One of the most striking features of quantum theory is that certain physical properties — energy levels, angular momentum, charge — appear quantised. They come in discrete packets rather than continuous ranges. This is often taken to mean that the world itself is fundamentally granular, composed of indivisible units: quanta.
But this interpretation risks reifying quantisation — treating it as an ontological given, a “pixelation” of reality. From a relational perspective, quantisation is not a statement about what things are made of, but about how systems resolve under specific constraints. Discreteness is not a substance, but a condition of coherence.
1. Quantisation as a Constraint Effect
-
In canonical quantum mechanics, quantisation arises from boundary conditions,
-
A particle in a box has discrete energy levels because only certain waveforms fit the constraints — continuity, normalisation, symmetry,
-
Thus, quantisation is not a property of the particle, but a property of the system-as-constrained.
2. Discreteness as Coherent Selection
-
The system does not contain pre-cut options; it resolves only those configurations that cohere under relational constraint,
-
What appears as “quantum jumps” are transitions between modes of coherence — shifts between structurally stable states,
-
These are not things the system “has,” but ways the system can actualise when modulated.
3. Quantisation and the Ontology of Modal Resolution
-
A relational ontology reframes quantisation as a modal grammar — a pattern of possibility shaped by constraint,
-
The “quantum” is not a thing but a unit of coherence — a minimal reconfiguration that the system can support without disintegrating,
-
It is not the building block of reality, but the smallest transformation compatible with constraint.
4. Systems and Discreteness
-
Quantisation is system-relative: a photon’s energy is quantised relative to its cavity or field mode; atomic orbitals are quantised relative to the nucleus’s potential,
-
The same system under different constraints may support different quantisation regimes — or none,
-
This suggests that discreteness is not a fact about particles, but a form of situated regularity.
5. Rethinking the Quantum
-
What makes a system “quantum” is not that it’s discrete or mysterious,
-
It’s that its actualisations reflect structured potential — that coherence is not given, but achieved under constraint,
-
The quantum is the repertoire of permitted resolution — the field of phase-consistent transitions available to a system under modulated conditions.
Closing
Quantisation does not mean nature is built from bricks. It means that under constraint, only certain transformations cohere. The quantum is not an object, but a signature of resolution — a measure of what a system can stabilise as intelligible structure. What appears as “discreteness” is, at heart, a relational grammar for coherence.
In the next post, we will return to the measurement problem — this time focusing specifically on the role of decoherence, and how a relational reading reframes it not as environmental noise, but as the field-wide restructuring of potential under constraint.
No comments:
Post a Comment