It is not by mere coincidence that mathematics encodes logic into a device called an equation which requires its elements to be equivalent on opposite sides of the argument. Sir Isaac Newton codified this natural balance in his third law of physics which stipulates that every action precipitates an equal and opposite reaction. Equilibrium is the very essence of logic.
It is the cornerstone of calculation, the governing dynamic that rules the realm of physics and the source that engenders the laws of nature.
The Standard Model of particle physics espouses the principle of reciprocal balance in some respects, but not strictly. Modern disciples intuitively assume the common bifurcated (positive vs negative) nature of quantitative balance also applies to the realm of qualitative values and they believe offsetting particles with anti-particles lends equilibrium to the cosmic architecture. But the imbalance between matter and anti-matter and the fact that what their model deems to be annihilation is nothing more than mere conversion are problematic. What if their intuitive assumption is wrong and elements of qualitative balance are not simply opposite bifurcative values?
Assume BLACK represents a null or 'neutral' qualitative value.
Within the realm of subtractive colors, the opposite (negative) of the color quality MAGENTA is GREEN. Equivalent proportions of MAGENTA and GREEN produce BLACK. But GREEN is, itself, an equal mixture of the colors CYAN and YELLOW.
Just as the quantitative value Ø is equivalent to two opposing numbers (+1) and (-1), the qualitative value of BLACK is equivalent to three opposing colors MAGENTA, CYAN and YELLOW. All the opposing sub-elements must be present in precisely equal proportion to reciprocally balance each other and maintain a perfectly null value. Of course, opposing qualitative sub-elements may not be limited in variety to just two or three - or any other finite number.
Reciprocal balance requires the qualitative value of every instance of being within an entity to have an opposite equivalent - but that doesn't mean each point within an existence has a diametric opposite (two defined points offsetting each other). Opposing sub-qualities of any fraction of an element may be disbursed throughout the remainder of the entity. If any fraction of a null element suddenly ceased to exist, the sum of the remaining sub-qualities would have an 'absolute value' less than nothing and the laws of mathematics and nature would be broken.
If qualitative symmetry resides within the physical boundary of each and every entity, those fundamental particles must have substructure, inter-dependent qualities and reciprocals which cannot exist as separate elements. The very existence of each point within the entity is co-dependent upon the existence of the remainder of the parcel. Every physical instance within the element is an interdependent contributor to its neutrality; and it is this reciprocal balance, not structureless homogeneity, that defines it as a single existence, an element comprised only of itself, an irreducible integral of null value.
Entities must be truly 'in-dividual'. They are not comprised of independent components, so no portion of an entity could ever be severed. When a composite is divided, as in slicing a loaf of bread or tearing a piece of paper, the forces holding independent particles together are overcome by the force of the device used to separate the material. But the field of existence within an entity is continuous. To cleave it, something must be inserted between two of its continuous points. Two independent elements cannot occupy the same volume, so the point you are trying to cleave would simply move. To sever an entity, the point of separation must cease to exist, and if change is a function of existence, then before the most infinitesimal point of being could be annihilated, it would lose its ability to change or be changed. Similarly, if one tried to annihilate an entity by compressing all of its sub-qualities into a single non-dimensional point, its ability to change or be changed would cease before achieving annihilation.
In the realm of the macrocosm it seems two things cannot simultaneously occupy the same space (which is why we have automobile insurance). But two points of being within a fundamental particle are not two independent things, they are two physical instances of the same thing, mutually co-dependent fractions of an elemental identity. The rules of conduct within an entity may be very different from those that govern the interaction between two entities. Like colors on a pallete, an entity's sub-qualities may have the ability to morph or blend to produce a spectrum of different conditions, a limitless variety of states of being. This substructure may produce some of those weird and seemingly impossible microcosmic effects which confound contemporary physicists, but this is covered later in the 'Subdimension' topic.
Equilibrium: The Architecture of Existence
Within each irreducible element in the Universe there exists a substructure of qualitative values V(P) offset by equal and opposite values or sets of values V(N) such that:
The sum of the values within each element is neutral
Natural balance defines an entity, not homogeneity. Unlike simplistic examples of structureless, fungible particles touted by the Standard Model of Particle Physics, reciprocal symmetry suggests a limitless selection of dynamic elements, a wondrous cosmic fabric of infinite variety. That uniquely self-justified and intrinsically logical primordial element 'Nothing' is but an abstract interpretation of the equilibrium that governs the architecture and evolution of the Universe. In the form of reciprocal balance, 'Nothing' has always existed. It is the common essence of every element in the cosmic spectrum and the fulcrum of an eternally balanced perpetual system.