Ok i have some questions regarding this POAMS stuff:To me the POAMS approach seems so much more natural and complete that I have trouble taking the standard view seriously any more.
If they are doing away with photons in favour of a constant that determines how fast the frames of reality flick past, then how do they explain the slit experiments that show photons diffracting? Whats more if they are doing away with photons, what becomes of elecrons of any other subatomic particle - they behave in a very similar manner to photons.
If their case is purely semantic ie. its quantitatively the same as the previous mechanics then do they not fall prey to postivistic arguments themselves? If it's not quantitatively the same then there must be some divergence from current theory if that is the case then there should be a way of testing their views experimentally. In either case there should be a lot of mathematics that is conspicuously absent from their webpage demonstrating their ideas, perhaps its in some of their references, (which if you restrict yourself to looking only at articles published in journals you see is pretty spartan)
Quantum field theory lead to the standard model the most accurate theory of particle physics that exists, it seems very odd to turn around say there is no such thing as fields when the most accurate theory capable of specifying obervables to a stupid degree of precision was based on the idea of fields. What's more i was under the impression that aside from the graviton the other 'particles' had been detected, now it may well be that what they are saying is simply alteration in vocabulary (ie as stated above is semantic) rather than in substance in which case well there is no problem, but then neither can their approach be a solution to a problem.
Appealing to "common sense" seems to me somewhat misguided since there is nothing that is ever going to make quantum mechanics common sense, so if quantum theory is "allowed" to violate common sense, whats more if common sense was a barrier to the development of quantum theory, then surely that means physics can never return to a "common sense" view point and all attemps to do so are invariably doomed to fail.
It may well be that all my queries (and i have a few more) have very good answers perhaps you know some? Otherwise i will attempt to read through some of their literature but at this point i must confess a fair degree of skepticism.
