The cosmological disagreement between the Ancient Greek tradition and our modern scientific tradition that extends even into the present moment and well into the first 20th century, this disagreement between ancient science and modern science, is about with what origin point do we begin with in Nature? What is the origin of the universe? This question can be answered by asking an adjacent question: where do we begin in finding an origin point? The prophase “where do we start?”, assumes the answer to the question “what is the origin of the universe?” What is the origin of the universe, relates to where it is, and “where” the universe is, relates to whom it is referring to, the reference point from where the negative is a negation of the positive. The determination of “positive” is derived from determinacy, the active force of the activity, the change causing agency. While the “negative” is the necessity for something to be there that indicates, or takes the form of characterizing the acivity into a rigid and static conception, called “solid” in geometry. A solid object is a measure of the other measure of its quantitive necessity, called “mass”, is total volume, or the extent of the greatest measures of variability. If we take the latter claim seriously, then the root nature of the universe is that it is a being, not an empty place where beings randomly arise out of. Whether the universe is a being or an object is the disagreement between organicism and atomism.
The universe at the fundamental levels is both agreed upon by the Ancient Greek traditions and the modern scientific, both past and future involve the idea that the fundamental component of the universe is an “atom”, which is a measure of discrete levels of energy, energy at the most finite or “smallest scale” in terms of size, but infinite or “greatest” in terms of variability. But this bare electrical charge on its own is a quantitative measure lacking quality. What the quality of the atom is described by an ontology that diverged away from atomism, in two distinct routes of approximations. The first way, is that this so called energy process, an electrical charge as taking the form of an “electron”, is not a random or abrupt. Second, the atom being the quantitive measure of some quality, it is the energy transfer between two or more origin points, the universe is an organism, a living being, not just an environment where rudimentary measures takes place.
Hegel explains that there is something more fundamental than what we know as “Nature” or as the Greeks referred to the “heavens, or the universe, as Nature. This being more fundamental than nature, or as the ancient Greeks say, nature belongs to something, as Aristotle speaks, the nature of a thing is the process of energy for it to move or change. Nature is the principle within an object that is the source of tendencies to change or rest in a particular way unless stopped. The process of nature is cunning and does not stop, destined to be a certain way, unless changed or determined otherwise. Inherent in anything is it’s nature, or the function it performs, manifests as it’s form, the idea of it, the nature of a thing, not just things in nature, but the being which nature belongs within as principle. The observer, or the organism, is what begins first, and his nature is rationality, then nature happens after as the quantitive measure of his activity. But this being because he has a nature, that can be observed by another being, and being is variable, meaning there is multiplicity and not just one being, being exhbits itself as an objective phenomenon for anything other that may experience it. Therefore being is one and only one being because his nature is an objective phenomenon.
“Nature, consequently, does not begin with quality but with quantity, because its determination is not, like logical being, the absolute first and immediate, but essentially a mediated being, a being external to and other than itself.”
Hegel here makes a distinction between nature and mind, whereas the latter begins with quality because consciousness observes forms performing a function; nature exhibits the first quantitive element for the observer, in other words, it exhibits fixed patterns and orders that provides measure of things. Space for example is a quantitive measure because it orders the world by intervals, two qualities are separated by a quantity; which can mean either, first between any two things there is an interval of something else which separates them, we can call that “space” or “time” or just some other different object that makes both of them identifiably not the same, like between you and me are distance. Second, it can means that within the same identical thing there is a conception of two different objects, or that the object stands as an intermediary point, a domain for space to pass through, and passing through this space are other objects, passing through the object taken as the intermediary passage of nature. What passes through my mind are qualities and conceptions, but objects pass through space and through time objects are passed.
Hegel outlines that nature begins with space it is the first determination in that it is the “abstract generality of its self-externality,-its unmediated indifference, space”. By this Hegel means that space is the first quantity – the first measure of quality into a particular and finite kind of order. There is a problem with assuming that space is the first quantity because as a quantity, space is the lack of quantity, meaning that space is not anything self-contained, it is not anything discernibly there occupying a position. This means that the very quality of space is that it is not any specific kind of quality, which means that it cannot be anything alone in and of itself, and so this is therefore its second quality, in that it must bear a necessary relation to something else. This necessary relation that space bears in relation to something else, makes it dependent on that thing it bears. Our observation makes it seem as if space is always there, stands alone, empty and bare, where objects manoeuvre and interact within. But what is often overlooked is that space itself is also disclosed within the conception of some observer. Space exists as a quality in the mind of some observer just like any thing passes through space and exists there as an object.
Space is just generally present but cannot be specifically pointed to because every time you point somewhere to an “empty” space, it is occupied by something either seen or not seen, either too big or too small, too near or too far. Space as a quantity must presuppose something external from itself, to which from the point of view of that thing, space is an externality. The problem is that something external from space can only be so by being disclosed, or contained, by space, because than it would require an interval which can differentiate space from something other than space, say the object in space, is an interval within space dividing space into two sides on the opposite ends of object in the middle. Space is this interval that differentiates a thing from itself, and anything from anything else. Anything requires space to be differentiated from something else, this is why things are separated and why we are entitled to say “give me some space”. And so we have in this case the first instance of something being self contained; there must be an identity which is contained within space so that it can separate itself from something other than itself, but simultaneously space must be in that object as a conception of it, so that it can differentiate things from other things and everything else from itself.
There is however an instance where space is not an aspect in the relation between things, and this is called time. Time can be said to be even more fundamental than space if we look out from the standpoint of time, of course if you have not yet noticed, any principle can be said to be the first, from the point of view of that principle. But from the standpoint of time, space is ordered into this external-internal, external -internal temporal order. The internal element itself is called time, because time is the self unity, the self identical element that something uses to maintain an identity of itself independent from other things outside itself, and to maintain an identity of other things independent of other things. For example when I look out into an object and perceive it as the same piece of matter, I do not notice the space in that object that the separate components of that objects are held to be maintained by. I see an object like a piece of food, and than some recognizable distance of space towards some other objects, which has its own unity of matter forming its identity up until its boarder lines separating it from space and that space separating it from some other object. In other words, although there are minute spaces separating the individual atoms between each other that form the structure of an object like a rock, I do not see this space between the objects, I just see the general form that the atoms combine to make, and I see this form as a homogenous continues piece of matter.
This first quantity is necessarily external- in other words, self-external, because this is the first step taken to multiply itself as further quantities because there needs to be, in the first place, some basis in which the muplticity of itself can be divided. Space is the platform in which objects exists and its externality is this necessity where it can become a platform. The understanding that space is a platform can be confusing because it suggests that space is this stage where objects lie and so space comes prior to the object. Space as externality however presupposes the object so that it can be externality- so that it can lie outside it. But space cannot be understood independently from the object. Space is in fact the very first determination of the object itself. Actual entities, as whitehead calls the object, first determines itself by being indifferent from itself and only from this difference it can start to differentiate itself and multiply. This indifference takes the form of spa all and temporal quantity.
Space is not merely a plain but rather a dimensional platform- this is the ideal environment for a draft thought to be actualized as concrete objects. Hegel writes: “Space has, as the concept in general (and more determinate than an indifferent self-externality) its differences within it: (a) in its indifference these are immediately the three dimensions, which are merely diverse and quite indeterminate.” Hegel provides an obscure, but true, description that space is not without form, but rather space takes on a form. The shape that space assumes is derived from the way it is in relation with itself- mainly space being self-external is a dimensional relation that presupposes a) there is externality- there is a thing to which it is outside of- outer being, and b) that this outer is external in relation to inner being, or rather, interior being.
Hegel explains: “That the line does not consist of points, nor the plane of lines, follows from their concepts, for the line is the point existing outside of itself relating itself to space, and suspending itself and the plane is just as much the suspended line existing outside of itself”. If the feature of space is that it is external, it is external to that which cannot be external – this we call the point. The point is the abstract notion to the modern concept of the atom.
The atom is the concrete characterization of what whitehead calls actual entities. The atom is indivisible and so only exists as internal being and this space produces by means of presupposing it otherwise space would not be indifferent externality- and if this doesn’t exists any different externalities cannot either as they require that indifferent basis to allow for their difference- for example any two chess peaces in conflict require the board- the board is only made to hold the different pieces of chess against each other. The development of any idea in thought is produced by means of the presupposition- that the antecedent is presupposed by the consequent- is likewise that nature presupposes logical being so as to be determined as quantitive being.
Space presupposes the point so as to be externality but the point likewise presupposes the externality so as to be that which is inside of it – and by this presupposition the point has at its essetinal nature internal being. But the point being internal being just means that it is different from space as external being and that we must not forget that their presupposition of each other makes hem difference. If the point presupposes self-externality- it being self external from itself makes the line- the line being the extension of the point. However the line now is a further and different determination from the point but while presupposing the first determination, space. Space, point and line are three determinations that are in negation with one another but it is this very negation of the negation that produces the form of space. What is meant by ‘negation of negation’ is clear when we see that any first is in negation with the second and with itself and the second with itself and the first, and the third with itself and the second- the self includes itself and its previous- the third as itself includes the second and the first and the other negation with the second and the first. The mathematical equivalence to this negation of negation is X2 (little 2). X squared.
Timeline
The idea of a timeline entirely misapprehends for us the actual state that time takes in relation to the object. Time is not this horizontal stream of continuity, this we adopted so as to visualize and understand time, rather time is measure of an activity as a duration having a beginning and an end, there are however an infinite of activities each of which with different durations and directions in space, such that if we take space as an indivisible invariability of time, then we
Let’s take biological life for instance, certain animals have faster heartbeats than other, a mouse has a heartbeat rate 5 times (check if this is true) faster than an elephant, and an elephant slower than a human being. The mouse lives about a year, an elephant about a 100 a human somewhere in the middle. What this says is that the heart is the biological clock for the animal- natural death always ends because of the stop of a heart. In this sense it is not the case that time demands a certain period of the animal, it is rather that the animal demands a certain period in time. The mouse only requires one year to attain its purpose whereas an elephant longer. Time is then the instrument of the object. If we say well why doesn’t an animal demand an infinite period in time. And as stupid as that statement which implants a human desire onto natures there could be a possibility for a being to demand such infinite time. However nature is not greedy and does not operate on unreasonable desire.
The following concern arises, a concern that strikes deeply at this kind of thinking; if space presupposes the point, that means the point must already exists so as to be presupposed and thus prior to space making space not the first determination. Generally, in order for anything to be presupposed it must already exists prior and so this results in the infinite regress of presupposing that which is prior- but what is prior to what is prior? That surely is an absurd question as it would not be prior to anything but itself? And it is this latter question that in facts provides the answer. Space and the point are two different determinations of the same thing. This is not an infinit regress resulting in a negative contradiction and therefore bearing an impossibility to any course of determinate action. It is rather the very process of bringing actuality to that which is potentiality- this has already been established but if you are looking for an answer that points to some kind of God- so you can either praise or dismiss it- then you are looking for an easy ready-made answer that hinders the analysis of the truth. What is true however is that there is necessarily the primary being to this process- but it is a being that is not captured by the term itself because it is a being of every being- it is that something that is everything. Let us not digress and turn our attention to knowlgde that provides us with an understanding of the primary being- for knowledge is it self such being. Time is the next determination in nature
We thus far explained that time is the activity and space is that externality and therefore takes on a form of its own and serves as the necessity of the activity. We thus far however did not explain what this activity is? What this activity is, indicates exactly what space and time are as abstract essences of matter. Time as an activity in space takes on a particular form, or rather, a concrete form. What we mean by concrete is not reducible to density, although that is one of its qualities, concrete rather means that the abstract takes on a real form, a living structure. We call this a “living” because it is activity as a system. The “atom” which is seen a mechanical mechanism for modern science is in fact the initial stage of life. The atom is both active and system. The atom is the reality where the activity takes on an actual form and so the atom is the activity that is the necessity, the process that is the result.
For Hegel what defines the process is what he understands by the contradiction- the contradiction is itself an active element because it excludes the truth of itself before resolving it. The result is what Hegel calls the resolution, which is itself the contradiction coming to accept itself- coming to recognize its antithesis as an element in its thesis and thus producing their unity given its idea. And so the contradiction is itself the resolution- the process is the result. The relation between the contradiction and the resolution exists as the process where Reason transforms its idea into the object. Reason recollects the idea (any idea) and looks to see the contradiction in the idea and comes to see what is necessary in the contradiction that makes the idea. For example, the idea of hydrogen involves a certain kind of contradiction between the protons and electrons. But looking at this from the lens of formal logic we reach an absurdity in thinking because we see that this is in fact the very dead-end of activity- the contradiction is seen from the negative sense as a dead end- formal logic deals with only the negative dialectic. There is however a positive contradiction from which a result arises out from as a quality.
The contradiction in formal logic when found that itself becomes the resolution and you achieved the goal. The entire logical equation involves finding the contradiction in formal logic, and the resolution is the process of finding it. But in our understanding of organic nature, the contradiction is itself the working out of the resolution because there is no result in the first place but the contradiction itself, otherwise there will be no contradiction if it is already resolved p, no process of the result already exists. But what necessarily must exists is the process itself as the result so that itself can achieve itself. The first result is the contradiction. This takes on the concrete form assumed by the atom- the atom is the manifestation of the process that is the result. The atom is the form of Reason as actuality and so it takes on systematic form- a logical form- the atom is an entirely contingent transparent matter. You have the proton which is the positive proposition of creativity- whitehead calls this the creative element in nature. Then you have the electrons with its negative charge- the contradiction to the proton. Then you have the neutron with its neutral charge which merely encompasses the contradiction as a thing, or a form- the ether taking on the kind of form provided by the proton and the electron. (Explain in detail particle physics).
The atom is the dialectic but the atom alone only tells us the very basic structure the dialectic. It does not tell us the creative element that formulate an object so as to be the kind of thing that it is. For example. Hydrogen is a certain kind of atomic structure having more protons etc. (check periodic table). The periodic element attributes a number to identify the atomic structure associated with the object but that only provides us with a quantitive understanding of the dialectic. This creative element we call consciousness which is nothing more then the abstract identity of reason with itself. And so consciousness is free insofar as it is rational. It is absolutely ethical because it is absolutely rational- that is what we call the love for itself- it takes its own reason for its object.
Manipulating the atomic structure of an object at the infinitesimal level changes the kind of energy that makes the thing that it is. Altering the kind of atomic structure changes the dialectic of the object- the way reason works with itself- and so a new essence is produced for the object. This is a stage in self-consciousness. Our modern example is the atomic bomb- the very initial manipulation of hydrogen. Such a small change in the structure causes what we see as such a significant change in energy. In this sense energy is always produced, it is irreversible according to Perice- the doctrine of necessity
space is outside itself
The concept of Space is the abstract generality of nature as its self-externality. It is the ideal that is real because it is pure indifference to difference and thus is eternally continues; it is by definition mere existence (Hegel 197 nature). Space possess no difference within itself by virtue of its externality and is thus the concept in general. Space is the first positive concept to nature from a deductive point of view because it’s very indifference to difference constitutes quantity – when there is nothing all else, the first positive move is the place for them to all be there. Quantity exists as the difference to its own indifference; it is by definition space. Space is spatially unlimited as quantity but it is also limited as quantity; space and quantity are only understood as relations. The quantity is the limit of space as itself but the limit of quantity is its inversion; quality. Quality for example constitutes what is meant by space as empty or full. The quality of density for example characterizes difference in the indifference of quantity. While the quality of space is quantity, quantity is quality in space. This conceptual analysis of Space is actually it’s concrete reality. Geometry is the pure abstract analysis of Space and thus presupposes space as its object. Because geometry is not a philosophical science, or is not ontological, it does not need to demonstrate the necessity to why it adopts space as its object rather then the object as space.
Geometry adopts space as its object by considering particular configurations of space to be further qualitative limitations of spatial abstractions. The triangle is an example of a spatial abstraction imposed as a qualitative limitation onto space. Hegel exemplifies the triangle as “the first rectilinear figure, that all other figures must, to be determined, be reduced to it or to the square, and so on.-The principle of these figures is the identity of the understanding, which determines the figurations as regular, and in this way grounds the relationships and sets them in place, which it now becomes the purpose of science to know” (199).Height, width and length are conceptually different but are not yet differences in space (198 nature). Hegel states for example that Geometry measures the precise height to distance from the centre of the earth; but this measurement of height makes no difference in space as it is also equally length, depth etc