The concept of 'Particle' dates back to the Greek philosophers Leucippus and Democritus (5th century B.C.E.) who held the view that matter is not infinitely divisible and consists ultimately of tiny indivisible particles. These were called atoms (from the Greek word 'atomos' meaning indivisible). Behind this view lies a deep principle of Nature. ' A fundamental idea, or even an action, pushed to its very limit invariably meets with its own opposite'. It may be called the Principle of Opposites and may be more precisely stated as ' Opposites always exit together in a state of dynamic balance'. Niels Bohr had it written into his coat of arms as Contraria sunt complementa (Opposites are Complimentary).

            If this principle is truly fundamental, then any effort to structure the physical world using particles only, or even using a particle centred approach, goes against nature, as field and particle are opposites which behave so that one never has the upper hand over the other in a fundamental sense. There is little doubt that for most rational people, it is intuitively pleasing to think of the physical world as a dynamic interaction between spacetime and matter (or field and particle), than to picture it painfully as a 'fruit salad' of particles existing in an empty spacetime, even if some of these particles represent fields.

            Compared to 'Particle', 'Field', or 'region of influence', had been a difficult concept to swallow and had remained a bitter pill of fiction until it entered the fertile imagination of the English experimental physicist, Michael Faraday. This creative imagination of Faraday has been the result of what Life sometimes gets up to in its sneaky way of juggling opposites; an experimentally oriented mind breathing life into 'field' which is the centre piece of theory. 'Field' had a lot of catching-up to do and it did so with venom in the idea of the curved spacetime of General Relativity. At long last Field-Particle balance loomed in the horizon, but soon only to degenerate and disappear in a murky Field of Probability of locating a particle in spacetime. There is no sense of balance between this Field and Particle as the latter only emerges as a result of the collapse of the latter; it is always just a case of either the one or the other.

            There is an intriguing experiment called ,'the double-slit', which had been used to illustrates this shyness, but it appears to tell a slightly different story now. What it appears to tell now is that a single particle in the guise of a photon, electron or even an atom or molecule, goes through both slits, and appears on the other side perfectly unharmed by this traumatic experience. Is Nature fooling around maliciously, or as Einstein believed, is she just being mysteriously subtle ?. Which would we intuitively prefer Nature to be?

            A particle has no reality away from the field in which it 'sits'. At the atomic end the field is virtually electromagnetic (a shift of balance towards antisymmetry), and at the cosmic end it is virtually gravitational (a shift of balance towards symmetry). At either of these ends, field-particle partnership is encoded in Balance as that between the two members of a pair of velocity vectors, linear and spin, linear representing field, and spin representing particle. When particles are shot at the double slit the partnership between field (electromagnetic usually) and particle is distorted in such a way that the field aspect is enhanced as the firing alters only the linear velocity. Spin velocity which, so to speak, is hard wired is not altered. So a shot particle is more field than matter, until it is observed. Observation always involves light in some form or the other and as light is balanced between field and particle observation becomes confined to the balanced state of particle, or simply particle. In other words what has been deliberately distorted become restored to normality with an encounter with light.

Under construction