Conceptual Postulate and System of Thought
Contemporary physics possesses mathematical formalisms of great power. However, the conceptual meaning of certain fundamental notions — such as space, mass, inertia, motion, or time — often remains implicit or dependent on a particular theoretical framework.
It may therefore be legitimate to explore these notions starting from a more fundamental inquiry concerning the very structure of reality.
The philosophical analyses that led to this postulate have been developed in my previous works. The text that follows is limited to presenting the conceptual postulate and certain consequences that may follow from it for the interpretation of fundamental concepts in physics.
The approach proposed here consists in explicitly formulating a conceptual postulate, and then examining certain conceptual consequences that may follow from it for the understanding of the initial concepts of physics.
The Conceptual Postulate
The physical world can be understood as resulting from the action of a driving principle acting:
- in an immanent way,
- through interrelation,
- according to the determination of elements.
Constituents possess their own determination, corresponding to their capacity to orient, at least in part, the action of the driving principle. The driving principle, according to its nature, establishes a harmony between all modalities of actuation.
One may naturally question the nature of the driving principle. However, the analysis proposed here does not concern its nature but rather its mode of action within the physical world.
The expression “according to its nature” simply means that physics does not necessarily constitute the ultimate perception of reality. It describes the ways in which certain phenomena manifest themselves, without always claiming to reach their ultimate foundation.
The question of the nature of the driving principle therefore belongs to a philosophical, and possibly theological, reflection that goes beyond the strictly physical analysis.
Within this perspective, the physical world rests upon two fundamental metaphysical principles:
- the driving principle, principle of actualization and unity;
- constituents, principle of multiplicity and determination.
The Unity of the Physical World
One may observe that without a driving principle acting in an immanent way and through interrelation according to the determination of elements, bodies would simply be juxtaposed to one another.
The universe would then not constitute a unified reality, but merely a multiplicity of independent elements.
It is precisely because the driving principle acts according to the determination of elements that its action respects the particularity of the physical world.
The action of the driving principle therefore makes possible the relational unity of the physical world.
One may also observe that the unity of the whole is realized in the unity of the parts. It is through its own unity that a body mediates the action of the driving principle.
This principle will have important consequences for the analysis of certain fundamental concepts in physics and may also have implications in other domains of knowledge.
Mass: Relational Unity of a Body
Within this perspective, mass may be understood as the unity of a body.
This unity results from the action of the driving principle that brings the constituents into relation according to their determination.
Mass therefore does not simply correspond to a quantity of matter: it represents an intensity of relational unity.
A particle must therefore possess several constituents in order to have mass.
Relational Origin of Space
Space is not a reality independent of bodies.
Space is possible only because there already exist particles that exhibit a first relational unity among their constituents.
The emergence of space therefore presupposes the prior existence of these first relational unities. Bodies receive the action of the driving principle and, in receiving it according to their constitution, determine the way in which it manifests itself.
If repulsion were primary, no unity could appear in the universe. The constitution of the first relational unities therefore presupposes that the attractive aspect of the action of the driving principle is primary. Repulsion appears only after the formation of these unities and makes possible the existence of distances between bodies; these distances then constitute the foundation of a relational space.
Attraction and Repulsion
In this system of thought, the notions of attraction and repulsion should not be understood as independent primary forces. Strictly speaking, it is not such-and-such a body that attracts or repels, but rather the driving principle acting in an immanent way and through interrelation, which is not exactly the same thing.
This makes it possible, for example, to distinguish the notion of actual cause from that of force, which is important for approaching the concept of inertia. Every motion, within a relational conception of space, implies an actual cause, but this actual cause is not necessarily linked to an equilibrium of forces.
For example, gravity becomes a force only when motion is prevented. A force then corresponds to the opposition of two tendencies toward motion.
The action of the driving principle aims to establish relations between the constituents, which corresponds to an attractive aspect.
However, the existence of distances and structures also implies the emergence of repulsive relations. Repulsion is therefore not primary: it appears only after the formation of the first units.
Expansion of Space
The expansion of space therefore cannot be explained by the inertia of bodies continuing their trajectory.
It implies the existence of particles possessing repulsive properties, while at the same time preserving certain attractive properties that allow the relative motion of bodies and maintain the unity of the Universe.
Inertia
Inertia may be understood as the stability of a body within the reference space.
Within this perspective, inertial motion does not result from an equilibrium of forces. It results from the present action of the driving principle, which brings bodies into relation according to their determination and simultaneously takes into account different relational aspects that combine together.
Impulse
Impulse allows a body to have continuous motion relative to the reference space.
It corresponds to a modification, in a given orientation, of the body's relation to this space.
Within this perspective, impulse may be understood as a relative contraction of space in a given orientation.
- relative to a particular body
- local
- progressive
Impulse implies that the body possesses its own energy corresponding to its unity of mass.
The Limit of the Speed of Light
The limit of the speed of light may be understood as resulting from the relation between two aspects of a body’s relation to space:
- its global relation to the reference space (inertia)
- the contraction of space in a given orientation (impulse)
When impulse increases, the contraction of space in that orientation reinforces the unity of the body and increases its mass.
This increase of mass in turn strengthens the relation of the body to the reference space.
The velocity of the body results from the progressive evolution of these relations, which introduces a limit in the speed of motions relative to the reference space.
Light and Matter
Within this perspective, the photon possesses its own mass since it has an impulse and participates in these dynamic relations.
The mass of the photon thus becomes the point of harmonization between the laws of light and those of matter.
Time
Time is a function of motion, whether it concerns initial phenomena or composite phenomena.
There exists a present instant for the Universe, since bodies must be presently in relation in order to form space or move within it.
Time is measured by establishing a relationship between two motions.
The diversity of proper times arises from the fact that this relationship depends on the spatial conditions in which these motions occur.
Two identical clocks may simultaneously run at different rates. This possibility cannot be arbitrarily excluded, since it follows directly from a relational conception of space-time corresponding to a new approach to this concept.
Within this perspective, there is no relativity of simultaneity, but rather a present instant for the Universe.
This may have, in certain cases, consequences for the impossibility of the invariance of the speed of light in a one-way propagation (see the Shuttle and Missile Objection).
Inertia, the Relational Structure of Space, and the Principle of Equivalence
The question of the origin of inertia constitutes a central point of this approach. General relativity describes the motion of bodies in curved space-time, but it does not directly answer the question of why a body possesses inertia and persists in its motion.
In the approach proposed here, inertia is not understood as a mere absence of force, but rather as the consequence of a relation between the body and the spatial configuration in which it is located. Momentum then corresponds to a modification of this relation. Motion relative to a given configuration may lead to an increase in mass, which in certain situations makes it possible to establish a correspondence between inertia and gravitation.
The principle of equivalence constitutes a physical formalization of this correspondence. However, although this correspondence may be understood as a consequence of the relational structure of space and motion, it does not necessarily follow that the principle of equivalence is universally respected. From this perspective, it appears rather as a derived law linked to certain configurations of space and motion.
Within this framework, the question of the mass of the photon also takes on particular importance. If the photon possessed no intrinsic mass, it would be difficult to establish a conceptual link between the laws governing the propagation of light and those governing the dynamics of matter. The existence of an intrinsic mass, even an extremely small one, would instead make it possible to consider light as a particular mode of propagation within the relational network of space, thereby contributing to the establishment of a conceptual continuity between the laws of light and those of matter.
Conclusion
The system of thought presented here does not claim to constitute a complete physical theory.
It rather proposes a conceptual framework allowing certain initial concepts of physics to be reconsidered within a relational perspective.
Such an approach could contribute to clarifying several fundamental questions concerning:
- the relational nature of space and time
- the meaning of mass and inertia
- the relation between locality and non-locality
- the possibility of a more unified conceptual framework for physics