LOGICAL PECULIARITIES OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Fast Lorentz transforms: was Why is the square of the universal speed limit the amount of energy?
Next: -*MARK*- meet George Re: LOGICAL PECULIARITIES OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
From: bigfletch8 on 3 May 2010 05:14 On May 3, 12:19 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...(a)notspam.com> wrote: > On Sun, 2 May 2010 19:53:38 -0700 (PDT), > > > > > > "bigflet...(a)gmail.com" <bigflet...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >On May 3, 5:01 am, George Hammond <Nowhe...(a)notspam.com> wrote: > >> LOGICAL PECULIARITIES OF LIFE AFTER DEATH > > >Consider the following: > > >Your biological structure is constantly dying and reforming. > > >There is not one single cell in your body that is more than ten years > >old, the oldest being your skeletal cells. > > >The structural rules to which you refer apply, funnily enough, to the > >"structure". > > >Life creates structure, but is 'of itself' structureless. It is also > >timeless and space less, so what you are doing, is trying to define > >life from a structural and spacial perspective. Absolutely impossible > >to explain, but inevitable to understand (to become conscious of). > > [Hammond] > Come down to earth BOfL. I realize you have a PhD in > theoretical physics. I wish I had have known that. I would have charged more for my services. You really do have a 'qualification' phobea. > Frankly, that means you are > OVERQUALIFIED to undertake a scientific investigation of > God. Ever considered a scientific investigation of science?Thats where you will find your curvature, but more like a helix if observed from a fourth dimension. It would have been more accurate to say 'underqualified to overtake'.. > You have simply got to allow a second rank scientist > with only a master's degree in theoretical physics undertake > the problem. You can be so childish... > Your expertise is sorely needed elsewhere for > more challenging scientific problems. > In the first place there is absolutely NO NEED to > scientifically explain what "life" is in order to > scientifically explain what God is. Science can only explain what life isnt,(the effect of life) and you are trying to relate "what isnt" to God! Scientificully explain dna A strand of proteins shaped in the form of a helix, with chromasomes which swich off and on, sending signals to the cells. Got it! We can all now go home and attend to the garden or go fishing... > Let me give an example: > classical Relativity does not need to scientifically explain > what space and time actually are in order to prove that > classical gravity is explained as a Curvature of (OBJECTIVE) > space-time. And thats why is is known as the theory of relativity. Space and time a purely mental constructs (actually the essence of subjectivity, to which, most go along with, giving the illusion of objectivity). The mind works only in theory ..capiche? and is why only a theory of God can be speculated, which, by definition, will be anthropomorphic. > LIKEWISE science does not need to explain what "life" is in > order to prove that the classical God of history is a > curvature of (SUBJECTIVE) space-time. Classical God? By what objective? Do you include a Quantum God by the same reference? > > THEREFORE your entire introductory argument is ABSOLUTELY > IRRELEVANT ! I wasnt making an argument. I leave that to the relativity wrestlers. > > >What is the difference between Hammond now and Hammond ten years ago? > >The body is new, (although it is still 'following orders' from the > >genetic code). The only difference is the level of consciousness, > >which is the timeless reality you are inadvertently making reference > >to. Some people appear to remain static in such states. You dont > >normally find them in such arenas as this. > > >Apply the ref. you make regarding meeting people 'in heaven', to > >meeting yourself many years ago. You would recognise your past self, > >but not the reverse. This is the basics to all interaction > >'supposidely' with others (and why there is an ever growing > >disenchantment with the 'romantic' world. It is NEVER about the other > >person, we are simply mirrors to others) > > [Hammond] > I don't know where you're going here but you are > certainly off on a tangent. Childhood memories can last for > 75 to 100 years. The cells of your body may change, but the > memory remains unchanged! Thats a big step....you need to put further investigation to such tangents. > Therefore the changing of the > cells in your body is again, an irrelevant non sequitur to > the scientific proof and explanation of the phenomenon of > "God". Correct. Another area of elimination. Not about cells or memory. Where does your proof sit,if not in the memory? > > >It gets confusing, particularly when some research departments in > >places like Harvard are starting to recognise genes which do effect > >the psyche. > > [Hammond] > You have simply failed to recognize that all of these > microbiology details are absolutely IRRELEVANT to the > scientific explanation and proof of the existence of the > classical God of history (e.g. the God of the Bible). Ohh THAT classic. Would that be the ref to the entity that ordered mass extermination/ethnic cleansing? Sounds like you are still steeped in religious dogma, and it is coloring your efforts. > The God of the Bible is caused by the secular trend > growth deficit of the human body particularly the brain. So suddenly the cells ARE important. (Brain also recycles...but as you said , the memories linger on. Much longer than you have alluded to. They 'cause' God? By anthropomorphising the missing links' Thats how the mid is stimulated to create.Like a migratory birds 'homing' sense. To the mind of an astronomer, God is the cosmos. > This brain growth deficit slows down our mental speed and > makes the world bigger and faster than it actually is. Correct, but you have to take that further. Actually 'is' has nothing to do with 'bigger, faster, smaller larger'...that is the realm of relativity once more. > Analysis shows that this is a classic space time Curvature. > We only see a "curved" version of reality compared to what a > theoretically full-grown person would see. That nonexistent > legendary and mythical "full-grown" person being called > "God". An individual has the capacity for 360 deg vision, so you are on track. In "no time" does that consciousness exist. Beyond matter energy space and time. > Obviously such a gross classical relativistic phenomenon > has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the cells of > our body are replaced every 10 years..... nothing > whatsoever! You have to understand the limitations of the biological structure,and its binary nature, to move on. > Two first-order, the Hammond of 10 years ago is the same > as the Hammond of today. All other effects such as aging, > hair loss, and having read another 200 books are only the > second order effects by comparison and have absolutely > nothing to do with the scientific explanation and proof of > the God of the Bible. So you are no more conscious today than you were then? Accumulation of information is avery different ball game. > Finally, your reaction is absolutely typical of a > first-class scientific mind which is overqualified to deal > with what is essentially nothing but a psychological > problem.... even though it turns out to be described > mathematically by the theory of General Relativity. Im involved in absolutes, not theories. > >This is because, although psychosomatic connection is well established > >(they are actually discovering the biological link.... one of the > >first conjectures was 'the criminal gene') that link is rather like > >the modem linking your comp. to the internet. > > >We each have the capacity to develop a state of consciousness which > >transcends the psychosomatic. One of the reasons that the term > >'forgiveness' shows up in many mystical schools (distorted by > >religious states of consciousness), is to complete the psychosomatic > >balance within. (Nothing whatever to do with another), to allow the > >'timeless' state of consciousness to unfold, so when you do 'see' you > >past states, you can see your earlier state with love and > >understanding. > >If not, you take on that past state once more. > > [Hammond] > Whoa professor! The reason we are able to experience > "mystical" or "altered states of consciousness" is simply > that due to the brain growth deficit and the phenomenon of > "repression" which is an artificial brain growth deficit, > the "apparent curvature" of our own personal subjective > space time is in fact VARIABLE. You are confusing cause with effect. > As this "curvature of > reality" fluctuates say plus or minus 5% due to stress, > meditation, drugs, unusual experience, shock, love, ecstasy, > depression etc. etc. what happens is that your "reality" is > "transcendentally modulated" and we call these "altered > states of consciousness". This is nothing but a CLASSICAL > RELATIVISTIC CURVATURE modulation of reality, and this > effect is commonly known as GOD. An interesting use of the word 'common'. Anything that 'appears', whether 5% or 95% out of sync with our accumulated experiences, acivates the need for such anthropomorphacising. Just as the brain only adapts to the second and subsequent 'new experience'. We see a 'winged serpent' (as many of our ancestors did) we project 'God'. Today we conjecture on scientifically logical visions of aliens, we see explaination. > God is not as complicated as particle physics and quantum > field theory by a long shot..... actually it's no more > complicated than plain vanilla General Relativity! So put > away the cannons, physics only needs a peashooter to solve > this one..... thanks to Einstein who has already done the > heavy lifting. GOD IS SIMPLY AN APPLIED GENERAL RELATIVITY > PROBLEM! Just as water is a life support system for a fish....I see you used the word PROBLEM. The mind always leaves clues. > > >I get the strong impression you are 'knocking on the door'. > > [Hammond] > Look again BOfL... I've already kicked in the door ! I only hear banging...and often childish tantrums. You are certsainly out of on door, but are currently in a relative anti space. > > In my recent post I am discussing a possible phenomenon > of life after death. Again theory is a simple classical > physics theory. Hameroff and Penrose have shown that the > microtubule system of the brain routinely handles the same > kind of high-level information that the neuronal system > handles. Furthermore it is now generally believed that the > microtubule system is the long sought for "Engram" of the > human memory system. > The point is that it is KNOWN that the microtubule system > of the brain survives human death by at least 30 minutes. It is also known that time is a mental construct. The microtuble system is fully active throughout physical life also and fascillitates the experiences to which you are referring. Anything biological is made of the same replenishing cells, and is ONLY ever part of a storage and retrieval system of information. > And it is known that information flows in the microtubule > system and microwave frequencies ( Froehlich's frequency > 10^11 Hz) this is 100 million times higher frequency than > the neuronal firing frequency in the brain. This means that > a pre-recorded "death dream" stored in the microtubule > memory could be read out in a fraction of a second after > death but would be subjectively experienced in real proper > time. Correct, but as you alluded to, this 'replays' a death dream. It is very common for people to report their past life pictures emerging rapidly during a life threatening crisis. There are also more subtle memories that can appear, bringing up religious or mystical 'images'. >Hence the bedside observer would see a person die in > a fraction of a second but according to the dearly departed > he would live on for say a year in a cyber paradise (aka > Heaven). Or Hell, depending on the absorbed and replayed experiences. > Now we already know that God is a classic relativistic > time dilation, You really spoil your validity with making such brash statements, but, hey, you already know this process is not about popularity. >therefore it should come as no surprise that > life after death so-called is actually nothing but a time > dilated afterlife "microtubule virtual-reality". Thats equivalent to saying 'water is nothing more than melted ice'. >And since > the microtubule system exists in every single cell of the > body and is completely interconnected, it is actually the > "real body" it is going to experience this life after death! The source of memory, by your own logic, is 'beyond' the biological framework. It is in fact a 'real body', but just another relative, more subtle version ( ref. to parallel universes ). > Now I submit, but that is a very simple theory, that does > not require vast philosophical analysis, nor does it require > the higher reaches of theoretical physics to understand. It is supported by both, and understood clearer from both disciplines, which may surprise you, given you spend all of your time in a battle ground. > > The upshot is, that I am firmly of the opinion that a > plausible scientific theory of the possibility of life after > death has been found. And we are back to the definition of life once more. > > Whether or not it's true of course is something that only > the future can tell. George, remember the old adage "It's about time?"...it is not. It is about consciousness expansion, and how we individually let go of every step we encounter. To not do so, creates fior the individual, precisley what you are experienciing. > > >It may surprise you to know, but I actually admire you more than most > >on these groups. You have the courage of your own convictions, and are > >sincere and genuine in your efforts. > > >BOfL > > [Hammond] > Yeah, that's what they said at Caesar's funeral too! Yes, but that particular one choked on his own ceaesar salad :-) BOfL > ======================================== > GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE > Primary sitehttp://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond > Mirror site > http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com > HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto > http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 > =======================================- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Dr. HotSalt on 3 May 2010 05:56 On May 2, 2:14 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...(a)notspam.com> wrote: > LOGICAL PECULIARITIES OF LIFE AFTER DEATH > > Copyright George Hammond 2010 > > Note: "LAD" = "Life After Death" > > Note: Please point out any logical inconsistencies > > It occurs to me that there must be certain structural > rules as to what can or cannot occur in life after death > (LAD). If we assume that LAD is basically a revisitation of > Earthly life, then the first thing we deduce is that it > cannot be possible for you to return to Earth at a date > later your date of death. The reason for this is simple; it > would be possible for you to meet someone who had attended > your funeral or read your obituary and knew that you were > already dead. This would present an illogical paradox which > cannot be allowed in our scientific view of LAD. > > So the first structural rule must be that you can never > observe a calendar day which postdates the date of your > death. Likewise, you apparently cannot meet people who are > already dead in Heaven at a date later than the date of > their death either, because other people still alive would > likewise notice them also! > > This it would appear is not a great problem. In the first > place we expect that LAD will largely be a biographical life > review, in other words most of it will take place in the > past. Visions from your childhood your adolescence, > middle-age etc. etc. etc. All of this occurred long before > your death. > > So I assume in the first place that it is not true that > the only people you see in Heaven are people who are already > dead- in fact just the opposite is true... you only see > dead people by returning to an earlier date when both you > and they, were both alive! Most of the people you see in > Heaven will probably still be alive on Earth, however, you > will not see them after the date of your death. > > Now arises the question of Beatification. One assumes > that the first principle or essential-reason for life after > death is the Beatification of the body and obtaining the > Beatific Vision. So the question is; will you be walking > around in the world with a Beatified body and looking like > God himself? Obviously this would present a problem, indeed > you would obviously start a riot if you ever appeared in > public in such a form. Okay then, I presume then that the > Beatification must be mental rather than physical at least > during the period of life review. In other words you will > revisit old situations and old scenes but you will see them > with "new eyes" and perhaps with a new body sensorially > speaking but not a new body appearance wise. In other words > you will be transformed or beatified psychologically and > spiritually but your appearance will not change. > This of course is getting complicated and it appears to > be the beginning of complications for the theory. For > instance if you revisit an old scene and with your newfound > powers act differently, this would alter the entire history > of your life.... so what would become of the rest of the > life review? We simply can't believe that you live life all > over again in a completely altered form and totally new > course of events. That is simply too complicated. No, if > there is LAD, I think you must simply revisit the old scenes > but see them with new eyes... and this ever-increasing > Beatific perception of your past life builds finally to a > level of complete Beatific Vision at the end of your life > history. In other words you revisit your entire past life > with an "invisible" transformed spirit but wearing your old > body appearancewise in the various scenarios. Apparently, > you don't do anything differently that would alter the > recorded biography of your life. > On the other hand there may be additional scenarios that > are not part of a conventional biographical life review in > which you may take different actions and do or accomplish > additional things without logically upsetting your world > history. > Naturally if you have a Beatified body you would > certainly want to run and jump and water-ski and drive a > sports car at 150 miles an hour and experience all the > pleasures of a perfect body. There is certainly no reason > why you couldn't do this without altering the course of > world history or your own recorded biography. Consider for > a moment how complex an ordinary nocturnal dream is, and yet > while you're experiencing the dream nothing seems logically > impossible. We must assume that the same power is at work > in LAD if it exists. > > Meanwhile I am still trying to develop an overall opinion > as to the probability of the existence of LAD. In the first > place, I now believe if it exists that it is, or must be, a > revisit with full bodily senses of our everyday worldly > environment.... but of course this environment is actually > what we call a "virtual reality".... even though it looks > exactly like the Earth we just left! If this is true, what > it means is that we must have a DOUBLE BODY! The neuronal > system of the brain is the first body and the microtubule > system of the brain constitutes a SECOND BODY! Hence if we > have two bodies we experience two lives before we finally > expire permanently. In the Microtubule-Body we achieve the > Beatific vision which by definition is a condition of > "eternal life" because it has ZERO TIME DILATION . A few things come to mind. AIUI you defined BGD as the adult *neuronal brain's* fraction of developent short of its full genetic potential. Does the Microtubule-Body, supported by the incompletely developed neuronal brain, consequently have its own BGD? Seems to me it must, hence there's a limit on how "Beatified" one can be. (Do they correlate directly?) You said: > On the other hand there may be additional scenarios that > are not part of a conventional biographical life review in > which you may take different actions and do or accomplish > additional things without logically upsetting your world > history. I translate that as to make permutations of experienced events or fragments thereof, but there will be things you *cannot* do *because* they would "logically upset your world history". They'd be events the neuronal brain had *not* processed as sensory inputs before its chemical death, which you said it can't do, and with which I agree. That's a huge blind spot, a kind of "event horizon". That means perception-space curvature, which inevitably means *perceived* time dilation. It isn't necessarily strongly correlated, but it's definitely nonzero. It will indisputably be able to remember/relive/reshuffle everything the neuronal brain *did* process though, and as perfectly as its BGD allows. But not infinitely fast; yes, we're talking infinitesimal shifts in the probability waves sloshing this way and that in the network of all the microtubules in every neuron but by definition, it takes nonzero time for any nonzero-energy quantum state change. > So the previous paragraph brings us around to the > question of the scientific explanation of the SOUL . The > microtubule system in the brain must in fact be the physical > embodiment of the SOUL ! Yup. > So it turns out the Greeks were correct, the Soul is > IMMORTAL, and now we know WHY! Subjectively immortal, possibly, but not objectively. The wavefunctions supported by the microtubules must decay as the cytoskeleta of the brain decay and connectivity erodes. The "Soul" may not notice; it's horizon could just shrink and eventually collapse with the destruction of the last tubules, but it'll be able to *perfectly* remember etc. what it can, while it can. Unless you have in mind another possible mode of support for what is basically not a structure, but a pattern? Mark L. Fergerson
From: Nagdash the wicked derelict-patter on 3 May 2010 06:28 George Hammond, ye ape-like jack-dog priest, though you bite so sharp at reasons, you are so empty of them, ye beseeched: > LOGICAL PECULIARITIES OF LIFE AFTER DEATH > > Copyright George Hammond 2010 > > > Note: "LAD" = "Life After Death" > > Note: Please point out any logical inconsistencies > > > It occurs to me that there must be certain structural > rules as to what can or cannot occur in life after death > (LAD). If we assume that LAD is basically a revisitation of > Earthly life, then the first thing we deduce is that it > cannot be possible for you to return to Earth at a date > later your date of death. The reason for this is simple; it > would be possible for you to meet someone who had attended > your funeral or read your obituary and knew that you were > already dead. Logical fallacy of audiatur et altera pars. You assume that "a revisitation of Earthly life" is both physical and time-bound. The rest of your illogical shite falls down like a house of cards on that point alone. -- Test signature
From: Zerkon on 3 May 2010 06:44 On Sun, 02 May 2010 17:01:13 -0400, George Hammond wrote: > LAD If life after death, life before birth might answer the same questions. > he first structural rule must be that you can never observe a calendar > day This rule is a breezy way of dodging time. "calendar date" is an attempt to mark the instant of death not the relationship between the sun and the earth because if so this life after is corporal in nature. This 'instant' needs explanation and the relevance of 'day'. > People you 'see' in heaven.. The optical system having not died... you see stuff? > Visions from the past... Memory capability remains > Beatification Does this aesthetic sense remain or formed after death. Is it uniform? You may or may not find solace in this LAD fact. Children are the life after death to individuals and the entire group of the species. So other than worms turds and St. Peter may this is a easier way to explain this.
From: George Hammond on 3 May 2010 16:17
On Mon, 3 May 2010 02:14:03 -0700 (PDT), "bigfletch8(a)gmail.com" <bigfletch8(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > <snip ... line item non sequitors and ad hominem wisecracks > [Hammond] Your commentary is uninformed not to say totally clueless and full of boring amateur philosophy spew. The motive for your posting seem to be a mixture of envy and simple narcissim. In the meantime it is obvious you have no real interest or competence in the problem of the existence or non-existence of Life After Death.... you are simply another wannabee without even the saving grace of insight or originality. Besides, the question here is: IS THERE LIFE AFTER DEATH .... YES OR NO ? and YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE AN OPINION, APPARENTLY BEING UNAWARE THAT THE ENTIRE WORLD HAS BEEN DEBATING THE ISSUE FOR 5,000 YEARS !! THAT MAKES YOU A CLUELESS BORE..... BY ANY STANDARD ! ======================================== GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE Primary site http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond Mirror site http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 ======================================= |