Dave Miller wrote:
...In the same fashion, the fact that you have chosen to reject science at some level doesn't mean that physics doesn't explain Aikido. Nor does it mean that the rest of us are somehow on a lesser plane of understanding because we don't hold to the same ideas about ki as you do...
Please don't use such rudeness in my presence.
First of all, is Jeff's rejection of science a "fact?" You say that it is, but I don't think I read in Jeff's post that he utterly, completely, rejects science.
Second, your (unfounded) assertion that he claims to be on a greater plane of understanding is simply insulting.
Science has, at it's very core, the willing acceptance of new ideas based on new, provable data. Science never stops. It accepts every single "fact" only as long as it takes new information to modify that fact. Some take a very long time, but that doesn't mean that science has closed the book on them. The book doesn't close.
I do get tired of hearing the phrase "Oh, it's just physics," used to mean, "There's nothing mysterious or magical about it." Really? Gravity is just physics, too. How does it work, please?
In the end, someone may find out that ki is fully explainable using the terminology of physics. That won't lessen it one bit. But if you're uncomfortable with the idea of ki, at least don't be so rude about it.
Given that you started this thread, and then jumped on Jeff the way you did, begins to read a little bit like trolling.
Jeff's aikido is not your aikido is not my aikido. You will never change that fact, and you're making unpleasant noises while you try.