I had a very interesting "dream" early this morning.  While dozing on the couch during a wakeful night, I think around 4:00 am, I was visited by two of our dogs, who had passed many years ago, but are buried outside the house in the garden. One of them, in particular was very vivid. In the "dream", I was still lying on the couch, as I had been, and the dogs came up to the couch wagging their butts (they were australian shepherds and hence had no real tails to wag). The female, Zoe, danced around and then jumped up on the couch with me as she use to do, nestling into the cushions and giving me her head to scratch.  The most memorable aspect of the experience is the very distinct smell of freshly groomed dog hair. My dreams don't usually come with olfactory senses included. What a pleasant encounter. I am getting to the point where I don't make distinctions between dreams and encounters any more. I don't really see the difference.

There are many unanswered questions about why some experiences are more tactile/sensuous than others. The tactile ones do seem to make a stronger impression.

I was reminded of that when I went to a book signing for a book I mentioned on another thread
http://afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1281547669
that I plan to comment on sometime.

This particular audience tended towards the senior set and focused on the author's hospice experiences, not exactly a surprise. The author invited peopel to share their own experiences of encounters with newly-passed over loved ones. Some did, and it was obviously an act of bravery for soem to speak as the cultural taboo against this sort of thing was strong for them. Some of the experiences included touch or hugs, and that certainly made them more "real" for the people involved.

So why are some experiences tactile/sensuous and others not?

Of course, with dogs, its all sensuous. I could tell my dogs apart by their distinct odors. What is more sensuous than barking-wet-dog-shaking-off (unless it is one that just chased off a skunk)?