Classical and Transductive Paradigms: An Investigation Into Ontological Coherence and Explanatory Capacity

CLASSICAL AND TRANSDUCTIVE PARADIGMS: AN INVESTIGATION INTO ONTOLOGICAL COHERENCE AND EXPLANATORY CAPACITY This work presents a comparative logical and ontological investigation of two fundamental approaches to understanding reality: the CLASSICAL PARADIGM, characterized as an Ontology of Being, and the TRANSDUCTIVE PARADIGM, characterized as an Ontology of Becoming. The study applies the principles of explanatory parsimony, internal coherence, and explanatory capacity to examine how each paradigm approaches fundamental questions concerning the organization and nature of reality. Its central objective is to establish a comparative framework capable of identifying which ontological structure offers a more coherent, comprehensive, and natural interpretation of phenomena across different domains of knowledge. The investigation addresses seven fundamental problems: THE SINGULARITY PROBLEM IN NAVIER–STOKES, examining the distinction between mathematical rupture and topological reorganization through transduction. THE QUANTUM MEASUREMENT PROBLEM, interpreting measurement as a transductive act involving the actualization of potency. THE EMERGENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS, approaching consciousness as an emergent relational configuration. THE NATURE OF TIME, understanding time as the sequence of transductions and the passage between configurations. THE PROBLEM OF CAUSALITY, examining causality as a relational structure in which configurations condition subsequent configurations. THE PROBLEM OF OBSERVATION, considering the observer as a participant within the system under investigation. THE UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS, interpreting general relativity and quantum mechanics as descriptions of transductive processes operating at different scales. The Transductive Paradigm is articulated through three fundamental elements: TRANSDUCTION, as the organizing ontological principle; the SYSTEMIC STATE, expressed as (Σ=(S,M,P)), comprising manifested configuration (S), relational memory (M), and latent potency (P); and the TRANSDUCTIVE OPERATOR (T), representing the passage between configurations. The comparative analysis also examines the assumptions underlying each paradigm, including the nature of space and time, the relationship between subject and object, causality, observation, local realism, and the explanatory organization of physical phenomena. Through the application of five logical criteria — explanatory parsimony, internal coherence, explanatory capacity, independence from ad hoc hypotheses, and adaptation to observed reality — the work develops a systematic comparison between the two ontological frameworks. The central proposition is that the TRANSDUCTIVE PARADIGM constitutes a more parsimonious and coherent ontological architecture. Within this framework, phenomena traditionally examined as separate problems are understood as different manifestations of a universal process of relational transformation. The study further proposes that the classical three-dimensional or four-dimensional description represents a useful approximation within limited domains, while the fundamental organization of reality is transductive: a continuous process of updating, transformation, and emergence of relational configurations. The work therefore presents transduction not merely as an alternative explanatory concept, but as a fundamental ontological principle for investigating the organization of reality across physical, quantum, biological, cognitive, mathematical, and cosmological domains. KEYWORDS: CLASSICAL PARADIGM; TRANSDUCTIVE PARADIGM; ONTOLOGY OF BEING; ONTOLOGY OF BECOMING; TRANSDUCTION; RELATIONAL ARCHITECTURE; SYSTEMIC STATE; RELATIONAL MEMORY; LATENT POTENCY; EXPLANATORY PARSIMONY; INTERNAL COHERENCE; EXPLANATORY CAPACITY; NAVIER–STOKES REGULARITY PROBLEM; QUANTUM MEASUREMENT; EMERGENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS; NATURE OF TIME; CAUSALITY; OBSERVATION; UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS.