Things and their interactions

Daniel

What does this statement makes you think?

If two objects are physical, by which I mean they occupy a space (any space) and are of finite extension - that is, neither object occupies all of the space in which they exist -, then all of their interactions* are physical (any interaction itself occupies a space, and the interaction is limited in its extension through it); that is, both the objects and their interactions have a limited distribution throughout space.

Interaction: any effect in the objects or their spatial distribution that would not occur in the absence of the other object, and the means through which such effects are produced.

If two objects are physical, then all of their interactions are physical.
If two objects occupy a (shared?) space and are of finite extension, then every one of their interactions occupies a space and is of finite extension.

Joshs

↪Daniel

If two objects occupy a (shared?) space and are of finite extension, then every one of their interactions occupies a space and is of finite extension. — Daniel

Do objects occupy space or do they create it? Is extension a pre-assigned property of an object or is it a qualitative change? ( Courtesy of Gilles Deleuze)

Jackson

Do objects occupy space or do they create it? — Joshs

Space is just things, for Leibniz.

Joshs

↪Jackson

Space is just things, for Leibniz. — Jackson

Wish I read more Leibnitz. Deleuze relies on him
heavily ( and Bergson).

Jackson

Wish I read more Leibnitz. — Joshs

Leibniz was the first critic of mechanistic science. He tore into Newton for saying there is absolute time and space.

Daniel

Do objects occupy space or do they create it? — Joshs

Man, this is one of those almost impossible questions. Sometimes I like to think everything is space, and the rest is just differences in space just to kind of escape from having to deal with it. Have you ever tried to define a particular entity (object) without referring to space?....... or vice versa?

Jackson

Wish I read more Leibnitz — Joshs

Leibniz: "I hold space to be something merely relative, as time is, that I hold it to be an order of coexistences, as time is an order of successions. (Third Paper, paragraph 4; G VII.363/Alexander 25–26)

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibniz-physics/

Daniel

that I hold it to be an order of coexistences — Jackson

Always changing then?

Jackson

Always changing then? — Daniel

Yes. Since time and space are not absolutes only relations exist.

Hillary

Objects are space. Filled with physical charges.

Hillary

Yes. Since time and space are not absolutes only relations exist. — Jackson

Space and time are absolutely existing. Their metric is relative though. The spacetime I measure is different from the spacetime a moving observer measures.

Relativist

If two objects are physical, by which I mean they occupy a space (any space) and are of finite extension - that is, neither object occupies all of the space in which they exist — Daniel

According to Quantum Field Theory, every quantum field exists at every point of space. Particles are quanta of these fields, so (per the theory) these fields are the fundamental basis for all matter.

Quantum fields don't fit your definition of "physical", and I think that's a problem.

Things and their interactions

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions