In classical physics, a force is an external cause that acts on a body to change its state of motion. Newton's second law — F = ma — encodes this: force causes acceleration in proportion to mass. In modern physics, forces are more abstract — mediated by fields, encoded in gauge symmetries, or emerging from exchange particles. But in all cases, the assumption remains: forces act on things.
From a relational ontological standpoint, this framing collapses. There are no isolated things to be acted upon. There is only the unfolding of constrained potential within a structured system. So what becomes of force when nothing is pushing on anything?
1. The Problem with External Causation
-
Force implies externality: a cause that acts from outside the system or outside the object,
-
But in a relational ontology, no part of the system is ontologically separate — nothing can act on a thing from outside, because there are no “things”,
-
Instead, we seek a model in which apparent motion or reconfiguration results from internal dynamics — from tensions within the system of relations itself.
2. Force as Gradient in Potential
-
Rather than thinking of force as something applied, we can treat it as an internal gradient: a slope in the topology of potential,
-
In this view, a force is not a cause of motion but an expression of tension within the field — the system “wants” to resolve itself differently,
-
The stronger the gradient, the more urgent the system's reconfiguration — this is what we experience as acceleration.
3. Constraint and Disequilibrium
-
A relational system may exist in local equilibrium — a stable configuration within its constraints,
-
But when constraints shift — due to interaction, entanglement, or broader systemic reorganisation — the equilibrium is disturbed,
-
The resulting imbalance or disequilibrium creates gradient pressure: a kind of “force” not from outside, but as an emergent drive to restore coherence.
4. Force Fields Without Carriers
-
In classical field theory, a force field (e.g. gravitational, electromagnetic) exists in space and acts on particles,
-
But in a relational ontology, the “field” is not a substance spread over space but the structure of possibility itself,
-
What we interpret as a force field is the pattern of varying constraints across the relational system — zones of higher or lower potential for transformation.
5. Quantum Forces as Constraint Patterns
-
In quantum physics, forces arise through field couplings and exchange interactions (e.g. virtual photons mediating electromagnetism),
-
But these, too, can be reframed: not as entities interacting through particle exchange, but as modulations in the topology of allowable transitions,
-
The quantum “force” is then not a push or pull, but a bias in the field’s evolving coherence — a patterned tendency for the system to resolve certain ways.
Toward a Relational Definition
We might say:
Force is a gradient in the topology of relational potential — an internal asymmetry that drives the system’s reconfiguration.
It is not an entity acting on another, but a pressure for transformation that emerges from misaligned or shifting constraints within a relational whole.
Closing
In the object-based view, force is an invisible hand that pushes objects around. But in a relational model, force is the tension of coherence under strain. It expresses not action from without, but the unfolding necessity of transformation from within.
In the next post, we’ll explore energy — perhaps the most conserved and yet most abstract quantity in physics — and reinterpret it not as a substance or capacity, but as a measure of systemic reconfigurability.
No comments:
Post a Comment