In some ways, my view of the nervous system has become my dichotomous. I tend to think of the correlary discharge as a means whereby certain controlling or overseeing parts of the brain can monitor what other parts are doing. On the other hand, the correlary discharge seems to interconnect different parts of the NS in a meaningful way.

While we, perhaps naively, first think of the NS as a one-to-one, stimulus/response, spaghetti network, we then shifted our view to encompass the Harvard law and the fact that neurons almost always make thousands of connections and receive thousands of inputs.In other words, the NS can create it's own signals and is an active processor, not a passive reciever. However, we also introduce the notion that the NS is really just a mind-boggling massive number of interconnected neurons.

This more complex view was at first quite confusing, because it is hard to imagine how such as system could keep track of itself- how it could operate coherently, let alone evolve and develope reliably.The notion of Central pattern generation adds a degree of organization by explaining that neurons although autonomous to some degree, can function as units in a coalition or circuit of neurons. Some of the interconnections can be accounted for by thses circuits. By noting that there are correlary discharges, we account for even more of these thousands of interconnections, as well as a collection of behaviors mentioned in class. (motion sickness etc.)

These corrolary discharges can be seen as the way that circuits of neurons communicate with each other and also as the means by which neurons that comprise a circuit may communicate with each other. We would expect that a circuit needs to be aware what its parts are doing, and also what other circuits as a whole are doing. Please let me knwo if this overall view is correct. have I charecterized the CD properly? have i left out important details? Where types of research are being done that have relevance to the above discussion? I'll lok on the web myself, but please mail me any links you know of. Thanks.

Sounds pretty good to me. Yes, recognition of groups of neurons interconnected in particular ways helps to account for coherence of activity (as in CPG's), and interconnections between such groups of neurons, informing each other of their current state, further helps to account for coherence. Just be careful of "aware of", since what we are of course really talking about (at least at this point), is neurons, synapses, action potentials, and the like. Not sure of relevant web sites, but happy to have any you run onto, and to keep my eyes open. PG