
i can do it in about 8 different methods which fit your description ...
i can do it by linking my hand and foot ...(link the "forwards" component, with arms and legs having opposite height components)
but easiest seems to be to just let them swing on their own and not know what i am doing.
i do not consider myself ambid ...[text shortened]... (but my mother is left handed at some things and right at others, and my son is left handed)
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeWell, I am certainly not neurologically typical, but I doubt you need to be a neurological freak to be able to do your exercise. However, there's also the possibility that some people believe they can do it, but if you would watch them do it, you would see that it doesn't work that well. I remember a teacher who believed that the brain is able to think two rhythms separately, while I and another student believed that if you play two different rhythms at the same time, either one of them gets automatic or you set them in relation to each other. She tried to prove her point by playing something like 3 against 4 on the piano, but it was easy to hear that she was only focussing on one rhythm at a time, and the other one became unsteady, which she didn't notice herself.
Either RHP is a circus of neurological freaks, or my hypothesis stands in need of revision.
Originally posted by msteachI emailed Dr. Diedrichsen, who authored the article you cited msteach, and he put me in the right direction. Here's the academic reference for which I was searching.
Here's a scholarly piece I think you will find interesting. It may not answer all your questions, but it's a start.
http://www.bme.jhu.edu/~jdiedric/pubs/JNeuroPhys_2003.pdf
Baldissera, F., Cavallari, P., & Civaschi, P. (1982). Preferential coupling between voluntary movements of ipsilateral limbs. Neuroscience Letters, 34, 95-100.
ABSTRACT:
Single or cyclical voluntary movements of flexion and extension of the hand, performed in a parasagittal plane, are immediately and naturally coupled with the same movements of the foot only if the extremities follow simultaneously the same direction. Instead, great care and attention are required to move the two segments in opposite directions, an association which tends to reverse spontaneously to the 'easy' pattern. This rule is followed independently of the muscles employed, since it holds both when the hand is prone and when it is supine. The same principle also applies to many other couples of voluntary movements of the ipsilateral limbs or of different segments in the same limb.