Yes, the Chagall reference is very good. Rafi, I think artists, especially the abstract expressionists and impressionists must have some insight into the workings of the mind. Many artists are introverted, and introspective. Their minds are always performing, whether it be calculations or abstract, philosophical ideas. They are "wired" differently, don't you think? And for you, a man of science, delving into art expression, how much of a departure is it from your mode of thinking? Does it transition smoothly, or do you have to step back and change gears? And finally, how do you define art in terms of your particular line of science?
I like this collage, Rafi, because it makes you think a lot. There are so many messages in it, open and hidden ones, and you put them all beautifully together. Somehow your collages remind me on Marc Chagall.
What I get from these montages is a summation of all that I've personally experienced. It's interesting, because these images before me have nothing to do with my life, and yet they trigger something. Like that Christmas ball in the upper left; when I was a young child, we used to have those kinds of balls. It reminds me of those pleasant times, even when we only got one gift, me and my brother. It goes from there, like going through one's lifetime to the present, the good and the bad. Art can sometimes be that way, and that's the kind I like most.
very interesting collection of pictures excellent the ibiscus in motion, for the other two ones if i am not wrong you put at fist stage the internal part of the flower, the pistil, that is known as it's the female reproduction part. is it why you put the young man upsidedown?
0 
