memory place identity

If I need to post this elsewhere, please let me know. See y'all Monday.

EXPERIMENTAL SITUATION:
Rig goggles to give real time visual feedback in MIRROR IMAGE or 3RD PERSON.
Give the participant motor tasks (ex: putting on shoes).

QUESTION 1:
One question I'd like to ask: after doing this a while, where do you experience yourself to be moving FROM?

EXPERIENTIAL PARAMETERS VARIED:
One experiential parameter being varied is PLACEMENT, or motor view(point): the tacit "here" to which your movements refer. So, the body-reference (instead of the object-reference) of a perceptual event.
Another experiential parameter being varied is an established level involving both MEMORY and PERCEPTION: specifically, motor memory and visual perception not lining up on the established level.

SPECULATION:
I expect that a new body-reference (and so a new sense of PLACE) will have to be developed in order to make sense of the experience.

An analogy: a stereogram. (If you're not familiar with these, I recommend the stereogram of the lilium flower on the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereogram) Two similar but dissonant images claim a similar object reference. Induced diplopia (splitting the visual body-reference) allows these to at first be experienced as double vision: diplopic divergence. The doubled image of the stereogram eventually converges in a 3rd image, this time with stereoscopic depth. A new depth-wise orientation and concomitant body-reference allows the dissonant images to reference both a non-dislocated object as well as a non-dislocated body. The experience is accompanied with the odd feeling of being in a new or different dimension.

In the experiment, motility and vision offer a "double image," experienced first in a manner analogous to the diplopic divergence undergone in looking at the stereogram. If the experience is going to begin to make sense, the participant must begin to experience the dissonance itself as a new level, a kind of depth with an accompanying body-reference.

For instance: say we do 3RD PERSON visual feedback. The participant is dealing with the dissonance of experiencing motility in the first person (as in movement in actual space), and vision in the 3rd person (as in movement in the virtual space of a video game). I speculate participants who manage to make sense of the situation may do so by developing a 2nd person body-reference, a bodily "here" that is also a "you," a 3rd party who can be referenced by both motility and vision, despite the fact that one is from 1st person and one from 3rd. Note the potential difficulty that participants will simply suppress vision in order to accomplish the task in a remembered way. Task will matter: it must be something for which they depend on vision.

QUESTION 2:
Does this ever feel like relating to one's self across time?

Memory and perception being dissonant, I speculate that the participant would begin to experience unusual expansions and contractions of lived time. She may, for instance, begin to experience a time interval between motility and vision. Note that this could be difficult to distinguish from performance difficulties due to the novelty of the situation.

PREP
We could prep participants by viewing and discussing stereograms and stereoscopic phenomena together, working with them to develop some phenomenological vocabulary for the internal articulations of experiences like these, working to avoid technical terms, especially controversial or technically ambiguous ones like "subject" and "object," or mind-body distinctions.

PHILOSOPHICAL RUMINATION:
I'm looking for a doubling to occur that splits the original. Derrida uses a similar description of the evolving relation of form and matter in the event of the materialization of language as writing in the "La Brisure" chapter of De La Grammatologie. 1+1=3. Two senses of the "here" to which my movements refer results in a splitting of what we might think of as an original or absolute position: my sense  of "here," where I stand and move and see from. This suggests it is not an absolute position after all: the sense of here that I come into everyday situations with may also have been established in a similar way, as the level of multiple body-references.