But I do not think that its inevitable consequences are understood.

When we really face them the paradox of the presentation of the character of space which I have elaborated is greatly mitigated.

If there is no absolute position, a point must cease to be a simple entity.
What is a point to one man in a balloon with his eyes fixed on an instrument is a track of points to an observer on the earth who is watching the balloon through a telescope, and is another track of points to an observer in the sun who is watching the balloon through some instrument suited to such a being.

Accordingly if I am reproached with the paradox of my theory of points as classes of event-particles, and of my theory of event-particles as groups of abstractive sets, I ask my critic to explain exactly what he means by a point.

While you explain your meaning about anything, however simple, it is always apt to look subtle and fine spun.