Ryan I have fascinated for a long time by the sequence that you describe. Moshe guided me through my first experience with it and I remain amazed by its efficacy. It is an expecially powerful way to rehabiliatate any part of the body that has been injured where the injury is to a portion of the body where there is bi-lateral symmetry. You memorize with exquisite detail the sensations of moving, say, your right arm (uninjured) in ways that are just beyond what you can do without any pain (the importance of feedback in all applications of Feldenkrais patternings) in your left arm (the injured one). You then transfer WITHOUT ATTEMPTING TO MOVE all the sensations memorized from the uninjured arm to the injured arm until you can feel them perfectly and then and only then, may you carefully move the "injured" arm. My own experience (quite limited compared to yours) has been that this transfer works (your description) if and only if the visual (sometimes there are auditory stimuli as well) stimuli trigger the micro muscle movements that are associated with the other representational systems (indeed, visualization is largely nonsense unless it triggers the appropriate micro muscle movements).  You appropriately point out that there is a distinction here but it is unclear how to characterize it. As you say, "So, imagining the movements, what the heck is it?"  My first inclination is to point to the internal/external subscript on the various variable in the 4 tuple (the representations in the channels that define FA), and simply say that the actual movements on the right hand side of the body (let's say) are an example of sensations arising within the body through actual movement while the imagined movements are the consequences of the oversale transfer of the sensations (or perhaps, better said, the activation of the corresponding muscle groups on the unexercised side of the body (left, in this case). Remember that while the contralateral neurological pathways dominate (under normal circumstances) the sides of the body, there are extensive ipsolateral ennervations. I am intrigued by the possibility that they may be the basis for this class of exercises. Someone far more qualified would have to test this. However that works out (or not), you point out, "I want to say that it's first access, that people are producing micro-muscle movements while they are imagining the movements. However, I'm not convinced." and "Do f2 mappings consist solely of words?" Nor am I - suppose, for contrast, we think about it as follows: we are confident from observations, modeling and even interviews that there are people: engineers, mathematicians, architects... whose professional competencies depend on a visual syntax. Yes, of course, some of them at some points in the computations and design work will include verbal (f2) cues to assist, stimulate... the sequence of images that they are manipulating. Let's recognize this as an example of a visual f2 mapping which is patently non-verbal - in other words, a visual, non-verbal f2 mapping, The imagined movements portion of the descriptions in this discussion strikes me as a corresponding example of a kinesthetic, non-verbal f2 mapping. Athletes, Feldenkrais practitioners, dancers... are the experts in kinesthetic, non-verbal f2 mappings. They are the counterparts of engineers, mathematicians and architects in visual, non-verbal, f2 mappings. What would be a brilliant contribution would be the development of a syntax of each of these systems: one for the visual non-verbal f2 mappings and one for the kinesthetic, non-verbal f2 mappings. What do you think? All the best, John