Complementarity-First: Relational Unity and the Genesis of Physical Structure

Abstract

The Complementarity-First program asks whether physical structure can be reconstructed from completed relations before independently complete objects, states, fields, or spacetime points are assumed. This conceptual-formal foundations article states the program’s primitive semantic proposal and its control discipline. The primitive datum is a completed relation $\mathcal{C}$; symbols such as $a$ and $b$ identify distinguishable role-positions internal to that completion, not independently complete objects supplied in advance. Four criteria classify a primitive candidate: role distinguishability, relational constraint, target-relative non-exhaustiveness, and nontrivial completion. Generative adequacy is a separate requirement on an enriched theory: it must specify controlled composition, iteration, transformation, or network formation. Elementary independence models show that the primitive proposal does not determine symmetry, unique complement, continuity, probability, scalar field, geometry, dynamics, or standard complex quantum theory. Gravity and quantum theory are therefore organized as parallel reconstruction tests with explicit selector and evidence ledgers, while a later paired-incidence/twistor reunion remains an outlook target. The motivating sequence from the Tao Te Ching, the Taichi Diagram, and the complementary architecture of DNA is kept behind a strict motivation–derivation firewall. The present formalism begins with a post-differentiation relational seed: it supplies neither a theorem from One to Two nor a composition theorem from Three to the many. Accordingly, “genesis” names the research target and explanatory architecture, not an achieved derivation of physics. The result provides a disciplined basis for later technical reconstruction rather than a completed physical theory.

Where it sits in the release

CF-F1 is the conceptual foundation of every other paper in Release I. It supplies the primitive and the evidence discipline; it establishes no physical theorem of its own. Its provenance edges run to the quantum-reconstruction audit (CFQF-Q4), the relational-time study (CFQF-Q2), and the gravity architecture (TCG-F1).

The four classification criteria are:

Generative adequacy — whether an enriched theory can compose completed relations into anything larger — is deliberately kept separate from C1–C4. A single typed edge can be a valid primitive candidate and still be physically sterile.

Download paper (Zenodo) — 24 pages, 24 references. CC-BY-4.0.