I believe I have already told you that velocity and direction are among our areas of free will. Size increases with speed, as does time and communication-strength. Linear speed is the factor for growth, or volume extension, as we call it.
The faster we tunnel the bigger we grow and the more time we have. And this has its psychological counterpart in the sense of well-being. But greater speed also brings the greater possibility of entrapment and cancellation. We have various mathematical techniques to help us plot out the Speed/Danger ratio under various circumstances. Frankly, these are of dubious practical worth and very difficult to understand, and your average worm just bores along on his hunches.
Personally, I detest science. But I, like all of us, am forced into the mysterious area of physics, metaphysics, and mathematics in order to solve the daily problems with which we are continually beset. Even our dreams and fantasies involve intuitional probes into areas where physical laws and special properties might be manipulated to our advantage. And sometimes I have nightmares of constriction.
Sometimes, on a good day, I think to myself that there is no established limit to the speed a worm could attain under ideal circumstances, since speed begets further speed, and at a logarithmic rate. The limiting factors are dead wormholes, other worms, and the unknowable Surface.
Fantasies of continually increasing speed and size are common among us. One of our oldest legends is of the Primordial Worm in the Original World. This world was entirely solid, of course. One version of the legend is that the Primordial Worm tried to reach maximum velocity (which is permitted only to Godworm, if He exists), and that the Primordial Worm grew so large and fast and long that he consumed the entire world, and worm and world canceled simultaneously. That was the end of the first Age of Worms. Then the Godworm made the world all over again, but this time with two worms in it.
Another version of the Creation Legend says the Godworm saved the world by creating a second worm of opposite sex, with whom the Primordial Worm had to share the world, mate, and procreate/ die, thus giving birth to the present worm race.
Both versions of this particular legend agree that in the beginning there was nothing, and then came the solid world, then Primordial Worm, and then the Mother Worm. Other legends say that the first worm was the Mother Worm who mated with herself to give birth to our race.
In any event, the Second Age began (it is said) with two worms, and life was paradisaical because they had the entire world at their disposal, and lived long lives and designed brilliant patterns before they mated/canceled and initiated the process resulting in our present multiplicity.
However it came about, it must have been wonderful back in the old days when there were only a few worms and everyone had a chance to live a long life and express himself fully.
I am puzzled by your references to “gravity.” No such force exists in our world, or if it does, we are not aware of it and it plays no important part in our lives. All directions in our world involve equal expenditure of energy. I don’t understand why you make a differentiation between “up “ and “down.” Does it correspond to “in” and “out”? Does it have something to do with symmetry-hunger? For us it is meaningless.
We dream a time before exclusivity; a dream of innocence, of paradise, when worms coiled round and round each other in veritable contact, when there was no cancellation, only childlike sexuality and unlimited fulfillment; when all worms lived in the great worm tangle, procreated, died, were absorbed back into the tangle of life as nutrients, to blend with sunlight to give more life. That was the state of worm before the Fall.
I was very interested in your description of water, and it does correspond in some ways to what we call earth. We don’t have anything like it, unless “water” is the medium through which we move. But this seems unlikely—from what you tell me, a wormhole made in water would instantaneously be filled in again, which is not the case with us. Might some other “liquid” or “semi-liquid” have the requisite properties? I like the idea that the changes in our earth are due to changes in the viscosity of the medium through which we pass. But I think it’s just a nice idea. I’m pretty sure we’re worms, not fish.
Possession can occur (or is said to occur) when one’s short-term wormhole pattern coincides in sufficient degrees of similitude (the critical degree is unknown) with the wormhole pattern made by some worm now deceased. It would take a very large/fast worm to produce a pattern of sufficient power to continue for a distance after his death. Some evil worms have been said to possess this power, and their patterns are said to wait for someone to be ensnared by forming a similar pattern. The mystics say that the magical power of Resonance then takes place. The living worm’s pattern, via a quantum/gestalt repatterning, becomes similar in all degrees to the dead worm’s pattern. The living worm is forced to continue the dead worm’s pattern; this our definition of possession, since a worm is defined by the patterns he creates. If a worm makes a pattern that is not his own—not self-willed, not self-directed—then he is not the same worm, he is the former worm. A worm so possessed is said to “ride the fixed pattern,” usually to his quick destruction, since he is unable to use his intuition to guide him away from dangerous volumes.
I don’t know if any of this is true, but it would account for the inexplicable behavior that takes over a worm from time to time.
There are said to be worm magicians among us who deliberately seek Similitude with the former pattern of some great former spirit-worm, some supreme magus. The belief is that, done consciously and with proper safeguards, the worm-spirit will not destroy the magician but rather confer on him the power to foresee the patterns of others. At cost of his soul, of course. On the other hand, the really zealous believers in God, sometimes called white magicians, try to attain Holy Resonant Similitude with the Great Pattern of the Godworm, for the sake of bliss or Infinite Velocity Communion, as it is technically called. But there are many doctrinal disputes among the Godworm worshippers and I myself take little note of all that, being an artist above all else, while still trying to keep up an intelligent worm’s interest in the world around me.
We artists (for I know you are a kindred spirit, Robert) use the data that is presented to us, but without taking too much stock of it. Our true allegiance lies not with worldly or unworldly views, but rather with some sort of formal elegance, which, for me, defines art as closely as I can do it. But either you understand these things intuitively or you don’t. Do you understand?
What corresponds to vision in you is our ability to sense wormholes, both individual and in patterns, as well as to sense and often identify other worms, and to sense certain irregularities or inconsistencies (technically called Anomalies) in the density and shape-structure of the world we move through. These Anomalies are sometimes of definite shape, size and thickness and sometimes are impenetrable. It is this fact that lends a possible credence to the otherwise discredited theory that we inhabit a crystalline world. This theory holds that the Anomalies we encounter from time to time are actually zones formed by sets of faces within our crystalline world. The zones may be considered points where intersections are all parallel, and hence impenetrable. I’m not too knowledgeable on all this, but I’m mentioning it in the hopes it’ll interest you.
The primary objection to the crystalline world theory is that if it were so we should be able to find an orderly arrangement of zones and faces, and thus be able to deduce the shape of the world. Which of course we cannot do.
This objection is answered to the satisfaction of some by the Semi or Quasi Crystalline Worlders, who hold that our world has certain crystalline properties, but is not itself a pure crystal, and is not bound by the laws of Symmetry which define classic crystal growth and prediction. They say, some of them, that the world is a living world with certain crystalline properties.
I don’t mean to sneer at the crystallographerworms; however, metaphysically, they may be suspect. But aesthetically, they provide the artist worm with fascinatin
g figures to inscribe via wormhole. Worms at the comic book stage usually inscribe simple cubes, staying well outside the critical limits of cancellation where lines meet, of course, and even then frequently abandoning the figure before completion because they have grown bored or thought of something else to do.
And of course plenty of worms are not interested in crystalline inscription art and prefer to spend their lives making tight helical search-patterns of various degrees of tightness depending on their timidity: a right helical search-pattern is safer and allows its maker to consume more “safe” (i.e. unwormholed) earth. But these tight search patterns are confining and life-limiting, because their extreme angularity holds down speed and therefore self-expression to a minimum, and so the makers of them tend to stay small and slow and lead a dull but safe life.
That sort of thing is not for me, however. Jill keeps on preaching the virtues of the helical way to me, but I am an artist worm and the fascinations of artistic wormhole inscription, the highest form of creation, call to me ceaselessly.
In fact, I made quite a name for myself recently for my composition of three linked tetragonal pyramids with single pyramids adorning all of the points except one, where I inscribed a tetrahedron for comic relief. I got quite a lot of criticism for that by the classicists, which pleased me since I am dedicated to asymmetry. Well, that’s putting it too strongly, I believe in symmetry, of course, as every artist must, but I believe that the frozen perfection of symmetry must be marred deliberately by the mystery and truth of asymmetry. I suppose you’d call me a romantic. But there it is, my creed, and I’m not ashamed of it.
You may laugh at my concept of planned asymmetries, since the nature of the world and the incursions of other worms distort our creations anyhow. Some would even question whether my third tetragonal bipyramid deserved that name at all. Its shape was far from perfect. I had to do some quick maneuvering in a seventy percent filled area to finish it off. It’s rather a distorted figure, but that’s no reason to say that it looks like a wormturd, as one critic said, with extreme injustice.
Well, that’s how it goes in the art game. At least I caused a stir, and showed that I can go beyond the simple-minded geometries which is the current artistic fad.
I promised to tell you something about what I do, and there it is. I’ve simplified it considerably, of course. There’s a great deal more involved in figure-inscription than I’ve indicated. But perhaps I’ve said enough to give you an idea.
What do you do, Robert?
This week I’m doing repeated contact twinning of a pseudo-hexagonal shape that came to me in a dream. It’s a pleasantly repetitious activity of a mildly pleasing aesthetic character, and gives me plenty of long lines along which to build up speed so that I’ll have the energy to communicate with you. By following a set contact twinning procedure I satisfy my form-need without having to actively invent a figure. I do this somewhat reluctantly, because I’ve got some big artistic projects in mind. Some of them would astonish you, I think. And Jill thinks I’m getting more than a little loony! But I restrain myself from entering these grand projects, in part for Jill’s sake, in part out of cowardice (for I contemplate some hazardous patterns!). But most of all I desist from them so that I can give my attention/energy to these communications with you, Robert.
Your explanation of what you do with your life was a little unclear, but I gather that you are a maker of popular aesthetic configurations just as I am. When you say you get “paid” for your work, in my terms that means you get increased fame and enhanced sustenance in some form that you can use. If I understand correctly, you are a maker and seller of your own sort of wormhole structures. We’re very much alike in certain ways. But this matter of “selling” is not at all obvious to me. I take it that your wormhole structures which you call stories are portable and can be isolated for specific distribution to your solid fellows. And they reward you in some way that I hope you will clarify for me in later communication.
I find it a strange idea, and I can’t imagine what they could give you aside from fame. What could other creatures possibly have to do with your sustenance? I guess I’ve supposed that you live according to the way we worms feed ourselves. As I’ve explained, we make our wormholes, and thus create artistic patterns that can only be rewarded by fame, since nothing else could penetrate the isolation in which we worms must live. It’s difficult for me to imagine getting sustenance from others rather than being annihilated by them. Please explain.
It was good to hear from you, Robert, although a lot of your message was garbled, or I just didn’t understand parts of it. But I think I empathized with the important stuff. You tell me that you’re having difficulties with the directing of your wormhole just now; you’ve got a lot of semi-threatening and sometimes ambiguous convergences to worry about as well, and that you’ve also got to make “a living” (please define in your next message!). And so it is difficult for you to set up the necessary circumstances and summon the necessary energy and focus to communicate with me.
I quite understand, I sense your eagerness to continue our association, so I know you’re not trying to put me off. Get in touch when you can. Your buddy Ron the Worm understands. I’ve got difficulties of my own, so my communications may get spotty from time to time also.
You tell me you haven’t told any of your fellow humans about our communication, for reasons I understand perfectly. But you seem to have some idea of finding a form of acceptable disclosure for this experience via your artistic medium, your storytelling.
Go to it, pal. Our talks have given me some ideas, too.
The beauty of telepathic communication is the way the process automatically translates your meanings into symbols and terms comprehensible and familiar to the other. Thus, your name, which in actuality must be incomprehensible and unvibrational to me, comes through, via the navel of telepathy (and perhaps, who knows, divine grace) as a familiar name to me—Robert, the name of several of my friends, as a matter of fact.
I think of you, crawling around your enormous sphere whose shape you know—marvel of marvels!
It is quite otherwise with us. We live within our world rather than on the surface of it. We are worms. Or wormoids, since there are several races of worms.
Klaus surprised me by showing definite interest in my telepathic communication with you. “I don’t like to give credence to something that I myself cannot verify,” he said, “but this—let’s call it communication that you have received—opens up some very interesting areas. Our scientists have long been aware of the possibility of other worlds with definite and measurable surfaces. We’ve had no real evidence for it up to now. And I’m not sure this constitutes evidence. But accepting the assumption for the moment, it opens some interesting conjectures.”
“Does it prove that our world has a real surface?” I asked.
“No, dear boy. Quite the contrary. If your informant speaks true, then it proves that our world absolutely does not have a surface, and it proves this as a matter of verifiable knowledge rather than as an idealistic statement.”
“Is that important?” I asked.
“Of course! Ideal concepts are mere logical constructs whose truth depends upon inner consistency, and whose main use is to keep the pragmatists upset and act as a sort of challenge to learn whether the ideal corresponds with what really is.”
“I don’t see why the fact that his world has a surface proves that our world doesn’t.”
“It’s only an indirect proof, a conclusion to be derived from the cosmological evidence presented by your observer. Actually, I’m not absolutely sure what it proves. If anything. I must consult with some of my colleagues, several of whom are working along similar lines.”
Artistry is my pursuit, perhaps the ultimate pursuit of all worms. But philosophy, and most especially metaphysics, is crucial to the direction of our day-to-day lives. I gather that it is the other way around with you. What a lucky creature you are! I had a rather frightening experienc
e today and I’m still in uneasy self-oscillation over it. I almost got trapped in a ninety-nine percent annihilation volume.
Well, perhaps I exaggerate, but only slightly. It’s hard for us worms to know much about degree of danger. With us, either you’re all right or you’re dead, canceled. The fear of cancellation-death haunts us all our lives, but it’s difficult to really assess the threat. As far as I’m concerned, if I can sense three-quarter wormhole coverage around me, I get a little jumpy and start looking for more spacious volumes. Well, today I got into this area, it must have been at least eighty-two percent canceled, and to make it worse, it was surrounded by impenetrable faces.
Still, even eighty-two percent coverage isn’t absolutely critical, as past statistical surveys have shown, and I was able to plot a direction for my wormhole that skirted a ninety-percent space at one point (that was hairy!) and then spiraled into a beautiful sixty percent volume for as far as the eye could see. (We don’t actually see, of course, but we do have a sense similar to your long-distance binocular vision that permits us to survey territory ahead and around us and to form a three-dimensional impression of it, a sort of moving topological map in our heads which models its hollows and solid areas, and, of course, its crystalline faces if any are present.)
Do enclosed self-annihilation spaces occur on the surface where you live, Robert? Here we’re always on the lookout for critical-width bottlenecks, which permit entry through the bottleneck but no exit, since the exit wormhole would violate the critical distance separating it from the entry wormhole. Sometimes we call them bottlenecks, sometimes box canyons, depending on whether the volume is cylindrical or rectangular. There are various other kinds of traps which occur, and which one must be on guard against. The terrain through which we pass is changing constantly. If only it were constant! We are like those pioneers you told me about, traveling over the great plains in their land-schooners. Only we go through the land, not over it. Sometimes we encounter easy going on what are for us the great plains, other times we face mountains—tumbled and tangled crystalline faces which must be worked around, and sometimes there are hollow volumes that must be skirted, and at other times we find the equivalent of swamp—areas that are not hollow, but which are not sufficiently tenacious to permit us to push a wormhole through without the whole thing collapsing around us. Solid matter is what we usually talk about, but actually, that’s a bit rare. Usually our surroundings are in a state of viscosity, and this viscosity exists in a range between tough, discrete, hard-packed particles on the one hand, so stable as to be considered eternal, and air (or, as we would say, space—because to us the chemical constituents of the gas that makes up hollow spaces is of no concern—the space itself is deadly to us—) and water, another peril, since it will support no worm- hole, or rather, a wormhole will leave no trace in it. Since it is essential to know where you’ve just been in order to know where to go next—the importance of the baseline—a worm in water, try as he will to hew a straight line in hope of reaching shore, will all too often describe a circle, enclosing himself in a course too curved to permit sufficient speed to be built up to go on. And so he dies. It seems to be one of the things that our different species share, the ability to drown.
Divine Intervention Page 12
