Following a tangent here.

As to views on dropping and/or rising, if the hips stay the same height always, this means that the kua are bearing the resistance that exists in the potential energy gravity always puts on us, which means part of the musculature and structure is working against this and not towards the technique.

If one drops in a swooping manner forward, rising at the end by the natural transition into a bow stance from a rear stance, one can capture that potential energy, and force it into the path of least resistance, forward. Additionally, one may then time dropping under another's center of gravity, whereas, in level footwork, one would always need a lower stance, an impossibility for a tall fighter using level waist theory against an equal but shorter fighter, whose stance, being equal in skill and strength, will always be under the taller fighters.

If one leaves the hips level and, from a forward position like a bow stance, must shift back to a rear weighted position, and the hips are level the whole time, then momentum shifts back in exactly the way that the rear leg is not stable in bearing, like sliding straight back on a chair with wheels, it is not the wheels that make you continue to roll backward at the end, it is the kinetic energy backwards. If, in the same manner(pressing back on the lead leg), one rises in an arc over the top, and then sinks into the rear weighted stance, one transitions into a secure stance without momentum driving further backward.

These are just observations. It is my view that level waist work cannot manage kinetic energy, or harness potential energy where gravity is concerned, and given this, its chances of harnessing more metaphysical energies seems unlikely.

Additionally, the idea that level waist work hides intentions, while interesting as a concept, in practice does not seem as effective to me as constantly changeable waist height. It is easier to lose track of a versatile opponent than a predictable one, and choosing one aspect is, by definition, predictable.

Taoism scoffs at alwayses and nevers for logical reasons, and philosophical taoism scoffs at the supernatural for good reasons. It seems to me more fruitful to be sublime at the ordinary, as a martial artist, a person, and a taoist, than to pursue vain superhumanisms.