> >Newcomer:
> >This was what I meant about the problems inherent in assuming that that 
> >Keichi is a contributing factor, rather than an unrelated 
> >observer/ reference point.
> 
> Modern physics suggests that phenomenon do not exist independently of
> observation.  What happens depends on how you look at it.
>
Well I say the cat is neither merely alive or dead,
but if you chose to "observe" and open Shrodinger's box,
you'd have a half-dead, half-alive, totally radioactive and 100% pissed 
off nuclear cat on your hands.
And assuming that just because no-ones around that the tree doesn't make 
a noise when it falls is bloody stupid: I mean, "what makes you so sure?".
Assuming that a phenomenon does not exist independent of observation
 is like assuming that you are the only "real" being in the universe, and 
that all other beings, objects and the like are merely highly advanced 
figments of their imagination.
"Putting your 'faith' in pyhsics" is, as I beleive Terry Pratchett once 
said, "like beleiving in the postman". You know he's _out_ there, but you 
never see him......
Sorry, I find the concept of exclusiveness to be one of the sillyier ideas 
come up with by "modern" science. 
Now that I think of it, who comes up with points like this, and WHY?!?
I mean, what RELEVANCE does theorys like this have? Really, "when you get 
right down to it"? I'm at a loss for an explaination.

However my point remains untouched by your comment:
Keiichi is NOT a _part_ of the Norn entity, rather a reference point.
If you need an observer to validify my argument, _we_ are not sufficeint,
since, Fujishima-sensei has chosen to only show us the possible-reality in 
which the Norn-aspect Belldandy is the dominant manifestation by my 
theory.
Perhaps, (following along my theory about other beings, eg the 
Kami-sama/God/Odin/So on entity being multi-aspectual, thus existing in 
different manifestations of reality)
Kami-sama makes a suitible witness, being multi-present to observe all the 
aspects of the Norn entity.

Newcomer
(who has just noticed that , via twisted physics, has not only used his 
own theory to validate his own theory, but, to top matters off, has used 
"god" as his witness ^_^    )
(Newcomer also feels that the "laws" of physics, like the law of Gravity, 
aren't so much "laws" as _guidelines_ that have always proven to be the 
case _UP UNTIL THIS POINT_ . I feel no one can say with absolute cetainty 
that, however unlikey the occurence, that ceterus parubus, that a rock, 
when dropped from a height, that has, up untill now always fallen down 
that it won't, when dropped once more, fall upwards.
And the laws of phyisics can smoke my pipe. Or make it smoke. Whatever. 
(^_^)