"Perhaps an understanding of sound could not come without an understanding of all senses." ---Richard R. [July 10 / 2015]
Each sense is a macrame of its sensibilia. ---Nathan Coppedge
"Thus, for sight there seems to be an immediate/non-immediate way of distributing the terms." ---Richard R. [July 10 / 2015]
If within is without, without is within ---Nathan Coppedge
"For any sound, one cannot create the sound themselves and even if they did they would already have to be an ounce or a sprinkle of forgetfulness in/with the thing, because if one can/could hear the thing then it must already be there. For any sound then, the cause is completely lost." ---Richard R. [July 10 / 2015]
Sound is in some way psychic, is what one must conclude, to hear a symphony ---Nathan Coppedge
For Richard's information, the general method, if you have patience for it, has been:
Real jolts ---> Big jumps
"All sounds then are not sounds, but noises." ---Richard R. [July 10 / 2015]
Here, I agree. And (surprisingly) I have said the exact same thing already on Yahoo! Answers.
"So I don’t remember my alien mother or my alien father." ---Richard R. [July 4 / 2015]
We relatively exist ---Nathan Coppedge
"For this theory to work everything must be covered in guilt ... as it could always still have a memory of the thing but misidentify the thing itself, and yet still act with it through a misinterpretation that could exist as a misidentification but not as something that could use the thing differently then it was designed to be used..." ---Richard R. [July 9th, 2015]
Or, perhaps what he meant was that one must design a new purpose for the thing, e.g. metaphysics, which it did not originally have...
Overall, I give Richard R. high marks for his profound thoughts, many of them being ones I wished I had had myself (rather recently).