...On the Trictahexacontapentational Direction Ungrammar, or the (Ungrammar Locale)

The Tricahexacontapentational Direction Ungrammar is, as we understand it, where we are, and where all things are. However, it also contains where all things are not, and where all things could potentially be, and where nothing could never be, and where things imagine being, and where they would never could possibly be, and all variations of that sort. It contains many different prixiis in which might be located, and all things are touched by the infinite hands of direction. Let us begin with some basic definitions of the concept of the Tricahexacontapentational Direction Ungrammer, otherwise known as (Ungrammar Locale).


Prixis and Prixiis

It must first be noted how all things are measured. All things find themselves upon uncountable prixiis: a spectrum of three points. This word is an evolution to axis, as all things may find themselves not only on the ends or in-between a certain axis, but also abaxile to a certain degree. The prixis method allows an observer to not only recognize how much of one leaning or another a thing might be, but also if it is or isn’t.

As an example, let us take the common idea of a human, one striving and toiling through its days. On the axis of animacy, it is highly animate, and is not abaxile to animacy: and thus its prixis of animacy is defined. A dead human body, of course, would measure highly in inanimacy, the opposite end of the spectrum, and similarly not abaxile to the scale of animacy. The being, soul, or mind of the human, released from body - be it in lucid temporal infinities, or a divinely contractual place of belonging, or within a void as a dormant energy - may be defined differently. The idea of animacy and inanimacy may not fully apply to the being of the human. It is slightly accurate to say that it is as inanimate as it is animate, but also not accurate enough. Thus, it might be half abaxilic, or maybe fully abaxilic, which defines its prixis.

All these parts may be conveniently measured as 0 through 1. Assume, in A:B:C, that A is animacy, B is abaxile to animacy, and C is inanimacy. We may say that a human may be, for simple terms, .90:.01:.09, or 90% animate, 1% abaxile to animacy, and 9% inanimate. A dead human may be .05:.10:.85, and a being of a human may be .05:.90:.05.

Visual representation of animacy prixiis.
Fig.1 {Animacy Prixiis}

It may be noted that this measuring system has some limitations, which make it break from being fully convenient. These prixiis seem to be defined by a set of axiis in practice. This is because the internal prixiis of each are simplified to the form of an axis. This is all which is needed in most situations and most measurements, but there is simple ways to notate distinction further if necessary: simply nesting the prixis notation within itself, inside parenthesis. An example of a particularly notable human, who might strangely be abaxile to abaxileness would be notated as .90:(.01:.03:.01):.05.

Additionally, while the sum of most prixiis should equal one, that is not always the case. As we can see above, certain things may be depicted as having a sum below 1. These are mostly abstractions, but do occasionally happen organically. Such instances may be known as premundane. Some things may have a sum of above one as well, which may be notated just the same. Things which have a sum of above 1 may be known postmundane. Postmundane things typically are interpreted as magical or impossible things by those highly real and highly physical in perceptions. However, if a specific measurement of the notation is above 1, such as a person with an animacy prixis of 2.0:.40:.05, they have a hyperpresence of animacy, and are thus considered abmundane.

It could be noted that premundanity to abmundanity is another prixis in which could be considered, thus having a four-folded cuxis of “Xness: abaxility of Xness: mundanity of Xness: not Xness”. However, this application of cuxiis is typically not necessary in most measurements. The current notation can express the mundanity in a practical and simplified way, with the simple usage of sums and numbers above or below 1.

Visual representation of a cuxis.
Fig.1 {Animacy Cuxis}

Grammars and Ungrammars

Grammars are a set of rules in which things may be understood, and mostly are used in reference to locations. For most common grammars, they are not necessarily written, but instead enforced by one’s raisers, guardians, peers, and other social linkings, at least in the case of personal perception. However, parts of grammars might be gained through intuition, reshaping experiences, musing encounters, and so on.

Grammars do not cover every aspect of a location. As such, many civilizations are built upon grammars which are commonly self-reinforced, which most all people of the civilization can grasp and interact with at some level. The fewer grammars of a location are shared between people, the less they live in the same total location. Two people can be so close to each other by any physical means, but if they happen to exist and perceive vastly differently in different means, they might feel like they live in entirely different realms. The same may be true if they are extremely close in mental means, or in spiritual means, or in temporal means, egoic means, and so on, but still overall differ in most means. As such, a closeness is determined by how close one’s grammars are to each other, and also how close one’s directions are to each other.

As such, ungrammars are things which may not be described by rulings. Due to the nature of the concept, this means that ungrammared things are both the most and the least common of things. In a sense, all is an ungrammar, and nothing is an ungrammar, and very few things in-between. All is ungrammar, as all is infinitely contradictory, and all is unable to fully coexist with itself. In practice, one could and should never be the most animate, the most inanimate, the most abaxile to animacy, and so on. Of course, all is though, as it necessarily contains the most and the least and the abaxilic to any given concept. Likewise, nothing in an ungrammar because in practice, one could never be the least animate, the least inanimate, and the least abaxile to animacy, and so on.


All things have one or more locations, which is defined by an intersection of different directions. One might be on the “up” access to the point of resting upon surface level, and “north” and “west” enough to be within a particular city. Following the prixis of this particular “up”, one might also be above the surface of the planet, or beneath the surface, or so far from the planet as to not have up or down in relation to the surface of the planet mean anything in particular, and everything in-between. However, for every single direction that can be thought of, there are hundreds more. This is the reality of all things, the reality of the Total Where, the reality of the (Ungrammar Locale).

There are many different nestings and spheres of directions. As with the example above, the up/down, north/south, and east/west prixiis all seem to correspond to a singular grouping or sphere. Using these, one can describe most locations within a Grammared Locale. However, if one does not have east or west, one may be advised with the directions of left or right instead, dipping into a different grouping of egoistic directions. These would be things like up/down, in front/behind, above/below, and so on. This simple concept can be applied to a much larger scope, and be able to give exact directions as to where a certain Grammared Locale is.

Let us take a certain city, the metaacata city of Naceweu. Naceweu is located to the east of the mountains, and just south of the coast. It exists on the surface, and exists this year. As such, when we visit this location, we should likely find Naceweu. However, that is not the case. There is nothing but a plain before the shore in its place, and that is because we do not match up with all the different directions that Naceweu intersects. For that, we would need to rotate and shear until we existed on the same degree that Naceweu. For some, this task might seem abstract, or impossible. For others, their grammars of existence equip them to understand it, but know that they cannot rotate in that way. It might be the same feeling that moving up or down the prixis of time might seem impossible. For others still, it would be as simple as any other translation, and they could simply use what organs, limbs, tools, magics, or what have you to simply go to the correct rotation. This direction of rotation is important for locating Naceweu in our particular case.

With the ideas of prixiis, grammars, and directions understood, the different nestings and groupings of grander directions all are given more palpable meaning.

...Grand Directions::2


As rotation was just mentioned in the prior section, we can start with that grand direction. Rotation was something uncovered by the grand Eccentric of Zhasso. Through their grand spells of shearing, the concept of rotation was placed into our grammars. For us, the lic, rotation is understood as something which can be traversed, but requires either specific angled points to be observed which acts as a perceptual/rotation vacuum, or through complex zhasso-based magics. It should be noted that the usage of rotation vacuum angles might be difficult to utilize without the instinct or grammar to know to will to rotate, as otherwise it might just be a fixating point in space with no further use. Without the grammar, it is to stare at a lock, without an idea of what a key even is.

It can be seen that any given thing exists in three-hundred and sixty degrees of perceptiveness. Anything outside one’s own degree or range of degrees is merely not existing, until one rotates to be within the range of degrees in which it exists. Anything at the edges of one’s own range of degrees may seem surreal, dreamlike, and so on, despite potentially still existing in the same state of realness or consciousness that the subject rests in.

As an example, the metaacata may believe that one of the stars in the sky are now missing. However, we can still view it plainly. This is because we remained in the same set of degrees necessary to view that specific star, where as the metaacata rotated to a degree in which the star was not.

Some things do exist abaxially to rotation. For example, the magic theory of zhasso remains regardless of rotation, as so does the concept of rotation, as far as has been observed. The understanding of the two concepts may be void in certain rotations, but they still functionally exist, absolute and fixed regardless of the rotation.


Realness is another notable grand direction. The grammars for realness exist in many cultures, and many can interact with realness in distinct ways like storytelling, kayfabe, deceit, immersion, drugs, hypnosis and dreams, simulation and game, determination and manifestation, and so on. These do effectively allow many cultures some travel into realness or unrealness. However, this is typically not a full-on traversal within the prixis, as most are not equipped with the grammars to delve into pure surreality or most states abaxile to realness. Within some cultures, such as the ones of the lic, there is a focus on trying to find a pursuit abaxile to surreality and reality, something more absolute. For me, {Lic E6nR}, that happens to be recognition, or at least that is what it is right now.

Realness is a difficult direction to pin down, as the concept of realness itself is more surreal than real. Real is anything that can possibly be under one’s own grammars, or one’s society’s grammars, or one’s cosmos’ grammars, depending on where upon the prixis of egoism it sits. As such, surreal things are things which cannot exist under the scope of the grammar. It could be argued in the scope of the Total Where, the (Ungrammar Local), that concepts of all and nothing are both not real, though it might also be argued that they could be half not-real, and half abaxile to the reality of the Total Where.


Ego is the direction of how “self” something is. This is a fairly easier direction to readily grasp, as it is merely the difference between “Me,” “I,” “Us,” and so on. Certain concepts and things only exist within a certain prixile point of egoism. For example, one’s biases, beliefs, musings, and so on only exist close to egoism, and may not be recognized the further from one’s self one becomes. Many cultures have techniques for “looking at the bigger picture,” so to speak, but interestingly these systems and techniques often only exist at an egoistic and individual level, rather than on a broader and collective level.

Let us take the example of people. A person of middling egoistic distance may be someone a person knows, someone a person is friends with, and so on. A person of closer egoistic distance may be someone with a deep bond to a person. Closer still, and they might share many same memories, and are often of a plural consciousness within a body. And closer still, and they are at an egoistic level the same self, and they may not have a distinct view of difference of themself, and themself. Further away from egoism, and it might be someone a person knows little about. Further, and it might be someone - or, often at this point, “something” - that they don’t know exist. Further, and it is someone that they didn’t know could have existed.


Lyr exists in a sort of parallel state to rotation, just as forward/backward and left/right might. However, lyrs are more defined and distinctive from one-another in most cases, and also act similarly to the idea of alternative realms or dimensions. That said, one can be in a different realm, in a different rotation, but still be within the same lyr. We exist within the lyrTotal. The name is fairly misleading, as it is not any more primary or secondary or total or untotal as any other lyr, but is merely the lyr in which our experience and our perception comes from. There exist countless lyrs, though it is difficult for us to travel betwixt them. Lyrs, similarly to rotation, can be visited through the perception of certain angles. However, one may also summon to other lyrs. These rituals depend from lyr to lyr, and mostly depends on a specific lyr to have developed magics, technologies, or general techniques for theoretically summoning things, and for one’s own lyr to have done so parallel by mere chance. While this would be impossibly, incredibly, and unfathomably rare for such an event to happen, it has regardless thanks to the likely trictahexacontapentational nature of these lyrs. These lyrs are called as such as they are the different structural layers of the Spines of the Urchin.

As an example, let us take the lyr associated with the Orange Moon Superstition. To have a 1:0:0 direction in the Orange Moon Superstition lyr, one simply has to be there. To have a 0:0:1, one would have to be at the most opposite lyr. While we don’t know what that could possibly be, we will suggest for the sake of the explanation that lyrTotal exists between those two, and so we might live in lyr .5:0:.5.


The direction of Urchin exists at the very bounds of the grammars I and the rest of the lic have. To paint the picture most clear, say there is a single, spherical mass, in which we may call the Urchin. For every possible point upon this Urchin, extrude a spine which tapers off into nothingness. For every spine, divide its structure into many lyrs. For every lyr, there are many cosmoses, in which there are many universes, in which galaxies, and so on. We have no reason to suspect that there is more than one Urchin, but as all things seem to repeat in nature, we certainly have no reason to suspect that there is any fewer than infinite Urchins.

There have been observed very few instances which things have interacted with Urchins, those few instances being the only ways that we were exposed to the basic concept. However, it can be assumed that one can move around the circumference of an Urchin’s spine, which may be the same system of rotation we use, or might be more of a super-rotation that exists above our own grammars. One could also likely move towards the end or base of any given spine, though what this might be in practice is far abstracted from us. The final way in which one might change direction in relation to an urchin is trans-spinally. This is the only way that we have observed, as it is something enacted by the Advanced and the color-eating gyblyn.

In the case of the Advanced, specific techniques and magics allow them to perceive in a more absolute sense very specific, individually-attuned triangulations. There is very little understanding as to what these triangulations are constructed with, but they seem to only be constructed by pure coincidence. If an Advanced can make out one of these which aligns with themselves in an egoistic way, then they may travel to it at will, so long as the triangulation remains. However, their body itself seems incapable of trans-spinal travel, so strange rituals have been put in place to ensure that they can exist at some physical or real level within a new spine.

In the case of the gyblyn, they happen to travel across their own cosmoses and rotations, hoarding a certain amount of each and every possible color there. Afterwards, they go between all lyrs. One such gyblyn had made their final stop, miraculously, within our own rotation of lyrTotal. After collecting its final colors, it birthed a knife from its chest. At the time, it was assumed it slew itself, but it is now generally more understood that the knife acted as a technique for a gyblyn to likely continue its pursuit of color-feasting in other spines.