Hi Jack, As you're probably aware, possibility to choose freely is fundamental to our human nature. And with freedom to choose, with free will, it came the possibility for error. Because a poor thing would be our freedom, if we did not have the freedom to choose wrongly. Unfortunately, there are many more ways to choose wrongly than to choose rightly. But fortunately, in between all of them there exists also the possibility of choosing rightly. When we do that we are reunited with God, who only wishes us good choosing. And this time (if we had taken the burden of choosing rightly under our own shoulders), we're reunited with Him in full waking consciousness.
What Ray Tomes proposes is compatible with what I think. The only need would be to find a standing wave formulation for what I prefer to think and denominate as a vortical or circular movement. I assume that a kind of circular, or better, spherical standing wave will do it. I agree with your "natural selection" thoughts regarding theories; and the "restriction of experimentation" is something I'm particularly aware of :-) Best regards, Mauro Taylor J. Smith wrote: Hi Mauro, 10-25-09 I just prefer particles; I don't "believe" in them. Ray Tomes, owner of the Cycles Group, goes futher than than what you suggest: Ray proposes that matter, in any form, is a standing wave, I also like Dirac's epos, as explained on Vortex by Don Hotson -- a plausible mechanism for action-at-a-distace across the universe. Theories should be judged by the design equations and inventios they facillitate; natural selection will pick the winners. The downside of any theory is the restriction of experimentation. Jack Smith