> i would also (respectfully) disagree that sense of motion falls
> (only) under sense of touch. yes, motion is percieved by inner ear -
> but there are other aspects that guide our sense of motion, aren't
> there (visual?) couldn't it be a seperate sense that draws from
> various inputs?
okay, i agree that it is not only touch, but does incorporate vision,
hearing, smell (not sure about taste) as well but i still don't believe that
there is anything else at work. if i remember correctly, i said that
anything that is slightly obscur about an observation is simply down to a
misinterpretation of the collected data. i don't believe there is need for
more than 6 senses. from my own experience, proffessors have a tendancy to
do a bit of overkill when clasifying the inhabitants of their respective
worlds, most of which are unnecessary.
Turning now to the question of passing on energy, what form does the energy
take when it is passed between the actors? surely you cannot be saying that
anything physical passes between the actors so what form can this energy
possibly take? Perhaps it is simply down to the 6th sense after all,
detecting the changes in alpha wave patterns emitted by the brains of the
actors around them. in this way, energy IS being passed, but it being
passed all the time so all that is being done is detection of changes in
this energy. that reduces it to the 6th sence that has already been
documented.
i dont know what your knowledge of science is but if anything here is
unclear, let me know and i'll explain. it is not my intention to baffle you
with science.
Ghadanga
Rich
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:11 BST