Since the dawn of civilization dichotomies like atom—void, realism—idealism,
reality—logos, body—soul, nature—spirit, res extensa—res cogitans, sein—zeit,
material—immaterial, objective—subjective etc., have been at the centre of attention for philosophers and naturalists alike. However, Kant’s scientific worldview
[17] engrained in the Enlightenment did set the terms for a metaphysics and philosophy for the coming years with fundamental motifs and patterns surviving until
today. He told us, already more than two hundred years ago, that ‘space and time
are the two essential forms of human sensibility’, i.e. everything we, as evolved life
forms perceive and experience, concerns phenomena set in this perspective.
Of course it is impossible for us to comprehend what Kant and his contemporaries actually had in mind and meant with such a statement, nevertheless an
orthodox starting point for doing science would rightfully study material representations in terms of energy and momentum as imagined and sensed by us in
Nature. Obviously energy-momentum constitutes the material part, while space and
time comprise the immaterial part of the world. Moreover, as any student of
quantum mechanics must learn today, it is imperative to realize that the two aspects
referred to are entwined through the non-commutative conjugate relationships of
their representations as linear operators.
This distinction is therefore mandatory in modern physics, however, not only in
connection with quantum physics, but also in preserving a fundamental interpretation within classical physics, where key correspondences are discerned through
the celebrated Fourier Transform. It is perhaps somewhat surprising that this feature
extended to incorporate special and general relativity admits generalizations to open
system dynamics, see e.g. Ref. [18] and in the following section.
3 A Consistent Formulation of Energy-Momentum
and Space-Time
Based on the argument just given above it follows that once space and time are
specified, momentum and energy are inevitable consequences of the declaration—
and vice versa. For instance, if some object, defined by its energy and momentum,
permits a portrayal within the basic deductive axioms of science as practised at
present in physics and formulated by the most succinct language we know today,
mathematics, we cannot avoid deductio in domum of the immaterial degrees of
freedom as given by time and space. Likewise, if we are able to differentiate some
non-stationary entities in space, we are in principle capable to discuss their
energy-mass-momentum relationships. The obvious conclusion is thus: inducing
the question whether time (or space) is not fundamental in some general setting
invites situations where the conjugate relationship viz. time–energy (or space–
momentum) would be relaxed. Although such situations might occur, e.g. in a black
hole, it might still be preferable to keep the deductive structure of a physical theory
intact, in order to investigate and analyse the emergence of any violations as they
A Simple Communication Hypothesis: The Process …
385
reality—logos, body—soul, nature—spirit, res extensa—res cogitans, sein—zeit,
material—immaterial, objective—subjective etc., have been at the centre of attention for philosophers and naturalists alike. However, Kant’s scientific worldview
[17] engrained in the Enlightenment did set the terms for a metaphysics and philosophy for the coming years with fundamental motifs and patterns surviving until
today. He told us, already more than two hundred years ago, that ‘space and time
are the two essential forms of human sensibility’, i.e. everything we, as evolved life
forms perceive and experience, concerns phenomena set in this perspective.
Of course it is impossible for us to comprehend what Kant and his contemporaries actually had in mind and meant with such a statement, nevertheless an
orthodox starting point for doing science would rightfully study material representations in terms of energy and momentum as imagined and sensed by us in
Nature. Obviously energy-momentum constitutes the material part, while space and
time comprise the immaterial part of the world. Moreover, as any student of
quantum mechanics must learn today, it is imperative to realize that the two aspects
referred to are entwined through the non-commutative conjugate relationships of
their representations as linear operators.
This distinction is therefore mandatory in modern physics, however, not only in
connection with quantum physics, but also in preserving a fundamental interpretation within classical physics, where key correspondences are discerned through
the celebrated Fourier Transform. It is perhaps somewhat surprising that this feature
extended to incorporate special and general relativity admits generalizations to open
system dynamics, see e.g. Ref. [18] and in the following section.
3 A Consistent Formulation of Energy-Momentum
and Space-Time
Based on the argument just given above it follows that once space and time are
specified, momentum and energy are inevitable consequences of the declaration—
and vice versa. For instance, if some object, defined by its energy and momentum,
permits a portrayal within the basic deductive axioms of science as practised at
present in physics and formulated by the most succinct language we know today,
mathematics, we cannot avoid deductio in domum of the immaterial degrees of
freedom as given by time and space. Likewise, if we are able to differentiate some
non-stationary entities in space, we are in principle capable to discuss their
energy-mass-momentum relationships. The obvious conclusion is thus: inducing
the question whether time (or space) is not fundamental in some general setting
invites situations where the conjugate relationship viz. time–energy (or space–
momentum) would be relaxed. Although such situations might occur, e.g. in a black
hole, it might still be preferable to keep the deductive structure of a physical theory
intact, in order to investigate and analyse the emergence of any violations as they
A Simple Communication Hypothesis: The Process …
385