Is Space Fundamental—or Just a Relationship Between Events?

Is Space Fundamental or just a sophisticated illusion arising from quantum interactions? This question haunts the corridors of physics departments worldwide as we move deeper into 2026.

For centuries, we viewed space as an empty stage, a rigid container where stars burn and planets dance, but modern evidence suggests a stranger reality.

My analysis suggests that we are witnessing the collapse of the “container” model of the universe.

If space is not a primary ingredient, then our entire perception of distance, travel, and existence itself might be a secondary effect of more complex events.

This shift changes everything from how we calculate orbital mechanics to how we understand the very fabric of our reality.

The Nature of Spacetime

• Substantivalism: The belief that space exists as a physical substance or “fabric” independently of matter.
• Relationalism: The theory that space is merely the sum of the spatial relationships between physical objects.
• Emergence: The cutting-edge 2026 view that space emerges from quantum entanglement, much like a solid emerges from atoms.

Why do physicists question if space is truly real?

Thinking about space as a “thing” is like looking at a digital image and forgetting about the pixels that create the picture.

Scientists increasingly argue that space emerges from a deeper, non-spatial layer of the universe, suggesting that distance might be a macroscopic convenient fiction.

Is Space Fundamental or merely a network of information exchange?

Current research into “Quantum Reconstruction” suggests that the geometry of the cosmos depends entirely on the degree of entanglement between particles, rather than pre-existing coordinates.

When entanglement breaks, the “distance” between points essentially becomes meaningless, challenging our most basic physical intuitions.

++ The Possibility That the Universe Is Incomplete by Design

How does the Holometer experiment impact this debate?

The 2026 updates from the Fermilab Holometer project suggest that space might have a “graininess” at the Planck scale, limited by information capacity.

This data implies that the universe behaves more like a high-definition stream than a continuous, infinite void, supporting the idea of a relational structure.

In my view, this experimental evidence pushes us toward a “pixelated” reality where space serves as the user interface for quantum data.

If space has a maximum resolution, it cannot be an infinite, fundamental stage; it must be a derived property of a more basic system.

Also read: Does the Universe Obey Logic—or Is Logic an Emergent Feature of the Universe?

What role does the Holographic Principle play?

The Holographic Principle suggests that all the information contained within a volume of space exists on its boundary, much like a security sticker.

This means the three-dimensional world we inhabit might be a projection of two-dimensional data, making our “depth” an emergent, secondary characteristic.

What many forget to observe is that this theory resolves the “black hole information paradox” by shifting the focus from volume to area.

If the interior of a room is just a projection of the walls, then space as we know it is a mathematical consequence of boundary information.

Is space just a relationship between physical events?

Leibniz once argued that space is simply the order of things that exist at the same time, rather than a container.

In 2026, this “relationalism” is back in style, fueled by Loop Quantum Gravity theories that treat space as a web of interconnected nodes.

Is Space Fundamental or just a way to describe the gaps between occurrences?

My recommendation for you is to view space as a geographic map: the map isn’t the territory, it just describes how far the landmarks are from each other.

Without events, the map ceases to exist, making “empty space” a logical impossibility.

Read more: Could the Universe Have Self-Correcting Mechanisms?

Why is Loop Quantum Gravity gaining traction?

This theory replaces the smooth fabric of Einstein’s General Relativity with a discrete network of “atoms of space” that cannot be divided.

These nodes define proximity through their connections, meaning that “here” and “there” are simply labels for how many links exist between two points.

The analysis more honest scholars suggest is that gravity isn’t a force moving through space, but rather the vibration of the space-web itself.

This eliminates the need for an external stage, as the web and the objects within it are essentially part of the same fluctuating system.

How does “The It from Qubit” theory work?

John Wheeler’s famous “It from Bit” has evolved into the “It from Qubit” movement, which posits that physical objects arise from quantum bits.

In this framework, Is Space Fundamental or just the result of how qubits share information through entanglement across the cosmic network?

I have noticed that this perspective turns the universe into a giant quantum computer where geometry is the output, not the hardware.

If the calculation stops, the space disappears, proving that the relationship between bits is the only thing that truly persists in the void.

How does the “Amplituhedron” challenge our view of space?

The discovery of the Amplituhedron, a multifaceted geometric object that simplifies particle collision calculations, suggests that space and time are not necessary for physics.

This mathematical structure allows us to predict the outcomes of events without ever using the concepts of “position” or “duration.”

Is Space Fundamental or an unnecessary variable in the master equation of the universe?

I believe that the Amplituhedron represents a “smoking gun” for the idea that our 4D reality is a simplified shadow of a much higher-dimensional, non-spatial geometry.

Why do particle collisions suggest space is emergent?

When particles collide at high energies, the standard models often break down unless we remove the assumption of a fixed spatial background.

By treating the collision as a purely mathematical probability event, the complexity vanishes, suggesting that space is a “clutter” we add to make sense of the math.

My recommendation for you is to consider that our brains evolved to perceive space to help us find food, not to see ultimate reality.

Just as a pilot uses an artificial horizon, we use space as a navigation tool, even if the “horizon” doesn’t actually exist in the cockpit.

What is the role of “Quantum Darwinism”?

This theory suggests that our classical world, including space and time, is the result of the “fittest” quantum states surviving interaction with the environment.

Space emerges because it is the most stable way for information to be shared among multiple observers without collapsing the quantum wave function.

When we observe with more attention, the pattern of space seems to be a consensus reality a shared hallucination that allows us to interact.

This makes space a biological and physical compromise, a stable platform for life to evolve within a much more chaotic, non-spatial quantum sea.

2026 Comparison of Spatial Theories

Theory	Status of Space	Primary Mechanism	Key Proponent/Project
General Relativity	Fundamental Fabric	Curvature of Spacetime	Albert Einstein
Relationalism	Derived Relationship	Inter-object distance	Gottfried Leibniz
Loop Quantum Gravity	Emergent Network	Spin Foam/Nodes	Carlo Rovelli
ER=EPR	Quantum Product	Entanglement Bridges	Susskind/Maldacena
Holographic Principle	2D Projection	Surface Information	Juan Maldacena

In my analysis, the question Is Space Fundamental or a secondary effect is the most important riddle of our century.

The evidence from 2026 points toward a universe where relationships and information are the true bedrock, while space is merely the theater we construct to visualize them.

If distance is truly an illusion born of entanglement, then the traditional barriers to interstellar travel and instant communication might one day be bypassed through the deeper, non-spatial layers of the cosmos.

Space serves us well as a coordinate system for our daily lives, but the true nature of the universe appears to be far more interconnected and immediate than a vast, empty void would suggest.

We are moving toward a physics of “being” rather than a physics of “where.”

Are you ready to accept that the distance between you and the stars might just be a matter of quantum perspective? Share your experience in the comments.

Frequently Asked Questions

If space isn’t real, why does it take time to travel?

Travel time reflects the complexity of the information processing required to move a state across the quantum network, not a physical distance in a void.

Can we exist without space?

Our consciousness and physical bodies are currently “tuned” to the spatial interface, but the fundamental data that makes you “you” is non-spatial.

Does this mean the universe is a simulation?

Not necessarily; it means the universe is “informational” at its core, which is a natural property rather than an artificial one created by a computer.

Is Space Fundamental or is it just for humans?

Many physicists believe space is a “macroscopic” phenomenon, meaning it only appears when you have large groups of particles interacting together.

How does entanglement “create” space?

The ER=EPR conjecture suggests that every entangled pair of particles is connected by a tiny wormhole, and the sum of these billions of connections creates the geometry of space.