In both classical and quantum physics, we often speak of “particles” as though they are the basic units of reality — tiny entities with identity, location, and properties. Even when quantum theory undermines this picture (as in superposition, entanglement, or indistinguishability), our language often pulls us back toward imagining things.
But a relational ontology starts elsewhere. It takes as primary the field of potential — a structured system of relations and constraints — and sees individuation as a local resolution within this field. There are no “individuals” in themselves. There are only configurations that become salient under particular constraints.
1. From Substance to Selection
-
Classical ontology treats individuals as given: substances that persist and interact,
-
A relational view treats individuation as a cut in a continuous field — a pattern that becomes coherent enough to be construed as an entity,
-
There is no substance beneath the pattern. What exists is coherence under constraint.
2. Quantum Indistinguishability and the Illusion of Identity
-
Quantum particles of the same type (e.g. electrons) are fundamentally indistinguishable — not just in practice, but in principle,
-
Swapping two identical particles yields no observable difference — they are not “two things” at all,
-
This suggests that identity is not a primitive feature of reality. It is a perspectival effect: a stance within a relational field.
3. Actualisation as Perspective
-
The wavefunction describes not a thing, but a space of possible coherences,
-
When a measurement is made, the field resolves locally: one coherence actualises, and that cut is perceived as a “particle”,
-
But this “particle” is not an entity — it is a point of salience in a field of constraints. It is a perspective instantiated.
4. Individuation as a Gradient, Not a Boundary
-
There is no sharp edge where a field “becomes” a particle. There is a cline of individuation: a gradual construal of coherence as localised,
-
What counts as an individual depends on the level of constraint and the perspective from which it is construed,
-
This applies even to so-called macroscopic objects: their “thingness” is an emergent coherence, not a metaphysical given.
5. Implications for Quantum Ontology
-
Instead of asking “What is this particle?” we should ask “How does this coherence arise under these constraints?”,
-
Individuation is not an ontological starting point — it is a local actualisation of systemic potential,
-
From this view, quantum phenomena like interference, tunnelling, and entanglement are not anomalies, but natural consequences of a reality in which individuation is not primary.
Closing
To reimagine quantum reality is to stop looking for the “things” beneath appearances — and start recognising appearance as a mode of resolution. In a relational ontology, individuation is not the foundation of being. It is a perspectival construal of potential coherence — a way the world locally makes sense of itself, under constraint.
In the next post, we will explore the measurement problem from this perspective: not as a mystery of collapse, but as a misframing of individuation as substance.
No comments:
Post a Comment