I was thinking today about this distinction, from classical Chinese philosophy. It layers nicely on to current models of reality.
Chi can be either energy or matter. Really, if we take E=MCSquared as accurate–and some very large explosions say it is accurate–then matter is a type of energy, and energy is a type of matter. What is “real”, within Einsteinian General Relativity theory, is the field within which they operate. Most people don’t grasp this point: that General Relativity is, in the end, a materialistic theory within which “God does not play dice”, or something close to that. Within General Relativity Theory we can, in principle, trace all causal lines forwards and backwards to the beginnings and end of Time. It is simply a much more sophisticated–and empirically useful–version of the billiard ball theories of the nineteenth century.
The problem with it, and it is a large problem, is that it posits that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Where previous theories related all motion to a presumed “ether”, Einstein related all motion to the speed of light. Empirically, though, information can and does travel faster than light, as demonstrated in the Aspect Experiment, and as proven earlier mathematically by John Bell.
Li is form, but it can also mean information, if we take morphological details as information, or what I tend to term “Quality”. What travels faster than light is not chi, but li.
This sets up the possibility of a metaphysics in which “form/li” molds chi, but has no objective existence. Yet matter is always in some form or other, if manifest. The only chi in which li is not present is the so-called Zero Point Field of quantum mechanics, which posits that every particle is simultaneously a wave, and that those waves can only go so low in amplitude. If we calculate the absolute minimum activity of matter in the universe, as I understand the issue, we determine that there is enough latent energy in one square meter of “empty” space to “boil all the oceans on Earth”, in Richard Feynman’s interesting and useful analogy. All quantum physicists accept the necessity of this math, but ignore it for all practical purposes. They put it in their equations, then zero it out again.
Let me offer two equations that are interesting to me: 1) E+i=MC2+i, where i is information; 2) Chi plus li=observable reality. In both cases, what I have added is the possibility of form. Framed another way, I have created a template for what we could term God, which is to say an informational substrate that underlies all of reality. I have turned Einsteins’ theory into what we might term a spiritual one.
This is, I think, how we can reconcile quantum physics and General Relativity. Both work exceedingly well in their domains, but are incompatible. The basic problem is that of the four basic forces in the universe, only three can be reconciled with one another. Gravity cannot. Einstein spent much of his life trying to do it.
Here is a far-out idea that may be nonsensical, but I will put it out there anyway: what if information serves as a sort of qualitative attractor? Form is information. Form is represented in the visible universe in matter/chi. What if “gravity” was expressed not as a result of chi, but li? What if li could be a sort of “mass”? What if “form”, understood in the abstract as having almost an existence on its own, carves out a section of space, “curving” it? What if light, as a type of information, is attracted to it?
I’m not entirely sure what I am saying myself. I have an excellent book by Einstein’s protege David Bohm which I need to read when I get time. Still, as I’ve said before, the road to good ideas is paved with bad ones.