Quantum Mechanics shows there's life after death

reply to post by Astyanax


Your really stinking up the thread with your bloviating.

If you want to debate the opposing view then bring some counter evidence and information to the table. There's nothing wrong with a good debate. But it's obvious that your a troll and you don't have a clue.

You keep talking about fiddlesticks and poppeycock and you look silly.

So stop pointing to other threads and try debating the issue.

If you can't debate the issue go and find someone from one of those other threads that can and ask him/her to come to this thread.

Throughout this thread people have presented evidence to support their claims.

Now your coming into the thread making these declarations based on fiddlesticks and your delusion that everyone will just scrap the evidence because of your religious zeal to ignorance makes no sense.

Seo either debate the evidence that has been presented throughout the thread or go and find someone who understands these things that can debate the issue because you obviously can't.

reply to post by Matrix Rising


Thanks for link, looks interesting , will view all later, very long.


'Darkness within darkness, the gateway to all mystery.'





Peace

reply to post by Point of No Return

No, I'm South Asian. I posted a reply to the OP, and then replied to his anwer. You stuck your rude finger into that conversation, entirely off topic, and I responded in kind. Defending myself against insult is not trolling.

But never mind. You've admitted you were telling porkies about the Einstein quote, everyone on this thread now knows exactly how seriously to take you, and that's that.

* * *

reply to post by loner007

Still can't show me where any of your links say that quantum mechanics shows there's life after death, can you?

My work here is done.

reply to post by Astyanax


welcome to my ignore list i cant be bothered to try and explain things to you the complications if u havent the mental capacity to work things out for yourself then i pity you but i really cant be bothered with your snide remarks.

reply to post by itstheendoftheworldaswekn


Yeah it's pretty long but it's full of good info.

Here's another video with Radin that's shorter and it's good also.

www.vidoemo.com...

Have you guys read My Big Toe by Thomas Campbell? It's the best theory I've ever seen, explains everything (TOE theory of everything), and absolutely makes complete sense. Amazing information on the non physical, consciousness, the virtual reality that we live in, and a lot more.

Originally posted by spacemanjupiter
Have you guys read My Big Toe by Thomas Campbell? It's the best theory I've ever seen, explains everything (TOE theory of everything), and absolutely makes complete sense. Amazing information on the non physical, consciousness, the virtual reality that we live in, and a lot more.

nope i havent and did a search and found his webpage. Tbh I think this guy is just a sensatioinist i read his page and couldnt actually find anything about what he was going on about. He talks much but dosent share it on his webpage you have to buy the book. When a scientist does this he is in it for the money and most likely dosent deliver in his book. As I cant read the book I cant say. Other scientists if they have a theory they will share it or at least give you fundamental insights into why the theory pans out but this guy gives you nothing unless you buy his book.......

reply to post by spacemanjupiter


Dr. Thomas Campbell and his Big Toe is pretty interesting.

If you want to check out a lecture of his there's one one youtube.
www.youtube.com...

It's broken down into 18 parts.

He's basically saying that a theory of everything entails metaphysics, physics and consciousness.

He's saying some of the same things that are being said on this thread.

He's see's the physical world (matter) as a subset of of the non physical (consciousness).

Thanks for the info.

reply to post by loner007

hey geez i said in a previous post for ppl to read these links ...you havent so stop saying this is all fiddlesticks just because you havent the intellectual capacity for learning

Reading something and exclaiming, "oh wow now that sounds cool, it must be true!" is not an intellectual capacity to learn nor even to comprehend the given text.

I was actually quiet intrigued with the last link given by you: link

I noticed something interesting stated in the article that struck me as a bit odd and perhaps more of a sensationalist attitude rather than a real hard proven fact.

Before I get to this, however, I’d like you to conduct a short experiment. While looking at your feet, stomp on the ground. You will notice that your visual perception of your foot hitting the floor matches your sensation of touching it. This would be fine except for one thing: the speed of light is vastly faster than the conduction times and synaptic delays through the long nerves and spinal cord from your feet. As a result, you should be seeing the event before you feel it – and the delay should be noticeable.

At first, I wasn't sure about the accuracy of this statement, and I personally was of the opinion that it was highly suspect and inaccurate. I personally don't know many people who are aware of less than a seconds worth of experience to the point of consciously noticing such an occurrence. So I did a bit of sleuthing on the interwebs and discovered a few key points that disprove that website's statement.

While it's true that light itself does travel very fast, once that light hits the retina it's now bound by the speed of the neural connections that control each system. For example, the 'speed of touch' 1processing is 76.2m/s whereas the eye's process at two different speeds. 2

So, in reality, it really is no real surprise as the article attempts to speculate on as to why we don't see the foot tap down before we feel it and why both appear to occur at the same instant. At least this is how I interpret the data and this is how it appears to myself. After researching it a little more this seemingly "mysterious" oddity doesn't appear so at odds at all.

Now that my friend is what we call an intellectual capacity to learn something. If you want to take any old statement made at face value through appeal to authority arguments screaming, "See, look at what this guy said!" then you haven't a clue how to learn properly.

@Matrix,

Your a complete poser, your replies to me make absolutely no sense because despite the links discussing not only what your trying to say *to a point*, but they also include what I have said, even to the point where I quoted the articles. Your either being an intentional imbecile or you have a learning disability. I can not reply to your points in debate, because previous attempt to do so was met with infantile idiotry and I simply can't handle such an immature level of discussion. You can go on continue believing that QM agrees with you and keep pretending the articles explicitly state exactly what your stating here, point of fact is, your a liar and I hate liars. We've read the articles, none give the explicit conclusion of life after death and this is only *your* assertion. If you want to call honest people trolls, then fine. You can only truly learn if your willing to learn, and your just to damn arrogant to bother trying. You have a wonderful day!

reply to post by sirnex


Well at least I got your attention on something. Now what about this link
Is Quantum Mechanics Controlling Your Thoughts?

Within the bacterial proteins, dancing electrons make seemingly impossible leaps and appear to inhabit multiple places at once. Louis have discovered the driving engine of a key step in photosynthesis, the process by which plants and some microorganisms convert water, carbon dioxide, and sunlight into oxygen and carbohydrates. More efficient by far in its ability to convert energy than any operation devised by man, this cascade helps drive almost all life on earth. Remarkably, photosynthesis appears to derive its ferocious efficiency not from the familiar physical laws that govern the visible world but from the seemingly exotic rules of quantum mechanics, the physics of the subatomic world. Somehow, in every green plant or photosynthetic bacterium, the two disparate realms of physics not only meet but mesh harmoniously. Welcome to the strange new world of quantum biology

HEres another link this site explains the implications of quantum if it is the building block of all life..
www.energygrid.com...

[edit on 11-12-2009 by loner007]

reply to post by loner007


To be absolutely honest, I personally think the research itself is way young to proclaim with absolute certainty that consciousness survives death. Let's consider the quoted text, it has nothing to say about consciousness nor can we even equate photosynthesis even from a quantum mechanical standpoint in relation to the human mind. From a quantum mechanical aspect, the two systems operate upon different rule sets. Whatever quantum thing's going on in a leaf are not the same quantum thing's going on in our brains.

Regardless of what the researcher personally speculates about the results isn't proof positive of any statement they wish to make. We've only just started getting around to doing any real research and experimentation with quantum mechanics. From an honesty viewpoint, it's simply to early and arrogant to exclaim an absolute fact from preliminary research. It's like still arrogantly believing the Earth is the center of the universe because all observations showed this to be absolutely true.

I personally can't say whether we survive death or not, but from my readings on these different theories discussed in this thread, the actual physics never explicitly state such a possibility nor does it even appear to be a main goal to discover by science. While it sounds great and all to live on after bodily death, I just don't feel there is enough if any real tangible evidence to support it right now. Yet, I also feel that we need to adhere to Occam's razor when it comes to this. It just appears more complex to survive bodily death than it does to change the state of that body into useful energy by other living entities.

reply to post by sirnex


You said:

Your a complete poser, your replies to me make absolutely no sense because despite the links discussing not only what your trying to say *to a point*, but they also include what I have said, even to the point where I quoted the articles. Your either being an intentional imbecile or you have a learning disability. I can not reply to your points in debate, because previous attempt to do so was met with infantile idiotry and I simply can't handle such an immature level of discussion. You can go on continue believing that QM agrees with you and keep pretending the articles explicitly state exactly what your stating here, point of fact is, your a liar and I hate liars. We've read the articles, none give the explicit conclusion of life after death and this is only *your* assertion. If you want to call honest people trolls, then fine. You can only truly learn if your willing to learn, and your just to damn arrogant to bother trying. You have a wonderful day!

Translation:

I searched for something to cut and paste to try and refute what you have said. I couldn't find anything but I wanted to get back on the thread and start trolling again.

You have shown that you are a joke that has tried to debate something that you don't understand.

You said:

I can not reply to your points in debate

Of course you can't because your a troll. You probably almost went blind trying to find something to cut and paste from Wiki.

I can't waste any more time with you because you don't have a clue as to what I'm talking about.

So I have to put you on ignore.

I will leave you with a quote from one of your idiotic posts.

Explicitly acknowledge in one of many interpretations. This make's it about as valid as the other interpretations that do not explicitly acknowledge this particular interpretation as none have been proven truer than any others as of yet.

reply to post by sirnex


In a nut shell consciousness is the driving force behind the universe and that the universe is consciousness. For most part most people see the newtonian state of things in other words everything has a space time location ie that tree is over there the planet is up there. The point behind all this is if we want to understand the universe we have to stop thinking in terms of newtonian and think of it as you do with quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is the heart of it all. The universe only comes into existence when the waveform of an particle collapses. For instance when you look at an object is it really there? In quantum you have to realise that it isnt really there but its a construct made up in the brain reciving information and making itself visible when its waveform collapses. also you have to realise is that space and time are only an illusion both dont exist except in the animal mind.
The way I am seeing it is this the animal mind is a conduit for consciousness. Consciousness arises from the quantum level and animal brains are used to make the illusion of space and time which gives us the newtonian universe.

Every particle has a twin thats one of the facts of quantum physics. Our brains are made up of particles. Now the twin particles of those can be scattered throughout the universe but at the quantum lvl theres is no spacetime. So these twin particles which make up your brain are have in a sense made another copy of your mind within the quantum world.....my head is starting to hurt...you beggining to see the picture now?

I really should go more into it but i am tired and my brain hurts. I elborate more later



[edit on 11-12-2009 by loner007]

Originally posted by loner007
reply to post by sirnex

 

In a nut shell consciousness is the driving force behind the universe and that the universe is consciousness. For most part most people see the newtonian state of things in other words everything has a space time location ie that tree is over there the planet is up there. The point behind all this is if we want to understand the universe we have to stop thinking in terms of newtonian and think of it as you do with quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is the heart of it all. The universe only comes into existence when the waveform of an particle collapses. For instance when you look at an object is it really there? In quantum you have to realise that it isnt really there but its a construct made up in the brain reciving information and making itself visible when its waveform collapses. also you have to realise is that space and time are only an illusion both dont exist except in the animal mind.
The way I am seeing it is this the animal mind is a conduit for consciousness. Consciousness arises from the quantum level and animal brains are used to make the illusion of space and time which gives us the newtonian universe.

I really should go more into it but i am tired and my brain hurts. I elborate more later

[edit on 11-12-2009 by loner007]

To be honest, your simply being too arrogant here. It has never been proven how, where or why the universe exists. We still hardly know anything about consciousness itself. I just can't get over this kind of arrogant BS, and them I'm a troll for being honest with you, myself and my endeavors to learn more about reality. You could be right, but point of fact is it hasn't been proven right at this time. So all attempts to discuss the point as an actuality is more of an attempt at arguing idiocy than intelligent thought.

reply to post by sirnex


Well in that case welcome to my ignore list. I cant be arsed with narrow minds like you. the whole point of this thread was to examine the possibility that consciousness arises from quantum. I have given you several links in which science has come to that conclusion and now has a new field called quantum biology and you havent given nothing to this debate. Get lost....

Originally posted by loner007
reply to post by sirnex

 

Well in that case welcome to my ignore list. I cant be arsed with narrow minds like you. the whole point of this thread was to examine the possibility that consciousness arises from quantum. I have given you several links in which science has come to that conclusion and now has a new field called quantum biology and you havent given nothing to this debate. Get lost....

Yes, I'm a narrow minded troll for being honest with myself and with you. Can't quiet figure out what you people have against honesty. If you're examining a possibility, then it should be discussed as a possibility with statements that allude to it being possible rather than statements that exclaim it is absolute. Perhaps I'm a troll because you just don't have the mental acuity to understand simple concepts.

astyanax you are telling people they're wrong without providing information to prove what you're saying. on ATS that is unacceptable. if you would like people to take you seriously you need to make a serious post. telling someone their information is fiddlesticks without providing them any sort of evidence as to why makes you look ignorant and ill informed. whether you are intending to be or not, you are a troll. and the general rule is "dont feed the trolls"

sirnex, i havent bothered reading any of your posts for pages because you have been schooled over and over by countless people in this discussion. name calling is the last resort for a person who is desperate.

aside from that...wonderful thread! thank you to the OP for bringing these ideas into discussion i have known many of these things to be true for years. but obviously no one is going to believe what a single person has to say without some sort of hard evidence and im delighted to learn that science is gaining some momentum in this field of study.

reply to post by devilishlyangelic23

sirnex, i havent bothered reading any of your posts for pages because you have been schooled over and over by countless people in this discussion. name calling is the last resort for a person who is desperate.

Alright, so there we have it. A tool who admits that he can't bother to read someones posts but "thinks" that the person he isn't listening to is being "schooled". Ah damn, I love the lack of intelligence here on ATS. Get off the soap box you poser. No, it's not an insult, it's how *YOU* are acting. Don't dare come into a damn thread, BS me, telling me you can't bother to read a damn post and then try and attempt to say I am being "schooled" here. I fing hate lying little twerps.

Originally posted by devilishlyangelic23
astyanax you are telling people they're wrong without providing information to prove what you're saying. on ATS that is unacceptable.

Welcome to Above Top Secret. The date I became a member of this site is displayed below my avatar in this post, should you care to look. I think I've been here long enough to know what is and what is not acceptable on ATS.

As I have said more than once on this thread, the moment the OP or one of his team members puts up a serious rationale for their position, or the tiniest smidgen of actual evidence to support it, I shall be only too happy to take it up. Meanwhile, since I do know a little about physics, and even a tiny little bit about quantum mechanics, I can safely assert that these people haven't the first idea what they are talking about. They wouldn't know a quantum if it bit them in the seat of the pants.

Believe me, I'm eager to engage them; but I can't wrestle with puffs of gas. There is simply nothing in their proposition but a childishly literal misunderstanding of the Schrödinger's Cat gedankenexperiment and the completely unwarranted and evidently false assumption that quantum effects occur on a macroscopic scale. And even from that godforsaken starting-point they go no further; they haven't even bothered to create a line of reasoning. There's nothing in their position to rebut.

They've been told that over and over again by sirnex and buddhasystem. Look at their responses and decide for yourself who is being honest and sensible, and who is being dishonest and rude.

Oh... I see you already have. And decided wrong. I'm really wasting my breath here, aren't I?

if you would like people to take you seriously you need to make a serious post.

If you would like to read a serious post by me, go to the posts menu on my profile page and have a look around. There's a reason why I, a firm sceptic of all things conspiratorial and supernatural, have lasted this long on ATS.

whether you are intending to be or not, you are a troll.

Thanks. Have a nice day.

[edit on 12/12/09 by Astyanax]

Originally posted by devilishlyangelic23
astyanax you are telling people they're wrong without providing information to prove what you're saying. on ATS that is unacceptable. if you would like people to take you seriously you need to make a serious post. telling someone their information is fiddlesticks without providing them any sort of evidence as to why makes you look ignorant and ill informed. whether you are intending to be or not, you are a troll. and the general rule is "dont feed the trolls"

sirnex, i havent bothered reading any of your posts for pages because you have been schooled over and over by countless people in this discussion. name calling is the last resort for a person who is desperate.

aside from that...wonderful thread! thank you to the OP for bringing these ideas into discussion

i have known many of these things to be true for years. but obviously no one is going to believe what a single person has to say without some sort of hard evidence and im delighted to learn that science is gaining some momentum in this field of study.

Good points,

The problem is they can't debate the issue or they have been lied to and told they are a good debater.They look foolish and their ATS ego is bruised so they lash out.

The point is, there has been a lot of information produced on this thread and a debate is always welcomed. Sadly, we have heard from trolls that are stinking up the thread with mindless bloviating.