The Duality of Fundamentality Expanded

Some philosophers may think that there is only one fundamental; perhaps, it is just a way of considering the issue. A fundamental of quantum mechanics is quantum fields, not quantum particles; string theorists think that vibrating strings is fundamental. Since physicists investigate nature and should be materialists, quantum fields should be material, not immaterial, a field of investigation for theologians and philosophers. Quantum fields, then, is deemed to be the second fundamental of the duality, so consideration of what is designated as the first fundamental will be next.

The first fundamental, viewed differently, must be involved with the creation of the universe. All attempts to determine a first cause or unmoved mover starting in the current universe while ascending fails; a first cause or unmoved mover is just assumed. Since this assumption is unacceptable among philosophers and the idea that the universe does not exist is impossible and contradicts reality. A solution to this problem must start in the pre-universe where the answer to how the universe started can be shown to be rational, logical and with a connection to reality in the current universe. Since nothing does not exist, something must exist; that something is the first existent, immaterial space which initiated the current universe. The first existent, immaterial space is the first fundamental, and it is the fundamental of the pre-universe. The problem of space, I think, all boils down to this: SPACE IS IMMATERIAL AND SPACETIME IS FALSE. How is it possible for the universe to exist without a playing field if space does not exist and Berkeley and Kant are correct? The relativists, Leibniz, Mach and Einstein, dispute Newton’s absolute space, but there must be one absolute and it should be immaterial space. Some would say that there is no first existent and immaterial existence, but they seem to be incorrect and it can easily be argued against the view that the universe always existed. For those who have the time and inclination, argue that this post is inaccurate and false.

Descartes calls it spiritual material.

There was never nothing, but always Being sustaining the whole sequence, begun whole, so in a non-sequential way every now-node is “first”. The reason it has always been like this is because love (the choice to treat self as other without being driven by impulse) is not love without demonstration.