I realise what you were getting at--that's why I provided some sources and argument to back up my interpretation. When I asked my question of you, I wasn't challenging you--I was asking a question. I honestly don't believe interpretation of fiction works the same way as the scientific investigation or a rigorous theological argument: speculation and extrapolation are half the fun. It's not like I believe there's a dragon in my garage, so I'm not making claims about the real world; indeed, I make no claim that my interpretation is authoritative. You're the only person making absolute claims like "It's not true" and "Force ghosting and balance are unrelated", so I don't see why the burden should fall on me, given that, again, negatives can be proven for fictional universes. I provided my reasoning. I didn't "prove" my case conclusively because when it comes to fiction, IMHO what's explicitly in the text isn't conducive to interesting discussion (nor is contradicting others without further comment, for that matter). Why discuss the obvious?