This website not only is about philosophy but also about physics, the relativity-theories for example and quantum-mechanics. And also then my approach is relational. With 'relational' I then mean that no single object can be understood separated from the surroundings. Without light the flower is no flower. And even a (black) dot only is dot because of the (white) background.
The real problem in physics, according to me, is the how and what (the why also) of the proton-electron couple. What is happening there, between the negative charged electron and the positive charged proton (or the quark)? What is charge? What is Electra? If you really understand Electra, then you also understand all other forces, I think.
Now one can find many comparable couples everywhere in reality. All these bolts for example in all these machines we have, can be compared with protons, all these nuts then with electrons. The outer screw-thread on the bolt then can be called positive, the inner screw-thread in the nut negative. And like the electron encloses the proton, the nut fits on the bolt. Something like that.
And the male-female couple also looks like that, with Eros playing in between. Between proton and electron Electra is playing, and between bolt and nut the screwing is playing, the idea of the screw-thread. Comparable couples indeed, or better said trinities, of male-Eros-female, proton-Electra-electron and bolt-screwing-nut.
Now it is a fact that in Western science we preferably assume the material parts to be the fundament, the cause. The workings we then see as secondary, as results and not as cause. Bolt and nut then produce or cause the screwing, like proton and electron cause Electra.
The workings, the relations, then are not the fundament but just a result, for us. The material things are the fundament in the West.
But if you pay attention to the sphere of let us say meaning or cause of for example bolt and nut, then you also have to come to the conclusion that the immaterial screwing is the real fundament. That is where it turns on, also in the propeller of boat and airplane, or in the wind-mill and the turbine, in pumping-engines, corkscrews and screw-springs.
This idea of the screw-thread also was first, and only later on all these screw-things. So the immaterial working is the fundament, where it turns on, what gives meaning and value to bolt and nut, what makes them bolt and nut, what defines their forms.
And that also is the case if it concerns proton and electron, I think. Between the two, Electra is playing, the field of light. And Electra in my view is the root, the fundament, the fundamental building-element. Electra constantly creates proton (or quark) and electron, I think, and not the other way around what Western science still seems to think. In the beginning there was light, finitely fast light.
This also means according to me that the electron only can be understood in relation with its antipode, the proton. Both antipodes are like the two ends of a line; there actually only is that line (Electra in this case) that, because of its finiteness, happens to have two ends. I think the relation between electron and proton is like between an 'enclosing space' or just an 'enclosing' (the electron) and a 'being enclosed' (the proton).
I also think there is reason to make a distinction between inner- and outer-space. Outer-space is where we are living in, the three dimensions. The proton however is inner-space with its own dimensions. We say a proton is very small. However, for light with for example speed 10–100 m/sec, a proton is an enormous space, billions of light-years. It is our specific speed of light that defines everything. And for an infinitely fast light, there is nothing at all. And that actually is the only objective reality. Our reality is relative, depending on our speed of light.
That then is a totally different approach of the quantum-mechanical problem. How to describe that mathematically then, I do not know. That is something for physicists. I just want to give you my view, the relational view.
All these relational phenomena in nature, I also call spirit. And since in the relational view, these immaterial relations are the fundament, the relational view actually is a spiritual view. So according to me, physics needs a bit of spirit.
Jan Helderman
27-5-2 and 4-5-3
