DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Is Gravitational Force Dependent on a Falling Object's Speed?
Next: Roberts: Explain to Gisse what a Metric is!!
From: Don Stockbauer on 10 Dec 2009 00:29 On Dec 10, 1:53 am, George Hammond <Nowhe...(a)notspam.com> wrote: > On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:22:24 -0800 (PST), darwinist > > > > <darwin...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >On Dec 10, 9:20 am, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.net> wrote: > >> In article > >> <e0bd139f-1d04-41fa-8cc5-6e13834b7...(a)13g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, > > >> darwinist <darwin...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On Dec 10, 11:30 am, George Hammond <Nowhe...(a)notspam.com> wrote: > >> > > LOG 12-9-09 THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH > > >> > > Copyright December 2009, George Hammond > > >> > This is an interesting theory. I wonder how one would go about testing > >> > it empirically. > > >> First one has to know whether Frohlich Condensates even exist. They have > >> not yet been observed. Next, we would have to know whether they can > >> possibly exist in our relatively cool body. > > >> Next, we have to know whether a quantum state can last a millisecond > >> _anywhere_, and especially a microtubule. That's a long damned time. > > >> We must also reconcile this 'secular trend growth deficit' against > >> research that shows that it is _increasing_ rapidly in Western cultures, > >> although it has varied over the history of humankind. > > >> Then perhaps Mr. Hammond will explain (hopefully with an illustration) > >> what he means by 'curved/truncated subjective time/space'. > > >> That's just get _started_. So far, he has presented no science. > > >You just had to go there didn't you? A perfectly optimistic theory > >about life after death and you use the "s" word. > > >In any case it seems the theory stated is actually about life *before* > >death, but why split hairs? I'm sure we can make it about life after > >death with only a little acrobatics: > > >Perhaps this dream - once it begins - can leave the cytoskeleton and > >still exist, like an image that leaves a projector and maintains its > >structure as it bounces off the wall into your eye. This quantum > >entity drifts through space, thereby finding an "infinite life" in > >"heaven" as a "disembodied soul". Presumably this quantum-paradise- > >ghost would learn to change direction at will, and interact with other > >ghosts as well as with matter. Thus they have become gods. > > >See? That wasn't so hard. We even get deification thrown in for free. > >Where's your precious science and logic now? > > [Hammond] > Ahhhh, it appears that you have just run up against your > own "intelligence barrier". Of course your observation is > correct, "life after death" actually IS "life before death" > which only APPEARS to occur after death. The point is that > we're talking about two different observers, the bedside > observer and the dearly departed observer. > To the bedside observer it appears to be a highly > compressed dream which takes place BEFORE death. But to the > dearly departed it appears that the death dream lasts for a > year after he actually died. This is utterly familiar to > anyone who has studied relativity of any kind whatsoever. > Obviously you haven't. > What you don't realize, is that upon neuronal death (EEG > flat line), the only part of brain meditation or > consciousness that still exists is in the still functioning > cytoskeleton. This cytoskeleton subserves the entire > neuronal system of the brain, and according to Penrose and > Hameroff and many many others it contains the preconscious > or subconscious mind of man. The death dream takes place in > the cytoskeleton of the human brain and therefore takes > place 10 billion times as fast as neuronal firing frequency, > yet, the dying observer (in this case the persons > cytoskeleton) is ALSO operating at that speed, so according > to the cytoskeleton-observer, the entire dream takes place > at ordinary clock on the wall terrestrial speed. > Now, if you can't understand that, then there's little > point in arguing with you. That would be like trying to > argue the Twins Paradox with a scientific amateur. > ======================================== > GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE God and the Universe are identical concepts (pantheism).
From: Uncle Vic on 10 Dec 2009 02:59 One fine day in alt.atheism, George Hammond <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote: > Serious intellectual commentary is invited, hecklers will be > killfiled. Then why is it you crosspost to alt.atheism with a subject line concerning life after death? I think you like hecklers. The same way some people like spankings. -- Uncle Vic aa Atheist #2011 Christians are like Slinkys. They're boring, but they'll put a smile on your face when you push them down the stairs.
From: " SNIP HECKLER>" on 10 Dec 2009 08:45 X-No-Archive: Yes On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 21:29:59 -0800
From: " SNIP HECKLER>" on 10 Dec 2009 08:46 X-No-Archive: Yes On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:59:05 -0600
From: " SNIP HECKLER>" on 10 Dec 2009 08:47
X-No-Archive: Yes On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:38:24 -0700 |