Interesting

[jaybreak]

Let me read the shorter article first. I'm not sure it's worth the money in the firsts place. He doesn't go where we go, but he does raise doubts that I find useful.

That's fine.

Rupert mentioned the universe's "habits," as in what we know of the universe scientifically . That would jibe with what we teach here about the universe (creation) being alive and autonomous. What we might discern, through science, as mechanistic laws would really be what the universe has developed so far as its "habit," like any other created being. If the universe is working on a much different time scale and scope, which I believe it is, what are really habits might appear to be static mechanisms. We don't see them changing because it's moving very slowly; we see a terribly small fraction of its "lifespan" (don't know what else to call it). Our understanding of the universe is a matter of perceptual scale, not degree of knowledge.