David Sim wrote:
I suppose it's similar to the way that westerners are quite happy with the concept of 'gravity' and the basic laws describing that even though it's known to be inaccurate, and has been superceded by general relativity. But it'd be more or less impossible (or at least impractical) to do the maths to explain relativistically how to make a plane stay up, so we use gravity instead.
Out of interest, has there been much research done on finding out (if and) how ki effects can fit into a western physiological / scientific framework?
I'm not sure why planes are such a mystery here. Its perfectly explainable and quite basic why planes fly. Of course the reason is the airfoil of the wing generates the air on top to travel faster than the air on the bottom creating low pressure on top of the wing and high pressure on the bottom. This pressure differential pushes the wing up, therefore the plane goes up. What is so mystical about that? And what is inaccurate about gravity or Newton's laws? Am I missing something here?
Now the jo trick to me is still mistycal, because redirecting of forces to the ground while someone pushes on a cantelever (arm and jo) is something that I don't comprehend at all...Thats a trick allright and I must say I'm still very skeptical.