Customer Discussions > Science forum

One day will science prove the afterlife?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 25 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 15, 2013 10:17:17 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Mar 27, 2013 6:09:33 AM PDT]

Posted on Jan 15, 2013 10:38:07 AM PST
Rev. Otter says:
+1 because Mary Roach is that awesome. :)

Posted on Jan 15, 2013 11:05:21 AM PST
Brian Curtis says:
Whole lotta nonscience threads cluttering up the Science forum lately, aren't there?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 11:13:56 AM PST
Rev. Otter says:
yeah but this one involves Spook, a book i've linked to many, many times in this forum.

to answer the OP, i predict Naham will have exactly as much success as every other search for material proof of the immaterial. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 12:27:02 PM PST
Deckard says:
Drifter said:
"An interesting topic. And you can read about all the various experiments into trying to prove life after death such as soul weighing etc in the book:
Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife
The book discusses the work Professor Gerry Naham and his aims to build a system that can detect the departure of a dying person's soul using electromagnetic energy. Any opinions on this?"

None that Mamazon won't delete.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 12:49:02 PM PST
Re OP: "Any opinions on this?" Yes: it's garbage. There is no evidence, nor any other reason, to believe in the existence of a "soul" separate from one's brain.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 2:10:46 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 2:27:28 PM PST
Rev. Otter says:
but it's a GREAT example that science doesn't "ignore the supernatural", as is so often claimed in this forum.

science LOOKS for evidence, no matter what. :)

Posted on Jan 16, 2013 6:15:05 AM PST
Ambulocetus says:
This forum should actually be called "Science and Pseudoscience." After all, 1) some folks don't know the difference, and 2) insofar as science doesn't stick to comfortable dogmas, it will necessarily delve into the empirical investigation of pseudoscientific ideas from time to time.

I guess I just don't understand why people assume that the idea of a soul explains anything, or why they don't think that the soul might die along with the body. Does anyone over the age of 20 REALLY believe that after you die, you get to keep right on being you, except without having to work and instead getting to hang out with other dead people (but only the nice ones)? REALLY? Who believes that?

Even if you're partial to the Bible, heaven has a lot more to do with using your face to scrub clouds while chanting "Holy, holy, holy" than it does with getting to taste your late grandma's fresh-baked cookies again.

Posted on Jan 16, 2013 10:02:41 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Mar 27, 2013 6:09:41 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 16, 2013 1:32:26 PM PST
Re Drifter, above: "I believe that when we die, there is a form of afterlife..." And your evidence for this is ...?

"You will also find the majority of people believe in an afterlife," An argument vox populi, and invalid.

Posted on Jan 16, 2013 1:46:33 PM PST
Rev. Otter says:
i'd bet the majority of people believe that a frog WON'T try jump out of slowly-heated water, too.

Posted on Jan 16, 2013 3:07:02 PM PST
[Deleted by the author on Mar 31, 2013 10:14:18 AM PDT]

Posted on Jan 17, 2013 7:24:32 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Mar 27, 2013 6:09:51 AM PDT]

Posted on Jan 19, 2013 3:00:37 PM PST
[Deleted by the author on Mar 31, 2013 10:14:23 AM PDT]

Posted on Jan 19, 2013 3:14:05 PM PST
[Deleted by the author on Mar 31, 2013 10:14:28 AM PDT]

Posted on Jan 19, 2013 5:06:41 PM PST
Knowledge of an afterlife is immaterial. One is either alive or not alive. One cannot be both at the same time.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2013 4:36:37 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 23, 2013 4:46:15 PM PST
Ashwood says:
Drifter says: The book discusses the work Professor Gerry Naham and his aims to build a system that can detect the departure of a dying person's soul using electromagnetic energy. Any opinions on this?

Ash : If souls can be detected using electromagnetic energy, then that means souls interact with electromagnetic energy, which means souls can be AFFECTED by electromagnetic energy, which means it should be possible to build a gun that destroys souls the same way a EMP cannon destroys electronic devices.

Ah, the wonders of science that await us in the future :)

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2013 4:48:12 PM PST
Rev. Otter says:
<<One is either alive or not alive.>>

Erwin Schrödinger seen nodding happily.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2013 5:02:33 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 23, 2013 7:07:50 PM PST
Ashwood says:
Old Rocker *Hungry Brainz* says: One is either alive or not alive. One cannot be both at the same time.

Ash : Depends on what you mean by "alive" and what you mean by "one". Humans are "one" but we are also a collection of organs and cells. My heart can survive as a transplant long after the rest of my flesh has decayed, so would I be alive or dead?

Even if you just consider the brain to be the person, there are cases where people can survive after half their brain is removed. Logically, it should be possible (a century down the line) to transplant half a brain into a new body and leave the other half in the old body. So when is that "one" dead?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemispherectomy

If your physical body dies, but your personality is uploaded to a computer capable of running it on a simulated human brain are you still alive? What if the cells in your brain are slowly replaced over the course of years, by nanobots which take over the function of cells they replace (keeping your personality intact)? Does that count as death and how much organic brain do they have to replace before you "die"?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2013 11:42:13 PM PST
Re Ashwood, above: An interesting and apt post. My two cents' worth: one is alive as long as there exists a system which supports the mental activity which one had in one's original corpus. This will include input-output systems such that the brain can interact with the outside world in the same general manner as it previously did.

Robert Heinlein had an interesting take on this in I Will Fear No Evil.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 24, 2013 4:12:49 AM PST
Yehonala says:
Yes, indeed, Reverend Otter. You can be both alive and dead at the same time. But there have to be two copies of you, and they have to exist in different eigenstates.

Posted on Mar 26, 2013 11:57:17 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Mar 27, 2013 6:10:00 AM PDT]

Posted on Apr 25, 2013 2:26:44 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Apr 25, 2013 2:26:50 PM PDT]

Posted on Apr 29, 2013 5:33:01 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Apr 29, 2013 5:33:08 PM PDT]
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  10
Total posts:  25
Initial post:  Jan 15, 2013
Latest post:  Apr 29, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions