I'm reading the paper "THE PROBLEM OF THE INTERRELATION OF CO-ORDINATION AND LOCALIZATION", which is written by N. Bernstein.
The paper said
"The degree of tension of a muscle is a function, in the first place, of its innervational (tetanic and tonic) condition E, and, in the second place, of its length at a given instant and of the velocity with which this length changes over time."
I don't know why the tension of a muscle is the function of those values.
If that is just assumption, why the assumption can be established? Thanks!

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In physics, tension is proportional to strain and strain is proportional to change in length per unit length.. so second part seems like a standard result i.e., Hooke's Law $\endgroup$ – yathish Aug 28 '18 at 16:08
  • $\begingroup$ So does the variable E roles like Young's modulus? I understand that the tension is the function of the change of length. But isn't young's modulus constant value? The paper said E also means the degree of excitation. Can you explain me what E can mean? $\endgroup$ – Kim Jaewoo Aug 29 '18 at 5:27
  • $\begingroup$ E in your question is not Young's modulus. It's innervation condition, as you put it, and I've no idea what it is. Young's modulus is indeed constant. Whenever length changes, there'll be a corresponding change in tension so that Young's modulus is constant. $\endgroup$ – yathish Aug 29 '18 at 6:34
  • $\begingroup$ In the paper, E is like the additional force to operate active motion. I didn't know about that because I didn't read that after that content. Thank you for the advise. $\endgroup$ – Kim Jaewoo Aug 29 '18 at 6:41

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.