That’s really it exactly. Ptolemaic “explanations” are not something the mind can grasp and grapple with to shake out new, deeper theories. This is everywhere in physics, though: what causes a magnet to attract another? “Lines of force.” No, that’s just a elegant description of what happens in the region around the magnet. Whatever happened to HOW?
Digital physics? If the universe is digital, surely something like this is going on.
Although of course the issue with LaFreniere’s hypothesis is that assuming matter is “made of” waves begs a central question.
We need to hypothesize an object (shape) contoured by space (no shape, nothing) in order to explain anything.
LaFreniere is stuck without any objects to begin with; what are his “waves” contoured by? Do they extend “infinitely”?
Gaede assumes a single closed-loop thread. I think this accounts for much, but I still have some issues with it. E.g. mechanisms of ‘touch’, formation of surfaces, then of atoms, etc. Perhaps I can’t quite visualize what he means yet but I think it needs elucidation anyway.
For LaFreniere’s theory I always imagined a giant block of latex in which the waves propagate.
Science can never answer the why, only the how.
Indeed, and the problem with modern physics is that it only pretends to answer the how.
That’s true. It’s extremely intellectually disingenuous of the scientific community. However, as with other things, there’s always an agenda behind it, with the attendant propaganda.