It's a nice study.
I'd like to see something else in the image. An added point of interest that is either complimentary, or contradictory.
I'd like to see #2 worked out a little better. The light is blown, and bothersome. But I do like the strong light in the back, and the dark foreground. While it goes against the "lights advance, and darks receed", think there is enough highlight on all the rings to bring the viewer to the foreground. It's a great "trick" contradicting perspective, but again, I wish there was something more when I reach the foreground. I would also like to see either more precision in the layout of the rings, or more irregularity, that the other images have.
#4 is another I am drawn to. It's a nice study of pattern and repetition. I don't like the empty space you are led to by the lighting. As a pattern interuption, I wouldn't put it soooo close to the edge.
You could also put some of the smaller rings inside the larger to increase the density of the pattern. Not a critique, just a thought.
What everybody should get out of this, is how effectively light, even just from the highlights, can move your eye through an image. They lack a focal point that you are led to, so there is no "ah hah!" moment. Just more or less of the same.
Sorry to pick on you clbd39. Incomplete thought's aren't helpful to anyone.
To say you like something for "different reasons" gives the OP nothing. It says you do have thoughts about it, but aren't willing to share.