From the perspective of relational ontology, however, there is no paradox. The puzzle dissolves once we shift the frame.
Relational structuring of potential
In relational terms, a system is not a set of individual particles, but a structured potential—a theory of possible instances. How the system is construed determines what kinds of correlations may be actualised.
If particles are construed as distinguishable individuals, then potential is structured accordingly: each particle carries its own trajectory of possible events.
If particles are construed as indistinguishable, the relational cut does not individuate them. Instead, the system is construed as a collective potential, where outcomes are constrained not by “this particle vs. that particle” but by their shared distribution.
Indistinguishability as a relational cut
The experiment in question shows that when photons are made indistinguishable, they generate Bell-type correlations even without entanglement. From the orthodox view, this is puzzling: how can correlations exist without entanglement?
From our ontology, it is straightforward. The correlations arise because the system was construed as a collective potential. Actualisations (the detection events) align with this potential. The so-called “nonlocal correlations” are simply the reflex of outcomes being instantiated from a non-individuated collective.
Entanglement, in this light, is just one way of structuring relational potential. Indistinguishability is another. What matters is not the presence or absence of “entanglement,” but the relational form in which potential is construed.
The Lesson
The mystery evaporates once we let go of the metaphysics of particles as things-in-themselves. What is fundamental is not entanglement, but the relational structuring of possibility. Correlations appear whenever actualisations align with a collective potential, whether construed through entanglement or indistinguishability.
This reframing shows how relational ontology can not only make sense of quantum experiments, but also dissolve the paradoxes that arise when we insist on interpreting phenomena through the lens of individuated objects.
The world is not stitched together by spooky bonds between distant particles. It is patterned by the ways in which potential is relationally construed—and by how events actualise within those patterns.