Eureka: A Prose Poem — Edgar A. Poe, 1848 — reading text

plainly inevitable annihilation of at least the material Universe. The willing into being the primordial particle, has com pleted the act, or more properly the conception, of Creation. We now proceed to the ultimate purpose for which we are to suppose the Particle created — that is to say, the ultimate purpose so far as our considerations yet enable us to see it — the constitution of the Universe from it, the Particle. This constitution has been effected by forcing the ori ginally and therefore normally One into the abnormal con dition of Many. An action of this character implies reac tion. A diffusion from Unity, under the conditions, involves THE UNIVERSE. 31 a tendency to return into Unity — a tendency ineradicable until satisfied. But on these points I will speak more fully hereafter. The assumption of absolute Unity in the primordial Particle includes that of infinite divisibility. Let us con ceive the Particle, then, to be only not totally exhausted by diffusion into Space. From the one Particle, as a centre, let us suppose to be irradiated spherically — in all directions — to immeasurable but still to definite distances in the pre viously vacant space — a certain inexpressibly great yet limited number of unimaginably yet not infinitely minute atoms. Now, of these atoms, thus diffused, or upon diffusion, what conditions are we permitted — not to assume, but to infer, from consideration as well of their source as of the character of the design apparent in their diffusion ? Unity being their source, and difference from Unity the character of the design manifested in their diffusion, we are warranted in supposing this character to be at least generally pre served throughout the design, and to form a portion of the design itself : — that is to say, we shall be warranted in con ceiving continual differences at all points from the uniquity and simplicity of the origin. But, for these reasons, shall we be justified in imagining the atoms heterogeneous, dis similar, unequal, and inequidistant ? More explicitly — are we to consider no two atoms as, at their diffusion, of the same nature, or of the same form, or of the same size ? — and, after fulfilment of their diffusion into Space, is absolute inequidistance, each from each, to be understood of all of them ? In such arrangement, under such conditions, we 32 EUREKA. most easily and immediately comprehend the subsequent most feasible carrying out to completion of any such design as that which I have suggested — the design of variety out of unity — diversity out of sameness — heterogeneity out of homogeneity — complexity out of simplicity — in a word, the utmost possible multiplicity of relation out of the emphatic ally irrelative One. Undoubtedly, therefore, we should be warranted in assuming all that has been mentioned, but for the reflection, first, that supererogation is not presumable of any Divine Act ; and, secondly, that the object supposed in view, appears as feasible when some of the conditions in question are dispensed with, in the beginning, as when all are understood immediately to exist. I mean to say that some are involved in the rest, or so instantaneous a consequence of them as to make the distinction inappre ciable. Difference of size, for example, will at once be brought about through the tendency of one atom to a second, in preference to a third, on account of particular inequidistance ; which is to be comprehended as particular inequidistances between centres of quantity, in neighboring atoms of different form — a matter not at all interfering with the generally-equable distribution of the atoms. Dif ference of kind, too, is easily conceived to be merely a result of differences in size and form, taken more or less conjointly : — in fact, since the Unity of the Particle Proper implies absolute homogeneity, we cannot imagine the atoms, at their diffusion, differing in kind, without imagining, at the same time, a special exercise of the Divine Will, at the emission of each atom, for the purpose of effecting, in each, a change of its essential nature : — so fantastic an idea is THE U'NIVEiRSE. 33 the less to be indulged, as the object proposed is seen to be thoroughly attainable withgut such minute and elaborate interposition. We perceive, therefore, upon the whole, that it would be supererogatory, and consequently unphilo- sophical, to predicate of the atoms, in view of their pur poses, any thing more than difference of form at their dis persion, with particular inequidistance after it — all other differences arising at once out of these, in the very first processes of mass-constitution : — We thus establish the Universe on a purely geometrical basis. Of course, it is by no means necessary to assume absolute difference, even of form, among all the atoms irradiated — any more than abso lute particular inequidistance of each from each. We are required to conceive merely that no neighboring atoms are of similar form — no atoms which can ever approximate, until their inevitable reunition at the end. Although the immediate and perpetual tendency of the disunited atoms to return into their normal Unity, is im plied, as I have said, in their abnormal diffusion ; still it is clear that this tendency will be without consequence — a tendency and no more — until the diffusive energy, in ceas ing to be exerted, shall leave it, the tendency, free to seek its satisfaction. The Divine Act, however, being consid ered as determinate, and discontinued on fulfilment of the diffusion, we understand, at once, a reaction — in other words, a satisfiable tendency of the disunited atoms to re turn into One. But the diffusive energy being withdrawn, and the re action having commenced in furtherance of the ultimate design — that of the utmost possible Relation — this design is 34 EUREKA. now in danger of being frustrated, in detail, by reason of that very tendency to return \\thich is to effect its accom plishment in general. Multiplicity is the object ; but there is nothing to prevent proximate atoms, from lapsing at once, through the now satisfiable tendency — before the fulfilment of any ends proposed in multiplicity — into absolute oneness among themselves : — there is nothing to impede the aggre gation of various unique masses, at various points of space : — in other words, nothing to interfere with the accumu lation of various masses, each absolutely One. » For the effectual and thorough completion of the gene ral design, we thus see the necessity for a repulsion of limited capacity — a separative something which, on with drawal of the diffusive Volition, shall at the same time allow the approach, and forbid the junction, of the atoms ; suffering them infinitely to approximate, while denying them positive contact ; in a word, having the power — up to a certain epoch — of preventing their coalition, but no ability to interfere with their coalescence in any respect or degree. The repulsion, already considered as so peculiarly limited in other regards, must be understood, let me repeat, as having power to prevent absolute coalition, only up to a certain epoch. Unless we are to conceive that the appetite for Unity among the atoms is doomed to be satisfied never ; — unless we are to conceive that what had a beginning is to have no end — a conception which cannot really be entertained, however much we may talk or dream of enter taining it — we are forced to conclude that the repulsive influence imagined, will, finally — under pressure of the Uni- tendency collectively applied, but never and in no degree THE UNIVERSE. 35 until, on fulfilment of the Divine purposes, such collective application shall be naturally made — yield to a force which, at that ultimate epoch, shall be the superior force precisely to the extent required, and thus permit the universal subsi dence into the inevitable, because original and therefore normal, One. — The conditions here to be reconciled are difficult indeed : — we cannot even comprehend the possibi lity of their conciliation ; — nevertheless, the apparent im possibility is brilliantly suggestive. That the repulsive something actually exists, we see. Man neither employs, nor knows, a force sufficient to bring two atoms into contact. This is but the well-established proposition of the impenetrability of matter. All Experi ment proves — all Philosophy admits it. The design of the repulsion — the necessity for its existence — I have endea vored to show ; but from all attempt at investigating its nature have religiously abstained ; this on account of an intuitive conviction that the principle at issue is strictly spiritual — lies in a recess impervious to our present under standing — lies involved in a consideration of what now — in our human state — is not to be considered — in a con sideration of Spirit in itself. I feel, in a word, that here the God has interposed, and here only, because here and here only the knot demanded the interposition of the God. In fact, while the tendency of the diffused atoms to return into Unity, will be recognized, at once, as the prin ciple of the Newtonian Gravity, what I have spoken of as a repulsive influence prescribing limits to the (immediate) satisfaction of the tendency, will be understood as that which we have been in the practice of designating now as 36 EUREKA. heat, now as magnetism, now as electricity; displaying our ignorance of its awful character in the vacillation of the phraseology with which we endeavor to circum scribe it. Calling it, merely for the moment, electricity, we know that all experimental analysis of electricity has given, as an ultimate result, the principle, or seeming principle, hetero geneity. Only where things differ is electricity apparent ; and it is presumable that they never differ where it is not developed at least, if not apparent. Now, this result is in the fullest keeping with that which I have reached unem- pirically. The design of the repulsive influence I have maintained to be that of preventing immediate Unity among the diffused atoms ; and these atoms are represented as different each from each. Difference is their character — their essentiality — just as no-difference was the essentiality of their source. When we say, then, that an attempt to bring any two of these