How do we Talk about a Field? Let’s take The Sea and the Wind as an example. The examples are taken from the Internet: “The Sea Is Watching“. “The Sea is calm“. “Our relationship with the Wind is often uncertain“.

We talk about the Sea in terms of a Personality. They are “like-us”. They are alive.

Now look at a Car. The Car is definitely a personality. They are designed to create this feeling. Are the Wheels of the Car Alive? I don’t think so. Wheels are part-of the Field called Car.

So now we have Parts and Fields.

Fields have a Freedom To Move. Parts are constrained by the Field. They have to move where the Field is going to.

Parts are connected to a Frame. Fields resonate.

Again I cite out of the document “the Holographic Universe”:

“Since the dawn of time there have been two conflicting explanations for the nature and structure of the world in which we live. Those can be most simply stated as the field and the particle. These two conflicting ideas appear in Greek thought, Democritus stressing the field and Heraclitus the particle. Today, fields are stressed in relativity physics, while particles are emphasized in quantum mechanics”.

“Field theory can be interwoven with particle theory in an attempt to better understand biological processes. This effect will enable us to approach an understanding of life because we can conceptualize all structures and functions, all levels from the electronic to the super molecular, as one single unit”.

Parts are Niels Bohr and Fields are Albert Einstein.

Fields & Parts is also Spinoza.

Spinoza envisaged A God that does not rule over the universe by providence, but a God which itself is part of the deterministic system of which everything in nature is a part. Thus, God is the natural world.

So Nature is Parts & Fields.

Parts are the domain of the Tools and Fields are the domain of the Living and Parts are there to support the Living not to Dominate them.