  The no-go theorems of Bell and Kochen and Specker could be interpreted as
implying that the notions of system and experimental context are fundamentally
inseparable. In this interpretation, statements such as "spin is 'up' along
direction $x$" are relational statements about the configurations of
macroscopic devices which are mediated by the spin and not about any intrinsic
properties of the spin. The operational meaning of these statements is provided
by the practically infinite resources of macroscopic devices that serve to
define the notion of a direction in three-dimensional space. This is the
subject of "textbook quantum mechanics": The description of quantum systems in
relation to an experimental context.. Can one go beyond that? Relational
quantum mechanics endeavors to provide a relational description between any
quantum systems without the necessity of involving macroscopic devices.
However, by applying "textbook quantum mechanics" in such situations, it
implicitly assumes infinite resources, even for simple quantum systems such as
spins, which have no capacity to define an experimental context. This leads to
conceptual difficulties. We analyse Penrose's spin network proposal as a
potential formalisation of quantum theory that goes beyond the textbook
framework: A description in presence of finite resources, which is inherently
relational and inseparable in the system-context entity.
