As we saw above, Herbart argues that from the instant at which a and b “collide” in consciousness, to the point of static equilibrium, a period of time must elapse. While at \(t_0\), the oppositional forces are at a maximum,[44] at \(t_1\) they will already have dimmed each other to an extent; at \(t_2\) this dimming will have progressed even further; etc. Herbart symbolizes the combined amount of the dimmed portion of a and b with “\(\sigma\)”.[45]  Hence we can see that as time passes and a and b progressively inhibit each other, \(S_n\), the load-to-be-distributed, continuously diminishes: this is what Herbart means by saying that the inhibition sum falls. And as \(S_n\) falls, \(\sigma\) increases, that is, the inhibited amount of a and b increases since they are taking on as a load a portion of \(S_n\). He notes, moreover, that as \(S_n\) falls—i.e., the forces’ conflicting activity decreases—the inhibitory pressure they exert also decreases (SW V: 339, e.g.). Hence, the rate of inhibition and dimming decreases over time as well. The situation can be summarized thus: at first a and b stand in maximal conflict, leading to rapid absorption of these forces in the form of dimming; hence, as the active forces decrease, the rate of dimming also decreases, as a and b jostle ever more slowly into equilibrium around the static point (cf. Felsch 1904: 196). As Felsch writes, “the billowing sea is becalmed but by and by” (Felsch 1904: 195).