|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 25, 2004 9:36:45 GMT -5
It sounds like the problem you are describing is one of those 'can't put my finger on it, but something is wrong' type of problems. More or less... the general premise is intriguing and viable - despite my tendencies to wonder about nutritional value of the plant vs. energy constraints and what would likely be CAM photosynthesis (!?) - but the image jars with that of the 40k universe more so than anything else that has been done in the ASP. Other than some the ideas on enviornmental systems I don't think it actually adds that which is in, as much as possible, keeping with the universe. I'm also uncertain as to the whole idea of STC (and please drop that final 's' from STCS) and the structure that you're pertaining to. I would question the need for that level of population aggregation such that you would actually continue on into the trillions... It just doesn't make a great deal of sense to me. That and some of the concepts with integration into what you see as '40k' also don't work... (Oh yes, and you need to work on presentation and engage the 'ole spell check! ) By dragons you mean 'dead pools', 'eddies' and full on 'warp storms'? No, I didn't mean dead pools. I mean eddies, warp storms, indigenous lifeforms, random 'warp flashes', even the odd daemon... or perhaps Aodiean. More Navigators, a lead Navigator followed by those in 'training' who lock onto the 'flag'. Self-evidently, although that kind of defeats the purpose in the first place does it not. Still think that the 'flag' should be able to lead if adjustments are mirrored in the 'slave' ships with 'modifications' applied by position and predicted warp variation... But that's just me. I just like to offer obvious counter-arguments where possible. Tau aren't the Imperium and do things differently. The Imperial warp engine is the same whether controlled via computer or navigator, it does the same thing, in the same way, at the same speed. I offer up merely an example, you can take with your interpretation what you will of it. Personally speaking I relate 'depth' to a fragmentation of the 'rules' and moving more directly into the 'Realms of Chaos'... So for me it is entirely plausible. In many ways, Navigators plumb deeper depths. numbers have changed again. The significnce of such changes waits to be seen. Again, I don't agree with the black/white nature... but there we go. No, I figure they were the only ones crazy enough and desperate enough to use calculated jumps, and because of this were limited in the range of influence they had. A reasonable suggestion... I'm not going to buy into it, though. Why? Personal preference... same thing that you're using. I thought smugglers would have to use calculated jumps when moving serious contraband to avoid the Navigator being 'tracked'... Note the 'fluff' that the Navigator is not specifically culpable for the cargo that they carry at the behest of another indiviudal assuming that the indiviudal is in no way bound to the House through contractual, or other, arrangements beyond the specific lease of services. Fairly sure that was the suggestion in the 'fluff'... The idea of only the criminals using calculated jumps is, once again, something that I don't like... Pirates in the Imperium? you'd have to be off your rocker to take up such a career. Yes, that is true. I'd be more concerned with the Fleet than the warp, though. Pirates use calculated jumps because not have a Navigator means no Navigator signal (so no tracking once they jump and would be very hard to follow, unless done quickly and by a very skilled Imperial navigator). I now think your beginning to make up something entirely different with reference to the Navigator signal... Doesn't seem quite right. It's preference, baby. I prefer the idea of 'free trade' since it creates the Imperium as an entity other than just something which is supposely imposed but doesn't quite work. With big cargo ships, you could just hire a stasis protected 'load space' and have the benefit of a Navigator jump at a fraction of the cost. Without the freedom or, rather, the illusion of freedom. I'm sure a Navigator House could afford to sub a sector to get a huge cargo line set up, and then maintain the monopoly indefinitely. And with history, the influence of noble houses - not the Navigators - they could also do this outside of the direct influence of the Imperium, but which the Imperium self-evidently influences. The Navigator House would keep a regular line running for all cargo transit, anyone can buy space for a trip (like the big metal containers used in modern shipping, that can be unload straight onto a truck). Again, this ties into your preference to keep Navigators omnipresent in space travel. I prefer not to. I win. Not saying that you don't make congent arguments since the above is going to apply even for non-navigated jumps. The Imperium loves this because the can nose around during the trip and see what be transported, scanning cargo... See above. They need to change quite a bit. I think this idea is at the heart of why the Imperium has a problem with the warp and clamps down so hard. Again, your interpretation. It's kind of like thinking about terminator armour... depending on how many ships needed 'cleaning suits' in the D/GAoT you can have as many as you want, that's assuming you believe the 'fluff' which states that they cannot be made any more. Of course, then you ignore the 'fluff' on automated cleaning systems in favour of the 'cool'... The simple fact is that the 'fluff' on the warp and just what the Imperium knows about it is... questionable. Again, remember the original statement that the eldar were one of the few races that had made the conceptual leaps that provide all the links. You could argue the same point in any universe. Also I revised the jump table, so calculated jumps are just 'shorter' and not so dangerous. That would be good since that is, in essence, the 'fluff'. 1-5 light years for a calculated jump...
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 28, 2004 9:53:34 GMT -5
More or less... the general premise is intriguing and viable - despite my tendencies to wonder about nutritional value of the plant vs. energy constraints and what would likely be CAM photosynthesis (!?) - but the image jars with that of the 40k universe more so than anything else that has been done in the ASP. Other than some the ideas on enviornmental systems I don't think it actually adds that which is in, as much as possible, keeping with the universe. I'm also uncertain as to the whole idea of STC (and please drop that final 's' from STCS) and the structure that you're pertaining to. I would question the need for that level of population aggregation such that you would actually continue on into the trillions... It just doesn't make a great deal of sense to me. I've been working on power plants and getting an idea of power requirements. At the moment they are a little steep, but not impossible. More info in my STC:CS thread. That bad, sorry. Seems fair, but I do think the navigator would encourage the Arbites to have a nose about. Not just criminals. I think powerful individuals who want to sneak about, short trips by dignitaries/ business men. Its like the astropaths tracing ability. I prefer no limited freedom when it comes to the Imperium. Besides they're free to book space and ship stuff. No different from shipping goods to the other side of the world, not every business needs a huge cargo ship, but I think they would like the idea of the shipping firm the use employees good navigators to back up any 'auto pilot'. Yes, but as soon as the navigators turned up they couldn't compete economically over longer distances. Navigators are very important to the Imperium, however they're only 'omnipresent' over larger distances. I have different view on the Adeptus Mechanicus and how much the lie. Jump table now matches this.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 28, 2004 10:19:34 GMT -5
Well, not that bad but rather obvious... You might also check out the spelling of "possession"... Seems fair, but I do think the navigator would encourage the Arbites to have a nose about. Then we're going to disagree on that. The navis nobilite are much like the Inquisition in one regard: they are not a part of the adeptus terra. Not just criminals. I think powerful individuals who want to sneak about, short trips by dignitaries/ business men. So, basically and for the most part, within a subsector which is where the premise of 'calculated jumps' is included... Its like the astropaths tracing ability. Nope. That requires an active component to their abilities... I prefer no limited freedom when it comes to the Imperium. Well, that's a shame. Yes, but as soon as the navigators turned up they couldn't compete economically over longer distances. We're not talking about long distances, though, are we? Calculated jumps are a means by which, for the most part, subsector-based trade exists. They can also be used for trade between subsectors, but those are the type of things that, as you say, they're going to be out-competed on. It's like the difference between jump levels and mains within the Traveller universe. Navigators are very important to the Imperium, however they're only 'omnipresent' over larger distances. Which I've never argued with... or didn't mean to. Darned quotation system when you use it officially doesn't include what I'm replying to at the moment and I only have a few minutes before having to head off to the boring money-earning work. I have different view on the Adeptus Mechanicus and how much the lie. They lie, perhaps? Not sure. Jump table now matches this... Wherever that is...
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Aug 30, 2004 13:47:39 GMT -5
Since Kage mentioned Aoideans, I'm obviously forced to reply to this thread Equally obvious, I'm going to have to side with Kage on more or less everything in this thread. Don't know what else there is for me to say, as I don't really have any cohesive ideas about the warp. That said, I think it would be interesting to have a somewhat cohesive idea, but that we are limited by the nature of the warp itself. Like Kage, I don't believe the warp can be explained with too much science, because it defies science. At least, I think that's what Kage thinks as well. I'm not saying that we should hide behind that fact, and make it into something that can't be understood or that doesn't have any basic principles at all, but.... I digress.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Aug 31, 2004 11:05:37 GMT -5
A more detailed discussing on the nature of the warp can be found here. I'm tying all the universes together into one mega concept. Any input is most welcome.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Aug 31, 2004 18:02:21 GMT -5
Ah, that thread. I will bow out of replying to that since the opening lines of, in essence, "Are the C'tan the new Gods of Law" is something that I find entirely displeasing, unpalatable, tedious or whatever word you wish to insert. As to integrating it into one mega-concept... nah, doesn't work. A bridge of spaghetti, for me. Sorry.
With that said you bring up some valid and interesting points over there. It's just that your addition is, for me, of the lines 1+1=27.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Sept 1, 2004 19:27:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Sept 2, 2004 9:16:47 GMT -5
Slightly more useful though even more relative with reference to 'mod'. On a preference side I really dislike the general approach... It's too much like "Encounter Tables" used in RPG and they're always something that is the first thing, for me, to be thrown out.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Sept 4, 2004 9:41:31 GMT -5
=From the new 4th edition 40K rule book=- Ships must have a navigator.
- All Navigators have the Warp Eye.
- All Navigators are Psykers.
Also Warp travel is 'hazardous in the extreme'. Looking through the new book it gels with my concepts very well (which is a nice surprise). As I said at the very beginning of my time here, my 'concept threads' and ideas are designed specifically for 40K (and not Traveller or any other universe). All my future posts will be based on the new 4 th edition.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Sept 4, 2004 18:32:22 GMT -5
Then, I'm afraid, all your future posts will be ignored. Heck, but then again everyone selects that which they prefer so I cannot really fault you on your selection though it overtly buys into the material aspects of the game... but the exclusion of the older material merely because it happens to buy into your "limited" (as in access) approach to the universe. No, non and no way.
That you cannot see the lattitude and the historical nature of that quote (the one you posted) is, perhaps, more scary than anything else. Of course, I think you can actually see it but are ignoring it.
Revisionism is the way forwards for GW. Fair enough... they're a company who make their profits on constantly revising everything and discluding that which went before. The ASP is not going to do that.
The ASP tries to create a holistic 'product' for the fans, not that which makes money. At this juncture I will have to say that non-ASP discussion focussed exclusively around 4E to the exclusion of 1E, 2E and 3E will be closed and deleted after it has become clear that is what is happening.
I've given a great deal of lattitude to the posts here, especially those that are non-ASP related. As my time decreases rapidly in having to finish PhD, move to States, etc., my patience for "freebies" is wearing a tad on the thin side. I find that I'm spending more time posting to 'concept' posts than on the ASP itself and, indeed, those self same posts as it stands have absolutely no application to ASP except in the form of "free kibitzing"...
I'm more than willing to edit the articles if you want them done to professional standard and to present the ephemeral viewpoint of whatever is materially viable... but that is something I charge for.
For the ASP, therefore, I suggest you begin to take a more holistic approach...
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Sept 4, 2004 20:30:46 GMT -5
This post make more sense in the light of your PM. My posts will be based on 4th edition. I not to sure what you are driving at but to reassure you: I understand where ASP is coming from, and I'm not going to shout people down for not using 4th edition or anything like that. This is all creative stuff (ASP) and therefore good stuff. I like seeing people express their creative side, and I like to encourage it. If anything I have tried to foster conversation, and encourage others in their ideas. Now get off my back and deal with you PhD! ;D
|
|
MvS
Scribe
Posts: 22
|
Post by MvS on Sept 17, 2004 21:16:25 GMT -5
I have no idea how useful/not useful this will be, but I have a slightly more metaphysical view on the Warp that could perhaps have elements balanced with the more 'scientific' topographies that have been suggested. It was originally written as part of the Liber Chaotica series, but was dropped because it was deemed both unsuitable for the particular demographic that those books were intended for, and because it was also a bit verbose (I admit it... ) However, it does try to set out the 'Why' of the existence of the Warp, and starts to look at a 'What' as well. I'll expand on it as time goes by - and if it is deemed in any way relevant to this thread (if not just drop me a note and cut the posts). Oh, and by the way, please ignore any references in the following texts to Warhammer imageries. Just use your imagination and slide the reference across to some 40K personality... +++++++++++++++++ GAZING INTO 'NOTHING' In his work, ‘The Elder Races’, our first Supreme Patriarch, Magister Volans, wrote that for anything to exist, and for Creation to continue as it does, there must exist a balance between all states and forces, and that everything that exists must have its equal opposite. In its simplest terms, this line of reasoning dictates that there must be a positive if there is to be a negative, an up if there is to be a down, and a truth if there is to be a lie. One without the other is either impossible or, at the very least, a short path to entropy. On the face of it, this theory seems to hold as sound in most areas, as the researches and inventions of the great magisters and engineers our Empire seem to have borne out. Indeed, did not the famed engineer and artist, Leonardo of Tilea, once coin the phrase, ‘For every action there must be an equal and opposite reaction’? But how (if at all), can the theory apply to the entirety of existence? Does, and indeed can, the totality of Creation have an equal opposite? In truth, I believe that the very question is a fallacy. I say this because it would be far too simple a thing to follow a seemingly logical progression and state that the opposite of existence ‘must’ therefore be non-existence, or that the opposite of something ‘must’ be nothing. To look a bit closer at ‘nothing’, it is, as a concept (for it is only a concept) fundamentally important to intelligent mortals, in that it can grant meaning and context to our existence and things within our existence. For example, whereas I believe that it might be possible for a creature to be self-aware and be able to say to itself ‘I am’ without possessing any notion of the concept of non-existence, I believe also that this theoretical creature could not understand what the value of existence is, or create meaning or context to existence, if it did not understand the concept of non-existence. As an example, one could argue that ‘now’ only has meaning and context to intelligent beings because we know it is not ‘never’. Perhaps ‘I am here’ only has gravitas because we know that the alternative would to not ‘be’ anywhere – to not exist at all. And yet despite its importance conceptually, if ‘nothing’ is just a concept and not a ‘thing’, can it in fact be the opposite of anything – as is the question of this dissertation? I would argue that it could not. ‘Nothing’ is nothing – non-existence. It does not exist. ‘Nothingness’ is a word used to describe a concept and has no reality beyond being just that – a word to describe a concept. The moment we can point in any particular direction and say ‘that is nothing’, it is a contradiction. For to be able to point at something there must first be ‘something’ to point at – if ‘nothing’ exists as a thing, state or place (or whatever else), then by merit of the fact that it does exist it ceases to be ‘nothing’ and becomes ‘something’. Indeed, one could say that ‘nothing’ is just a qualitative description rather than a state or thing in its own right. So ‘nothingness’ is only a word and a concept, for ‘true’ nothingness would have to be the total absence of any and all existence, and so therefore cannot exist – not as a ‘thing’, nor as a state, nor as a process. So one could say that ‘nothingness’ is a linguistic and conceptual device used to help explain and give meaning to what ‘something’ is, by trying to express what ‘something’ is not. But should the investigation be ended here? If ‘nothingness’ does not exist and cannot be an equal opposite to existence, does this mean that there is no opposite counterbalance to the actuality of existence? Either way, how precisely does this question relate to the existence of the Empyrean and the torments of Chaos?
|
|
MvS
Scribe
Posts: 22
|
Post by MvS on Sept 17, 2004 21:21:59 GMT -5
KEEPING THE BALANCE
If ‘nothingness’ is a word that describes the concept of non-existence, and ‘non-existence’ is only and ever a concept, then ‘nothingness’ does not and cannot exist as anything other than a word and concept. This has led me to the conclusion that existence itself is the only true ‘thing’, the supreme, all encompassing and truly unending totality that has no opposite and comprises of all realised and unrealised states, processes and things, in some form or other. I see existence as not just the physical and measurable aspects of reality, but as the entirety of Creation itself, the ‘Great Balance of All Things’; the one absolute state, the one truly endless and self-fulfilling process, and the one infinite ‘thing’.
Contained within this Great Balance (and bearing in mind that in my model of existence there can be no ‘outside’ of the Great Balance) is all time, all space, all matter, all dimension, all momentum, every mortal and god and daemon, every purpose, every process and every reason, all that is and is not, all that could and shall be, the entirety of the universe, and every layer of actuality, probability, possibility and seeming impossibility.
Yet also within the Great Balance, I believe that a division can be made between all those states, processes and things that have dimension and direction, and are actual, particular, predictable, quantifiable and present, and all those states, processes and things that lack dimension or direction, and are non-actual, non-particular, non-predictable, non-quantifiable or non-present (but still have reality in the sense that they are part of the totality of existence, or perhaps the potential for existence).
To put in a different way, I believe that the Great Balance is divisible into ‘Actual Reality’ and ‘Potential Reality’, the former being that which determines what shall be, and the latter is that which has been already been determined and fully exists.
As I have already discussed, I believe the notion of ‘nothingness’ to be an illogic and a fallacy. However, I believe that the concept of ‘Potential Reality’ lends reason and logic to the question as to what it is that balances out the physical existence, or ‘Actual Reality’ as I shall call it henceforth, and also gives an indication as to what the Empyrean is and why it exists.
In addition to the concept that for anything to exist it requires an equal opposite to balance it out and thereby give it momentum, I believe that there must also be an element, or ‘seed’, of one thing residing within the ‘body’ of its opposite for this balance to work – or that everything in existence needs an element of its opposite as an implicit part of itself, if it is to exist in the first place.
As an example, one could say that the only reason darkness can be recognised is because the state of being in darkness can be compared with the state of being in light, and therefore darkness can be recognised as the absence of light. Or again, heat can be experienced, measured and understood only because cold can also be experienced, measured and understood. In our mortal experience of these two things, one does not exist without the other, and an element of each exists in the other, hence we can understand and experience a sliding scale of ‘hotter’ and ‘colder’ – or, for that matter, ‘lighter’ and ‘darker’.
So indeed, one could say that in every description of a thing lies a seed of its opposite, for without the relativity and existence of ‘coldness’, surely everything would have to be one constant and ‘absolute’ heat from which there would be no variation of hotter or cooler?
This notion is symbolised in the Asur’s representations of their Emperor God, Asuryan. This great deity is supposed to be the keeper of the balance between Order and Chaos, and in Asur religious art he is always depicted as wearing a mask, one side black and the other side white, but with one white eye socket in the black side of the mask, and one black eye socket in the white side of the mask – two seeds in the body of their opposites.
In this sense one could say that Asuryan, besides being the Asur’s most powerful deity, is also their cultural representation of the Great Balance of Existence, in that he contains within himself all that is and is not, all that is real and unreal, both in equal measure and in perfect harmony.
But how does all this reflect back upon the notion of ‘Actual Reality’ and ‘Potential Reality’? I would maintain that ‘Actual Reality’ needs the non-realised possibility of ‘Potential Reality’ to be able to realise itself. For one could say (in admittedly quite simplistic terms) that it is only by merit of the fact that ‘nothing’ cannot exist that ‘something’ therefore must exist, and so although ‘Potential Reality’ is not realised or manifest necessarily, it is also not ‘nothing’ as we would understand the term.
To explain further, I believe that this interrelation between what we have identified as ‘Potential Reality’ and the physical and measurable ‘Actual Reality’ goes far beyond the realms of mere concept. If ‘nothing’ cannot exist, but at the same time the concept of ‘nothingness’ seems so intrinsic to our understanding of existence, then I believe that intelligent mortals can shift the emphasis of ‘nothingness’ away from being the non-existent impossibility that it is conceptually supposed to ‘be’, into what I see as its entirely real and entirely more possible existence as a state of infinite potential – or, indeed, ‘Potential Reality’.
To explore this shift in emphasis further, if there can be no ‘absence of existence’, one could say that something, perhaps anything, must exist. Or indeed, if it can be said that ‘nothing’ is impossible, is that not the same as saying anything is possible, in some way, shape or form? More simply, because ‘nothing’ cannot exist, could one not follow the logic through to say that there is the possibility (however miniscule) for anything and everything to exist, somewhere or somehow?
So indeed, if all things are to have a balancing equal opposite, then I think it better to shift the emphasis of existence’s opposite from non-existence (entirely negative and impossible), to the notion of infinite and unfulfilled potential (entirely positive and possible). For what would be more probable than the impossibility of absolutely nothing? I believe, absolutely anything. So one could continue view the impossibility of ‘nothingness’ as a conceptual fallacy, or one could (I think more accurately) view the impossibility of ‘nothingness’ as the proof of the existence of absolute and infinite potential. Or again, if ‘nothingness’ is impossible, then I believe that existence must therefore be divisible into only that which is actual and that which is potential, not that which is actual and that which is non-existent.
As another example, if one were able to uncreate absolutely everything, all matter, time and all physical and metaphysical dimensions, and even the gods themselves, I do not believe that we would be left with ‘nothing’ (an oxymoron in itself, for how can one be ‘left’ with ‘nothing’?). I believe instead that in the absence of anything else we would be left with the possibility for absolutely anything to exist, or, indeed, quintessential or absolute potential, that would instantaneously realise itself into a new and broiling Creation. There could be, I believe, no possible ‘point’ or ‘state’ of non-existence or nothingness in the sense that the term is commonly understood, because total non-existence is an impossibility – non-existence cannot exist.
So this brings me back to the notion that for the Great Balance to continue, the ‘seed’ of one thing must be present in its opposite. I believe that if the commonly accepted view of ‘nothing’ is a fallacy, and we instead view the impossibility of the total absence of all energy, matter, dimension and time (i.e.: nothingness) as the proof of the existence of quintessential and absolute potential, then I believe it becomes easier to see where the ‘seed’ of ‘nothing’ is in existence, and where the seed of existence is in ‘nothing’.
For if another way of looking at the impossibility of ‘nothingness’ is as the proof of absolute potential, is it not true to say that every single thing that exists is filled with potential? Cannot everything (from time to matter) change, be altered, grow or break down into something else? Is not potential and the possibility for progression and change a fundamental and vital part of existence? Do we, the magisters of the Colleges of Magic, not show by our very existence and practices that anything in the multiverse (as the Asur would call it) can be altered and changed given enough power and ability?
|
|
MvS
Scribe
Posts: 22
|
Post by MvS on Sept 17, 2004 21:22:33 GMT -5
Without Actual Reality there could be no potential for anything to grow, change, break down, or be adapted. There would be no potential and no ‘possibility’. So I would suggest that any attempt to isolate infinite potential (or Potential Reality) from the reality of time and dimension-bound physical reality (or Actual Reality) is a fallacy and moot point, for one is as much part of the other as it is of itself. They are fundamental parts of the same continuum and cannot be separated. One feeds the other and together they form the one Absolute of the Great Balance of existence, and though the Balance is infinitely divisible and eminently changeable, the concept of it, or something else like it, not ‘Being’ is the one true impossibility. Existence simply ‘IS’, and even were it possible for the multiverse as it is now to unravel or collapse in on itself, then I believe it would instantly remake and restructure itself in some way, without any moment of absence – existence will, and must, always exist.
So, if one can see the elements or ‘seeds’ of ‘Potential Reality’ in the physical existence of ‘Actual Reality’ (being the multiverse itself and its contents), is there a ‘tree’ of potential and possibility from which these seeds come? Well, that is what I suspect the Empyrean to be – the state and presence of infinite and boundless potential and possibility, existing as real and limitless forces and not just as words or concepts.
|
|
MvS
Scribe
Posts: 22
|
Post by MvS on Sept 17, 2004 21:23:17 GMT -5
PLACING THE EMPYREAN
The Empyrean; the Immaterium; the Warp; the Aethyr; the Source; the Thesis and Antithesis; the Realm of Chaos; Heaven, Elysium or Hell. Its names are as manifold as the cultures that spawned them, yet the place – if 'place' is even an appropriate term in this context – is always the same. Yet what is the Empyrean, and why and how does it exist? I shall seek to address this very question in the following sections.
I believe existence is the interaction between the ‘realised’ and the ‘unrealised’. I do not view existence as being like a circle divided into one black half and one white half – that, to me, would be like describing the Imperial Palace as just bricks with mortar in between. I see existence as a process not a thing, an interaction between extremes, or, in another way, I see existence as the spinning of that divided circle, so that its surface appears grey and the black and the white cease to exist in their separate constituents. The grey (being my allegory for existence) is a product of the interaction between the extremes of black and white, and it needs in equal measure both the black and the white to exist.
In terms of our existence, I see ‘Actual Reality’ as the white, and ‘Potential Reality’ as the black. They, I believe, are the two opposite states through whose interaction the ‘process’ of existence is made possible. Without potential, ‘Actual Reality’ would be static and timeless matter that could not move or change. Without actual and already existing reality to interact with, there could be no possibility for growth or change and therefore no ‘Potential Reality’. So I believe that time and change are the products of the interaction between actual and potential – and without time and change I do not believe there could exist any life – not mortal and therefore not divine.
For the purposes of my investigation, and in an effort to maintain clarity, I will henceforth use the term ‘Materium’ to denote the entirety of all that is realised and actual within existence (or Actual Reality), and ‘Immaterium’ to denote all that is truly ‘unrealised’ and ‘non-actual’, within existence (or Potential; Reality). I see the latter,(the state and presence of infinite and unfulfilled potential), as the Empyrean itself, and the former as the multiverse, with all its countless measures, laws and facts.
The Immaterium is fundamentally paradoxical, as its existence appears to be in direct contradiction of nearly all that we scholars think we understand about the multiverse. It would perhaps be self-defeating therefore to attempt to explore the Immaterium in terms that were not allegorical and abstract, for, unlike the Materium with its facts and physics, the Immaterium is a state of truth and metaphysics.
I see the Immaterium as infinite potential, a state where absolutely everything (conceivable and otherwise) is a possibility, though not necessarily a probability. ‘Potentiality’ and ‘possibility’ denote anything and everything that may or can be, anything and everything that could and might be done, and any latent thing or state that may happen or come to exist, whether these things are predictable or not. Though it bears remembering that possibility is not probability, and potentiality is not actuality.
Possibility and potential are intrinsic parts of all reality, woven into every single aspect of Materium, from the smallest to the largest, from the inanimate to the animate, and from the pre and non-sensate to the sensate. For indeed, the words ‘possibility’ and ‘potential’ denote something that cannot be seen, touched or measured. They are words used to describe something that is otherwise unquantifiable – whether that is because the things they denote lack any dimension or existence in their own right and are therefore totally immeasurable, or whether it is because they are truly infinite and therefore beyond all measure.
I believe the Immaterium to be the existence, spring and well of all potential and all possibility, and that the very stuff of Chaos, what we have called magic, is quintessential and raw potential. This in itself creates a paradox, as the common perception is that potential and possibility are not ‘things’ as one would commonly understand the term. They could instead be seen as humanity’s recognition and naming of the fact that all things have the potential to be something else (to change or be changed in whatever way) and are in a permanent state of momentum in that they are changing all the time, without end.
For instance, all creatures change and have the potential for change. They eat and therefore add something to themselves. They move, changing their position and location and affect the world around them. They age, and so their bodies and minds change – and these are just some of the physical attributes of change. With intelligence comes the potential to do, perceive or be almost anything. A child could grow into a saint or a tyrant, a poet or a soldier, a happy man or a sad man. Most importantly, there is no final point to this process; everyone and everything is in a constant process of becoming someone and something else.
So ‘potential’ and ‘possibility’ are the names we have given to abstracts that can be theorised about only because of the existence and interaction of observable things and forces. But despite the fact that potential and possibility could be seen as ‘just’ words, with no physical dimension, time, mass, or quantifiable energy of their own, I feel certain that they exist in some other manner within every single part and aspect of the Materium as fundamental catalysts for existence.
But if I am correct in my assumptions, and if, as stated previously, I believe that the Immaterium, is the state and existence of quintessential and infinite potential and possibility, how can the two be reconciled? If potential and possibility have no independent reality outside of the Materium and the perception of intelligent beings within the Materium, this raises the question as to how the Immaterium can be a place at all.
|
|