going causal: causation vs.essence in physics

Cross-abstracted from a post at: mindX

In common regurgitations (what a great opening phrase!) of the standard model of particle physics, there is often no description of any actual causality at all, despite the colorful physical-sounding verbiage, like "patina" and analogs with mountain ranges, rubber-trampolines, glue, color, charm and  whatnot.

For instance, try to describe to us the causality of how a "gluon" actually "glues" the particles of a nucleus together.  How does the gluon transmit the "glue" and what causation or structure gives the "glue" its properties? Does a gluon merely possess the "essence" of glue?

I wondered where those long lost ancient essences ran off to! Modern theory has a "patina" of physicalism, with loose and poetic physical analogies for its accounting categories, but it is really a hyper-complex essentialism at its core; with the disembodied essences of glue, color, strangeness, and charm just wandering around magically infecting their assigned particles with their abstract "particle-mediated" nature.

This is an empty accounting system, not a causal model of fundamental physical reality, as is Sorce Theory. The difference is VAST and impossible to see without learning and embodying BOTH models in order to compare them simultaneously. Once you go causal, you can't ever go back ... unless the sheep clawing at your heels gets to be too much.