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

Reply via email to