Process Theology & Relativity: Reading Einstein Through Whitehead

Illustration by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

Process Theology & Relativity

Reading Einstein Through Whitehead

A Geometric Expression of Processual Reality

in a Geometry of Becoming

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT 5

Introduction

Whitehead's process philosophy finds its grounding in process theology, and process theology finds its source in process philosophy. The one goes with the other. Similarly, when exploring processual reality, the sciences themselves are encircled within this reality, a reality which finds its most radical and ultimate expression in the quantum sciences.

---

Relativity in Processual Perspective

Einstein’s relativity marked a decisive break with the older metaphysical assumptions of timeless absolutes. Time and space were no longer rigid containers but dynamic, interwoven dimensions of a relational cosmos. Events in relativity are situated within light cones, connected by causal structures, and shaped by the curvature of spacetime itself. This discovery reflects the same metaphysical truth Whitehead articulated:

reality is not a collection of static substances, but a web of events, each

inheriting from the past and creating the conditions for the future.

In special relativity, perspective matters. Observers in different frames of reference experience time and simultaneity differently. In process thought, each actual occasion also has its unique perspective - its way of prehending and integrating the world. Both physics and philosophy converge on a world where reality is not fixed and absolute but perspectival and relational.

General relativity extends this insight by showing how matter and energy shape spacetime, and how that spacetime guides matter in return. This reciprocity mirrors Whitehead’s principle of creative advance, where events both condition and are conditioned, both inherit and contribute. Processual theology then may metaphorically state a divine interplay between God and creation: 

God's relational participation in creation is not the imposition of power

from outside, but a persuasive companionship from within, guiding the

world toward greater harmony, intensity, and beauty.

Relativity also places limits on what is possible. Light cones define the boundaries of causal influence, setting the horizon for future potential. Whitehead’s process metaphysics offers a parallel:

past events constrain the present, but within those constraints novelty emerges.

For theology, this reinforces a picture of divine action that is not coercive but invitational - that God works within the real conditions of the cosmos, opening possibilities but never violating the relational integrity of creation (sic, for example, "biblical" miracles must work within creation, not separately in violation to creation or scientific observations).

Finally, the mathematics of relativity - elegant geometries, curvature tensors, and invariant intervals - reveal the deep rationality of the cosmos. Whitehead’s concept of eternal objects helps us see these as the realm of divine potentialities: abstract patterns that become concrete only when woven into actualizing events. Thus,

relativity becomes not only a scientific description but a theological witness

to a world created for intelligibility, relationality, and processual becoming.

---

Conclusion

If one is to come to the idea of a Creator who authored creation, or to the idea of faith and religion as expressed in a variety of ways by the world’s global religions, or to the Christian faith as a singular expression of God and creation, then one’s theology, beliefs, faith, and living acts must correspond to the processual reality that uniquely expresses the God of that creation. To behold God is to behold God’s processual nature and attributes, expressed through divine creative acts upon an infinite cosmos with its infinite processual traits.

Everywhere one looks - whether in relativity’s spacetime curvatures or in quantum physic's probabilistic indeterminacies - can be found processual acts of relational dynamism evolving in freewill struggle towards harmony and balance. Humans participate in this cosmic rhythm when they live ethically with one another when creating acts of generative goodness, equality, justice, and love. All processual traits of a processual reality that carries within it worth, value, and the divine lure toward beauty. The call to weave novelty, harmony, sacred dignity, and love into every becoming of an unfolding cosmos.

The Sacred Geometry of Becoming

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

  Everywhere one looks -  

      in relativity’s curving spacetime,

    in quantum’s trembling veil of chance -

   processual acts stir,

  dynamism unfolds,

 relational currents rise,

a freewill struggle lifts

        toward balance,

     toward harmony.

         We are woven into this rhythm.

      Our lives a chord within the cosmic score,

    when we live lovingly with one another,

   when we shape acts of generative goodness,

  when we breathe equality into being,

 when we walk the paths of justice,

when we dare the work of love.

      These are the traits of reality itself:

        worth that is not borrowed,

          value that is not imposed,

             a cosmos seeded with beauty,

                God’s quiet lure toward wholeness,

                   singing in every becoming.

---

A SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE

Einstein's Relativity Theory Visualized & Expressed Geometrically

Question to ChatGPT:

Is it possible to either visualize or mathematically represent geometrically Einstein's Relativity Theory?

ChatGPT said:

Yes — Einstein’s relativity can be expressed both visually and mathematically in geometric terms. In fact, geometry is at the very heart of relativity. Here’s how:

---

1. Special Relativity: Minkowski Spacetime

• Hermann Minkowski (1908) reformulated Einstein’s special relativity as a geometric theory.

• Instead of thinking in terms of separate 3D space + time, spacetime is a 4-dimensional pseudo-Euclidean geometry with coordinates $(t, x, y, z)$.

• The “distance” (interval) between events is given by the metric:

  $$s^2 = -c^2 t^2 + x^2 + y^2 + z^2$$
  where 
  c is the speed of light.

• Visualization: In 2D (one space + one time dimension), this looks like a light cone diagram. The cone divides possible motion into:

  • Inside: events reachable by slower-than-light signals.

  • On the cone: light rays.

  • Outside: events that can’t be causally connected.

---

2. General Relativity: Curved Spacetime Geometry

• General Relativity extends this idea: spacetime itself is curved by mass and energy.

• The geometry is described by a metric tensor $g_{\mu\nu}$, which defines local intervals:

  $$ds^2 = g_{\mu\nu} dx^\mu dx^\nu$$

• Einstein’s field equations relate curvature to matter/energy:

  $$G_{\mu\nu} + \Lambda g_{\mu\nu} = \frac{8\pi G}{c^4} T_{\mu\nu}$$

  where:

  • $G_{\mu\nu}$ = Einstein tensor (curvature of spacetime),

  • $T_{\mu\nu}$ = energy-momentum tensor,

  • $\Lambda$ = cosmological constant.

• Visualization: Curved spacetime is often pictured as a “rubber sheet” with masses creating indentations. More rigorously:

  • Geodesics (the straightest possible paths in curved geometry) describe how planets orbit or how light bends near stars.

  • Light cones tilt in curved spacetime, showing how gravity changes causality structure.

---

3. Geometric Representations

• Light Cones: Local causal structure, showing what is possible within relativity.

• Geodesics: Worldlines of free-falling particles, akin to “straight lines” in curved spacetime.

• Embedding Diagrams: 2D surfaces (like Schwarzschild “wormhole” diagrams) to show curvature in a lower dimension.

• Spacetime Diagrams: Minkowski diagrams for special relativity, Penrose diagrams for black holes and cosmology.

---

✅ In summary:
Einstein’s relativity is fundamentally a theory of geometry. Special relativity uses flat Minkowski geometry; general relativity uses curved Riemannian geometry (pseudo-Riemannian, to be precise). These can be represented both mathematically (metric tensors, geodesics, curvature) and visually (light cones, warped grids, spacetime diagrams).

---

Here’s a curated selection of visual aids to help you grasp the geometric beauty of Einstein’s Relativity:

• Minkowski Light Cone Diagram (flat spacetime / special relativity)

• Spacetime Curvature Illustration (rubber‑sheet analogy for general relativity)

• Penrose Diagram (causal structure with infinities compactified)

• Embedding Diagram (visualizing curves in spacetime using surfaces)

Minkowski Light Cone (flat spacetime / special relativity)

Spacetime Curvature Illustration (rubber‑sheet analogy for general relativity)

Penrose Diagram (causal structure with infinities compactified)

Embedding Diagram (visualizing curves in spacetime using surfaces)

---

Essential Online Resources

1. Spacetime (Minkowski) Diagrams

• Wikipedia (Spacetime diagram)
  Clear introduction to Minkowski diagrams used in special relativity—useful for understanding Lorentz transformations and how light cones are drawn on them. Adobe Stock+15Medium+15Medium+15Wikipedia+12Wikipedia+12Binghamton University+12Reddit+1Wikipedia+2ResearchGate+2

• LibreTexts (Spacetime Diagrams)
  A step-by-step guide to graphing spacetime events, worldlines, and interpretations of time dilation and length contraction. Physics LibreTexts

• MathAdam (Medium)
  Offers vivid diagrams showing how different inertial frames tilt in Minkowski diagrams—great for visual learners. ResearchGate+15Medium+15Medium+15

2. General Relativity Visualizations

• Reddit on Elastic Sheet Model
  A popular intuitive model:

  “I always found the elastic sheet model … makes acceleration due to gravity look more intuitive.”
  arXiv+8Reddit+8ResearchGate+8

• General-Relativistic Visualization (pdf)
  Technical but fascinating: how to trace light geodesics in curved spacetimes—useful for simulations and ray-tracing visualizations. Physics Stack Exchange+15Computer Science+15CiteSeerX+15

3. Causal Structure & Penrose Diagrams

• Wikipedia (Penrose diagram)
  Shows how spacetime regions—including infinities—can be compactly represented while preserving causal relationships. Often used in black hole and cosmological contexts. Binghamton University+3Wikipedia+3Reddit+3

• ResearchGate Image
  The visual I included above gives a concrete example of a Penrose diagram of Minkowski spacetime. ResearchGate+1

4. Mathematical & Teaching Resources

• StackExchange (Recommended GR Books)
  Mentions accessible textbooks like Spacetime and Geometry by Sean Carroll and A First Course in General Relativity by Schutz—excellent for mathematical depth. Computer Science+14Physics Stack Exchange+14Reddit+14

• Sector Models (Regge Calculus Approach)
  A conceptual tool for building up curved spacetimes from flat pieces—great for teaching and intuitive insight. OAPT Newsletter+14arXiv+14Physics LibreTexts+14
  It's also part of a digital learning environment called V‑SeMo, which allows interactive exploration of spacetimes and light deflection. arXiv

• Pictorial Introduction to Differential Geometry
  No heavy equations—uses pictures to ease into the geometry underpinning relativity (especially Maxwell's equations, but helpful context for GR). arXiv

---

Summary Table

Type	Source & Links	Highlights
Minkowski Diagrams	Wikipedia, LibreTexts, MathAdam	Visualize worldlines, light cones, Lorentz boosts
General Relativity Visuals	Reddit, GR Visualization (pdf)	Rubber-sheet intuitions, geodesic tracing
Penrose Diagrams	Wikipedia + Image from ResearchGate	Causal structure, infinities, black holes
Educational & Math Tools	Carroll, Schutz books; Sector Models; Visual guides	Deep understanding via textbooks and models

---

A PROCESSUAL PERSPECTIVE

Question:

From the above discussion, mathematics, diagrams is there anything that can be said about process philosophy or theology??

ChatGPT said:

Yes — relativity’s geometry of spacetime actually resonates in interesting ways with process philosophy and theology. Let me draw some connections for you:

---

1. Spacetime as Processual Reality

• In Einstein’s theories, events (not static “things”) are the fundamental units of reality.

• This aligns closely with Whitehead’s actual occasions in process philosophy: reality is a web of happenings, not enduring substances.

• Both frameworks see becoming and relation (events connecting through spacetime / occasions prehending one another) as more fundamental than fixed being.

👉 Process theology can read relativity as confirmation that “creation” is not made of Plato's "eternal/transcendent ideals" (timeless, perfect, changeless essences) nor Aristotle's "fixed, immanent essences" but of Whitehead's relational potentials actualized in ongoing, dynamic, and continuously unfolding processual events woven into a relational spacetime.

Einstein’s relativity transformed our view of space and time from fixed absolutes into a unified, dynamic spacetime fabric. Events, not static substances, are the fundamental constituents of reality, and their relations are what give rise to the geometry of spacetime itself. This resonates deeply with Whitehead’s notion of actual occasions - reality as a web of happenings that inherit, transform, and contribute to the ongoing advance of the cosmos.

For process theology, this marks a decisive break with older metaphysical assumptions. Creation is not made of Plato’s eternal essences (timeless, perfect, changeless ideals), nor of Aristotle’s fixed essences (forms embedded in substances). Rather, creation is constituted by Whitehead’s relational potentials (eternal objects=potentials), which are actualized in processual events woven into relational spacetime. Reality, therefore, is not timeless or static but eventful, relational, and becoming.

---

2. Relativity of Perspective & Relational Knowing

• Special relativity shows that motion, time, and simultaneity depend on the observer’s frame of reference.

• This echoes process philosophy’s emphasis on perspectival knowing: every actual occasion integrates reality from its standpoint.

• In theology, this means God’s relation to the world is contextual and relational, not imposed from outside but engaged from within.

👉 Relativity strengthens the idea of a relationally immanent God who encounters the world within its own unfolding or evolving processes rather than transcendentally dictating from  above timeless ideals and absolutes from beyond creation (the cosmos,  world, nature, us).

More specifically, process theology portrays God not as a distant, timeless Absolute standing outside creation, but as a relational presence who shares in the world’s unfolding. Just as spacetime adapts and responds to what inhabits it, God is envisioned as responsive, participatory, and co-creative - encountering creation in its processes rather than dictating from beyond them.

Thus, relativity strengthens the plausibility of a theology where God’s action is not imposed from a timeless, fixed realm (à la Plato or classical theism), but lived within the evolving spacetime fabric of creation. God is dynamically present in the very same relational processes that constitute reality itself (something akin to the idea that God is the DNA of a freewill cosmos birthed with agency.)

---

3. Curvature as Creative Advance

• In general relativity, matter and energy shape spacetime geometry, and spacetime guides the motion of matter:

  $$\text{<i><span style="font-family: georgia;">Matter tells spacetime how to curve, spacetime tells matter how to move.</span></i>}$$

• Whitehead’s “creative advance into novelty” is similar: each actual occasion both inherits the past (shaped by prior reality) and contributes novelty that reshapes the future.

• Theology can view this as a divine-cosmic synergy: God does not override the world but lures it toward harmony, just as spacetime and matter co-determine paths.

In general relativity, matter and energy curve spacetime, and that curvature guides how matter and light move. This dynamic interplay mirrors Whitehead’s vision of the creative advance into novelty: where every event is both conditioned by what has come before and provides a fresh contribution to what follows. The cosmos is not a static order but a living rhythm of influence and response, in which God participates as the lure toward harmony and novelty. 

This theologic idea is captured in the science of evolution where reality is a rhythm of influence and response, shaping and reshaping itself in a continuous dance. Consequently, theology may be seen in this interplay as a metaphor for the divine-cosmic relationship. God does not stand over creation as a unilateral force but works within it as a persuasive lure toward harmony, beauty, and intensity of experience. Just as spacetime curvature emerges from mass-energy, so the divine call emerges from the world’s actualities, inviting creation forward without coercion. Relativity thus strengthens the vision of a participatory God whose creativity is relationally embedded in the very fabric of cosmic advance.

---

4. Light Cones and Limits of Possibility

• In relativity, light cones define what is possible for any event - its causal reach.

• Whitehead speaks of objective immortality: past events set the conditions for future ones, delimiting what is possible yet leaving room for novelty.

• Theologically, this mirrors freedom with limits: God’s action is not coercion but persuasive within the causal structure of creation.

👉Relativity’s causal cones can be read as metaphors for God’s persuasive = luring power - opening pathways but never violating the relational structure of reality.

In relativity, light cones define the causal boundaries of every event. They set the horizon of what is possible - what can be influenced and what lies forever beyond reach. This echoes Whitehead’s idea of objective immortality: every event, once actualized, becomes a fixed condition for the future, delimiting possibilities while still allowing for novelty.

Theologically, this provides a model for how God’s action operates. Divine creativity does not erase causal structures but works persuasively within them. God opens pathways and possibilities, yet respects the relational integrity of creation. Freedom and structure go hand in hand: the past sets the conditions, but within those conditions, new futures emerge.

---

5. Eternal Objects and Mathematical Structures

• Relativity relies on elegant geometric forms (metrics, tensors, symmetries) that make sense of becoming.

• Whitehead would call these eternal objects/potentials - potential forms that actual occasions realize.

• Theology can see divine rationality as dwelling in these mathematical structures that allow the cosmos to unfold intelligibly.

Relativity’s mathematics - spacetime intervals, curvature tensors, geodesics - reveals the profound rationality of the cosmos. These abstract patterns resemble Whitehead’s eternal objects: pure potentials that find concreteness only when actualized in events. Just as geometry makes sense of becoming in physics, eternal objects make sense of becoming in metaphysics.

Theologically, this affirms that God’s rationality is not remote but woven into the intelligible structures of creation. Mathematics and geometry become witnesses to divine presence, not as static ideals but as living potentials for order and harmony within process. The cosmos is intelligible because it is relationally grounded, shaped by potentials that invite actualization in the ongoing advance of creation.

---

✨ Summary: Relativity as Process Metaphor

• Physics: Events, spacetime, curvature, geodesics, causal structure.

• Process Philosophy: Actual occasions, concrescence, creative advance, relational perspective.

• Process Theology: God as relational companion, lure toward harmony, presence in becoming.

Thus, Einstein’s relativity doesn’t just describe physics — it also visually and mathematically reinforces a process worldview where reality is interdependent, relational, and ever-becoming.

The Necessity for Processual Relational Sustainability for Affective Cultural Transformation

A relational map illustrating entangled sustainability across human and non-human
cultures of feeling, knowing, and doing, promoting healthy connections and relationships.

The Necessity for Processual

Relational Sustainability for

Affective Cultural Transformation

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

Entwined roots of connected, open futures

bespeak relational renewal of what

the world could be, would be, can be, might be.  - R.E. Slater

A relational approach to human cultural sustainability focused on

healthy pluralism, cross cultural communities, and cosmoecological biotas.

Above is a tanglegram mapping significant relational approaches for developing cultural mindsets whereupon everyone, and all things, are understood (or, felt) to be intimately and uniquely, entangled together, one with the other. This includes not only humanity but nature as well (sic, conveying the idea of valuing all non-human  entities).

Within the tanglegram is a map of the many different academic fields and perspectives which connect the three main pillars of relational transformation. These pillars are:

• Relational Ontology (blue) → How we see reality as made up of relationships.

• Relational Epistemology (orange) → How we know and study those relationships.

• Relational Ethics (green) → How we act ethically within those relationships.

Additionally, the lines themselves illustrate how each field or idea links to one or more of the pillars. For example, Eco-feminism connects to Ontology, Epistemology, and Ethics, meaning it helps shape how we see, know, and act relationally.

The net result of this mapping illustrates that many disciplines and cultural permutations overlap and contribute complexly together to build a relational way of understanding and practice between individuation and community for affective, transformal sustainability.

Descriptors such as Co-operation, Co-Flourishing, Nurturing,

and Nourishing would all be indicators of successful transformation.

In lay terms, relational sustainability does not simply involve "green infrastructural fixes," but is a deep and systemic multimodal approach for affecting solidarity between societies of humans and natural ecosystems as dynamic cooperative actors living together rather than as "separate sectors of self-involved operators."

Further, a processual approach to life recognizes that all people, ecosystems, cultures, and beliefs are interdependent each upon the other. Thus transforming how we live, learn, govern, and care not only for one another but - for the Earth as well - based on generative and beneficial relationships to-and-with one another.

In this form of processual arrangement we do not manage resources. Rather, we lean into one another for co-development for justice, resilience, and co-flourishing between communities of humans and non-humans. In short, this attitude is more than an approach for “sustainable development” but is an approach for sustainable processual relations and relationships.

R.E. Slater

July 8, 2025

Reference:

Towards a relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice, and education

A Relational Approach to Sustainability:

Rethinking How We See, Know, and Act

Introduction

In an era of mounting climate crises, biodiversity loss, and deepening social inequalities, traditional ways of tackling sustainability issues often fall short. Many existing approaches focus on technological fixes or isolated interventions. However, a growing movement in research, practice, and education argues that true sustainability requires us to rethink how we see the world: not as a collection of separate parts, but as a dynamic web of relationships. This document reimagines sustainability through a relational lens, integrating ideas from systems thinking, indigenous knowledge, and contemporary relational philosophies.

Body

Seeing: A Relational Ontology

A relational ontology begins with the belief that things do not exist in isolation. Trees are not just trees; they are forests, habitats, carbon sinks, and cultural symbols. Rivers are not simply water channels but lifelines for communities, ecosystems, and entire regional climates. In a relational worldview, everything exists because of its connections to everything else. This stands in contrast to mechanistic views, which treat nature as a collection of separate resources to be extracted or managed.

Knowing: A Relational Epistemology

Traditional science often claims to produce objective knowledge that is detached from the observer. A relational approach challenges this, recognizing that knowledge is always produced within networks of people, places, and non-human actors. Indigenous knowledge systems have long embraced this view, integrating empirical observation with relational and spiritual understanding of the land. A relational epistemology calls for multiple ways of knowing, inviting dialogue between scientific, local, and traditional forms of knowledge.

Acting: A Relational Ethics

Ethics in a relational paradigm extend beyond human interests. It asks us to consider the well-being of animals, plants, ecosystems, and future generations as part of our moral community. Policies, research agendas, and educational programs must be designed with this broader ethical horizon in mind. This means shifting from resource extraction and exploitation to stewardship, care, and co-flourishing with non-human ecosystems of nature.

Conclusion

A relational paradigm reframes sustainability from a technical fix to a cultural transformation. It calls us to redesign how we see the world, how we generate knowledge, and how we live responsibly within it. By embedding relationships at the heart of our thinking and action, we can move towards a more resilient, just, and life-sustaining future.

Bibliography

• Capra, Fritjof. The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision. Cambridge University Press, 2014.

• Ingold, Tim. Being Alive: Essays on Movement, Knowledge and Description. Routledge, 2011.

• Latour, Bruno. We Have Never Been Modern. Harvard University Press, 1993.

• Maturana, Humberto and Francisco Varela. The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. Shambhala, 1992.

• Shiva, Vandana. Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development. Zed Books, 1988.

• SpringerLink article: Escobar, Arturo et al. "Towards a relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice and education." Ambio (2020).

EPILOGUE

Threads of Relational Becoming
by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

Within self and community, flows

a cosmic, natural weave wherein
co-operative threads blend

soil to sky and earth to man.

Once living kin to rivers and forests,

birds and beast, rain and fire,

fled Eden's nurturing lands

of promising, nourishing futures.

Circles of stewarding care are

learning to listen deeper than

we speak or act, variegated pulses

of life surging towards blended belonging.

Measured in co-operative acts of

co-flourishing choices, feeding many

not the few; tending relationships

like well-planted gardens sharing

harvest wild amid systems wide.

Attentive practices breathe

unmet allures of becoming,

renewing vagabond spirits

freed to be more when together.

R.E. Slater

July 6, 2025

@copyright R.E. Slater Publications

all rights reserved