Einstein famously introduced the cosmological constant (Λ) to balance his equations, later retracting it, only for it to re-emerge as a key factor in explaining the universe’s accelerating expansion. While Λ works mathematically, its ontological status is deeply evasive: it functions as a tuneable parameter, a “dial” physics turns to match observation, rather than as a relational process that explains cosmic behaviour.
The evasive manoeuvre
The cosmological constant is deployed to ensure consistency with data: equations behave, predictions align with observation, and theory remains formally intact. Yet Λ is not derived from relational dynamics; it is assumed, adjusted, or reintroduced as needed. This preserves mathematical formalism while evading the question of why the universe’s expansion has the properties it does.
The ontological cost
Λ abstracts the relational emergence of cosmic expansion into a single, manipulable quantity. Actualisation—the interplay of matter, energy, and spacetime—is reduced to a number, masking the underlying relational processes. The richness of cosmological interaction is subordinated to the convenience of a tuning parameter.
The epistemic collapse
Because the cosmological constant can be adjusted to fit observations, predictive power is weakened. Observations confirm the parameter, but the deeper relational mechanisms remain unexplained. Physics risks mistaking curve-fitting for insight.
The theological return
Λ functions like a divine regulator: an invisible hand adjusting the cosmos to maintain coherence. Its introduction and manipulation echo theological impulses, replacing relational explanation with the authority of a guiding parameter.
A relational reframing
From a relational standpoint, acceleration and expansion are outcomes of emergent alignment among matter, energy, and spacetime. No fixed constant is needed; dynamics are scale-dependent and perspectival. Λ is thus understood not as a real entity but as an effective shorthand for relational processes.
Conclusion
The cosmological constant exemplifies ontological evasion through formal convenience. By turning a relational phenomenon into a tuneable dial, physics avoids confronting the actual dynamics of cosmic expansion. Relational ontology restores intelligibility: expansion is emergent, actualisation is grounded in interaction, and the cosmos is coherent without ad hoc parameters.
No comments:
Post a Comment