Physics of space-time, conclusion

Concl.1. The relational view as new philosophy

I now conclude the Relational philosophy, and physics of space-time is part of it.
In the relational view at life and reality, the relation is the spider in the web, the fundamental building block of the web. Some immaterial thing is the root of everything, of matter as well.
I again give the example of the bolt and nut. Two partners with an opposite form, wherein the difference also is the correspondence. The relation between bolt and nut plays in the emptiness, as an idea, the idea of the screw-thread in this case. And this immaterial relation defines everything then, the form of bolt and nut, their meaning, the working of the thing et cetera. And in the end, the immaterial relations even form the materiality of the particles.

We can not deny seeing a correspondence then with many other relations in nature, for example with the relation between man and woman (or semen and egg) or between proton and electron.
Eros and electromagnetism resemble the idea of the screw-thread in this relational view.

Is there really that sharp difference between dead things and living beings? A simple stone too is all movement under a microscope. The relations in nature also are playing in these dead things. And is that playing something dead?
Is an atom a dead thing? It anyhow must bear the potency to form life, otherwise life would be impossible. So an atom contains the potency of life, that can not be denied. Even if you think that life comes from God, you must admit that atoms bear the possibility to bear that life.

I do not want to say here that there are no differences in reality. There are many differences and I even see the human as a very special being on earth, the only being that also can see all these relations in nature.
And of course it also is useful to make a distinction between technical relations in a bike, chemical relations in a molecule, and the relational phenomenon that is called life.
However, there also are correspondences between all these different relating phenomena. They all relate opposite forms, and everywhere we also see an enclosing and a being enclosed. A proton-electron couple therefore can very well be compared with the man-woman couple, though I do not know which partner of the proton-electron couple then is the man.

We can describe the differences in next way. A dead thing is arranged by the relations in nature. A living being can also arrange these relations, within certain limits. A human being additionally sees the relations, also sees that the relations can be arranged.
And behind everything, the relational phenomena of nature are working, the life of nature, the spirit of nature. A dead thing like an atom then only is lived by nature's life, a living being also lives that life, while a human can also see it.

The concept relation is the spider in the web in the Relational philosophy and that is why it is a new philosophy, the relational view. Relations play a role in Western philosophy, but never as the spider in the web. And when they are the spider there, or seem to be the spider, then they are hidden in an obscure word like Hegel's 'Geist' .
Seeing the relations in nature as the mind or spirit of nature, making our human mind a sense-organ for spirit, can clarify many theoretical problems. That is one purpose of the relational view.

Main purpose of the relational view is to show the naturalness of a human, and that is nothing to be ashamed of. Because everything is in nature, music and all other enjoyable things, mathematics and all sciences as well.
All our knowledge and awareness is nothing but a seeing and experiencing of the relations in nature. Do we see fitting of forms, then we understand, do we also see harmony in that fitting of forms, then we feel quality. Or we see and feel a lack of quality, when the relations are disturbed or even broken.

We do not need to believe in a super-nature as if nature itself is too poor for us. The relations in nature are like an all embracing mind, and a human can read this mind .

Concl.2. The conflict between relativity theory and quantum-physics

The relativity theory conflicts with quantum-physics, while quantum-physics is based on facts.
The conflict is not caused by a lack of knowledge of facts, I think. We now have measured even the smallest facts, have reached a real limit of reality that never will be bridged.
The conflict between relativity theory and quantum-physics is caused by interpretation of these facts, a lack of understanding. Misunderstanding of understanding itself as well, I think.

We believe that an objective view is possible. But we are never objective. Understanding of every fact always is based on the light we shine on the fact, and with light I mean all aspects of light. In the end, light is even creating everything. So we must give up the notion of objectivity.

Relativity theory first gave room to the subject in physics by showing that every point of view knows its own time. The notion of objectivity however, still was maintained in the relativity theory, in one way or an other. The measuring device then must relate subject and object. However, such a device is an object as well!
In relativity theory the gap between subject and object is not bridged.

Now we know, after having measured all these quantum-facts, that the notion of an objective reality no longer can be accepted.
But then you need a new frame, an other way of looking wherein subject and object really are one. Otherwise you can not explain all these quantum-facts.
And at the moment physicists do not yet have that new frame, that new way of thinking and seeing.

It is a philosophical problem in the end. We need an other picture of reality. The object-subject duality must be changed in the partner-relation duality, that is what I think. Points of view measuring each other, that is all there is. Such a picture of reality can explain all these quantum-facts.

In the relational view there is room for a mind-aspect in physics. Mind not in the sense of thinking but mind as the activity of measuring, always by shining and seeing light.
This activity of measuring is the real fundamental building block, the real subject of physics.

When we see light as an activity of measuring with finite space-time standards and also see that this finite light creates everything, then we can find a solution for many philosophical problems.
The relational view can also be a frame for all these measured quantum-facts.

Is our reality a quantum-reality? Is everything uncertain?
Only if it concerns the quantity, I think, the exact size and the like. We must make a distinction here between quantity and quality.
It is like in the picture below. The small animation that forms the background also is projected on the foreground, 20 times enlarged, like under a microscope. You then see the smallest building-block of the picture very good, one pixel.
On a more superficial level however, so in the background, this pixel-character is much less noticeable, unless you use a magnifying-glass.

The background then has an own character, like bolt and nut have an own character. And this character of bolt and nut is not defined by the quantum-character of the atoms that form these things.
There is reason to see different levels of relations, I believe.
In the essence we find a kind of formless relation creating the so called fundamental particles, which particles only and fully are characterized by a space-time measure. At the best we then can make a distinction between inner- and outer-space.
On this deepest level, the quantum-character plays a fundamental role, since these fundamental particles only are characterized by a space-time measure. Influencing the space-time measure, and that is what we do while measuring, therefore is changing all there is, on this level.

A proton-electron couple, so an atom, then behaves as playmate on a more superficial level, forming molecules and the like. And this atom already has more character than only being space-time, certainly when in molecules. Molecules then form materials, and we use these materials to build our machines and the like, like the relational phenomenon called life uses these materials to form bodies.
The quantum-character then is of minor importance. Influencing the space-time measure does not change the character of for example gold, water, a car, a human et cetera. Such characters, such pictures, such ideas, are much more than only space-time.

The character of for example the car is not influenced by the quantum-character of reality, not at all. Because a car is much more than only space-time.
The quantum-character then only plays a role, when you want to measure the size of a car or a part of it very exactly, so even the last quantum of the size. However, that last quantum of the size is not important at all for the character of the car or the part.
In other words. The quantum-character is a quantitative character that does not influence the quality of things. And this quality is the essence of the thing.
I think that physics must pay more attention to this qualitative aspects of reality, the relativity and even subjectivity of everything.

Concl.3. God as the ultimate relating phenomenon

When you see the relations in nature as the root of everything and you write a philosophy about it, then it is impossible to not write about physics, or techniques. Actually, all boundaries between the many different sciences then become less sharp, simply because there are correspondences everywhere, like between the bolt-nut, man-woman and proton-electron couples.

And seeing the relations in nature as the root of everything also automatically brings religion into picture. There are many different religions on earth. However, they also have something in common.
In every religion God is a relating phenomenon, for who the gaps we experience in daily life do not exist. God anyhow never is a being that divides everything into pieces with gaps in between.
People who say to believe in God, make such gaps, but their God then is telling something different. God always is unity, unity of all and everything.

So God is the ultimate relating phenomenon for us, a light that does not know any limit, an infinite and eternal light for who everything really is 1 and for who the differences only are relative or even less than that.
We finite beings will never be able to see everything as really 1, we will always experience distance, unless we stop living.
We can not understand an infinite light by picturing it. However, we can understand the finiteness of our light, the relativity and even subjectivity of everything. We can feel the relation with an infinite light. We can not bridge the bridge, but we can see the bridge as bridgeable, instead of seeing only a gap.

A final remark about light, making this conclusion physics again. Suppose there really exists an infinitely fast light in our reality. Also suppose that we, we particles in the end, are characterized by the fact that we can not follow this infinitely fast light. Every second we lose more distance to that divine light, and that is also exactly why we are, and what we are.
Would we ever be able to measure the existence of such an infinite light? No, I think, because the finite light we need to measure with, can not follow an infinitely fast light. Maybe we can catch a tiny glimpse of faster light, but only for a very short moment. Then after that glimpse, the distance has become too large already.

Jan Helderman
end 1999 - beginning 2000