Section 29 (first updated 1.23.2021)

Oscillations

The proposition of String Theory, which posits one-dimensional objects called strings, describes how point-like particles of particle physics propagate through space.¹

The vibrational state of the string explains the mechanical phenomenon whereby oscillations occur about an equilibrium point.² This description denotes how the uncertainty of spacetime—coming in and out of Being—forms a stable conception for the observer.

According to String Theory, the notion of vibration describes a fundamental formal activity—an activity which, in Philosophy, denotes Form.³ Unfortunately, vibration is usually seen as a wholly mechanical process, meaning that as a fundamental activity, it is regarded as an extension of some physicality repetitively exhibiting it. The inverse view, however, offers the alternative that the existence of the activity as a fundamental logical principle is what constitutes the object as the process of the activity itself.⁴

What the term vibration represents as a pure logical activity is central to quantum mechanical investigation. For example, oscillation is used to describe the way vibration operates, defined by repetitive variations—typically happening in time—of some measure about a central value (often a point of equilibrium) or between two or more different physical states.⁵ Why there is a repetitive variation of some measure in the process of vibration is not properly explained by our ordinary observations of daily phenomena exhibiting vibrational patterns.

The concern of String Theory in describing the notion of vibration is to show how the objects of sense awareness themselves are constituted by more unstable, fundamental activities. In other words, how can a vibrational activity constitute, for sense awareness, a static object while simultaneously enabling motion? What is the vibrational pattern that sustains a physical object over time?

Ordinary sense experience perceives objects as having a certain stability, even though they exhibit motions and actions that may not be predictable and are therefore always uncertain. On the other side, when quantum science observes these macroscopic objects, it identifies more inherently unstable microscopic activities that presumably exist to sustain the object. These minute components operate in an entirely different domain of reality, yet somehow sustain the macroscopic world of our senses that we take to be our reality.⁶

Footnotes

1. Strings in String Theory – Fundamental one-dimensional objects whose vibrational modes correspond to different elementary particles.
2. Oscillations – Repetitive variations about an equilibrium point; in physics, oscillations can describe waves, particle vibrations, or other cyclic behaviors.
3. Form in Philosophy – In Aristotelian and Hegelian terms, the principle or structure that organizes matter or activity into a coherent entity.
4. Logical activity vs. physical manifestation – Suggests that an object’s existence is not merely a material fact but arises from an underlying, organizing principle or activity.
5. Vibrational pattern – In quantum mechanics, vibrations of strings correspond to quantum states, producing observable particles and forces.
6. Microscopic vs. macroscopic reality – Quantum fluctuations operate at a scale much smaller than human perception, yet they provide the stability that allows macroscopic objects to exist.

Oscillations, Vibration, and Trans-Dimensional Thought

When oscillations are periodic, they are perceived as desirable because they exhibit order. For example, the motion of a pendulum, a tuning fork, the reed of a woodwind instrument or harmonica, a mobile phone, or the cone of a loudspeaker demonstrates controlled, predictable oscillatory behavior. On the other hand, vibration is often undesirable, as it can waste energy and create unwanted sound when perceived as random. For instance, the vibrational motions of engines, electric motors, or any mechanical device in operation are typically unwanted. Such vibrations may be caused by imbalances in rotating parts, uneven friction, or the meshing of gear teeth. Careful engineering and design aim to minimize these unwanted vibrations.¹

In either case, vibration is fundamentally a repetitive movement of some quantity. However, in the subatomic realm, quantum mechanics cannot rely on a pre-existing quantity as exhibiting the activity of vibration. The existence of the quantity must be accounted for by the quality of the activity itself, or equivalently, the activity itself is represented by the quantitative measure that constitutes the object. For example, the “string” in String Theory is meant to characterize one-dimensional objects, which are quantities of pure activity.²

A line has a single dimension because only one coordinate is needed to specify a point on it. A temporal dimension measures time. Time is often referred to as the “fourth dimension,” but this does not imply it is spatial. A temporal dimension measures physical change and is perceived differently from the three spatial dimensions: there is only one of it, and we cannot move freely in time but are subjectively confined to one direction. Time is one-dimensional because it represents pure activity. Objects in one dimension can only be described by the property of “moving on”; this is why they are never truly static for observation. This does not mean they are indefinite; rather, they are eternal precisely because they cannot be grasped as particularized entities.³ [See Whitehead on the passage of nature.]⁴

In everyday observation, we often assume that the activity of an object results from the object itself. In quantum mechanics, however, no object may be assumed to exhibit activity without the activity itself being responsible for the form of the object. Vibration must instead be seen as the motion generating the quality that defines the object, or rather, the form of vibration is descriptive of the being-quality of the activity.⁵

In one dimension, each sequence of change constitutes a distinct quantity in the motion of some definite quality. For example, when a pendulum swings, we see it either to the left or to the right—but never both at the same time. In a first-dimensional conception of vibration, however, the pendulum would appear left and right, at the center, and at every intermediate point simultaneously, stretching into a wave spectrum rather than behaving as a particle. Approaching a black hole, objects begin to operate in a quantum manner. Entering a black hole, one would theoretically experience a freezing of time from the external perspective, illustrating how the present—the most recent moment—derives from the verb to present, meaning to introduce or bring about.⁶

Vibration also describes the unity of wave and particle: how a thing can simultaneously exhibit properties of both. In describing the form of the activity we call vibration, the quantum state requires that each sequence of change in motion is treated as the quantitative measure of this quality. Thus, we encounter an absolute totality presented as “layers” of dimensions, each dimension marking a quantitative measure of the change in motion of the quality. A dimension is a measure of a shift in motion. The recognition of change as distinct from the motion it is part of constitutes quantity, generally defined as the measurable extent of some kind.⁷

The question arises: what quality maintains itself as trans-dimensional, such that its transition through each dimension—each being the record of a quantitative shift—constitutes the overall framework of complex interactions between dimensions? When we say that thought is the quality that remains as no-thing so as to constitute each thing, we do not mean that “nothing” is some measurable void or blank space, for these can be measured and perceived. Thought is not a lack; it is an active principle.⁸

In quantum mechanics, the existence of any given quality cannot be accepted merely on the assumption that activity is abstracted from it. Abstraction itself is an active effect of thought, not passive. Thought is first and foremost a positive principle, though positive in form and negative in content—the content being the object that thought supersedes. Thought as nothing is the trans-dimensional quality constituting the manifold of dimensions, as outlined by String Theory. In other words, thought, insofar as reason is the essence of consciousness, is “nothing” insofar as it forms the framework—the “landscape”—in which the complexity of dimensions is held in place. Thought is the relational principle between distinctions, always escaping direct identification.⁹

Reality is eternal, and every possible thought has already been partially elucidated. The apparent barrier in reality that prevents complete conception is a function of thought as a principle of efficiency. Thought divides reality into distinctions, allowing one conception at a time. Each layer of reality is held distinct by the thought attached to it, but all distinctions are transcended by the thought that discloses the totality of distinctions.¹⁰

This explains why our conception of the world is limited, even though the world is theoretically infinite in dimensional complexity. Accessing trans-dimensional states of thought, for instance through molecules such as DMT, temporarily permits experience of such higher-dimensional consciousness, before returning to the limits of ordinary thought.¹¹

Our existence on a planet is restricted to the physical and geometric properties of a sphere. Theoretically, the mind could operate in unaccustomed physical structures of reality, but doing so may be physically dangerous, as the body is adapted to ordinary conditions. The “vibrational” quality of the string is the indeterminate quality of reality, where all possible events exist simultaneously, serving as potential routes of approximation for the present moment of an observer.¹²

Footnotes

1. Unwanted vibration – Mechanical vibrations from engines or machines dissipate energy, cause wear, and create noise.
2. String as pure activity – In String Theory, strings are one-dimensional entities whose vibrational modes generate particles; they are not merely material objects but carriers of dynamic activity.
3. Time as a one-dimensional measure – A temporal dimension differs from spatial dimensions in that movement through it is unidirectional and conceptualized as change.
4. Whitehead on nature – Whitehead describes the passage of nature as a continuous process, emphasizing becoming over static being.
5. Vibration as quality-forming – The form of vibration constitutes the object, rather than being a passive property of it.
6. Black hole analogy – Highlights the relationship between time, observation, and quantum phenomena, reflecting relativity and singularity behavior.
7. Dimension as quantity – Each dimension measures a discrete shift in motion; collectively, dimensions form the structure of reality.
8. Thought as active principle – Thought is positive and foundational; it structures reality rather than being a passive void.
9. Thought as relational – Inspired by Hegel and Alan Watts, thought mediates between distinctions, forming the context for perception.
10. Infinite layers of reality – Each thought constrains perception, yet higher-order thought reveals totality.
11. Trans-dimensional access – Certain psychoactive molecules can temporarily expand conscious perception into higher-dimensional thought.
12. Vibrational quality of strings – The indeterminate potentiality of reality is realized as sequences of events, constituting the present for an observer.

Quantum Level

In the science of ontology, the term quantum refers to the fundamental realm of nature where the logical determinations of Reason—traditionally applied as quantitative standards of measurement—are themselves the quality that underlies observation.¹

Physical standards such as atoms, strings, and other measurable entities, which are necessary for quantitative analysis, are ultimately generated from a logical basis implicit in their establishment. In other words, for something to be generated, it must first be conceived. This is not the subjective idealistic claim that mere observation creates the phenomenon, or that the phenomenon comes into existence only when perceived. Rather, it asserts that physical objects inherently contain the logical operations necessary for both their being and knowing.²

One can imagine the universe as a self-exciting circuit, where every act of perception is a feedback loop between consciousness and reality. Consciousness may be conceived as spherical, like a fish-eye lens: when you perceive someone as a particular kind of object, that conception is objective insofar as it corresponds with how they perceive you as an object. Both participants access the same continuity of being but from different perspectives.³

At the quantum level, what we perceive are particular stages constituting the psyche capable of conceiving those phenomena. Just as observing another person reflects both the individual and the species-level structures that make that perception possible, observing quantum phenomena reveals the foundational structures of mind that allow such observation. In essence, the quantum realm is the structural substratum of the capacity of consciousness to retrieve, represent, and engage with reality.⁴

This perspective aligns with the principle of indeterminacy in quantum mechanics: the limits of measurable certainty reflect the inherent qualities of the systems being measured, rather than limitations of human perception alone.⁵

Footnotes

1. Quantum as logical quality – The quantum realm is where measurements themselves emerge from the logical structuring of phenomena, emphasizing the intertwining of ontological and epistemological principles.
2. Logical basis of physical objects – Atoms, strings, and other structures are not merely empirical but are conceptually grounded in the logical operations that define them; observation reveals these operations rather than generating them.
3. Spherical consciousness (fish-eye lens analogy) – Consciousness can be visualized as a spherical network, where perception from any point corresponds with other points in the system, creating objective intersubjectivity.
4. Quantum level as structural mind – Quantum structures are analogous to the mental frameworks enabling conception; observing quantum states reveals the “psyche” of reality’s structuring principles.
5. Indeterminacy principle – Rooted in Heisenberg’s principle, indeterminacy reflects the inherent limitations in simultaneously measuring certain properties, demonstrating the intertwining of logical and physical necessity at the quantum level.

Quarks

String theory operates at a level of nature that allows for the distinction of one conception from another. At this level, the atom is compartmentalized into quarks. Quarks are never directly observed; rather, they are deduced as relational structures with intrinsic properties such as electric charge, mass, color, and spin. These properties combine to form composite particles called hadrons, the most stable of which are neutrons and protons, together constituting the nuclei of atoms.¹

The term quarks often carries a mechanical connotation, as if they were mere pieces fitting together like gears. However, quarks function more like the “cells” of an atom, and their activity is far from mechanical. They consist of dynamically changing, inherently unpredictable motions known as vibrations. Quarks can be understood as bundles of vibrating strings, conceptualized within a shared spherical space, though internally they are rugged and highly variable. The vibrations of strings illustrate the indeterminacy inherent in defining any particular object.²

Before exploring the physical phenomenon of vibration, it is crucial to understand its philosophical significance. Correlating scientific explanations with philosophical notions of being is challenging, because language and disciplinary boundaries fragment the world. Science often isolates particular aspects of reality—physics studies motion and forces, chemistry studies compounds, biology studies life—while philosophy emphasizes the unity of being and the underlying principles connecting these phenomena.³

Science demonstrates that being encompasses all possibilities, while philosophy reminds us that these possibilities exist within a unified conception. For example, physical forces like gravity are not directly perceived but inferred, while chemical or biological phenomena are partially perceptible. The ontological principle that relations are more fundamental than the individuals or parts they connect is difficult to grasp empirically because perception often assumes the whole arises from compiling discrete parts, rather than recognizing the whole as primary.⁴

For instance, when observing a tree, we perceive its greenness, the hardness of its wood, and other qualities. We tend to treat these as isolated properties, forgetting that they exist in relation to the tree as a whole. The tree, as a whole of its qualities, exists prior to perception and is more fundamental than the partial abstractions our senses register. In this sense, a priori knowledge is not merely perceptual; it apprehends the abstract whole of an object, of which perceptual moments are only partial instantiations.⁵

Consider a finger moving rapidly side to side: it appears as a blurred spectrum rather than a distinct object. When motion ceases, the finger takes on a definite position. At sufficient speed, the object simultaneously occupies all positions within its possible spectrum, illustrating wave-particle duality and the indeterminacy of perception.⁶

Perception does not assume simultaneity prior to the determination of an object’s definite position; instead, the definite position is adopted as a reference point from which other objects’ motions are determined. According to Einstein’s theory of special relativity, the concept of distant simultaneity asserts that two spatially separated events cannot be considered simultaneous in an absolute sense.⁷

The reason is that the spatial distance between events entails a temporal difference: it takes time for information or influence to travel from one location to another. Two events that appear simultaneous in one frame may occur in different sequences in another frame due to relative motion. For example, a car crash in London and another in New York may appear simultaneous to an observer on Earth, but a passenger on an airplane moving between the two cities may perceive the events in a different order. If the events are causally connected, the sequence is preserved across frames; if not, relative simultaneity allows differing perceptions.⁸

Space, then, is not merely a backdrop but an aspect of the observer’s framework, structuring the perception of simultaneity and temporal relationships between events.

Footnotes

1. Quarks as relational entities – Quarks are not directly observable but inferred from their contributions to hadrons and other subatomic structures.
2. Vibration and indeterminacy – The motions of quarks reflect the dynamic, unpredictable nature of strings and the inherent indeterminacy in defining subatomic entities.
3. Philosophy vs. science – Science isolates phenomena; philosophy emphasizes relational unity and ontological principles across domains.
4. Relations prior to parts – The whole is ontologically prior to its parts; individual attributes are meaningful only within the relational context of the whole.
5. A priori perception – Partial sensory perceptions are abstractions; the true essence of an object exists as a whole prior to sensory apprehension.
6. Wave-particle duality – Rapid motion of macroscopic objects analogously illustrates quantum principles of indeterminacy and superposition.
7. Distant simultaneity – Einstein’s special relativity shows that simultaneity is relative to the observer’s frame of reference.
8. Causal connection and perception – Relative motion affects temporal order in the observation of distant events, illustrating the dependence of perceived simultaneity on frame and causality.

Simultaneity and Order

The ordinary understanding of simultaneity is that a set of unrelated events occurs at the same time—for example, a car is beeping, someone is walking, and a bird is singing. A single reference frame captures these distinct events occurring concurrently and produces a general order: the situation constitutes the “first order” in which the reference frame finds itself. In other words, events are organized by their mutual reference to one another. However, different modes of sensation capture simultaneity differently.¹

For example, sound differs from vision. When two tones occur simultaneously, hearing cannot easily distinguish their sources, and they seem to merge into a single frequency. Sound operates in one fundamental dimension (pressure), whereas vision perceives objects in distinct dimensions: a rock is perceptually separate from a tree. On a deeper level, understanding allows us to group the simultaneity of the same phenomena over different temporal extents. For instance, someone finishing a meal and someone beginning one can be seen as different extents of the same duration. In an abstract analysis or vacuum state, these constitute varying aspects of a shared temporal continuum.²

Time as Meditation

Definition of mediation:

“Mediating is nothing but self-identity working itself out through an active self-directed process; or, in other words, it is reflection into self, the aspect in which the ego is for itself, objective to itself. It is pure negativity, or, reduced to its utmost abstraction, the process of bare and simple becoming.”³

Every moment is eternal if conceived in a vacuum state. Moments only become transient or corruptible when there is a change to another moment. The shift from one moment to another constitutes what we experience as the duration of time. Common expressions such as “I do not have enough time” or “time is going so fast” reflect the observer mediating between multiple events during daily experience. The sum total of such mediation constitutes the motion of time itself.⁴

Aristotle’s notion of form is often confused with being merely the exterior frame or outline of an object. This interpretation obscures the way form provides matter with identity, because the form—as a frame—appears to change constantly while matter appears stable. For instance, moving one’s hands closer together or farther apart changes the frame, yet the underlying substratum remains. This is not what Aristotle meant: even a “static” material substrate, such as a brick, involves particles in constant motion at the microscopic level while maintaining its formal identity.⁵

Form, properly understood, is the concentration of consciousness that abstracts a definite object from a field of indeterminate possibilities. Form is not externally imposed; instead, it is the active operation of consciousness itself, producing the object as a formula of focus. The process by which a single object is distinguished from a field of possibilities is different from ordinary selection. For example, picking one fruit from a market stand presupposes that the set of fruits is already conceived as a coherent group. The more fundamental process is how a group of objects comes into focus as distinct entities in the first place.⁶

Geometric Analogy: Circle on a Sphere

Consider a circle on a sphere. Let points A and B lie on the surface:

1. Object – B is the object being perceived, distinct from the observer at A.
2. Conception – The conception of B by A constitutes a circumference of possibilities.
3. Potentiality – The conception and object are mutually related: any point on the circumference is distinct from the center, and the center is defined by the circumference.

Because a point is inherently spherical, the extension of a point generates curvature. The abstraction of a straight line presupposes the curvature inherent in a point: a straight line is an idealized concept derived from the dynamical motion of extended points. In this sense, a straight line is never truly static but is fundamentally “wiggly”—akin to a string—while straightness functions as a conceptual structure maintaining the underlying curvature.⁷

Footnotes

1. Simultaneity across senses – Sound and vision perceive simultaneity differently due to their dimensional characteristics; sound operates in pressure, vision in spatial dimensions.
2. Temporal extents – Simultaneity can span different temporal scales, revealing underlying patterns in the flow of events.
3. Hegel, Science of Logic, definition of mediation; “bare and simple becoming” as the process of self-identity.
4. Time as mediation – Duration arises from the observer’s active integration of multiple events; subjective experience of time depends on the degree of mediation.
5. Aristotle on form – Form is not a static external frame but a principle that organizes matter at multiple levels of activity, including microscopic motion.
6. Selection from indeterminate fields – Consciousness abstracts definite objects from potentiality; perception relies on prior conceptual unity of objects.
7. Geometric abstraction – The concept of straightness presupposes curvature in fundamental points; straight lines are idealizations derived from the dynamics of extended points, anticipating string-theoretic interpretations of fundamental objects.

Zero-Point Energy and Quarks

Zero-point energy is the energy inherent in the conception of a system—the fundamental potentiality from which all particular manifestations arise.¹

Quarks operate in a manner analogous to entropy involving chaos. Strings, as one-dimensional objects in string theory, exhibit indeterminate motion representing the full potentiality of a particle. This indeterminate potentiality is continuously moving uncertainty. When a potentiality becomes an actual particular object, its certainty repels the surrounding indeterminate motion, producing a new distribution of uncertainty, which in turn collapses into another particular object. This ongoing process forms the dynamic substrate of matter and energy.²

A string’s indeterminate motion assumes particular angles temporarily, then continues in a new indeterminate state. The sum of these angles forms a collective certainty, which manifests as the universal structure of the string.³

The spherical nature of a quark is not random but emerges from the interplay of these indeterminate string motions. The individual angles and shapes of the strings are repelled and redistributed, producing a dynamic, coherent spherical structure. Randomness at the micro-level is integrated into an overall ordered form, which discloses the quark’s abstract structure.⁴

Loops in a string are defined whenever uncertainty changes. Each change adds a certainty to the form of the whole, producing what is known as a quark flux tube.⁵ When quarks are pulled apart, the energy of the flux tube grows until it favors the creation of a new quark–antiquark pair in the middle of the original pair. The original string “breaks” and forms two new flux tubes, connecting the new quark pairs. This process does not erase the old geometry; rather, it creates a continuous evolution of structure, forming a geometric shape over time.⁶

Quarks are bound together by the strong interaction, mediated by the exchange of virtual gluons. These interactions form flux tubes similar to strings stretched between particles. As quarks are pulled apart, potential energy grows and eventually becomes sufficient to generate additional quark pairs. The flux tube breaks, new quarks are formed, and the system reconfigures.⁷

The curvature of a string determines the type of fundamental particle: for example, changing the curve may transform an electron-like excitation into a gluon-like one. These variations constitute different aspects of the same underlying structure, abstracted from the spherical form that discloses it.⁸ According to supersymmetry, the most basic form underlies the most general form, reflecting a fundamental unity consistent with pre-Socratic ontological delineations of being.⁹

Compactification

Compactification is a method for modifying the number of dimensions in a physical theory. In compactification, some extra dimensions are “closed up” on themselves, forming small circles. Viewed from a distance, these curled-up dimensions are effectively invisible, yielding a lower-dimensional spacetime.¹⁰

A standard analogy is a garden hose: from far away, it appears one-dimensional (its length), but an ant crawling on the surface experiences a second dimension (the circumference). Similarly, compactified dimensions in string theory allow a higher-dimensional universe to appear four-dimensional at macroscopic scales.¹¹

Not all compactifications yield physically realistic models. To construct a viable model of particle physics, the extra dimensions are typically shaped as Calabi–Yau manifolds, named after Eugenio Calabi and Shing-Tung Yau. These special six-dimensional manifolds are mathematically complex and preserve supersymmetry, which is essential for the consistency of string theory.¹²

The cross-section of a quintic Calabi–Yau manifold illustrates how compact dimensions can encode intricate geometric and topological properties, which influence the particle spectrum and interactions in four-dimensional spacetime.

Footnotes

1. Zero-point energy – The irreducible energy inherent in a system, even at its lowest energy state.
2. Entropy and chaos – Quark behavior demonstrates the interplay of indeterminate motion collapsing into particular states, similar to thermodynamic entropy.
3. Particular angles of a string – Each transient state contributes to the overall “form” of the string as a universal pattern of certainty.
4. Spherical nature of quarks – Random local motions aggregate into a coherent structure; micro-level chaos produces macro-level order.
5. Quark flux tube – A dynamic tube of color charge connecting quarks, whose energy grows with separation.
6. String breaking – Mechanism by which energy concentration in a flux tube produces new quark–antiquark pairs, maintaining conservation laws.
7. Strong interaction – Mediated by gluons; responsible for quark confinement and flux tube formation.
8. Curvature and particle type – String curvature determines particle excitations; local variations produce different particle types while maintaining the underlying structure.
9. Supersymmetry and ontological unity – Basic forms underlie general forms, connecting modern physics with pre-Socratic notions of being as fundamental unity.
10. Compactification – Extra dimensions “curl up” to small scales, becoming effectively invisible at large distances.
11. Garden hose analogy – Illustrates perception of lower-dimensional space from higher-dimensional objects.
12. Calabi–Yau manifolds – Six-dimensional spaces required for consistent string compactification; preserve supersymmetry and influence particle physics.

Different Levels of Physicality

In general, the term duality refers to a situation where two seemingly different physical systems turn out to be equivalent in a nontrivial way.¹

One of the relationships that can exist between different string theories is called S-duality. This relationship states that a collection of strongly interacting particles in one theory can, in some cases, be viewed as a collection of weakly interacting particles in a completely different theory. Roughly speaking, a collection of particles is strongly interacting if they combine and decay often, and weakly interacting if they do so infrequently.²

The concept of vibration in string theory challenges the classical notion of a “point-like particle” in particle physics. Instead of being a stable, zero-dimensional entity, a particle is understood as a one-dimensional string undergoing oscillatory motion. A string’s one-dimensional nature allows it to exhibit more observable properties than a static, zero-dimensional particle because the latter’s features are only explainable through its interactions as a one-dimensional dynamic system.³

In metaphysics, what is more fundamental is not necessarily smaller in magnitude. A fundamental entity is not inherently minute. Modern physics often equates microscopic scales with fundamental operations of nature because investigating minute levels can reveal the basic structure of reality. However, fundamental understanding can also be achieved by examining phenomena at maximal scales—approaching the speed of light, for example, provides a generalized, holistic picture of reality. The fundamental nature of reality transcends scale: motion at the speed of light expands into all things, just as microscopic motion opens new expansive dimensions to enclose ever-smaller extensions.⁴

String theory suggests that even more fundamental than atomic nuclei are vibrations. These vibrations are not fully explained by current scientific standards and are often deferred until new hypotheses—frequently philosophical in nature—emerge. At levels more fundamental than atomic nuclei, there exists a continuum between the uncertainty inherent in conceiving an object and the uncertainty inherent in the physical motion that maintains the object being perceived.⁵

There is a synchronization between the internal uncertainty of the object and the external uncertainty of its conception. Setting aside the observer effect—the notion that observation changes the phenomenon—there is an intensive and extensive uncertainty mediated by a shared certainty. The uncertainty shared by two aspects constitutes their mutual certainty. String theory, without fully explaining the motion of uncertainty, treats the movements of vibration as determinative of particle types. This aligns with Aristotle’s ancient notion that form is the activity that determines a physical object.⁶

String theory treats these basic vibrating motions as raw material: patterns from which form is generated. Probability, in this context, is a motion more fundamental than locomotion. It is the quantitative measure of potentiality and the generative motion underlying simultaneity and instantaneity. In the definition of simultaneity, opposing factors are considered in inversion, because within the same framework of time, one factor cannot be distinguished as occurring before or after another. Instantaneity is the quality in which a set of simultaneous inverse factors emerges concurrently.⁷

These initial probabilistic conditions constitute generation: the continuous becoming of something rather than the creation of something from nothing. Generation is understood as a spectrum of time in which several events unfold in sequential duration. The sequence presupposed by durations constitutes the quality of generation—not as separate parts, but as a capacity for distinction whereby a set of variables forms a series. This series defines the nature of the particular and provides the form shared by the simultaneously distinguished factors.⁸

Footnotes

1. Duality – A concept in physics where seemingly distinct systems are mathematically or physically equivalent.
2. S-duality – Relates strongly interacting particles in one theory to weakly interacting particles in another, highlighting symmetry in interactions.
3. Strings vs. point particles – Strings are one-dimensional, dynamic entities whose oscillatory modes determine particle properties; point particles are abstractions derived from string behavior.
4. Fundamentality and scale – Fundamental entities are defined by their ontological role, not by size; both microscopic and extreme-speed perspectives reveal essential aspects of reality.
5. Vibrations in string theory – Represent indeterminate motions underlying particle properties, reflecting a continuum of uncertainty between conception and physical manifestation.
6. Form as activity – Aristotle’s notion of form corresponds to the dynamic process that gives matter its determinate properties, analogous to vibrating strings generating particle types.
7. Probability, simultaneity, and instantaneity – Probability is treated as a generative motion; simultaneity involves factors in inversion, and instantaneity refers to their concurrent emergence.
8. Generation as continuous becoming – The sequential unfolding of events forms a spectrum of time; distinctions among variables define the form of the particular while maintaining unity with the whole.

Person Running (Illustration of Quantum Decoherence)

What it means for a particular to carry with it the sequence of its total events relates to the nature of the particular as the discrete measure of a continuous duration. The question of discreteness concerns how the order of the particular, arranged relative to other particulars, is simultaneously the very same order that constitutes the form of the particular. This can be understood through the logical nature of dialectic, where the inverse determination of a definite action is synthesized by distinctions to form an identical entity, capable of moving within opposing determinations constituting its self-unity.

Take, for example, the directions up, down, left, right: is the particular each specific direction (pointed by a red marker) or are the directions together a single unit particular? On one hand, each direction is distinct, but it cannot be particular on its own. Any single direction, such as “left,” presupposes “right,” and both presuppose “up,” which in turn presupposes “down.” Hence, any single direction presupposes the totality of all directions as a unit. The directions together form a single body, able to move in each direction at a given time.¹

The particular identified as “I” does not stand independently from its past and future conduct. The past is not something that no longer exists, and the future is not something that does not yet exist. The object identified as a particular in any given moment carries with it the sequence of all its past and future experiences as part of its durability. The past and future provide an abstract path, which the particular in the present realizes through experience. The duration is the measure between past and future; it is both intensive and extensive. For example, the past may be one second ago or thousands of years ago; the continuity between one and ten thousand seconds includes all discrete numbers between them.²

The particular is composed of all the events it will experience. The particular object is a moment in a sequence, and the sequence abstractly belongs to it, in line with the uncertainty principle—the possibility of one event transitioning into others. The indeterminacy of the object is its energy or entropy, whereby one event transitions into another, constituting continuity of duration.³

The term entropy originates from the Ancient Greek en-trope, meaning “en” (inside) and “trope” (transformation). Entropy studies internal transformation, though modern definitions have inconsistencies. Thermodynamically, entropy is a quantity representing the “unavailability” of a system’s thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work. This lack of work is interpreted as randomness or disorder. Randomness in this context is a form of potential energy: an unknown system is potentially anything and thus indeterminate.⁴

The reason why the unknown characterizes the transformation of one definite state into another is central to chaos theory: during the change, a system is potentially anything, including the state it will become. The transformation of one particular state into another is mediated by the universal possibility of all other states. The energy that transforms one state into another is the sum of all possible states. What determines one exact state becoming another is the conception that discloses a particular sequence of events.⁵

Quantum entanglement further explains this: a conception can disclose particular events from the potentiality of all events. The conception itself can be disclosed by another conception. Any two objects separated by space and time can still relate through their shared conceptual entanglement. This entanglement mediates how events lead into other events: the change of one event into another is the realization of potential events determined by the total course of existence.⁶

The Big Bang is not merely a historical event at the universe’s beginning, but an ongoing law of entropy: one object changes to another through the cumulative force of all existence. The indeterminacy of one event transforming into another reflects the total course of events, exemplifying the butterfly effect.⁷

The transition of one event into another requires a particular observer, who acts as the discrete measure of the indeterminate flow of events. Any present moment is an abstraction of the observer determining a specific experience of an event by intersecting with the indeterminate flow of events.

The physicality of reality varies across scales. At the DNA level, physics differs from the level of the object it constitutes. DNA is not spatial in the traditional sense but temporal: it represents all events that can possibly happen to the object it forms, such as a hand. These events—breaking an arm, exercising, aging—are encompassed as potentialities defining the object. DNA therefore constitutes a collection of events forming the particular body that experiences duration.⁸

Footnotes

1. Directions as a unit – Illustrates how a discrete entity presupposes the totality of relations for its determinacy, analogous to vectorial or phase-space representation in physics.
2. Particular and duration – A particular carries its sequence of events across time; duration is the measure between past and future moments.
3. Entropy and uncertainty – Indeterminacy of events can be understood as internal energy, mediating transitions between states in time.
4. Greek origin of entropy – En-trope: “inside transformation”; modern thermodynamic definition partially abstracts the underlying philosophical notion.
5. Chaos principle – The transformation of states reflects potentiality and the mediation of all possible states within a system.
6. Quantum entanglement – Conceptual entanglement allows events or objects separated in space and time to exhibit relational coherence.
7. Big Bang as law of entropy – Continuous unfolding of events is not historical but represents ongoing transformations mediated by total existence.
8. DNA as temporal system – DNA represents the collection of potential events that constitute the durability and physicality of an object.

Natural Discretion

There is a disconnect in time between the conception of thought and the present moment in which it is physically experienced. This is classically described as the mind-body dualism or thought-object distinction, but in reality, it reflects a temporal contrast between mind and matter outside the present moment. A conception in thought is abstract because it is uncertain; it is never fully in the present moment and is not directly experienced. A thought outside the present moment remains abstract because it cannot be precisely defined and exists in a flux of uncertainty: a conception occurs at an instant, often overlapping with other simultaneous conceptions, leaving insufficient time to distinguish it fully. The present moment captures a particular conception and molds it into physical experience. Matter outside the present moment is also in a state of uncertainty, but its indeterminacy arises from being undifferentiated.¹

The Amount of Time It Takes

In string theory, this represents the malleable nature of matter, taking on the form of a definite conception. In general relativity, matter is defined by the indivisibility of spacetime. On Earth, distance can be measured by the space covered, e.g., in kilometers, which corresponds to a measurable amount of time. In outer space, time itself is the object being shaped—the so-called “fabric of space.” When scientists say that it takes a certain number of light-years to reach a location, this implies that it takes that amount of time for the space to be realized. A location in outer space is not fully generated until one arrives; the time it takes to reach it is identical with it coming into being.²

A wormhole, for example, condenses two points in space into a single point. Similarly, two points in time can constitute the same present moment: a past and a future point meet in the present. This is a form of temporal entanglement, where two potential conceptions at different times converge at the present. A mind may hold an idea in the past relative to the present, while matter holds the potential of the future. The present moves to reconcile the idea and the matter. The relativity of two points in time not sharing the same present begins with the fact that each is a “present” away from the other: to one, the other exists as a future potential.³

For example, when I am at the grocery store, I am experiencing that present moment. Meanwhile, my wife is at home, in her present moment. To me, she exists in a future moment when I arrive home, and vice versa.

Matter is malleable, and outside the present moment, it is undifferentiated. It will take the form of another conception in the future. In the present, matter captures the form of a conception realized in time, bringing thought into determinateness through experience.⁴

This idea underlies parallel universes: the warping of spacetime causes a disconnect in time, effectively accelerating certain potentials into the present. A potential moment becomes a present one, making multiple possible realities accessible depending on the temporal frame of reference.⁵

Footnotes

1. Mind and matter temporal disconnect – Reflects classical mind-body dualism as a difference in temporal positioning rather than an ontological separation.
2. Time as generation of space – In relativity, light-years measure not just distance but the time-space interval required for realization of a location.
3. Temporal entanglement – Two points in time can converge in the present, analogous to spatial entanglement in quantum mechanics.
4. Malleability of matter – Matter outside the present is undifferentiated and takes form when intersecting with a conception, enabling determinate experience.
5. Parallel universes – The warping of spacetime can bring potential moments into the present, providing a conceptual basis for multiple simultaneous realities.

Parallelogram

This disconnect outside the present moment and the connection during the present moment between conception and object is the fundamental process occurring during DNA replication. The separation of the DNA strand is the reconstruction of matter forming the present moment so that a new connection of duration occurs. This deconstruction is simply the molding of matter to meet a new conception.¹

There is discreteness or discretion between these concurrent events in a sequence. This discreteness is precisely the particular object undergoing each event at a specific point in time. The particular object is the discrete measure between each event occurring during a duration.²

Every being orbits spherically around its counterpart: nothing.

This orbiting is not like terrestrial bodies orbiting others, maintaining their discrete identity while moving in space. Rather, the orbiting of being around nothing is analogous to objects orbiting a black hole. When an object orbits a black hole, it does not maintain its particle-like identity but becomes extended, obscured, and stretched.³

A single mass sucked into a black hole is dispersed throughout the universe at a microscopic scale, representing all its potential variations. Each dispersed particle may grow into a new object, embodying the sum of all potential actions rather than the sum of its actual past. Near a black hole, an object enters a wave-like function where its qualities and movements are extended as a continuous space spectrum, and its particle-like identity becomes merely a possibility in that continuum.⁴

Being, spatially, orbits nothing, and temporally, being is like a circle extended around nothing. Duration is connected by the beginning and end being the same point. The advance of the particle-like states is experienced as moving from the start point back to itself at the end point. At a quantum level, every action and event is a discrete particle-like point, subjectively experienced as a new course of conduct, yet part of a connected spectrum of the same wave function. Reality is determined in this way, but for a particular to be determined, it must have the freedom to act within that spectrum.⁵

Unlike black holes and stars, more stable forms of this phenomenon exist at the most fundamental states: strings. If an individual approaches a black hole, all their possible events would be extended outward as a spectrum. Divisibility is multiplicity, a form of generation: the one becomes the many.⁶

Charles Sanders Peirce’s categories of Firstness and Secondness provide a useful framework for understanding this multiplicity and potentiality.

A standing wave is defined as the vibration of a system in which some points remain fixed while others vibrate with maximum amplitude. This concept underlies the collapsed state, defined as “to fall or shrink together abruptly and completely,” forming the basis for discreteness and continuity in physical systems.⁷

A standing wave is a stationary state of a string—a spectrum of probability. If the wave spectrum of the string is fixed at a certain mode, it will remain in that mode until acted upon by an external force. Perturbing the string at specific points can create transitions between modes. Similarly, electrons in atoms behave according to this principle: an electron remains in a given orbital (associated with a specific wave function) until acted upon by a perturbation such as an electromagnetic field or collision. Such perturbations can induce transitions or create superpositions.⁸

Two distinct conceptions occurring simultaneously can cause an abrupt change: a wave propagation of their potential places against each other. In a wave function, electrons constantly pop in and out of existence. When two particles arise at the same time and location, they cause superposition, creating a new orbital. The conception that exceeds the object remains inconceivable until succeeded by another conception that discloses it as an object.

Vibrations and standing waves are the physical manifestation of the fundamental relation between the universal and the particular. The question of whether the world is predetermined or free becomes secondary: the universe is both determined and free. What is determined is potentiality—infinity of possibilities. Every possibility is predetermined as a wave spectrum disclosing the emergence of events. This is why electrons remain in orbitals until acted upon.

The energy of unaltered wave functions represents determined potentiality. This wave function of potentiality is universal. Continuity between discrete quanta occurs because each particular event is a realization of a certain potentiality, participating in the duration of the conception. The particular embodies freedom because it actualizes a pre-existing potential state. Universal potentiality is abstract and characterless, becoming determinate only through interaction with a particular.⁹

As Alan Watts emphasizes, “The life you are living is the life you are choosing and parking in.” Not only is life determined by the particular partaking in universal potential, but future potentialities remain open to determination. The individual, through thought and action, participates in shaping these potentials. Understanding time and the interplay of conception and matter explains how thought determines the form of reality.¹⁰

Footnotes

1. DNA replication as an intersection of conception and matter; strand separation as temporal realization of potential events.
2. Discreteness as the measure of events occurring in sequence; the particular object as temporal interval.
3. Analogous to black hole physics; particle identity is extended and transformed into potential forms.
4. Wave-like extension near black holes; quantum superposition as spectrum of potential states.
5. Temporal and spatial orbiting as cyclical and continuous; quantum determination requiring local freedom.
6. Multiplicity and generation; Peirce’s categories of Firstness (possibility) and Secondness (actuality) are relevant.
7. Standing wave as discrete-continuous spectrum; collapsed state as abrupt consolidation of potentiality.
8. Electrons in orbitals and wave functions; superposition and perturbation transitions as quantum analogues of standing waves.
9. Universal potentiality realized through particular events; wave function continuity connecting discrete quanta.
10. Alan Watts, philosophical illustration of participation in universal potential and the determination of the future.

Time as Context

Time is the context of objects because it determines the relation and order of events. Space is the context in which time functions as the context of events, as events exhibit a certain form of appearance along with basic quantitative measures of direction, place, velocity, mass, etc.¹

From a Hegelian perspective, the question arises whether the spatial order of things as perceived corresponds to an objective temporal order.² If we adopt the continuity of things laid out coherently during a moment of time—and if a moment of time is succeeded by a change into another moment—then the continuity disclosing a set of things is itself a discrete moment, changing to disclose another set of things.³

A moment in time is distinguishable and thus abstract, as it discloses a particular order of continuity. The true temporal order of things is not merely the relation of distinct objects as disclosed by the same conception. More fundamentally, the conception that discloses continuity of related but different objects is itself a discrete element in each object. This is because:

A) For continuity to exist, things must differentiate from one another.
B) Similarities shared by different things disclose continuity, which remains distinct from each particular difference, and thus each discrete moment participates in disclosing the continuous order of other things.

This means that uncertainty is inherent not merely in the observer’s limits but in the form of things themselves: the conception disclosing a continuity of distinct objects is discrete in each particular object, characterized by the indeterminacy of constant change.⁴

The constant alteration in the conception, which discloses certain objects in one moment and others in another, is the inherent flux differentiating particulars. Indeterminacy across all possible events operates as vibrations: the conception is the discrete indeterminacy within each object, enabling continuity across distinct things.⁵

Strings and Standing Waves

How can a conception be discrete yet continuous across all unique things? By being identical with the particular, the conception is as discrete as the thing is different from others but discloses other things by extending and changing within each thing.

Time, when limited by place and location, is conceived as having a direction of motion, e.g., getting larger or smaller. Yet as generality, time encompasses all particular conceptions simultaneously. Consider the life cycle of a flower: the blossom is the present, the seed is the past, and withering is the future. While each stage has a direction in time, the cycle as a whole can be viewed simultaneously—an abstract simultaneity prior to any particular moment.⁶

The string analogy illustrates this: a string is not a pre-formed object; rather, its vibration represents potentiality mediating between definite forms. Sub-quark structures are not pre-disposed items but bare motion of vibration, from which forms are abstracted as static objects. Strings are extensive not in spatial size but in temporal influence: the more spatially minute, the more temporally pervasive. Extensive magnitude is determined by intensive variability—a fundamental principle: the species predicates the individual.⁷

Osculation—motion caused by uncertainty—is variable because it mediates between one form and another. The indeterminacy of potentiality manifests as a blur of qualities: color, mass, shape, direction, etc. Pure potentiality is a qualitative continuum; only through thought is clarity imposed to pick out particular forms.

A string’s vibration represents the indeterminacy of thoughts, taking infinite possible forms. When motion becomes definite, a particular emerges, inverting into a form distinguished from universal potentiality. This universal relation to the particular is why every atom vibrates: potentiality is implicit in each structure, from which particular forms are extracted.⁸

Temporal Order, Infinitesimal, and Conception

A conception is the eternally changing form implicit in each particular thing. The abstraction of change into a static object presupposes the uncertainty from which it is abstracted; each particular is thus a principle of uncertainty. The conception externalizes this indeterminacy to disclose the object. In each particular, the universal indeterminate potential exists, explaining why one thing emerges rather than another. Nature is fundamentally metaphysical; the most elementary sciences are ontological.⁹

Nothing can move faster than light, but conception exceeds light by disclosing it. The Big Bang and inflation illustrate this: the universe expanded exponentially in a short period. While nothing within the universe can surpass light speed, the universe’s becoming is more fundamental than its being.¹⁰ Being is always becoming; light itself comes to be. Hegel reminds us: “Nature isn’t complete without mind, and mind isn’t real without nature.”¹¹

The quantitative expansion of the universe—from the infinitesimal to the enormous—is a logical meditation on extremes. Spatial extremes establish the framework for all intermediate possibilities. Contemporary cosmology often misinterprets these extremes as sequential, neglecting the simultaneity inherent in conception.¹²

Black Holes, Time, and Entanglement

Consider black holes: they are not spatial bodies in the classical sense but temporal structures, pure bodies of time. Merging black holes represents the unification of temporal periods—past and future merging as the present. Similarly, observing a distant star is a simultaneous act of perceiving its future relative to Earth, as light requires time to travel. Time is selective: the present is a conception that merges past and future.¹³

This leads to the question: Is the universe the sum of its parts, or the whole of which the parts are the sum? The answer lies in understanding conception, potentiality, and the ordering of time, where the particular and universal, discrete and continuous, are inseparably entwined.

Footnotes

1. Space as context of time; time as context of objects. See Hegel, Science of Logic, Objectivity.
2. Hegelian objectivity: spatial order corresponds to temporal order.
3. Discreteness of temporal moments; continuity as abstraction of conception.
4. Indeterminacy inherent in objects; conception as discrete and continuous.
5. Vibrations as indeterminacy mediating continuity of objects.
6. Temporal simultaneity and life cycles as conceptual abstraction.
7. Strings as temporal extensive forms; intensive variability determines magnitude.
8. Osculation and universal-particular relation; string vibrations as potentiality realized.
9. Universality of indeterminacy; metaphysical nature of particulars; Hegelian metaphysics.
10. Big Bang inflation; speed of light limitation and becoming as prior to being.
11. Hegel, Philosophy of Nature, lecture 5: “Nature is incomplete without mind; mind is unreal without nature.”
12. Extremes in magnitude as simultaneous conceptual extremes; limit as logical requirement.
13. Black holes as temporal structures; merging of past and future as present; entanglement across time.

Big Bang Inflation and the Nature of Conception

The Big Bang idea of “inflation” asserts that, in a small region of space over a short period, the universe came into being by growing exponentially fast. Within this brief interval, the universe expanded from the smallest possible size to the largest conceivable magnitude.¹

This growth is often described as having occurred faster than the speed of light, which seems to contradict the fundamental law that nothing moves faster than light. However, the law technically means that nothing can move through the universe faster than light. If the limit is considered as part of the universe itself, then what exceeds this limit is existence itself, as the generative act of becoming, which is prior to being.²

Becoming is more fundamental than anything already existing, because for a thing to exist, it must first come into being. Becoming is a kind of being; thus, being is always becoming.³ Nothing disclosed within the known universe can go faster than light because light is more fundamental than any other element. Yet what is more fundamental than light is its coming into being, which discloses light itself.

Hegel emphasizes this ontological interdependence: “Nature isn’t complete without mind, and mind isn’t real without nature.”⁴ In the context of inflation, the extent of growth is measured as having a direction: in a single second, the universe expanded from smaller than an atom toward a much larger scale.

The reason the universe began small and expanded rapidly is not fully explained by conventional physics. Inflation is often treated as a methodology to measure cause and effect, giving structure and direction to temporal evolution. From a finite, internal perspective, the universe is a structure with measurable dimensions and a definite direction of motion.⁵

The empirical fact that the universe expanded from minute to vast scale cannot ontologically justify the claim that the universe arose from nothing. Doing so is an instance of the fallacy of misplaced concreteness, assuming that extremes in magnitude imply sequential causation. What appears as the “smallest” and “largest” are logical extremes derived from the same underlying conception, simultaneous in essence.⁶ Logically, to discern intermediate forms, one must first establish the extremes as a framework encompassing all possibilities.

Spacetime and Extraterrestrial Observations

Spacetime is often considered the cause of an object’s form, but it does not explain why something has its particular form. For example, the discovery of Tabby’s Star (KIC 8462852) revealed irregular dips in brightness, which some speculate may result from extraterrestrial engineering, such as a Dyson sphere.⁷

This raises questions about the nature of extraterrestrial life. We typically imagine beings existing simultaneously on distant planets, but the distances in space also constitute differences in time. A star many light-years away represents a potential future point relative to Earth. Observing it is not simultaneous with its local present; the light we see is temporally displaced.

Black Holes and Temporal Bodies

Consider the merging of black holes, often described as the most violent events in the universe. Black holes are typically assumed to be spatial objects, since they exert enormous gravitational force. However, they do not exhibit the characteristics of ordinary matter.⁸

Black holes are not spatial bodies but temporal ones—bodies of pure time. When they merge, different periods of time coalesce into one present moment. Similarly, white dwarfs at vast distances, with aging processes separated by billions of light-years, can attract and merge as if temporally entangled, illustrating that the present is a synthesis of past and future.⁹

Time is therefore not strictly linear; it is a merging of two conceptions—past and future—into the present, which is itself a selective process. This aligns with earlier discussions of string theory, where temporal and spatial potentialities are mediated through vibration and standing waves.¹⁰

Concluding Question

This raises the perennial philosophical question: Is the universe the sum of its parts, or the whole of which the parts are the sum? The answer lies in understanding conception, potentiality, and the ordering of time, where the particular and universal, discrete and continuous, are inseparably intertwined.

Footnotes

1. Guth, Alan. Inflationary Universe: The Quest for a New Theory of Cosmic Origins. Basic Books, 1998.
2. Becoming as prior to being: Whitehead, A.N. Process and Reality. 1929.
3. Ibid.; ontological primacy of becoming over being.
4. Hegel, Philosophy of Nature, lecture 5, 5:01:00; mind and nature interdependence.
5. Inflation as methodology: Linde, Andrei. Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology. 1990.
6. Misplaced concreteness fallacy: Whitehead, Process and Reality, 1929.
7. Tabby’s Star KIC 8462852: Boyajian et al., Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 2016.
8. Black holes as temporal rather than spatial bodies: Hawking, A Brief History of Time, 1988.
9. Quantum entanglement of temporally separated stellar objects: Lloyd, Programming the Universe, 2006.
10. String theory and potentiality: Green, Schwarz, Witten, Superstring Theory, 1987.