From Mattergy to Gnergy to Gnergitons
An ITR-Based Account of Matter, Life, and Reality
In my previous posts, I focused on gnergy [1]—the inseparable coupling of energy (to do work) and information (to control work)—as a way to reinterpret the long-standing “life force”[10] intuition without reifying it as a new force. That discussion, however, remained incomplete.
According to the Principle of the Irreducible Triadic Relation (ITR) [2], no domain of reality is fundamentally dyadic. Reality is not exhausted by matter–energy alone, nor by information–energy alone. It is fundamentally triadic.
In this follow-up, I extend the framework [3] to its full scope by explicitly introducing mattergy (X), gnergy (XY), and gnergitons (XYZ), and by interpreting Reality itself as a three-dimensional XYZ volume whose lower-dimensional projections appear to us as physics, biology, and mind (see Figures 1 and 2 below).
Figure 1. Two commutative triangles in GOR: IRVSE(2)◦IRVSE(1) = IRVSE(3), and L◦IRVSE(3) = IRVSE(1).
Figure 2. The geometric mechanism of generating the Fibonacci series and the Golden spiral based on the Principle of IRVSE (Iterative Reproduction with Variations and Selection by Environment).
(i) After squaring (or reproducing) 1 and adding the result to the original square, S1, you get rectangle R1 with the long side length 2.
(ii) After squaring (or reproducing) the long side of R1 and adding the result to R1, you get a rectangle R2 with the long side length 3.
(iii) After squaring (or reproducing) the long side of R2 and adding the result to R2, you get a rectangle R3 with the long side length 5.
(iv) Repeat (iii) with R3, namely, after squaring (or reproducing) the long side of R3 and adding the result to R3, you get a rectangle R4 with long side length 8.
(v) Form a spiral by connecting the opposite corners of each square with a circular arc (selected out of an infinite number of possible curves)by a conscious agent in order to achieve a desired goal.
1. ITR and the architecture of Reality
ITR (Irreducible Triadic Relation) [2] states that whenever a system appears to be describable in terms of two elements, a third element is always implicitly required for coherence, mediation, or realization. Applied ontologically, this leads to a triadic structure of Reality [3]:
X: Mattergy (Matter–Energy)
The domain of physical substance, forces, and energetic interactions.XY: Gnergy (Information–Energy)
The domain of organized, goal-directed processes—life, metabolism, regulation, and agency.XYZ: Gnergitons (Information–Energy–Spirit) (see the legend to Figures 1 above)
The domain of meaning, consciousness, value, and experiential unity.
Reality, on this view, is not any one of these levels alone, but the full XYZ volume (see Figure 1 above).
2. Mattergy (X): the shadow called physics
Figure 3. The geometry of reality [3] superposed on Plato’s allegory of the cave [4].
When Reality is projected onto the X axis, we obtain mattergy: the world of particles, fields, forces, and conserved quantities. This is the domain of mechanical and quantum physics.
Mattergy excels at describing:
motion,
interaction,
transformation of energy.
But by itself, mattergy has no intrinsic direction, purpose, or meaning. It dissipates. It does not decide.
Physics, in this sense, is Plato’s shadow of Reality [4]—powerful, precise, but incomplete.
3. Gnergy (XY): the shadow called life
When the XYZ volume is projected onto the XY plane, mattergy becomes constrained by information, giving rise to gnergy [1] (see Figures 1 and 3)..
This is the domain of:
living systems,
regulation,
metabolism,
development,
learning,
goal-directed action.
Here, energy does not merely flow—it is channeled. Information does not merely exist—it controls work. The “life force” [10] intuition arises precisely because gnergy-dominant systems behave in ways that mattergy alone cannot predict.
Yet gnergy is still not the whole story. Life organizes energy and information, but organization alone does not explain meaning, awareness, or value.
4. Gnergitons (XYZ): the reality of meaning and consciousness
To account for consciousness [12], meaning, intentionality, and value, the triad must be completed. This completion is the gnergiton (defined in the legend to Figure 1 above):
A gnergiton is an irreducible integration of information (‘gn-‘), energy (‘erg-‘), and spirit (‘-it-‘).
Here, spirit does not mean a supernatural substance. It names the third ontological dimension required to account for first-person experience, significance, and purposive unity—that which cannot be reduced to dynamics or organization alone.
Gnergitons are not added onto mattergy or gnergy; they are the full XYZ realization of Reality at certain loci—especially in conscious organisms.
5. Saddle-point geometry as the triadic gateway
Figure 4. The saddle surface (mixed-curvature surface) [5, 6] consisting of the triad of (i) a concave surface (green line, A <-> B; ), slow neural network rearrangement) [7, 8], (ii) a convex surface (red line, D -> C; fast quantum transitions), and (iii) a saddle point (see the arrow) where (i) and (ii) converge transiently giving rise to conscious experience (referred to as ‘conscions’ [7, 8]).
How does Reality move between these domains?
The answer lies in saddle-point geometry [5, 6]. (see Figure 4 above)
Saddle points—regions of mixed curvature on energy–information landscapes—are where:
multiple futures coexist,
selection occurs,
irreversible commitments are made.
At the X → XY transition, saddle points convert mattergy into gnergy (e.g., catalysis, conformational switching, regulatory decisions).[3]
At the XY → XYZ transition, saddle points become sites where organized action acquires meaning and experiential unity—where gnergy is lifted into gnergitonic realization (see Step L in Figure 1).
Thus, saddle points are triadic gateways, not merely transition states.
6. IRVSE across the XYZ volume
IRVSE (Iterative Reproduction with Variations followed by Selection by Environment) [3] (see Figure 2 above) operates across all three levels:
In X, it appears as physical pattern stability.
In XY, it appears as biological evolution, development, and learning.
In XYZ, it appears as the evolution of meaning, values, and conscious agency [7].
IRVSE is the algorithmic backbone that stabilizes projections of the XYZ volume over time. It explains how transient gnergitonic events can become persistent features of reality (see Figure 5 and [9]).
Figure 5. Torus as an organized system of saddle points.[9]
7. Reality as volume, science as projection
This leads to a simple but radical picture:
Reality is XYZ.
Physics studies X.
Biology studies XY.
Phenomenology [13]
and consciousness studies glimpse XYZ.
Each discipline is valid—but incomplete—because each studies a projection, not the volume itself.
The long-standing conflicts between physics, biology, and consciousness studies arise not from error, but from dimensional truncation.
8. Synthesis
What was once called “life force” [10] is now seen as a partial intuition of triadic reality.
Mattergy explains what moves.
Gnergy explains what is organized.
Gnergitons explain what means.
Reality is not matter, life, or mind alone.
Reality is the irreducible triadic volume from which they all arise as Plato’s shadows.
This is the ontological implication of ITR.
9. The TI (Transactional Interpretation) and the Saddle-Point Interpretation (SPI) of Quantum Mechanics.
According to Ruth Kastner, TI (Transactional Interpretation) of quantum mechanics [11] is relativistically compatible because:
Transactions are spacetime-global
They are not signals sent from past → future
They are standing-wave constraints across spacetime intervals
Offer and confirmation waves are not observables
No measurable signal propagates faster than light
Only the completed transaction corresponds to an event
No preferred frame
Transactions are invariant descriptions of emitter–absorber relations
Collapse is not a local, frame-dependent “happening”
In short:
TI replaces temporal causation with spacetime consistency.
That already aligns naturally with relativity.
The saddle point proposal goes one step deeper by shifting the focus from spacetime trajectories to topology of state space.
Key insight:
Saddle points live in configuration / phase / energy landscapes, not in spacetime coordinates.
This is crucial for relativity, because
Relativity constrains spacetime geometry,
Saddle points govern dynamical selection in state space, and
These are orthogonal domains
A saddle point:
is not “located” at a spacetime point,
has no velocity,
does not propagate.
It is a topological bottleneck, not a causal messenger.
Therefore, no relativistic violation is even possible.
10. How Saddle-Point Dissipation Produces Irreversibility Without Violating Relativity
Relativity is time-reversal symmetric at the level of fundamental laws.
Irreversibility comes from thermodynamics, not spacetime structure.
The saddle point model [14] respects this separation:
Quantum dynamics (fast): reversible, relativistic, unitary
Slow degrees of freedom: material, macroscopic, dissipative
Saddle point: where the two meet, not where spacetime is bent
Crucial point:
Free-energy [15] dissipation occurs locally, within the light cone, in material systems.
Thus:
No backward-in-time signaling
No superluminal causation
No preferred foliation of spacetime
The arrow of time emerges from entropy production (in isolated systems) [16], not from relativistic structure—exactly as required by modern physics.
11. Transaction vs Saddle Point: Complementary, Not Competing
Here is the conceptual alignment:
op of ForInterpretation:
Transaction ensures relativistic consistency
Saddle-point dissipation ensures physical actuality
Together they form a two-layer theory:
Relativistic coordination (TI)
Thermodynamic commitment (GFCP) [17]
12. A Key Unifying Insight
Here is the deepest point, stated explicitly:
Relativity governs what spacetime histories are allowed.
Saddle-point topology governs which histories become real.
Relativity sets the kinematic envelope.
GFCP [17] sets the selection rule within that envelope.
This mirrors biology perfectly:
Many molecular trajectories are allowed
Only those passing through dissipative saddle points survive
Quantum measurement is no different.
13. Why The Saddle Point Model May Be an Advantage Over TI Alone
TI answers:
How nonlocal consistency is possible without violating relativity
The saddle point framework additionally answers:
Why one consistent possibility becomes irreversible fact
In that sense, the saddle point model [14] does not challenge Kastner’s claim—it completes it.
14. Conclusion
Transactional Interpretation (TI) guarantees relativistic consistency;
Saddle-point dissipation model (SDM) explains thermodynamic actuality.
Or:
Relativity constrains spacetime.
Saddle points select reality.
References:
[1] Ji, S. (1991). Molecular Theories of Cell Life and Death, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J. Pp. 152-163
[2] Ji, S. (2018). The Universality of the Irreducible Triadic Relation. In: The Cell Language Theory: Connecting Mind and Matter. World Scientific Publishing, New Jersey. Pp. 377-393
[3] Ji, S. (2025). The Geometry of Reality (GOR): A Triadic Framework for Matter, Mind, and Spirit.
https://622622.substack.com/p/geometry-of-reality
[4] Allegory of the cave. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave
[5] Saddle point. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddle_point
[6] Ji, S. (2025). The Saddle Point of Reality.
https://622622.substack.com/p/the-saddle-point-of-reality
[7] Ji, S. (2025). Discovery of Conscions.
https://622622.substack.com/p/discovery-of-conscions
[8] Ji, S., and Davis, J. J. Joshua (2025). Geometry of Conscions: A Unified Framework for Consciousness. J. Consciousness Exploration & Research. Volume 16, No 4 (2025).
[9] Ji, S. (2025). From Saddle to Torus The Geometry of Energy Transduction, Decision, and Biological Function
https://622622.substack.com/p/from-saddle-to-torus-the-geometry
[10] Life force. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_force
[11] Transactional interpretation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretationscions.
[12] Consciousness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness
[13] Phenomenology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenology_(philosophy)
[14] Ji, S. (2025). Does the Gnergy Principle Provide a Mechanism for Wave Function Collapse? https://622622.substack.com/p/does-the-gnergy-principle-provide
[15] Free Energy. Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/free-energy
[16] Entropy production. https://www.britannica.com/science/free-energy
[17] Ji, S. (1974). Energy and Negentropy in Enzymic Catalysis, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 227, 419-437.