Science recognizes "four forces of nature," and Fagg sets them out as nuclear, electromagnetic, weak and gravity. The nuclear and weak forces are "short-range" while electromagnetic and gravity forces are "long-range," each characterization indicating the expanse over which they are effective. Thus the nuclear and weak might be said to be microscopic and the other two telescopic, so to speak. Ranked by their relative strength, from greatest to least, they are nuclear, electromagnetic, weak and gravitational. The gravitational force is only attractive while the electromagnetic can be repulsive or attractive. Both long-range forces are inversely proportional to the square of the distance between two bodies and thus never die out to exactly zero. In this there is a hint of a pattern of diminution pointing in the direction of the spiritual world—but to cross that threshold is to pass through what Steiner calls the "null point" where the photograph becomes the negative, the higher mirror image (Gen 1,26-27). Einstein showed that there could be no space without mass and vice versa, but on the other side of the null point we leave space (as well as time) behind. We shall look more fully at this concept in the final essay.

Having listed the forces, Fagg asks, "How is the force transmitted?" and answers by saying "by the exchange of … particles [called] bosons." Further, "except for the fleeting existence of the bosons discharging their function as force messengers, the totality of the known matter in the cosmos is made up of a variety of particles" ranging from "the most elementary, such as quarks and electrons, to the more complex, such as protons and neutrons, to the still more complex, such as atoms and molecules."²⁵ He then gives us the most helpful table below (p. 30):

As indicated in "Fire," forces cannot be seen. And all of the above "building blocks" are far too minute to ever have been seen by the human eye, even through the most powerful microscope. Fagg makes the interesting observation that "all matter" is composed of twelve "indivisible particles," being the above six quarks and six leptons. Each lepton has a corresponding neutrino that is far lighter than its partner. Further, "Each of the quarks and leptons has a corresponding antiparticle (not listed in table 1) that is in general identical to the particle, except that it has an electric charge opposite to that of the particle" (p. 31). The best known is the one corresponding to the electron, which is known as a "positron" since it has a positive charge compared to the negative of the electron. For perspective, the tauon is far smaller; theoretically it may be on the order of one ten-millionth the mass of the electron. These twelve building blocks, together with their antiparticles, compose "the complete list of particles that are the irreducible ingredients of the … material universe" as far as is known by science today (p. 32). The only force carriers (bosons) that have any mass are the threefold group associated with the weak force (p. 34 and WNWCD, "photon"). Noting that "nothing that has mass when at rest can move at the speed of light," and that the photon (the force carrier for electromagnetism) has no mass at rest, Fagg points out that the photon nevertheless has "an effective mass by virtue of its energy of motion through the use of Einstein's well-known equation linking mass and energy, E = mc²" (p. 34).

According to my understanding of anthroposophy, I am unable to go along with Fagg on the widely held big bang theory of creation, arrived at by a science that has not yet taken anthroposophical insights into account. This detracts little, however, from my admiration for his work otherwise.

Here Fagg sets out, as do the other sources, an account of the history and personalities involved in the development of electromagnetic science down to the present time. The names I've mentioned above are included in his account, along with others particularly significant in the century's more recent developments. The story of the development of electromagnetism from the very first has read like a pantheon of genius for which all creation should be grateful, even if insights of this science only carry us to the threshold of a higher realm of knowledge, the crossing of which must await the gift of true intuition (the basis of anthroposophy, according to its founder and the understanding of its adherents).

During the latter part of the twentieth century, the nature of the photon as it relates to electromagnetism has been further refined so that now one speaks of "real" photons and "virtual" photons. Inasmuch as Fagg (in line with scientific thinking) tends to equate electromagnetism and light, and an inspection of Fagg's Table 1 above shows us that our discussion of electromagnetism must relate to the photon, we now approach the critical questions, for our purposes, presented by his most helpful exposition. At this point it is well, considering my lay status in regard to nuclear physics, that I surrender enough originality of expression to avoid error by quoting liberally from Fagg's exposition at pp. 51-54 (fns mine):

QED [quantum electrodynamics] tells us that the electromagnetic force is transmitted by photons. These "carrier" photons are very transient and are actually unobservable; in the parlance of the trade they are called "virtual" photons.

This is the hidden mode of existence for photons. In contrast, the photons that help us see light and color and vivify the world around us are called "real" photons. While virtual photons are continually being produced and exchanged between any bodies that interact via the electromagnetic force, real photons are generally produced in two ways. . . . Using the word "virtual" to specify the force-carrying photons is perhaps unfortunate because it tends to imply that they do not exist, when indeed they do. Just because we cannot observe them does not mean they are not there. They are there and are a vital part of [QED] calculations; and if they are not included in these calculations, we do not get the right answer—that is, the answer that agrees with experimental observations.

Note that from the Goethean standpoint, science here departs from observation in fact to observation only through kinetics or calculation. Recall Steiner's twin parallelograms of kinematics (ideal) versus mechanics (empirical) set out in the "Fire" essay. It seems that Einstein, that paradigm of open-minded genius, to the end of his days was also troubled by this aspect of quantum mechanics. Is this not already the cusp of the chasm or null point between nature and the spiritual world? Steiner indicated that Einstein's relativity would be a catalyst toward ultimate human penetration of the spiritual world. Perhaps the symbiotic twins of quantum theory and relativity, both born out of science's quest for an understanding of light at the outset of the new age of the Archangel Michael, Christ's faithful and majestic regent of light, will jointly serve as that catalyst. Fagg continues:

Another vital part of QED calculations that also involves unobservable phenomena has to do with the nature of the vacuum. If we had a perfect vacuum pump that could pump every single molecule of gas out of a sealed container, then we might reasonably suppose that the volume of the container had been reduced to a completely dormant space of nothing. But this is not true. The vacuum is alive with evanescent pairs of particles, mostly electrons and positrons, that materialize for a brief instant and then vanish.²⁶

The reader will recall Steiner's characterization in the "Fire" essay above of the realm of light as that of materialization-dematerialization, and this decades before science began to use the same language for light. But science is still on this side of the null point, and the Cherubim with the Seraphim's flaming sword (Gen 3,24) prevents its going further until it leaves the mineral kingdom and seeks the mysteries of the higher three kingdoms. Fagg goes on:

How can this be? This seems to fly in the face of the time-tested law of the conservation of energy. That is, if we use Einstein's famous formula, E = mc², we see that the masses of the electron and positron are really a form of energy and the conservation law is violated.

This, however, is where quantum theory comes in to tell us that under certain circumstances this apparent violation is possible. At the core of the quantum theory is what is known as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which essentially states that two complementary quantities describing the state of a particle cannot simultaneously be measured with ultimate accuracy. In other words, nature has imposed an objective limit on how precisely we see what is going on with a particle. For example, it is impossible to determine at the same time and with perfect accuracy both the position and momentum, or velocity, of the particle.

Another version of the uncertainty principle tells us that there is also a limit to how precisely we can simultaneously measure both the energy of a particle and the duration of time that it has that energy.²⁷ This does not mean, however, that below this limit, particles, which are not too massive or too long-lasting, cannot exist for a very short time, only that it is impossible for us to observe and measure them.

Thus, the law of conservation of energy applies to energy and mass we can observe, so that pairs of electrons and positrons can emerge out of the vacuum and then vanish as long as they do not stay around long enough for us to observe them. It is as if the particle pairs "borrow" energy in the form of mass from the vacuum but must pay it back quickly, and the more the mass-energy that is "borrowed," the more quickly it must be paid back (Harrison [Masks of the Universe], 126).

Nevertheless, the question immediately arises: if we can't observe them, how do we know they are there? This again is where QED comes in. For without accounting for the brief presence of such electron-positron pairs in the calculations we make to predict the results of an experiment, we do not get the right, experimentally verified answer, just as in the case of the virtual photons. The presence of both the virtual photons and the virtual particle pairs tell us, therefore, that nature, and indeed space itself, is electrically alive.

In fact, the great majority of space occupied by all earthly objects is impregnated with an astronomical number of such essentially nonmaterial phenomena in a constant flurry of activity. All things that appear to be solid or liquid or to have substance consist principally of this vibrant space. This can be understood by considering, for example, a carbon atom in your pencil where some 99.97 percent of its mass is concentrated in the nucleus at its center, which occupies roughly one-trillionth of the volume of the atom as a whole. The remainder of the volume is occupied by six electrons (of very low mass) and trillions of virtual photons transmitting the electromagnetic force that keeps them in their orbits. Hence, we and all apparently material earthly objects are a part of a vast ocean of essentially nonmaterial space energized by an innumerable multitude of virtual electrodynamic phenomena.

In any case, with the inclusion of these virtual phenomena in calculations on a host of electrodynamic phenomena, QED yields incredibly accurate answers, answers that agree with experiments to better than one part in ten billion. Indeed, QED is by far the most accurate theory in all of physics. It is a case where humans have come as close as they may in a long time to describing accurately an aspect of nature. In Richard Feynman's words, "But so far, we have found nothing wrong with the theory of [QED]. It is therefore, I would say, the jewel of physics-our proudest possession" (Feynman, Q.E.D., 8).