It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quantum Mechanics shows there's life after death

page: 4
31
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


thats great and all, and Ive seen enough on the double slit expirements to understand that scientists "believe" they are witnessing a photon jump through both slits, but I still think its a ricochet effect where the photon hits another photon and it "looks" like the same photon goes through both slits, causing the wave interference pattern.

What I really want to know is are they anywhere near actually understanding these multi dimensions?; where in as the "double slit experiment" is so far the only place they have "seen" these dimensions manifest in our observable dimension of reality.

Also, if multiverse is true, then it is actually (infinite-multi-verse) meaning, if there is a dimension where the only difference is you didnt get hit by the car, then there is a dimension where all coke cans are blue, and one where they are all green. That is ASSINE, because EVERYTHING has a variable, meaning, [maybe you woke up this morning, and maybe you didnt. Maybe your breakfast was stale, maybe not. maybe you took a leak before you left your house, maybe not - three seemingly wasted alternate dimensions for the most petty of things]

well for each person < each choice < multi choice (2*2=4)*(4*4=16)*(16*16=256)*(256*256=65536)*(..ad infintum.) right there are 65536 different dimensions where the each possible outcome of the college basketball march madness brackets (the only things that are different in each dimesnion are the outcome of each game - but for each game - Maybe bob bought Dr. pepper, in this dimesnion he bought pepsi.....)

that suggests Each PERSON, OBJECT, EVENT, DAY, PARTICLE..(and so forth beyond super computer caculations)... has millions of dimensions associated with it just so all possiblites can exist. your looking at more dimesnions that there are pieces of sand on all the beaches on all the planets.

I find it FAR more probable, that there are only two dimesnions. -reality - and the EXACT opposite of reality, which is where you go when you are dead, because thats the opposite of being alive.

[edit on 7-12-2009 by drsmooth23]




posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by drsmooth23
 





thats great and all, and Ive seen enough on the double slit expirements to understand that scientists "believe" they are witnessing a photon jump through both slits, but I still think its a ricochet effect where the photon hits another photon and it "looks" like the same photon goes through both slits, causing the wave interference pattern.


You still think?

Think again.

They fire single particles, there is no way they can interfere with another particle.

There is no other explanation than that it goes through both slits, and interferes with itself. the particle is in superposition.

You can "think" what you want, but these are the facts.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by hhcore
and I do believe I have not given a decent example after all. sorry -

[edit on 12/6/2009 by hhcore]

[edit on 12/6/2009 by hhcore]


It makes perfect sense to me as I've got a similar story, or at least similar thoughts on a situation that could have turned out much worse.

Back in April I fell about fifteen feet into a cement stairwell, not tumbling down the stairs, just straight down the tall part. My neighbors house was on fire and I was banging on windows making sure they were awake, it was late like 3am quiet no sirens, nothing.

I was on their back deck and apparently a section of railing had been cut away for remodeling, I didn't notice. One second I'm banging on windows the next I wake up twisted like a pretzel at the bottom, my back on the lowest part and my legs going up the steps. I should have been destroyed or at the very least a broken bone or two, I got up and walked it off, now I was sore for a few weeks but that was it.

A few days later I told a friend jokingly, I thought it sounded cool at the time, that I really died that night and my consciousness hitched a ride on the next dimensions version of me. We merged and the good intentions/karma of me trying to warn a family of a house fire cancels out some of the bad stuff next dimension me was doing, one version of me was dead but another me got a little better for it.

I don't necessarily believe that but the OP and especially your reply reminded me of the conversation, interesting topic.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRepublic
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


exactly. energy can be neither created nor destroyed. matter is just energy trapped in form.


Consciousness can neither be created nor destroyed.

A Simple Quantum Experiment You Can Do At Home.

Take three pieces of polarized plastic (old sunglasses will do)

Rotate two of them until they are dark when looked through. Now place a third piece between the two. They suddenly get light. Why???????
Called the Einstein Podansky Effect?



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
reply to post by drsmooth23
 





thats great and all, and Ive seen enough on the double slit expirements to understand that scientists "believe" they are witnessing a photon jump through both slits, but I still think its a ricochet effect where the photon hits another photon and it "looks" like the same photon goes through both slits, causing the wave interference pattern.


You still think?

Think again.

They fire single particles, there is no way they can interfere with another particle.

There is no other explanation than that it goes through both slits, and interferes with itself. the particle is in superposition.

You can "think" what you want, but these are the facts.


They aren't set in stone 'facts', none of science is, so please discern the difference when arguing a point. Current *belief* is as you state, but all speculation as to the causation of the phenomena are equally valid until we discover more about the nature of said phenomena. Blind belief in current science is just as idiotic as blind belief in some idealized 'supernatural' world, which would inherently be natural to reality if it truly existed.

People really need to learn how to throw around these seemingly big words they don't know how to use themselves.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRokkyy

Originally posted by TheRepublic
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


exactly. energy can be neither created nor destroyed. matter is just energy trapped in form.


Consciousness can neither be created nor destroyed.

A Simple Quantum Experiment You Can Do At Home.

Take three pieces of polarized plastic (old sunglasses will do)

Rotate two of them until they are dark when looked through. Now place a third piece between the two. They suddenly get light. Why???????
Called the Einstein Podansky Effect?


I wouldn't go so far as to simply state in such a matter of factual manner that consciousness can neither be creator nor destroyed unless your willing, able and ready to put forth all knowledge of consciousness that will *ever* be known both now and in the future in which to make such bold statements. Have you studied neurology, biology, chemistry, AI, electrical engineering, or anything that would have any slight remote possibility of giving rise to a conscious sentient being naturally?

I can't even wrap my head around the polarized sun glasses analogy... Your obviously screwing around, stop it. It is not funny.

[EDIT TO ADD]

Just wanted to mention that you had left out that the EPR is not so much an effect, but a paradox that shouldn't exist. A paradox is an indication that our maths and understandings of the inner mechanics behind reality are *wrong*, not that the EPR paradox has some 'magical' implications to consciousness. Ugh...

[edit on 7-12-2009 by sirnex]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
This sounds like hitting the Hyperspace button on Asteroids. You survive, but you don't know where or how long.

If you could go forward to some other place, and then come back to the previous place, without losing awareness, then people would see you as a devil that had died and returned. They'd kill you if you didn't quickly get away. How crazy would that be? They'd kill you, and then you would just pop up again! Like a mushroom!



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
This is not science fiction, it's well known science.


It really looks like a piece of pseudo-science demagoguery to me. That's about the only way I can put it.

If death is "quantum", so is flatulence in your stomach. Let's open a thread on that, and don't forget the "entanglement".



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
This is not science fiction, it's well known science.


It really looks like a piece of pseudo-science demagoguery to me. That's about the only way I can put it.

If death is "quantum", so is flatulence in your stomach. Let's open a thread on that, and don't forget the "entanglement".


LMAO, the fart puffs are entangled to the beans growing in Ecuador. Every time we fart it's because a bean was eaten by some Ecuadorian kid! Always wondered where my farts came from, thanks for the enlightenment!



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


Seriously i dont think you have all the facts heres a link to a quantum consciousness. I am not saying that when you die you will live on in another form of energy. I already posted what I believe on page 2

www.quantumconsciousness.org...



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
To the OP: Quantum Mechanics makes no such assumptions about life and death, so perhaps you should not use your own agenda to bastardize the science itself. It's amazing how twisted and ridiculous the "new age" philosophies try to use science to prove the supernatural, but it's a gross misinterpretation.

[edit on 7-12-2009 by DisappearCompletely]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by DisappearCompletely
 


If it's a gross interpretation, tell me where I'm wrong.

Skeptics will always use hyperbole over evidence.

It reminds me of a quote from Alfred Russel Wallace who was a spiritualist and biologist that worked on natural selection.


I thus learnt my first great lesson in the inquiry into these obscure fields of knowledge, never to accept the disbelief of men or their accusations of imposture or of imbecility, as of any weight when opposed to the repeated observation of facts by other men, admittedly sane and honest. The whole history of science shows us that whenever the educated and scientific men of any age have denied the facts of other investigators on a priori grounds of absurdity or impossibility, the deniers have always been wrong.


If it's a "gross" misinterpretation than provide some counter evidence.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by loner007
reply to post by sirnex
 


Seriously i dont think you have all the facts heres a link to a quantum consciousness. I am not saying that when you die you will live on in another form of energy. I already posted what I believe on page 2

www.quantumconsciousness.org...


I never made it to page two due to the drivel on page one. I checked out the link, but all I saw was pure speculation, not any facts. Well, the one fact that was present and factually stated was that we don't know how accurate consciousness perceives the external world. Despite this obvious fact of not knowing due to our just starting to study the mechanics of what consciousness is doesn't really add any value to any amount of speculation. Not knowing is not evidence of anything else, not knowing something doesn't make something else a fact at all, far from it.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 



Skeptics will always use hyperbole over evidence.


And the biased narrow minded folks will always state science agrees with them without citing sources to prove their case from the get go. Then if ever asked for such sources, those with common sense are met with a brick wall set up along with a plethora of cop out BS tactics that state "it's just something you have to understand".


If it's a "gross" misinterpretation than provide some counter evidence.


Let's try a different tactic called, not shifting burden of proof. You've made a particularly bold claim in regards to QM and Entanglement and their implications towards the mechanism of what consciousness is and how it works, cite your sources. Put up or shut up.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


Oh did I mention also Roger Penrose has helped build this idea. You do know roger Penrose???? HE is mentioned and here is a link to tthe overview page in case u didnt read it
www.quantumconsciousness.org...



spent twenty years studying how computer-like structures called microtubules inside neurons and other cells could process information related to consciousness. But when I read The emperor’s new mind by Sir Roger Penrose in 1991 I realized that consciousness may be a specific process on the edge between the quantum and classical worlds. Roger and I teamed up to develop a theory of consciousness based on quantum computation in microtubules within neurons. Roger’s mechanism for an objective threshold for quantum state reduction connects us to the most basic, “funda-mental” level of the universe at the Planck scale, and is called objective reduction (OR). Our suggestion for biological feedback to microtubule quantum states is orchestration (Orch), hence our model is called orchestrated objective reduction, Orch OR.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by loner007]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by loner007
 



Oh did I mention also Roger Penrose has helped build this idea. You do know roger Penrose???? HE is mentioned and here is a link to tthe overview page in case u didnt read it


I read that part and yes I do know who Roger Penrose is. I wouldn't be so quick to use appeal to authority tactics when discussing speculated subjects with me. My stance on things at this moment is to take the *honest* route and simply state that I don't know how the universe works nor does anyone else as no one has ever explored *every single facet and aspect* of our universe and reality.

But hey, if others wish to be so bold and arrogant in pushing their speculations forward as facts, i can't stop that, but I can respectfully ask that when discussing such speculations with me that we maintain a more intelligent forum of discussion and a lot of honesty as I would expect you to wish the same from me.

I don't attack other people's ideas as I am open to the possibility, but I do get turned off from those possibilities when they are prematurely pushed forward as ultimate absolute truths and facts or discussed in such manners. Arrogant ignorance is not a trait I strive for nor do I have any shred of respect for those who do strive for it themselves.

Point of the matter is, the entire article is just speculation devoid of tangible fact. There is no way around that and to restate, I won't accept appeal to authority based arguments if that was what you were alluding to in regards to Mr. Penrose.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Matter is just a phantasm. There's no scientific evidence that matter exists.

First we have to look at black hole entropy. To me, this is an amazing discovery. It tells us that information about matter in the universe is not found in it's volume but a 2D surface area. So your shadow contains more information about you then your 3D body.


Black hole entropy is the entropy carried by a black hole.

If black holes carried no entropy, it would be possible to violate the second law of thermodynamics by throwing mass into the black hole. The only way to satisfy the second law is to admit that the black holes have entropy whose increase more than compensates for the decrease of the entropy carried by the object that was swallowed.

Starting from theorems proved by Stephen Hawking, Jacob Bekenstein conjectured that the black hole entropy was proportional to the area of its event horizon divided by the Planck area. Later, Stephen Hawking showed that black holes emit thermal Hawking radiation corresponding to a certain temperature (Hawking temperature). Using the thermodynamic relationship between energy, temperature and entropy, Hawking was able to confirm Bekenstein's conjecture and fix the constant of proportionality at 1/4:

The black hole entropy is proportional to its area A. The fact that the black hole entropy is also the maximal entropy that can be squeezed within a fixed volume was the main observation that led to the holographic principle. The subscript BH either stands for "black hole" or "Bekenstein-Hawking".


Secondly, matter is mostly empty space.


Surprisingly, matter is composed almost entirely of empty space. To understand why this is so, one first has to know a little bit about atoms.
All matter is made up of very tiny units called atoms. How small are atoms? They are much too small to be seen, even with a microscope. Generally speaking, atoms have a radius on the order of 1/10^10 meters. That means that there are many more atoms in your little finger than there are people on the entire planet.

It was once thought that atoms were solid bits of matter. But, in 1910, Sir Rutherford and two of his students, Mardsen and Geiger, discovered that most of the matter in an atom is condensed at its center, in the nucleus. In fact, more than 99.9 percent of all matter is packed into the nucleus. Nuclei are composed of subatomic particles called protons and neutrons. Measurements done with particle accelerators have shown that the radius of nuclei is about 1/10^15 meters.

The other well known subatomic particles, the electrons, swarm around the nuclei at relatively great distances. It is the swarming action of electrons, and the associated electromagnetic forces, that determines how closely atoms can be packed. Between the electrons and the nucleus there is mostly empty space.


www.pa.msu.edu...

Here's a recent article from New Scientist.

It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations


Matter is built on flaky foundations. Physicists have now confirmed that the apparently substantial stuff is actually no more than fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.


www.newscientist.com...

What quantum mechanics and information theory tells us is there can't be anything like death because life is a product of decoherence. We are under the illusion of seperation from the whole.

Reality is virtual, so at death you just transition into another state.

For instance, me and a friend were on the highway years ago. We slid on some black ice and we crashed into the railing pretty hard. There's a reality where we went through the railings and died. I no longer exist in this universe, but I exist in the universe where we survived.

This is what quantum mechanics tells us. The problem is, people try to look at these parallel realities as material universes. There not, they are virtual realities.

Science has not shown that anything dies. Everything is just transformed from one state into the next. Science also hasn't shown that matter has an objective existence.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 





This is what quantum mechanics tells us. The problem is, people try to look at these parallel realities as material universes. There not, they are virtual realities.


No you are wrong.. They ARE physical...

Not for you tho! ; )

That is the point, but the OP is about "life" after death...

Both words are missunderstud.. for a start we do not know what life is, and we do not know what happens when you die.

Both are "idilogicaly nusences"

more so death

life we can prove as fact as we are here to observe it.

Get a clue
x



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 



Matter is just a phantasm. There's no scientific evidence that matter exists.

First we have to look at black hole entropy. To me, this is an amazing discovery. It tells us that information about matter in the universe is not found in it's volume but a 2D surface area. So your shadow contains more information about you then your 3D body.


The truly amazing thing about black holes is that... they may not even exist and at first *only* existed as mathematical constructs. Still today there are a few competing theories that are capable of describing similar effects seen from assumed observed 'black holes' without the seemingly physics defying feats that black holes are capable of. The first model of black holes were infinitely collapsing sense singularities, and if I'm not mistaken this concept has been thrown out and now black holes are something else entirely. The other amazing thing in regards to so called information trapped in black holes is, it's essentially useless. Couldn't even use it as a proper descriptor for all other objects observed in the universe.


Here's a recent article from New Scientist.

It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

Matter is built on flaky foundations. Physicists have now confirmed that the apparently substantial stuff is actually no more than fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.


www.newscientist.com...

What quantum mechanics and information theory tells us is there can't be anything like death because life is a product of decoherence. We are under the illusion of seperation from the whole.

Reality is virtual, so at death you just transition into another state.


You need to research virtual particles a little more. Yes, I could quickly and easily explain why your usage of these fluctuations is wrong for your argument, but I personally believe in personal accountability. It's your job to maintain an intelligent and informed mind, not mine.


For instance, me and a friend were on the highway years ago. We slid on some black ice and we crashed into the railing pretty hard. There's a reality where we went through the railings and died. I no longer exist in this universe, but I exist in the universe where we survived.


The multiple reality aspect of QM is but one of many interpretations of QM and no interpretation has thus far been proven to be more valid than any other. To utilize *one* interpretation regardless of others is simply infantile argumentation.


This is what quantum mechanics tells us. The problem is, people try to look at these parallel realities as material universes. There not, they are virtual realities.


OK, so you've personally done the experiments and maths to 'prove' this? How arrogant to make an empty claim that equally implies the scientists who first concocted this particular interpretation had ended up getting it all wrong while your woefully correct.


Science has not shown that anything dies. Everything is just transformed from one state into the next. Science also hasn't shown that matter has an objective existence.


Nor have you shown the contrary to be any more true. Yet at the same time you would love to use science to prove your case. Your a blatant hypocrite. Ridiculousness abounds on ATS.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 





The truly amazing thing about black holes is that... they may not even exist and at first *only* existed as mathematical constructs. Still today there are a few competing theories that are capable of describing similar effects seen from assumed observed 'black holes' without the seemingly physics defying feats that black holes are capable of. The first model of black holes were infinitely collapsing sense singularities, and if I'm not mistaken this concept has been thrown out and now black holes are something else entirely. The other amazing thing in regards to so called information trapped in black holes is, it's essentially useless. Couldn't even use it as a proper descriptor for all other objects observed in the universe.


and that is a bull$ statement if i ever seen one.

Why? because you assume based on OLD math.. and let me point out why ROBIN as you did call me BATMAN correct?

here is your first bs comment




The truly amazing thing about black holes is that... they may not even exist and at first *only* existed as mathematical constructs


yet you have no grasp of math.




Still today there are a few competing theories that are capable of describing similar effects seen from assumed observed 'black holes' without the seemingly physics defying feats that black holes are capable of.


This comment alone makes no sens
read it again...




The first model of black holes were infinitely collapsing sense singularities, and if I'm not mistaken this concept has been thrown out and now black holes are something else entirely.


Please provide links to this.. and Also do not controdict your self with the use of the word "MODEL".




The other amazing thing in regards to so called information trapped in black holes is, it's essentially useless.


This again shows your lack of understanding...

You are a TROLL..

every single post i have read is full of BS just to make you look like you have any idea what you are talking about.

care to debate me on this topic? If not then go on to BTS and please leave the adults alone.

Or go and read some books..

And if you think im being stuck up like im smarter than you?

I AM

"KISS KISS"



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join