Thesis: Conservation laws are often framed in physics with the aura of providential guarantee, reflecting a theological residue of eternal oversight rather than relational bookkeeping.
Observation: Energy, momentum, and charge are said to be “conserved,” treated as timeless, inviolable truths. Textbooks and lectures routinely describe these as universal, absolute, and binding, with language suggesting inherent foresight or ordering in nature itself.
Analysis: Conceptually, framing conservation as providential parallels theological thought: the universe is governed by constants that preserve balance, echoing divine care or supervision. Relational actualisation is obscured; the focus is on eternal, unbroken continuity rather than contingent processes. The world is imagined as metaphysically secured, rather than as emergent from interdependent processes.
Implication: This theological trace constrains ontology. By naturalising conservation as universal law, physics inadvertently suppresses relational contingency and downplays the role of perspective and context in actualisation. Processes are perceived as preordained rather than co-constructed.
Conclusion: A relational reframing treats conservation as descriptive of relations and patterns, not as a guarantor of cosmic order. Recognising the providential residue in conservation laws is essential to dislodge theological assumptions and reveal the participatory, contingent nature of reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment