Physics overwhelmingly relies on continuous models: smooth fields, differentiable functions, continuous spacetime. Continuity is mathematically convenient, but treating it as ontologically fundamental is misleading.
This is the distortion: a modelling convenience is mistaken for the fundamental nature of reality.
The Physics Move
Classical fields (electromagnetism, gravity) are modelled as continuous, infinitely differentiable entities.
Spacetime in general relativity is treated as a smooth manifold, concealing underlying quantum or relational discreteness.
Quantum field theory employs continuous operators and spectra, sometimes overlooking the inherently perspectival cuts that actualise events.
Why This Overextends Ontology
Continuity abstracts away the perspectival and discrete:
It presents smoothness as intrinsic, rather than a convenient approximation.
It hides the fundamental processes by which relational potentialities actualise.
It encourages thinking of reality as infinitely divisible, masking the role of discretisation and alignment in actualisation.
The distortion lies in reifying smoothness: what is a calculational convenience is misread as an ontological feature.
The Relational Reframing
From a relational standpoint:
Continuity is a tool for modelling, not a property of relational actualisation itself.
Actual events and interactions occur via perspectival cuts and discrete alignments, intelligible within continuous approximations but not reducible to them.
Recognising continuity as methodological, not fundamental, restores fidelity to the relational structure of reality.
Thus, continuity is intelligible — but only as a representational convenience, not a component of being.
No comments:
Post a Comment