The most interesting property of reality is that one aspect of it (eg, “the front side” or “process”) IS the other aspect of it (then “the back side” or “pattern”) by meaning that there is no real difference between them, but that this aspectual difference emerges in the moment we look at it. It is just as if reality forms in terms of this difference in the moment we look at it. However, the fact that we can predict processes pretty well using math and “natural laws” means that it is not reality that forms, but just our comprehension of it. Reality itself avoids our comprehension.
This property can be interpreted as that reality fundamentally IS “process” (eg, the ancient Greek Heracleitus) or pattern (eg, the ancient Greek Parmenides), but the fact that the difference between them emerges in the moment we look at reality means that reality also fundamentally is both (at the same time). The fact that time is relative to speed in space does indeed mean that the former interpretation (ie, that reality fundamentally IS “process”) agrees with facts, whereas the latter (ie, that it is “pattern”) isn’t, but it isn’t consistent to assume that consistency in an inconsistent comprehension of reality equals consistency in this reality.
This property of reality does thus mean that we can’t reveal what reality IS with the tools we have. We can model how it behaves using math, but we can’t understand what it IS.
Another contribution to understanding of conceptualization http://menvall.wordpress.com/