In the page Science of Music, you define music as "an intuitive natural phenomenon operating in the 3 Worlds of Time, Pitch, Energy, and under the 3 distinct and interrelated organization structures of Rhythm, Harmony, and Melody". What exactly do you mean by "an intuitive natural phenomenon"?

     We will divide this in two parts and start with the expression "natural phenomenon". Above all, natural phenomena are not of human, cultural origin, but operate on a cosmic level independently of human intervention or control. Human inventions, like languages, inevitably vary with time, region and culture, and evolve erratically and unreliably. Music, on the other hand, like mathematics, has its roots in the four natural laws of Regularity, Simplicity, Symmetry, and Hierarchy, and its basic structure cannot be altered. It is true that musical habits, styles, and customs can vary considerably from one culture to another but the basic structure always remains the same. It is precisely this basic, cosmic structure which we present here in MusicNovatory.
     By "intuitive" we mean that this basic structure seems perfectly normal and logical to our ears without our even understanding how it works, a bit the same way that our digestive system, or even our brain, works. This is what permitted humanity for centuries to compose and evaluate musical works uniquely by ear, without any real knowledge of our intuitive preferences. It seems high time that we not only knew how these preferences work, but also where their limits are.
     We hope that this answers your question and thank you for having sent it in. Please do not hesitate to write back for further details.

Thanks for your answer and for inviting me back. Is there a reason why "this basic structure (of music) seems perfectly normal and logical to our ears without our even understanding how it works"? For a theory that is meant to be scientific, this part seems a little mysterious, even suspicious.

The reason seems to lie in the fact that, as human beings, we are structured according to the same fundamental laws as Music is (Regularity, Simplicity, Symmetry, and Hierarchy). As an example, we could say that our preference for binary subdivision and grouping (in Rhythm) is the same as the preference for binary grouping in the parts of our body (eyes, ears, arms, legs). The neurons of our brain also function in binary (either on or off), the same way that bits do in computer operations. This could be elaborated almost indefinitely, but should give you an idea of why our musical intuition is so strong. Thanks for writing back and don't hesitate to send more questions, or comments.

One last (I hope) question. If human musical intuition is so strong, why do we need a theory like MusicNovatory at all?

Now this is a really good one, and these really good questions are often the result of "throwing the ball back and forth" a couple of times. In making a choice between human musical intuition and music theory, there seems to be little doubt that humanity made the better choice by relying on intuition rather than on a theory which did not take intuition into serious consideration. The job of theory is to understand how intuition works and how it can be helped. This is what we claim MusicNovatory can do. We strongly recommend that you have a look a new section called The Two Faces Of Music in the Introduction/Preface, where you will find, we hope, all the details.