Mike Sigman wrote:
Cool, but I made a very valid point about what "internal arts" means and you can't address it.
Won't address any more, at the moment -- not the same thing, on several levels.
I am dealing in mechanics and mechanics only, at the moment, so as to have no further cause for these pointless semantic disputes between three language systems and three distinct banks of cultural assumptions underlying the points in question that have severe problems for mutual mappig of concepts.
We have more than proven here, I think, that the same law holds for argument as holds for orbital mechanics -- three body problems do not have discrete solutions after only a very few iterations.
When I have fleshed out the mechanics of the aiki interactions in those terms with those two reference systems to my satisfaction, I may get back to your system of references.
Until then, if you have anything to add along these lines, please do, or not, as you wish.