Modern physics is built on fields. Gravitational fields, electromagnetic fields, quantum fields — each is said to permeate space, carrying energy and momentum, mediating interactions, and determining the behaviour of particles.
Fields have largely replaced particles as the fundamental ontology of physics — but only partially. The standard picture still imagines a kind of dualism: particles are excitations of fields, which in turn are defined in spacetime.
But what is a field, ontologically?
In mainstream physics, a field is a set of values assigned to every point in spacetime — a mapping from location to physical quantity.
This account treats fields as extended substances — smooth, continuous distributions of something — laid out within a container (spacetime). The language has changed since Newton, but the metaphysics has not.
A relational ontology offers a deeper shift.
1. No Fields In Space
-
In a relational framework, space is not a backdrop; it is itself a structure of relation,
-
Fields are not things in space, but patterns constitutive of space-as-relation,
-
There are no background points awaiting values — only configurations of constraint giving rise to distinguishable location.
Thus:
A field is not a distribution over space; it is a coherence structure from which spatio-temporal distinctions emerge.
Space is an effect of the field, not its substrate.
2. No Independent Carriers
-
In conventional physics, a field is something that carries or transmits force,
-
This presupposes that interaction involves entities linked across space by mediating stuff,
-
But in a relational ontology, there are no substances to connect, and no “in-between” to be filled.
Instead:
A field is the local patterning of the relational system — the way potential is structured such that some transformations are possible and others are not.
It is not a thing, but a profile of affordance.
3. From Values to Constraints
-
Classical fields assign values (e.g. electric charge, velocity) to locations,
-
Quantum fields assign operators or amplitudes to field modes,
-
Both imply an underlying grid — a scaffold of points with values superimposed.
The relational shift reverses this:
A field is not a set of values applied to points, but a topology of interdependence from which points and values alike are derived.
There is no value without constraint; no location without configuration.
4. Quantum Fields Without Quanta
-
In quantum field theory (QFT), particles are said to be excitations of fields — discrete packets of energy or momentum,
-
But this “particle-in-a-field” metaphor hides a deeper coherence:
So-called particles are phase-stable configurations within a deeper relational matrix — not lumps in a field, but rhythmic stabilisations of the field itself.
The field is not a fabric; it is a systemic condition.
5. Relational Fields as Modal Landscapes
-
The behaviour of a system is constrained by its possible modes of configuration,
-
A relational field is nothing more (and nothing less) than the modal landscape of potential actualisation.
Thus:
To describe a field is to describe how the system’s potential to transform is structured.
This is not a picture of substance, but of dynamically constrained possibility.
Relational Definition
We might say:
A field is a topological structure of constraint that shapes the actualisation of potential within a relational system.
It is not in space; it is what gives rise to the experience of space as structured potential.
Closing
In reimagining fields, we leave behind the metaphors of substance and medium. No longer do we require vibrating fabrics or invisible forces filling the void. Instead, we discover that what we called fields are just names for patterns of coherence — recurring solutions to the system’s tensions, woven from nothing but relation.
In this view, a gravitational field is not something a mass produces; it is how the system coheres around massful entrenchments. An electromagnetic field is not something carried by photons; it is the configuration space in which light and charge are synchronised. A quantum field is not the canvas of particles, but the dynamic phase space of becoming.
Next, we’ll take up the idea of spacetime itself — often treated as the ultimate container — and ask what remains of space and time when the field is all there is.
No comments:
Post a Comment