Electroconvergence: A Relational Ontology for Scientific Reference — Part I: Formal Foundations and Empirical Grounding
Abstract
This article presents the foundational framework of electroconvergence as a relational ontology for the philosophy of physics and scientific reference. The framework is constructed from a single primitive relational-phasic distinction, δ = Φ_G - Φ_L, denoting the difference between global and local relational descriptors. From this elementary distinction, the formalism progressively generates organizational matrices, persistent relational organizations, informational structures, and the organizational descriptors of body, place, time, and space. Crucially, the framework avoids introducing physical substances, absolute containers, or ontological categories as primitives. The article situates this ontology within the contemporary landscape of the philosophy of science. It is characterized as a radical ontic structural realism that preserves the insights of relational quantum mechanics and process philosophy, while resolving the persistence problem of formal structures via the persistence operator Π. Furthermore, the article identifies structural affinities with non-Western relational ontologies, particularly Madhyamaka Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta, and Huayan Buddhism, treating these convergences as formal rather than historical. By establishing relational reality as primary, the framework recovers classical substantivalist paradigms as particular limit cases (δ → 0) and provides a rigorous formal semantics for theoretical reference.
Related
- Gravitation from Relational Causality in EAS/Scalar Fields Paper I — Scientific Foundations
- Electroconvergence: The Epistemological Link between Chaos and the Relational Referent of Organization
- Electroconvergence: From Relational Ontology to a Physics of Phase — Part II: The Mach–Maxwell Paradigm and the Emergence of Physical Constructs
- The Path Hypothesis: Foundations of a Relational-Discrete Physics (Die Pfad-These)
- Foundations of Anti-Mathematics and Family Mathematics: Involutions, Anti-Calculus, Generative Networks, and Relational Invariants
BibTeX
@misc{crivoi2026electroconvergence,
title = {{Electroconvergence: A Relational Ontology for Scientific Reference — Part I: Formal Foundations and Empirical Grounding}},
author = {Dumitru Crivoi},
howpublished = {Zenodo},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.5281/zenodo.23480958},
url = {https://zenodo.org/records/23480958},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Electroconvergence: A Relational Ontology for Scientific Reference — Part I: Formal Foundations and Empirical Grounding
AU - Dumitru Crivoi
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/19
PB - Zenodo
DO - 10.5281/zenodo.23480958
UR - https://zenodo.org/records/23480958
AB - This article presents the foundational framework of electroconvergence as a relational ontology for the philosophy of physics and scientific reference. The framework is constructed from a single primitive relational-phasic distinction, δ = Φ_G - Φ_L, denoting the difference between global and local relational descriptors. From this elementary distinction, the formalism progressively generates organizational matrices, persistent relational organizations, informational structures, and the organizational descriptors of body, place, time, and space. Crucially, the framework avoids introducing physical substances, absolute containers, or ontological categories as primitives. The article situates this ontology within the contemporary landscape of the philosophy of science. It is characterized as a radical ontic structural realism that preserves the insights of relational quantum mechanics and process philosophy, while resolving the persistence problem of formal structures via the persistence operator Π. Furthermore, the article identifies structural affinities with non-Western relational ontologies, particularly Madhyamaka Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta, and Huayan Buddhism, treating these convergences as formal rather than historical. By establishing relational reality as primary, the framework recovers classical substantivalist paradigms as particular limit cases (δ → 0) and provides a rigorous formal semantics for theoretical reference.
ER -