A recent debate on life after death.

a reply to: FlySolo

Now, I believe in evolution but I would like a scientist to explain just how does a PLANT contain the same biochemical properties produced in our brain to regulate mood when the two aren't even connected in the evolutionary chain?

I must say Flysolo, I am thoroughly impressed that you aren't yet fed up with my chronically incessant skepticism lol. The above is another intriguing question, one for which I am not qualified to answer, though I might attempt to speculate. The keyword is "resembles", not necessarily the "same" but I do find it compelling either way, so I'm not trying to diminish it. I have a feeling that science might suggest something along the lines that you can find most of the chemical base structures outside of the human body that you could inside, E.g. proteins, atoms, particles and so on. So it doesn't seem that far a stretch to find the monoamine oxidase inhibitor or something that can function the same way outside of the body. This is an area in which I'm out of depths however in that I know next to nothing about brain chemistry.

Chewing on a tree or a mouthful of hay wouldn't do a single thing to your brain. Never mind strip you of your ego and manage to chemically induce alternate realities. Scientifically, just how does a primitive plant even have the ability to evolve in such a way where it's chemical properties are allowed to pass through the blood brain barrier of a human being? I guess the same question could be asked about a plethora of species of plants used in homeopathic remedies. I just can't wrap my head around it being chance.

I need to research the term "blood brain barrier" as I'm afraid I'm just not familiar with its context. It's true that chewing on a tree probably won't do it, but arguably; depending on the person, a bad batch of wheat could produce an experience. Supposedly from something I recall reading not long ago, people were stripping bark from a certain tree that either contained '___' or was believed to produce similar effects.

The question for me is whether or not it evolves in nature, based on a design or genetic code that has any affiliation with the human-animal brain. We know that such things effect us the way they do, but does that really suggest that it is meant to? I don't mind the concept of there being a "design" factor behind the universe and evolution (NOT to be confused with "Intelligent Design" as is represented by various Christian groups), but it seems increasingly difficult to find good examples of anything that appears "designed". Even the eye was once considered so astoundingly amazing that it simply couldn't have evolved, and it seems like these days, biologists say it is rather imperfect. Some have gone as far as to say its actually sloppy. That could be arrogance perhaps, or maybe it simply hasn't evolved enough to be considered design.

a reply to: UnBreakable

I think sometimes you don't get to contact the ones still alive and vice versa. They either probably get put back onto this earth as a different person or they go somewhere else to experience something new. And I guess whatever your family heard was just part of your dad that was still attached to the house, and after the priest did his thing it was able to move along.

a reply to: BS_Slayer

I must say Flysolo, I am thoroughly impressed that you aren't yet fed up with my chronically incessant skepticism lol

Nah, this is conversation. Skeptics I get fed up with aren't willing to exchange ideas. Big difference.

So it doesn't seem that far a stretch to find the monoamine oxidase inhibitor or something that can function the same way outside of the body.

The MAO enzyme created in our intestines is designed to break down common foods which could kill you. Like cheese for example. To me, it just doesn't seem reasonable for 1 specific plant in the amazon to carry the MAOI enzyme to prevent that. 1 out of 80,000 species of plants mind you. It's hardly common and a freak of astronomical odds to find it.

depending on the person, a bad batch of wheat could produce an experience

Ah, but that's like poison. Same as alcohol slowly poisoning your body giving that drunken feeling. Ayahuasca actually is an antidepressant because of the serotonin similarities. But yes, you will puke your guts out so I guess that too could be considered poisonous as the body tries to reject it. However, bad wheat or too much beer will not send you to the godhead.

but it seems increasingly difficult to find good examples of anything that appears "designed"

Phi. The Fibonacci sequence is your intelligent design. We're looking in the wrong places for intelligent design when it's been right in front of us the whole time.




Here is one of my most epic threads. When you have time read it over.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


And the first lesson you learn during Ayahu is fractals. It's the basic building blocks of everything. Once you understand the fractals and sacred geometry in that realm, then you're on to the next lesson.

I've posted this story elsewhere on ATS, but I'll tell it again. Back in probably the late 1980's, my mother's husband passed away suddenly from a heart attack. My daughter at the time was around 6 or 7. She loved that man and the feeling was mutual. One night a few days after he died, I was woken up by my dog barking. This went on for several minutes and I finally just went back to sleep. The next morning my mom told me this story. She woke up in the middle of the night and heard the dog barking, when all a sudden her husband was right there standing on the side of her bed. She said he was wearing some kind of brown robe. She said that he leaned over and touched her wedding ring and then touched my daughter's cheek and said that he would watch over her. Then she just went back to sleep. So yes, I believe that there is something after we die.

a reply to: FlySolo

I read once the odds of finding the right combination of the vine and '___' plant is 1 in 6,000,000

Wow...is this maybe what "adam" ate to get kicked out of Eden? Consider the movie "The Matrix". Were the gods upset that the game was up and Neo saw the reality in that we are in stuck in cocoons and being fed upon by machines/alien intelligence?

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Supposedly from something I recall reading not long ago, people were stripping bark from a certain tree that either contained

Would that be perhaps Ergot?
en.wikipedia.org...
"Convulsive symptoms include painful seizures and spasms, diarrhea, paresthesias, itching, mental effects including mania or psychosis"

mental effects...

How is it rational to believe that life is just a space between
two blanks? That would render not only life and man, but the
whole universe with absolutely no purpose at all. Everything
came from nothing, for nothing, by nothing and will return to
nothing. Because it was better off as nothing. But every once
in a while nothing gets a wild hair up it's ass and becomes something
for a while. And if that's what we as mere slow motion, accidental
beings of nothing, by nothing, and good for nothing, are experiencing
right now, for nothing? If the life force and consciousness do not continue
after the physical life ? No matter how irrational it may seem to some ? Then
absolutely nothing should be rational. Now, is that the case, not at all.
Much of our consciousness in existence, experiences rational thought
and occurrances. So if nothing were rational, it would not have become
something in the first place.

a reply to: randyvs

What is rational to begin with? Order? Sequence? Rhythm? If we can't prove what rational is how are we to truthfully say what irrational is either? What are we to say there is even two blanks? We can't have 2 without 1, and 1 could'nt create 2 without 2. Therefore they are co-existent, co-dependant. But what holds them together? Certainly 1 can not be 2 and 2 can not be 1. So what gave rise to there seemingly seperate appearance?

Further, what is blank? Is it Formlessness? Non-existence? Emptiness? What are we to say is blank or not blank? Do we know form as to ascertain non-form? Could form exist independently from non-form? Could truth exist without lies? ...What are we to judge? ...What are we to? ...What are we? ...What are? ...What? ...

No thing exists independently in and of itself. If it requires an opposite to exist it cannot truly exist independently and is therefore an illusion. But what gave rise to that illusion? Could the appearance of emptiness be just that? An appearance? The solution to understanding is in not understanding.

a reply to: EviLCHiMP

What is rational to begin with?

Something!

See here.

So if nothing were rational, it would not have become
something in the first place.

Now this.

If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then
the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and
the whole evolution of man was an accident too. If so, then all our present
thoughts are mere accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement
of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and
astronomers as well as for anyone else's. But if their thoughts - i.e.,
Materialism and Astronomy - are mere accidental by-products, why should
we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident
should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It's
like expecting the accidental shape, taken by the splash when you upset
a milk-jug, should give you a correct account, of how the jug was made
and why it was upset.

C.S. Lewis

a reply to: FlySolo

Sorry for another delay, but I'm back. I have done some small scale research into the Fibonacci sequence and find my own math limitations preventing me from understanding it in a more personal level, but I have found that many people misunderstand or misinterpret it's principles. I'll try to give some examples but again, the arithmetic and geometric aspects are foreign to me I'm afraid.

In my search I found far more web sites that argue in favor of it's implications than I did in favor of debunking. The problem with that though, is that like most web sites discussing spirituality of any kind, these sites have a very common interest. The sources that come from universities seem to take issue with many of the Fibonacci claims.

Kind of like the flower picture you posted. That image is seen a lot but when measured somehow falls short of the implication according to various scholars. I have to say again though, I am not math-minded enough to qualify as a credible observer. I do find it very interesting though either way though.

Fibonacci criticisms

Quotes I cherry picked from the Article: Which are not an attempt to debunk Fibonacci Inquiry in any way, but merely present a few criticisms I wouldn't mind hearing input on.

Of course much of this is patently nonsense. Mathematics doesn't "explain" anything in nature, but mathematical models are very powerful for describing patterns and laws found in nature. I think it's safe to say that the Fibonacci sequence, golden mean, and golden rectangle have never, not even once, directly led to the discovery of a fundamental law of nature. When we see a neat numeric or geometric pattern in nature, we realize we must dig deeper to find the underlying reason why these patterns arise.

The "golden spiral" is a fascinating curve. But it is just one member of a larger family of curves/spirals collectively known as "logarithmic spirals", and there are still other spirals found in nature, such as the "Archimedian spiral." It's not difficult to find one of these curves that fits a particular pattern found in nature, even if that pattern is only in the eye of the beholder. But the dirty little secret of all of this is that when such a fit is found, it is seldom exact. The examples from nature that you find in books often have considerable variations from the "golden ideal". Sometimes curves claimed to fit the golden spiral actually are better fit by some other spiral. The fact that a curve "fits" physical data gives no clue to the underlying physical processes that produce such a curve in nature. We must dig deeper to find those processes.

Nautilus shells. Consider the commonly seen assertion that shells of the Chambered Nautilus conform to the golden spiral. The photo on the right shows one that has been sawed carefully to show the inner chambers. For comparison, the actual golden spiral is shown on the left. Clearly this creature hadn't read the books! If these two were superimposed they wouldn't match no matter how they were scaled or aligned.

In fact, the drawing on the left isn't quite correct. It was found on a web site, and is constructed with circular arc segments within each square. This curve has curvature discontinuity wherever it crosses into another square. The actual Fibonacci spiral has smoothly changing curvature. The difference would hardly be noticeable to the eye at this scale.

This diagram reveals how to subdivide the golden rectangle. Draw a square within it. The rectangular area left over is a smaller golden rectangle. Draw a square within it, and continue doing this. Then fit the points with a smooth curve as shown to get something that at least looks superficially like the golden spiral.

i died once and my mind, emotions and senses all
survived and were housed in my soul/spirit.

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Meh, I started reading your link hoping it would be an objective point of view but then it begins to take on a typical tonality and an 'apples or oranges' type of comparison; I start to lose interest. Clearly 'vortexes' as they used in an example, can't be expected to follow the same principles as shell or sunflower. It's not about nature or the sequence being perfect every time, it's about recognizing that nature will use fractals as a method to build upon. And fractals do follow laws which indeed follow the rules of math we designed to model (or the other way around). But again, this topic will turn into a philosophical one I've had many times. Logic precedes numbers (math) but logic does not evolve in the cosmos. Therefore, numerical 'logic' has always been and always will be - consciousness? Understanding math is just understanding a preexisting law or formula.

I think it's safe to say that the Fibonacci sequence, golden mean, and golden rectangle have never, not even once, directly led to the discovery of a fundamental law of nature.

This isn't exactly true.

Aidan Dwyer created a solar cell tree that produces 20-50% more power than a uniform array of photovoltaic panels. His impressive results show that using a specific formula for distributing solar cells can drastically improve energy generation. The study earned Aidan a provisional U.S patent – it’s a rare find in the field of technology and a fantastic example of how biomimicry can drastically improve design.

Read more: 13-Year-Old Makes Solar Power Breakthrough by Harnessing the Fibonacci Sequence | Inhabitat - Sustainable Design Innovation, Eco Architecture, Green Building

But of course, someone will come along and say it's pseudo science.
www.thewire.com...
Not surprising though, for every thesis there's an antithesis but that doesn't explain why other's are copying it...
inhabitat.com... tes-7/?extend=1
inhabitat.com...
inhabitat.com...

The fact that a curve "fits" physical data gives no clue to the underlying physical processes that produce such a curve in nature. We must dig deeper to find those processes.

But there is a physical process. And that's all you need to know really. Nothing is random. Here, the author is trying to discredit the Fibonacci rule by saying we don't understand what makes curves or that curve is different. "We have to dig deeper". That's the only thing he got right. A vortex curve is different than a sunflower curve, but again, both curves are following rules that pertain to the circumstances in which they were created. Variances in curves doesn't disprove anything.

Regarding the Fibonacci sequence ...

We tend to see it as two dimensional I.E. Photos of it in Nature or diagrams

As an artist part of what I try to achieve is the illusion of a third dimension ... in a two dimensional space I.E. On paper or canvas.

It is true that mathematics / geometry give us a plan / information to work from ... But one aspect of Reality and the Universe is that mathematics and geometry fall short at some point ... I.E. A spiral galaxy is not consitently the same as one plotted using Fibonacci ...

The reason for this being that the space it expands into is in a way is lumpy ...
Even the rotation of the Earth through what we term a day has variance ...
Even the Calenders we use are not accurate to a day ... we add leap years

In a way there are wheels within wheels and we fail to grasp the bigger picture and patterns that occur and all the potential things that can alter that pattern

But sure Fibonacci is a great tool,

As for life after death the missing component that deserves full consideration is that of the Soul IMO

a reply to: FlySolo

I hope my use of that article didn't come off as an attempt at debunking the concept. As I said I just don't have the ability to observe formulas or equations in any meaningful way. In fact if there is an easier way to understand the relevance of the Fibonacci sequence in regard to nature I am more than willing to listen. I do get that you can see the spiral pattern all throughout nature. I also can see the same geometric theme (sort of) within a spiral galaxy. I'm not sure beyond that what it is that people are trying to say from a mathematics perspective.

Clearly 'vortexes' as they used in an example, can't be expected to follow the same principles as shell or sunflower.

This is exactly the kind of input I was hoping to get from you; hence the choice in articles. I would love to hear more if you're so inclined and have the time. I'm not planning on countering your ideas out of habit or agenda, unless I have a sincere question of course, so don't worry about a tiring debate. I wouldn't blame you from not wanting to put in the effort if you're convinced I will brush everything off, I promise that isn't my style. It's just that I like understand a thing from as many perspectives as there are available, at least an important thing.

It's not about nature or the sequence being perfect every time, it's about recognizing that nature will use fractals as a method to build upon. And fractals do follow laws which indeed follow the rules of math we designed to model (or the other way around).

Again, this is helpful to me in understanding the thing in general. In a nutshell, your input will help squeeze out the basic idea in a way that gets the information across without preaching or debunking entirely. I'm going to check out your links in any event, as to get more familiar with it.

originally posted by: artistpoet
Regarding the Fibonacci sequence ...

We tend to see it as two dimensional I.E. Photos of it in Nature or diagrams

As an artist part of what I try to achieve is the illusion of a third dimension ... in a two dimensional space I.E. On paper or canvas.

It is true that mathematics / geometry give us a plan / information to work from ... But one aspect of Reality and the Universe is that mathematics and geometry fall short at some point ... I.E. A spiral galaxy is not consitently the same as one plotted using Fibonacci ...

The reason for this being that the space it expands into is in a way is lumpy ...
Even the rotation of the Earth through what we term a day has variance ...
Even the Calenders we use are not accurate to a day ... we add leap years

In a way there are wheels within wheels and we fail to grasp the bigger picture and patterns that occur and all the potential things that can alter that pattern

But sure Fibonacci is a great tool,

As for life after death the missing component that deserves full consideration is that of the Soul IMO

In a recent discussion I watched on YouTube between four physicists, it was said how Math eventually breaks down, and I was floored lol. I just never knew that was possible and assumed if a man or machine was so inclined an equation could be dragged on into infinity.

But one aspect of Reality and the Universe is that mathematics and geometry fall short at some point

It makes me wonder if there is not some better means by which to measure anything?

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Wanna know something? I really don't know, but I have my doubts about the whole NDE thing. So when exactly do the experiences occur? For how long? What's the role of '___'? What about the hellish NDE's?

I really don't know.

But I'll tell you this. If the afterlife is like a lucid dream in which things are not solid but 'thought up' I don't really care for it.

EDIT: ___ is the name of an illegal substance secreted by the brain which I apparently can't mention here...

a reply to: QueenofWeird

EDIT: ___ is the name of an illegal substance secreted by the brain which I apparently can't mention here...

I've noticed this word has been removed in various posts.. anyone know why? Is it all substances in general or just one?

I think that we are living inside of some type of computer and when you die your data is still in the hard drive and you are free to say that is stupid but the fact is dieing must be good, no one comes back to complain and no one knows what happens even if they fool themselves and try to fool others that they know the truth, they don't

What does seem odd with a nateral death is the body shuts down in a way to make the death as peaceful as possible or so i am told which has no logic to me cus your no use once you are gone to nature.

The mind is a funny thing, it plays tricks on you

a reply to: VirusGuard

I would like to think that dying is peaceful, and for some that may very well be the case. It's hard to process though, especially considering your brain takes quite some time to die, and then there is even the possibility that it could slow down your perception of time. I have always wondered if its just customary that people say "well he died from a heart attack instantly".

An organ shutting down has to hurt when it seizes all the others up, the difference is you can't holler, whimper or cry because your body isn't working anymore. I can't see that all your nerves etc would stop working assuming your brain is the last to go. Add to the possibility of pain, that the last sounds you ever hear are your loved ones all screaming and crying as you realize you will simply cease to be in a matter of minutes. Most people don't even really get to say goodbye at all.

You almost can't blame the religious. Reality is pretty depressing.

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Everything listed I guess. Anyway I have another idea. If and that is a big if there is life after death it must obey the same physics, chemistry and biology laws as other matter and energy and so on have to.

So, these dead must be some sort of energy. A collection of bosons, particles without mass. They need to refuel, energy in and add to increasing entropy. Just like other living things.

In order not to be bombarded by particles thrown out by the sun or background radiation, the dead need to stay here on earth protected by the magnetosfere.

In other words, must be realllllyyyyy very crowded here