Quantum mechanics is infamous for its “spooky action at a distance,” the puzzling correlations between entangled particles that seem to defy classical intuitions of space and causality. From a relational perspective, these phenomena are not paradoxical at all. They are manifestations of co-individuation — the actualisation of relational cuts across a shared horizon of possibility.
What is Co-Individuation?
Co-individuation is a principle we borrow from relational ontology:
-
Entities do not pre-exist independently; they emerge relationally, defined by constraints within a horizon.
-
When two or more systems become correlated, they are mutually constituted: the identity of each system depends on its relational context with the other(s).
-
This is not metaphysical abstraction; it is observable in quantum entanglement, measurement correlations, and systemic interactions.
In short: entanglement is the actualisation of mutual possibility across systems, not a mysterious “connection” between pre-existing particles.
Entangled Particles as Relational Patterns
Consider a pair of entangled particles:
-
Classical intuition imagines two independent objects, each with intrinsic properties.
-
Measurement of one particle seems to instantaneously define the state of the other, leading to the “spooky” label.
-
From a relational view:
-
The pair forms a single horizon of possibility.
-
Each measurement is a cut that stabilises relational outcomes.
-
The apparent nonlocality is a natural consequence of shared constraints, not faster-than-light communication.
-
Entanglement thus exemplifies how relational cuts co-actualise distinctions across a system.
Co-Individuation and Horizons
Horizons are central:
-
Before measurement, the entangled pair is a horizon of potential correlations, not two independent entities.
-
The horizon defines what distinctions can stabilise — which outcomes are possible and compatible.
-
Actualisation occurs when a relational cut selects a consistent pattern, producing correlated results.
In this sense, identity itself is relational: each particle’s properties exist only in relation to the horizon and its co-actualised counterpart.
Implications for Causality and Locality
Co-individuation reframes “spooky” phenomena:
-
Causality is not violated; there is no signal travelling faster than light.
-
Nonlocal correlations arise naturally from shared relational constraints, not from independent objects interacting mysteriously.
-
The paradox dissolves when we abandon the notion of independent particle identity.
Horizons of possibility, not space-time locality alone, determine the pattern of actualised outcomes.
Beyond Physics: Lessons for Relational Thinking
Entanglement illustrates a principle with broader application:
-
Identity emerges relationally: No system is truly independent.
-
Constraints generate intelligible correlation: Systems co-individuate through the stabilisation of patterns.
-
Horizons shape outcomes: What is possible is defined by the relational field, not by intrinsic properties of isolated entities.
This mirrors lessons from Category Cuts and The Semiotics of Emergence: both meaning and matter are actualised through relational cuts, constrained by structured horizons.
Conclusion
Entanglement is no longer “spooky.” It is an intelligible expression of co-individuated horizons:
-
Systems emerge together; distinctions actualise relationally.
-
Measurement stabilises one among many potential correlations.
-
Apparent paradoxes arise only when we impose independent-object thinking onto a fundamentally relational domain.
The next post, “Temporal Asymmetry and Becoming”, will extend this relational lens to time itself, showing how horizons of possibility produce the flow and directionality of physical events — a perspectival arrow of becoming.
No comments:
Post a Comment