a thing of beauty is a joy forever

Silence.

 

What?!

 

Silence and perhaps inaction.

 

But how is it possible?

 

Because the weight of things interconnected with myriad other things means it’s almost impossible to make a mark or achieve anything by doing something or other.

 

Don’t be absurd. History of full of people doing things and achieving incredible results.

 

Isn’t it just.

 

Which proves you wrong.

 

Does it?

 

Well if you have any logic then yes, it does.

 

All it proves is that people have done incredible things, but they all happen within history, and history, if you don’t mind me saying, continues the same as always, from one murderous war to the next, from disease and famine through a brief interlude to more of the same.

 

But you can’t blame the heroes for that – the ones who nobly fought to bring about change. They shone a light and showed humanity that we can do better – we can rise above our shallow, petty-minded natures and start a new chapter in humanity – if only each of us will accept that we are all endowed with nobility and heroic attributes.

 

Sounds great Masha, but in practice it’s totally unworkable.

 

But why?

 

Because you can’t push on a string.

 

I beg your pardon?

 

Try it, if you like.

 

Try what?

 

To push on a string. You won’t get far.

 

But what’s that got to do with anything?

 

Because of mathematics.

 

What?

 

Because you can’t really affect things by doing, or even saying, things.

 

Of course you can! You can build a house or a bridge, you can make clothes or computers, you can invent the wheel or a time machine... There's so much you can do when you apply yourself. That's why we've come so far already.

 

Ah, we left behind the Neanderthals and all but destroyed the planet.

 

Yes, we've damaged the planet horribly, but we also created beautiful poetry, music and art, not to mention gardens full of wonderfully cultivated plants, and farms stocked with animals we’ve bred for generations. It goes on and on, Tom. You shouldn't dismiss the astonishing achievements of humanity.

 

Indubitably, Masha, but these achievements are nothing compared to what we have sacrificed and what we could have achieved if we’d better balanced the 1 of action with the zero of non.

 

Non what?

 

Hey nonny nonny!

 

Have you nothing more intelligent to say?

 

Ok, Masha, my apologies – I’ll be more serious: the zero of non-action.

 

Non-action – as in inaction?

 

Well, there’s a subtle difference, isn’t there?

 

I wouldn’t know, Tom, is there?

 

Yes. Inaction is a bit like the failure to act because of uncertainty, laziness or prevarication – whereas non-action is a confident, positive um…

 

A positive um? You got me there.

 

Sorry – it’s difficult putting it into words.

 

I wonder why that would be?

 

Either because my theory is abstract or nonsensical…

 

Well, I’m not holding my breath, Tom.

 

Or… because language itself is part of the doing and acting mania.

 

Nonsense – people spend their whole lives talking and not getting anything done.

 

There’s that, Masha, I must admit – but this is more a case of language’s inability to express the beauty and power of zero, of non or the positive, pregnant pause.

 

Me thinks you underrate language, Tom.

 

You might be right, Masha.

 

There’s poetry, for instance, which can do all kinds of things straight-forward prose struggles to.

 

Yes. Touché.

 

But if you expect me to believe your hypothesis – that not doing is equal to doing – that things can just magically sort themselves out – then good luck to you, Tom. I’d like to see you try – poetry or prose.

 

Ah – the false dichotomy, is it?

 

I beg your pardon?

 

The either-or logical fallacy.

 

What on earth are you on about?

 

You said poetry or prose – as if these are the only two ways I can persuade you that non-action is more powerful than action.

 

Well how else are you going to do so – by blowing your nose?

 

Ha ha, very funny.

 

Seriously. Do you think there’s an alternative?

 

There’s always an alternative – or to be precise – multiple alternatives.

 

Like what?

 

I don’t know, really. I could paint a picture, couldn’t I.

 

To prove a hypothesis? Possibly – but I’m deeply sceptical.

 

I could make a movie.

 

How likely is that? You’re going to make a whole movie just to prove a point which basically makes no sense.

 

Ah – but there we disagree, Masha. It makes perfect sense when you embrace the power of non-action. Besides, it’s becoming ridiculously easy to make movies with the AI engines now freely available.

 

Ok – you have a point – you could theoretically make a movie – but wouldn’t that disprove your hypothesis by requiring not-inconsiderable action?

 

Yes, you’re absolutely right my dear logical lady love.

 

Er… less of that, please.

 

So, if my theory’s correct – I should be able to prove it using little or no action whatsoever. Things should just fall into place in a matter of time.

 

In which case, your theory might be renamed the theory of infinite patience – because most people don’t have the time or the patience to wait for things to rearrange themselves – we’re always cutting to the chase, speeding up production times or even watching videos at double speed.

 

Yes. An age of hasty – racing towards the abyss. But don’t worry Masha – this isn’t going to take long.

 

No?

 

No, in fact the proof is already in the pudding.

 

It is?

 

Yes.

 

How’s that?

 

Because my silence, my zero is not, in fact, the passive inaction you assumed it was.

 

So you say.

 

Real change, real action cannot happen in time.

 

So you say.

 

Because time is where things are merely shuffled around – with nothing changing fundamentally.

 

So you’re saying that nothing has changed in our world – that we’re where we were hundreds or thousands of years ago?

 

No, not at all.

 

Then I fail to see how…

 

Correct. Let me help. Newton’s third law.

 

Er…

 

For every action, or force, in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction.

 

And?

 

Meaning it’s a zero-sum game.

 

But that’s not what we see in reality, is it?

 

No, which means there’s clearly more to reality than what we see, or what we’re currently aware of.

 

Does it, Tom? Perhaps this is just the false premise fallacy.

 

The what?

 

An argument based on an incorrect or unsupported assumption, rendering the argument logically unsound.

 

Trying to beat me at my own game, I see! Well done, Masha.

 

Well, it isn’t so very difficult to be clever, is it?

 

You’re absolutely right, my love.

 

?! Do you have to resort to sexual harassment, Tom? I expected better of you?

 

Sexual harassment? Are you serious?

 

Well, you’ve twice referred to me as “your love”, which you have no right to do.

 

Ah that. I see what you mean, but here you’re hoisted by your own petard.

 

You what?

 

You yourself acknowledged I could use poetry to prove my hypothesis.

 

And?

 

And that’s exactly what I did.

 

No you didn’t.

 

Didn’t I? Why do you have to assume so intransigently that I’m being prosaic and literal when I switch into verse and addressed you poetically?

 

Because there was no poem. Just a little demeaning sexual harassment.

 

Ah, but poetry doesn’t have to be any particular length – dear Masha. If I switch to the poetic mode, even if only for two or three words – that is legitimate.

 

So you’re giving yourself the right to address any woman as “your love” just because you claim it’s poetic?

 

No.

 

Then what?

 

I was opening zero – creating a space, a pause, and to do that I used micro-poetry.

 

Oh, so now it’s “micro-poetry” is it?

 

Yes, why not?

 

How about “micro-harassment”, Tom?

 

Well you see, Masha, you can’t have your cake and eat it.

 

Oh really?

 

Yes, you can’t ask me to demonstrate the power of silence, the power of zero – without allowing me to open a portal into the aforementioned.

 

And the only way for you to do so is by treating me as a sexual object?

 

A sexual object? Poems throughout the ages have been more often than not addressed to a “love” or “lover” – real or imaginary – it matters little or matters not.

 

Well, they were poets and poems – whereas this was a regular conversation. You never indicated you were switching to poetry so I was perfectly justified in taking it personally.

 

Good.

 

Good?

 

Yes, now you see the difficulty we have effecting real or meaningful change in a world where things are bound up, through the medium of a person’s mind, his or her emotions, his or her ego, his or her feelings, his or her beliefs and assumptions – a whole tapestry of interwoven strands. We are all vulnerable and aware of the need to defend ourselves from change or imposition – as any change is going to affect or impose on someone else.

 

But there are people who bring about change intelligently, creatively, beautifully so that everyone is happy and willing to embrace it.

 

Yes, I agree. But still, speaking fundamentally, the problem of the poem – of shifting into another mode is revealing, is it not?

 

No, Tom, it’s not. It merely reveals that you’re an insensitive male chauvinist.

 

Ah, but suspend your disbelief for a moment – supposing I really was opening up a portal – into silence or zero – and to do that I referred poetically, not sexually, to love – then…

 

Then what did you achieve?

 

Ah – the pudding.

 

Yes. The pudding.

 

Have you noticed the passage of time? – while we were chatting about nothing much.

 

Well, yes, of course I did. We’ve been chatting for ten or fifteen minutes, have we not.

 

You’d think so, wouldn’t you. What about them?

 

Them?

 

The people who are party to this discussion.

 

What people, Tom?

 

There are always people, Gods or spirits party to any discussion no matter where you are.

 

Really?

 

Absolutely. Such is the nature of consciousness. It cannot, does not happen in a vacuum – or if it does, the vacuum has the need or the ability to keep itself under constant observation.

 

And why is that?

 

Quantum physics, dear Masha.

 

Quantum physics?

 

Without constant observation – nothing happens – even if it apparently did or does.

 

Huh?

 

Without observation by a third party – it’s all just pie in the sky, or dream, you might say.

 

It is?

 

No substance whatsoever – so no traction whatsoever. The wheels spin but the car cannot, does not move forwards.

 

So there has to be observation?

 

Yes, and observation is never entirely neutral, is it, dear Mary.

 

You’re being poetic, Tom, are you?

 

Yes, my love.

 

I wish you wouldn’t.

 

I know, but somehow or other I have to keep the gates of poetry ajar – and the safest or easiest way to do so is

 

Sexual harassment.

 

Well, this is the modern age – is it not – an age of things and matter – where faery and alchemy and mythical creatures have all been consigned to the nursery – because love has been relegated to procreation and sexual identity.

 

Er… what else do you expect – if you’re being realistic?

 

Realistically I expect nothing else. It is what it is – but speaking poetically I care not in the least – for love is the force which embraces, encapsulates and activates the quantum field, where things can and do happen outside time, outside space, outside the endless push and shove of matter.

 

Oh really! Who ever heard such nonsense. Ask any scientist who knows about the quantum field whether love is a factor – if you want to see an expression of amused bewilderment or derision.

 

Ask a scientist? How many of your scientists are able to access the quantum field directly?

 

Don’t be ridiculous, Tom! No one is able to access the quantum field directly – it exists at the sub-atomic level – not at the scale of human beings.

 

Not if you are unable to tunnel from prose to poetry – entering the zero equals one state of quantum indeterminacy.

 

Well Tom – I have to say – you are persistent and determined, if nothing else.

 

Well Masha – it’s been fun. But like I said, the proof is in the pudding.

 

Fat chance of that, Tom.

 

Fat chance, my lady love.

 

 

Masha winces, then turns to go out. Something strange is going on. Something she can’t quite put her finger on. She glances back at Tom to see if he’s feeling the same thing – but astonishingly he’s no longer there.

 

What the… where’d he go?

 

Numbers, numbers all around – Masha is shocked to find that she’s now able to see what looks like the green descending digits of the matrix.

 

No way… this can’t be!

 

She rubs her eyes and will the numbers away. They upset her – something inside doesn’t want to know they’re there – doesn’t want to believe it could be true – doesn’t want to see what she’s just seen. To her relief they recede. They’re barely perceptible – barely – but there’s still a trace – a hint – a sense of impermanence in the walls and objects surrounding her – that they could at any moment be mathematically rubbed out or deleted.

 

Against her will something poetic inside rises up – she looks at a boring thing – a machine – I won’t say what – it really doesn’t matter – a machine that makes her mind feel tired and bored – as if it has an energy that saps the joy, saps the will to dance and live and know – and without wondering how – without wondering why – she looks at it from the other side – sensing different numbers – sensing an opposite force – an opposite thing – and now the machine is a rose – a rose is what she now sees – details flood in in real time – a rose bush – a garden – the thing is now a source of delight and joy – poetry – and she’s dancing around it like a child – feeling love, feeling joy – feeling relieved that the quantum field, or whatever this is – has no material constraints.

 

Masha – that was incredible.

 

Oh – Tom. I didn’t know you were…

 

So beautiful. Thanks for showing me that.

 

I – really don’t know what came over me.

 

Not to worry, my love, tis no matter.

 

I… ok.

 

They part. The poem – if poem it be – reverberates in the halls of third party observer minds – if halls there be – and the matrix shrugs – returning to its usual grip on things – adding ones interminably.

 

 

1=0ve

 

testing Mr Edwards' sanity

 

Yes, infinity is problematic. One of the problems is that it doesn’t fit into one reality.

 

Er… how do you mean?

 

Well, 3D reality for all its faults presents a unified operational platform. You can run your “me” avatar without needing to fly off into other worlds or dimensions.

 

And in your case that isn’t possible?

 

Sadly, no, it isn’t. A momentary glitch as the matrix screen freezes revealing…

 

So, practically, what does this mean?

 

It means that other becomes a major and persistent factor in my experiences.

 

Well, I still don’t see what the problem is.

 

Other is a bit like Carl Jung’s shadow or Sigmund Freud’s id. While you’re in 3D it can be fairly comfortably suppressed and ignored, for most people at least. 3D is designed for that.

 

But in your case?

 

But in my case that’s no longer an option. The other is a bit like junk DNA, which is only junk until you start expanding beyond the limitations of 3D reality and suddenly there’s way more of you than you hitherto realised.

 

Oh.

 

Yes, well whether it’s the chicken or the egg that comes first – either you have to start getting familiar with the suppressed shadow or id because other can’t be handled exclusively by the regular, sanitized 3D version of me, or infinity starts stirring in your timbers, making you painfully aware of other parts of yourself which don’t seem to fit into regular space-time

 

You mean 3D?

 

Yes, I suppose so. Whichever it is, you find yourself balancing with one leg in 3D and another in contact with other frames which are beyond your ken, which disrupt your ability to process logically.

 

In what way?

 

They’re outside any thing you’ve ever lucidly experienced, behold: a Nokia telephone seems to grow fuzzy and morph into a canyon, then a plimsoll, next a series of feelings and intentions being experienced by penguins intent on exploring the Horse Shoe Nebula therefore they are almost impossible to perceive or comprehend.

 

Oh. So you can’t see them?

 

Not really, no. They mostly filtered out, to preserve one’s sanity.

 

Then how do you know they’re there?

 

Good question, Mike. At first, you don’t.

 

So it could all be imaginary?

 

Absolutely, except that experiencing the other makes it clear that the original 3D you started with is absurdly limited and incomplete.

 

Oh! How can you be so sure?

 

Because, all of a sudden you’re coming into contact with things that start to solve real life problems and empower you.

 

How do you mean?

 

Like if you were sick.

 

Go on.

 

Well, every phenomenon – even sickness – has a kind of hyperlink attached which you can follow if you’re willing to get the bottom of it.

 

Really?

 

Absolutely.

 

So what does it entail?

 

You follow the link.

 

And?

 

And it takes you to the root cause, or one of the root causes of what you’re experiencing in 3D as “sickness”, or a physical problem with your car, your central heating, or your finances.

 

And?

 

And that root cause isn’t, cannot be in 3D reality.

 

No.

 

Why not?

 

Because in 3D you’re dealing with a closed system – an encapsulation, a physical representation of something incomprehensibly vast and complicated.

 

Really?

 

Yes, and the encapsulation can’t really be fixed in the very system or frequency band which is responsible for maintaining your encapsulation.

 

Oh.

 

To fix the imbalance you need to go to the full, unpackaged version of yourself – which exists across a number of different dimensions.

 

Really?

 

Really.

 

And this can be done?

 

Naturally – if you’re willing, or able, to handle the disorienting effects of infinity.

 

You say “disorienting” but what exactly do you mean?

 

I say what I mean. There are all these other frequency bands or dimensions in which parts of you exist – which need to be visited and experienced from time to time if you’re to keep evolving and reintegrating. The only problem being that they may contradict or undermine the 3D core component of what you are or who you be.

 

And that wouldn’t be a good thing, would it?

 

You’re dead right, as Mary says.

 

Mary – who’s she?

 

My mother.

 

Oh – you have a mother, do you?

 

Ha – and what do you think I am – not to have a mother?

 

I don’t know, Ed, I never thought it through – it’s just

 

What?

 

I don’t know how to express it.

 

Spit it out, Mike.

 

It’s just you never quite seem human – more like an overgrown child with a bit of bird and tree thrown in.

 

Excellent answer, Mike.

 

Thanks bro.

 

And why is that, do you think?

 

Why is what?

 

That I don’t quite seem human.

 

I don’t know… It’s a feeling. It’s visceral. But I never really joined the dots together – not when I’m able to see and touch you – you see, Ed, it’s a contradiction.

 

At this precise moment the number cloud streaming down Ed and Mike’s mind displays are almost perfectly matched, synchronically.

 

Right. Well, that’s what happens when you start giving more and more time and attention to the other.

 

You mean you turn into an alien?

 

Yes and no.

 

Er…

 

You turn into a version of yourself which reflects the greater reality – the bigger me – not because you’re trying to be clever or powerful.

 

No?

 

No, that would be a recipe for disaster.

 

It would? How so?

 

Infinity is vast and bewildering. It takes no prisoners.

 

Yikes!

 

Precisely.

 

Then how do you handle it safely?

 

At first, at least, you only proceed to visit other frequencies by invitation – as and when the need arises.

 

Like when?

 

Like when you’re sick – or feeling an insurmountable inner-barrier.

Ah. So instead of going to the doctor, is it?

 

Yes, look at the screen Mike. The easy vertical flow of green digits becomes arrhythmic, hinting at darker, deeper patches, other currents welling up, trying to push their way through. Suddenly one of those starts transmitting a pirate signal on part of the screen, images n’sounds from another world inducing a sensation of nausea, of vertigo. Ed allows himself to pulse with this arrhythmia, and the two appear to harmonise and equalise.

 

Yes. Instead of going to the doctor you follow the hyperlink and find yourself here – for instance.

 

Here?

 

Yes. Here in this dialogue we’re already outside the 3D frequency band.

 

No Way – I’d never have guessed.

 

Well, it is a continuum, after all. Outside the window, descending numbers that in 3D would indicate rocks and plants in a Mexican desert appear to be  exploring human form, playing chess on a bench by the pool, with a glass of beer and smoking contentedly.

 

It’s just – when you referred to other dimensions or frequency bands – I imagined they were distinct and recognizable.

 

They can be – but until you’ve built up your experience base and started consciously engaging other, yourself, you’re going to find it hard to discern one from other.

 

Ah. So I could be outside the matrix but not even see it?

 

Yes, because the matrix has a little stretch and leeway. It might give you a headache or make you feel a bit drunk; you might even forget it afterwards as without activating the id’s other you wouldn’t have the energy to hold that frequency as a memory.

 

Oh my!

 

So it would be consigned to the dream or junk DNA folder, wouldn’t it?

 

Yes, I suppose so. But go on – I want to know what it’s like for you?

 

What what’s like?

 

Visiting other frequency bands.

 

It’s just like visiting any place you might go to.

 

But these places are outside 3D reality.

 

Correct, but once you follow the hyperlink and start to work with your id – 3D becomes porous at the same time your certainties about reality and your Self become more and more equivocal.

 

Oh! So you stop knowing who you are?

 

I’m not sure if that’s what I meant to say.

 

Then what?

 

It might be the reverse.

 

How do you mean?

 

You might start knowing better and better who you are.

 

But you said your certainties about reality and Self become more and more equivocal.

 

Weird, isn’t it?

 

You’re telling me, Ed, but try to explain yourself a bit clearer if you can.

 

Well, you can no longer see yourself as x or y – as this or that – because you realise that you’re part of something infinitely larger – not just part in the abstract sense

 

No?

 

No, you’re part of everything in a more physical sense.

 

How do you mean?

 

It is I am.

 

It is – I am?

 

That’s right. Infinity, like a mobius strip loops over, and now your on the side of who I am, experiencing the self version of things; and now you’re able to experience the what side of things.

 

The what side?

 

Well yes – as far as infinity is concerned – it’s a continuum. It’s like a ribbon that passes through you and every thing.

 

So you start imagining you’re a chair, do you?

 

You’re being slightly reductive, Mike.

 

I’m trying to understand.

 

Yes, I see that, but I was trying to explain how your certainties about reality and self become more equivocal. A chair is a chair and I am me, but supposing I was sick and needed to experience something in a far flung part of my underlying Self – I might return, if I complete the healing process successfully, now able to feel how there’s a kind of energy connection between myself and everything else – chair included.

 

All because you were sick?

 

Well, it’s almost like sickness in reverse, in fact.

 

How do you mean?

 

Because the 3D state of mind and awareness is, frankly speaking, pathological.

 

What?

 

You see things as being disconnected whereas in fact – at the quantum level – it’s much more of a oneness – a pulsating wave form or a unity field.

 

So you say, Ed, so you say – but who’s to say that you’re not the one that’s losing his marbles?

 

Yes, indeed, there’s that.

 

How can you be sure that you’re not becoming enslaved by your id – made to see yourself as an extension of inanimate things – turning your back on basic humanity – given to us by God.

 

Yes, Mike, there’s always the concern that we might be wrong, isn’t there?

 

Yes, but I have the entirety of human civilization on my side to back me up and tell me that I’m not a chair, and that humans are conscious and other things are not.

 

Yes, Mike, you do.

 

Whereas you might be sinking into the morass of pathological relativity – where you just become an extension or an attribute of everything else – your so-called continuum.

 

Excellent criticism, Mike. I shall certainly do my utmost to test for this pathology.

 

But you don’t seem to be too concerned, Ed. That’s what’s worrying me.

 

Like I said, Mike, one’s certainties about reality and Self become more and more equivocal, or perhaps refined – but that doesn’t mean I entirely lose, or lost, my sense of self – nor that I can survive entirely without a sense of self. Each time I venture beyond the Pale – into the other – it’s in a real sense, a battle for survival, on the one hand, but on the other it’s a battle for self-knowledge – stripping away the clichés and gross assumptions, and coming to a deeper awareness of who or what underlies the 3D version of me.

 

But you yourself admit there’s a what component.

 

As you do too, Mike, for you have a body and a mind that requires a functional brain – do you not – in the same way you have and require a house, a bank account, a phone, a job etc – all whats – all parts or extensions of yourself – without which you cannot survive in this wonderful world of thingliness.

 

Oh.

 

I don’t do away with the things by going deeper into self-realisation, I merely refine my relationship to them, insisting no longer that they are merely extraneous, discovering and allowing that they are in some respects fundamental to me, a relationship that extends to the very core of my being.

 

It is I am?

 

That’s right.

 

But to what purpose all these niceties?

 

To what purpose?

 

Yes.

 

To health.

 

To health?

 

Yes, whenever I get sick or old once more unto the breach I go, once more to the dark and foreboding id to continue my studies, to vacate temporarily my iddish certainties and allow the numbers to prime their squares, parenthetically.

 

Ah, you’re a perpetual student?

 

By necessity, Mike, by necessity.

 

Because there’s no other way to keep healthy?

 

Absolutely. The 3D that seems to serve and satisfy most people, for some reason doesn’t work for me. I’m too aware of other and the need to experience myself in other frequency bands.

 

And?

 

And doing so I discover that infinity takes me back to the drawing board again and again, overturning one assumption after another, compelling me to find, to feel once again the unity which beggars belief.

 

I beg your pardon?

 

Well, think about it Mike, it's one thing to talk about underlying unity, quite another to feel and experience it directly.

 

What's so difficult about unity?

 

Nothing, once you harmonise with id.

 

I don't see why I have to go that far. I have no difficulty accepting or believing in some kind of fundamental unity. “All is one” – there, that's a wonderful affirmation, is it not?

 

Is it not, indeed, and yet affirming unity when you are still divided is an exercise in self-deception. It can only go so far.

 

I don’t see why.

 

No, but your body does, and when you're sick you’re brought back down to earth with a thud, or a crash.

 

Well, sickness is natural, isn't it? I don't see how it undermines my belief in unity, or why my belief in unity makes me have to see myself and a chair as one and the same, essentially.

 

Correct, Mike. From your perspective everything you are saying is perfectly reasonable and I have no desire to disabuse you of this position. In 3D reality, unity is a wonderful abstraction which can and often does help individuals to grow deeper in their understanding of beauty, truth or even spirituality.

 

Well, I’m glad we agree on that.

 

Outside or beyond 3D, unity is no longer an abstraction.

 

No?

 

It becomes a practical necessity, without which you cannot advance one single iota.

 

Oh

 

It is – I am, like it or not, agree or disagree, without this fundamental basis it is impossible to integrate all which lies beyond sight, beyond our awareness of the 3D mind, the 3D me.

 

Oh, you do love to overdramatize things, Ed. With you it's always do or die, there's no compromise, no middle ground. Try not to be so rigid and doctrinaire.

 

This is truly excellent advice Mike, but when once again I find myself at the breach, experiencing something rather close to death, the abyss all around. I have to go back to the drawing board of commonality; I have to take all that I am, all that is on the table top of my existence and watch what infinity is showing me.

 

Ah, now I begin to see…

 

You do?

 

You are anthropomorphising infinity, treating it as a god or teacher, when in fact you are merely encountering different aspects of yourself. It's a mild form of schizophrenia. We must nip it in the bud before it takes control of you.

 

Not exactly schizophrenia, Mike, though you're on the right track.

 

Huh?

 

All of us are to a greater or lesser extent divided. “I was in two minds” – you hear people say, do you not?

 

You can't seriously want to deny that you are treating infinity anthropomorphically?

 

No, Mike, I cannot deny there is truth in that, but there is truth in the opposite, no less.

 

In what?

 

In the fact that you treat things as if they are merely things, devoid of mind or consciousness.

 

 

Well, I hardly see how your can expect it to be otherwise.

 

Correct, dear Mike. In 3D reality other is marginalised to the point of non-existence, as is infinity itself. If I treat it as a presence or a being, that is because any it, no matter what, no matter which, is to a greater or lesser extent part of presence or being. But this only starts making sense when you go through the somewhat fraught process of meeting the id and starting to reconcile the unreconcilable.

 

Poppycock, Ed!

 

In any case, Mike, these things only become relevant or important if and when you are no longer able to operate within the bounds of 3D.

 

Well, I and 99.9% of humanity Ed, seem to be doing fine within these “bounds”, as you call them.

 

True.

 

So I think I'll just agree to disagree and wish you the very best.

 

Excellent, Mike, that's the sign of a mature and intelligent thinker. It’s so nice to be able to have a friendly conversation without offending one another, though our views are diametrically opposed.

 

They shake hands, and Mike pulls out his phone.

-          Did you hear all that?

-          Yes.

-          Are they in place?

-          Affirmative.

 

A squad of medics are waiting nearby. As Ed strolls down the leafy boulevard towards them, one of them calls out – Mr Edwards?

Ed looks their way but seems to look through them.

-          Away with the fairies, mutters the medic. Could you come with us please, Mr Edwards. We’re here to provide mandatory medical assistance.

-          Yes, of course. Ed answers in a strangely slow, calm, composed drawl, like he’s from the deep south.

He seems completely focussed on a point behind the four medics and walks towards it. The medics assume he’s coming to them but suddenly they notice that they’re no longer in the same spatial frame as Ed, that he’s walking straight through them until his image fades away leaving a lingering bowl of fruit and a bunch of petunias.

-          Bloody hell, what was that?

-          I dunno…  Me neither…  Er…  Nonplussed.

Mike gazing at the scene incredulously feels a tugging at his heart, as if his old school friend, Ed, just took a part of him to infinity, as if a wine glass had just appeared in front of the LED display, twisting the green numbers streaming down, introducing a much-needed splash of equivocation.

 

 

0=1

certainly