Abstract
The powerful conceptions of nature that have been surveyed at this Symposium incorporate two recent revolutions and yet may still be upside-down in an interesting and suggestive sense. They employ spacetime to describe matter and process as though spacetime were primary and process secondary. The primacy of process has been urged by philosophers from Heraclitus to Whitehead and beyond. The dependence of our perception of spacetime upon dynamical processes was important during the conception of special relativity, when Einstein argued operationally from the invariance properties of Maxwell’s dynamics and light signals to those of spacetime geometry. Even theories using a deep spacetime structure recognize that the spacetime we see is surface structure, is at least renormalized. I believe that the way has been prepared to turn over the structure of present physics, to take process as fundamental at the microscopic level and spacetime and matter as semimacroscopic statistical constructs akin to temperature and entropy.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Thus the formalism is a hybrid of the relativistic continuum diagrams of Feynman and the discrete spin diagrams of Penrose.
See J. Neumann, Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata (ed. by A. W. Burks), Urbana, University of Illinois Press (1966), in which the evolution from a particle to a field theory of automata takes place. That the world too is a digital computer was suggested by R. P. Feynman.
J. Schwinger taught that the action principle was the beachhead for the next quantum mechanics in his 1950 classes. However neither spacetime nor fields exist in the deep structure of the physics presented here, and the connection to conventional quantum field theory must be made through Schwinger’s source theory or its equivalent.
This famous result which seems from the present point of view so crucial for physics is due to E. P. Wigner.
These questions are treated under the series title of ‘Spacetime Code’ in The Physical Review (1969-).
C. F. von Weizsäcker reaches a similar conclusion on similar grounds. I am deeply indebted to him for discussions and encouragement in this study.
This deduction is due to G. Frye and L. Susskind. See D. Finkelstein, G. Frye and L. Susskind, ‘Spacetime Code V’ (submitted).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1973 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht-Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Finkelstein, D. (1973). A Process Conception of Nature. In: Mehra, J. (eds) The Physicist’s Conception of Nature. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2602-4_38
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2602-4_38
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-2604-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-2602-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive