Is There Life After Death (YES!)

When I died I went to a very joyous and loving place. It was like a tunnel but in 4 dimensions it was more like a mandala that I went to the center of. No light, just a golden feeling. There were others guiding me. I was sent back to do something.

reply to post by WhatAmI


In which case we may as well be truly dead, surely. I sometimes think, if we revert to mindless energy, with no memory and no purpose, what's the point? Nor do I want to be assimilated as in 'the borg.... '.
I do want to believe, but with all the billions and billions of folk that have gone on before, you would think there would have been more evidence other than a few dodgy psychics


[edit on 25-1-2010 by unicorn1]

Very easy to prove that "Life" after "Death" is real scientifically - Follow me here, (1) the human body runs on electricity - every emotion, feeling or idea begins with an electrical impulse - every individual cell of your body is powered by electricity. (2) NO scientist can tell you exactly where that electricity is produced, we can see its effects (pain, thoughts, etc.) but they don't know where its produced or stored. (3) When you "die" that electricity ceases - flat EEG, etc. (4) The Law of Conservation of Energy/Law of Conservation of Matter states that no Energy can be created or destroyed, only changed. Now the question, where does the electrical energy that comprises our "consciousness" go when our physical bodies cease to function? How is that energy "changed"? We know that the energy cannot be destroyed (see 4 above), so what happens to our electrical consciousness? Dr. Deepak Chopra says that looking for this energy, this "soul" or "spirit" inside the body is like taking apart a radio to look for the band that's playing....American Indians believe that your spirit goes to join the "Great Spirit", in my view - given the evidence above - this is probably the closest of any religion from a scientific standpoint. Our Energy goes to re-join the greater energy of the Universe from whence it came - colloquially expressed as the "afterlife", which is kind of a misnomer since our energy was there before our "life" ... following this line of thinking would tend to explain things such as NDE's and the recalling of past lives (reincarnation). Thoughts ?

Right -- there's a difference between individual awareness and pure consciousness. So you can maintain your sense of individual ego after death sort of like a lucid dream. But this lasts only temporarily. Professor Stuart Hameroff says this is because of quantum entanglement -- our spirit is entangled photons -- but they dissipate over time. There is an equation for the photoelectric effect -- the relation of photons turning into electrons. In yoga what enables spirit astral travel is the electromagnetic energy. So the spirit is like a laser of biophotons -- a laser holograph. It's a more intense form of energy that has to be created with the conscious sublimation of electrochemical or etheric emotional energy of the body into electromagnetic energy. So you create first strong electromagnetic or astral energy and that's when enables you to travel to astral realms. But the soul is the holographic photon energy which is connected to your astral body. So depending on how strong the electromagnetic energy is this determines how long your photon entanglement will last.

Energy masters can look inside you and read your past lives and then energy masters can maintain individual awareness of their past lives and as they leave their body and then take on a new body, etc. But the universe as a whole is a huge holograph without any sense of individual ego -- and this is the final truth of spirituality -- which means that the individual ego of the spirit is finally entangled back to its source -- without any emotional etheric or even astral electromagnetic attachment -- it's when the intensity of photon entanglement is so strong that it resonates beyond the previous past lives. Ramana Maharshi focused on this teaching of Advaita Vedanta but in Buddhism it's not considered the final path. In other words in Buddhism and Taoism you use the energy of the body as an impersonal dynamic so there is an eternal recycling of the body's energy as holographic spirit energy as well -- this is the "rainbow body" so that the astral realms are interwoven into the chakras and the whole universe is entangled inside the individual's body.

reply to post by TSZodiac

During my life I've spent about 5 minutes of it deceased. IMHO there is something after death. I think it is scientifficly verifiable and some hospitals are using pictures on high shelves of cardiac patients, pictures that could only be seen if your floating. But I believe not just because of an experience but because of Science.

Enter quantum mechanics. This started as the study of very small things — subatomic particles. It is the most effective scientific idea ever — it powers your computer, TV, anything dependent on electronics. So we know it’s true enough to work, but it’s also weird enough to defy belief. Everything about the discoveries in this area turned out to be in defiance of reason. Crucially, two things were discovered. First, particles can continue to be connected to each other even though separated by long distances — billions of light years, even: a phenomenon known as non-locality. This is, in our big world, impossible. Second, quantum theory showed that the mind can affect the world. If, for example, you say that light is made of particles, then, obligingly, light will be particles. If you say it is waves, then it will be waves. The questions we ask of nature determine the answers it gives

.
“So what happens when a person dies? Does this psychological part just fade away? That’s what most would think. On the other hand, there are these experiments done by physicians in connection with NDEs which seem to be evidence that brain death or total brain inactivity does not totally put out the psychological aspect. The relationship between the brain and the psychic experience is not as simple as one might have expected.”

On top of that, quantum non-locality could mean the mind is capable of being non-local to the brain, of floating to the ceiling of the room. It can become, as Stapp puts it, “unglued”. His words “certain choices not specified by the physical dynamics” are world-changing. This idea would, if widely accepted, end the reign of scientific materialism, replacing it with a new dualism. It would mean the universe is not a “causally closed” system, locked down since the big bang, as mainstream science has always insisted it is, but open to freedom of choice by the autonomous, floating, matter-altering mind. We would have regained our souls.

Positive results from Parnia’s survey might foreshadow the soul’s return. The effects would be seismic. First, you’d have to accustom yourself to the idea that your mind is not just the little man inside your skull — he really is out there in the world. Second, you’d have to accept that a lot of the things that now seem like products of charlatans and grifters — telepathy, spiritualism, even psychokinesis — will suddenly seem much more credible. Thirdly, you need not anticipate instant oblivion on death but a series of very weird and very illuminating experiences.


This would be a revolution, but it would also be a return to the past. Until the rise of secular mater-ialism over the past 200 years, humans always lived with the conviction that the world was made of far more than brick-stuff, and they also lived with a lively sense of the presence of the dead.

But a bucket of iced water is necessary at this point. Few scientists think any of this is going to happen. Believers in a new dualism — or, indeed, believers that there is anything more to NDEs than a psychologically interesting hallucination — are still in a small minority. The problem is that all the evidence remains anecdotal, and even the most impressive stories, like Reynolds’s, tend to look less convincing on closer examination.

Don't believe it for a nanosecond. It does not pass the common sense test:

Who was first? Adam? If so then we open up a new can of improbable worms. Is it just christians or everybody? How far back, apemen? Or all animals? Including dinosaurs! Every insect? Where does the fauna selection start and end? Do families group together (implied by spiritualism!) if so which family gets precedence!!! How far back does the grouping go.....and on and on and on.

If its none of the above and the "nature" is quite different then all spiritualism is a con (which I believe anyway!). Yet another can of awkward worms in this direction.

People WANT to believe in life after death because they can't cope with the thought of their mortality and/or that they will never see their loved ones again.

It's a crutch for those unable to cope with death being an integral part of life.

I would not want eternal life.

If I do get it, I'll being trying as hard as I'm am trying to live, to die.

reply to post by DrJay1975


Wow that must of been a scary experience, just curious how did it happen. Its always interesting members sharing near death experiences. Also for those 5 minutes, I take it your heart stopped, but you still had brain waves? There have been cases documented of blind patients at birth, being able to see while experiencing an NDE. People who have been dead longer then you. I think the longest was 30 minutes? Maybe longer, and they had an NDE experience. Now sceptics can say what they want, but anyone who has suffered a brain injury (me for example) realised you’re in such a state of confusion everything is muffled. In an NDE though, everything is clear and lucid. Now how can you be that lucid while dying? Now people say it is the optic nerve. It could be, but what about people who has an NDE, and didn’t see a tunnel of light? There are just too many variables.

I agree with that view Mr_skepticc, for years and years I believed it was not the case, so that when one died it ended there forever and for certain reasons I hoped it was true.

Since some years now my view on that has changed dramatically and the reasons for that I will keep for myself.
end of qute from OP

relpy to above poster....

Well,I was i agreement...on the `gone and that`s it kind of thing......but not so sure now...
I am not keeping stuff to myself.....for whatever anyone thinks...
Went to see Father June 2008...knew he had health issues includig Vascular Dementia`due to `compomised heart`
Anyways we are camping out in the backwaters of Canada...and June 22 at 12.30pm my father dies GMT (UK time)..in Canada time (pacific time that is 4.30am)...so the dogs went crazy and I felt a rush of energy literally rip through me...like a whirlwind...can`t explain it...and after that all I hear in my head...is And I Lòve Her by The Beatles`...a favourite of my Fathers...
However...coincidentally my hubbys father died UNPREDICTABLY 24 hrs later (in his sleep) and we did not have any kind of experiences...so...whoknows...just my cents worth....

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Jools]

"What came first, the pheonix or the flame?" Answer: "A circle has no begining. Thusly, no end."


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by die_another_day
I would not want eternal life.

If I do get it, I'll being trying as hard as I'm am trying to live, to die.

Those of a religious nature would argue that we are far more than that, they would argue that we have a soul. A soul is, for me, hard to imagine. How do you describe it? It is not something that we can detect, it is a spiritual thing without any physical substance, and it is this that supposedly lives on after our mortal bodies have died. So where is the soul while we are alive? I assume it must reside in the brain as that is where we reside. I can only assume again that when the brain dies the soul is released.That being the case the soul is able to survive without the need of a body, it is obviously independent of the body. So why does it need a body in the first place? Perhaps it needs a body to develop

Guess not too many check out the religions section

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Mr_skepticc


The 'soul' is a name we give the appearance of life in a person. It's merely the electrochemical chain reaction that sustains us. When that stops, there is nothing left.

There is no evidence that the 'soul' exists. None. Or that there is life after death. Anyone saying there is, is speaking their opinion, and should be treated as such.

Well i for one don't believe an after life exists, and the mere thought of one is repulsive to me. To me NDE's are a very specific mix of factors that result from the body dying. That is why many(probably the majority) of people do not have them while others do. I have a friend who was resuscitated and had no NDE for example. And if we are to believe that NDE's are the result of someones soul/conscious or whatever you want to believe going somewhere else then surely you would expect it to happen to everyone and not just a minority of people. That for me shows that it is a very specific chemical cocktail that produces NDE's.

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc

Dr. Jeffrey Long argues that if you look at the scientific evidence, the answer is unequivocally yes. Drawing on a decade's worth of research on near-death experiences — work that includes cataloguing the stories of some 1,600 people who have gone through them — he makes the case for that controversial conclusion in a new book, Evidence of the Afterlife. Medicine.

I believe the energy within us, some may call a soul, never dies! Interesting piece from Time magazine I thought some of you might enjoy.

Questions and Answrs.

Medically speaking, what is a near-death experience?
A near-death experience has two components. The person has to be near death, which means physically compromised so severely that permanent death would occur if they did not improve: they're unconscious, or often clinically dead, with an absence of heartbeat and breathing. The second component [is that] at the time they're having a close brush with death, they have an experience. [It is] generally lucid [and] highly organized.
(See the year in health 2009.)

How do you respond to skeptics who say there must be some biological or physiological basis for that kind of experience, which you say in the book is medically inexplicable?
There have been over 20 alternative, skeptical "explanations" for near-death experience. The reason is very clear: no one or several skeptical explanations make sense, even to the skeptics themselves. Or [else ]there wouldn't be so many.

You say there's less skepticism about near-death experiences than there used to be, as well as more awareness. Why is that?
Literally hundreds of scholarly articles have been written over the last 35 years about near-death experience. In addition to that, the media continues to present [evidence of] near-death experience. Hundreds of thousands of pages a month are read on our website, NDERF.org.

Read more: www.time.com...


This is NOT scientific.






[mod edit: clipped quoted content, added Required external source tags]
Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 24-1-2010 by 12m8keall2c]

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc

Dr. Jeffrey Long argues that if you look at the scientific evidence, the answer is unequivocally yes. Drawing on a decade's worth of research on near-death experiences — work that includes cataloguing the stories of some 1,600 people who have gone through them — he makes the case for that controversial conclusion in a new book, Evidence of the Afterlife. Medicine.

I believe the energy within us, some may call a soul, never dies! Interesting piece from Time magazine I thought some of you might enjoy.

Questions and Answrs.

Medically speaking, what is a near-death experience?
A near-death experience has two components. The person has to be near death, which means physically compromised so severely that permanent death would occur if they did not improve: they're unconscious, or often clinically dead, with an absence of heartbeat and breathing. The second component [is that] at the time they're having a close brush with death, they have an experience. [It is] generally lucid [and] highly organized.
(See the year in health 2009.)

How do you respond to skeptics who say there must be some biological or physiological basis for that kind of experience, which you say in the book is medically inexplicable?
There have been over 20 alternative, skeptical "explanations" for near-death experience. The reason is very clear: no one or several skeptical explanations make sense, even to the skeptics themselves. Or [else ]there wouldn't be so many.

You say there's less skepticism about near-death experiences than there used to be, as well as more awareness. Why is that?
Literally hundreds of scholarly articles have been written over the last 35 years about near-death experience. In addition to that, the media continues to present [evidence of] near-death experience. Hundreds of thousands of pages a month are read on our website, NDERF.org.

Read more: www.time.com...


This is NOT scientific.






[mod edit: clipped quoted content, added Required external source tags]
Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 24-1-2010 by 12m8keall2c]

I've seen some videos of this guy that dies and claims he visited hell... It made me nauseous...

www.youtube.com...


Blegh....

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Cisko]

Originally posted by malcr
Don't believe it for a nanosecond. It does not pass the common sense test:

Who was first? Adam? If so then we open up a new can of improbable worms. Is it just christians or everybody? How far back, apemen? Or all animals? Including dinosaurs! Every insect? Where does the fauna selection start and end? Do families group together (implied by spiritualism!) if so which family gets precedence!!! How far back does the grouping go.....and on and on and on.

If its none of the above and the "nature" is quite different then all spiritualism is a con (which I believe anyway!). Yet another can of awkward worms in this direction.

People WANT to believe in life after death because they can't cope with the thought of their mortality and/or that they will never see their loved ones again.

It's a crutch for those unable to cope with death being an integral part of life.

Completely agree!!

They've got a long way to go in terms of explaining how this all works, and whether all living things go to the 'afterlife' etc before I'll start believing it.

You can just do '___' to find out.

reply to post by Bluebelle

Originally posted by Bluebelle

Originally posted by malcr
Don't believe it for a nanosecond. It does not pass the common sense test:

Who was first? Adam? If so then we open up a new can of improbable worms. Is it just christians or everybody? How far back, apemen? Or all animals? Including dinosaurs! Every insect? Where does the fauna selection start and end? Do families group together (implied by spiritualism!) if so which family gets precedence!!! How far back does the grouping go.....and on and on and on.

If its none of the above and the "nature" is quite different then all spiritualism is a con (which I believe anyway!). Yet another can of awkward worms in this direction.

People WANT to believe in life after death because they can't cope with the thought of their mortality and/or that they will never see their loved ones again.

It's a crutch for those unable to cope with death being an integral part of life.

Completely agree!!

They've got a long way to go in terms of explaining how this all works, and whether all living things go to the 'afterlife' etc before I'll start believing it.

It is not a crutch for me. It is not a new life, it is a place of love, we go to God, Allah, Mjumgahellagoodtimea, whatever ya wanna call her. I guess I was lucky I died, gave me something to live for.