In a digital world, there would be no "interval" defined between the digital cells of space. I do not understand your assertion that this couldn't be digitized. Everything I explained could be implemented in a digital computer. Speaking of "intervals" that exist between the computer memory bytes seems irrelevant. What intervals appear between the bytes in your personal computer? None, of course. All that is requited is that space come in some smallest dimension and this is easily implemented digitally. Only if you think space is infinitely divisible do you run into theoretical problems. I don't think space is ever continuous.
As for what is a positron and an electron, this is where the digital world comes to the rescue in that these are merely defined as numeric states within the computer. If you read some of my other papers like "The Real God Particle", you see that I postulate but do not explain what a positron and electron are. But the digital explanation shows exactly what they are - a numeric property of a memory cell. This may be why we cannot figure out what a positron and electron really are because they are ultimately - non physical.
In my explanations, I start out as 1 dimensional in order to show how waves interact. But I do extend this to 3 dimensions and show that the intensity drops of as 1/r^2. Also, in a digital world, you would be able to precisely locate an electron and so far as the macroscopic world is concerned the Heisenberg uncertainty doesn't make a speck of difference. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle only applies and makes sense if you treat particles as waves. Now, you can assign a volkswagon beetle a frequency, but I don't think that makes it right. Nether should you over apply the Heisnberg uncertainty principle.
What you say about protons and electrons only being attracted to one another is clearly wrong. Mainstream would tell you that positrons and electrons are most definitely attracted through the electrostatic force - they have pictures of this happening.
I would question "your assumptions" about what happens when a positron and electron meet. You say they "annihilate". I say they produce a neutral particle called a poselectron. See the article:
http://www.franklinhu.com/emc.html
You would assume "magical" conversion of matter to energy - please explain exactly how ponderable matter like your hand is converted into energy which is just motion? You can't explain this, can you? You just have to have "faith" that it happens that way.
Funny how we can build a theory without even the faintest idea of how the most basic of operations occur.
I don't need faith. The creation of he poselectron and the resulting release of energy can be perfectly modeled on the digital world I have proposed, no faith necessary. The release of positron and electron from empty space is also correspondingly explained.
Fundamentally, my model of the universe is only based on the existence of the positron and the electron and their known properties. That is the only assumption I make and I think we are pretty sure that this is a good assumption since we can physically measure these to exist.
Perhaps you should read my companion article which describes the universe without the digital metaphor:
http://vixra.org/pdf/1305.0075v1.pdf
To fully understand the extent of my models read my TOE and recent papers:
http://www.franklinhu.com/theory.html
http://www.franklinhu.com/papers.html
I thank you for your detailed questions, I hope you enjoy my answers - and by the way, I'm not a doctor - I don't even play one on TV :)
thanks
Franklin