IMG_2361
Blog powered by Typepad

« Proof of life | Main | Mrs. Piper »

Comments

no one - Your whole argument in this comment seems to me based on your personal opinion and perhaps the crowd you hang out with.

Nope. It is based on observation of life, personal experience, and logic.

There are many people all over the world that live with and accept the inevitibility of death and pain, yet also manage to live deeply spiritual lives.

I would never claim otherwise, though they are a tiny minority.

no one - Integers and things that can be described by them are a property of *this* world. There *are* other ways to assemble infinity where this is not true. Worlds are assembled out of infinity. Worlds are emergent. Therefore, at the end of the day and in the big scheme of things, math is emergent.

This discussion is interesting, so I guess I'll butt in. I would contend that basic logic and the known behavior of numbers in mathematics must be built into any and all possible worlds no matter how much beyond ordinary human experience. For instance the behavior of integers. Could there be a realm where the series of primes was different from what has been 'discovered' by mathematicians? If so, it would seem to violate some sort of fundamental rules governing anything for it to exist. In it's most simple form this argument from the known behavior of numbers in mathematics could use as an example the simple multiplication tables. Could 2 x 2 = 4 be a limited local to our physical Universe human perception not necessarily applying to higher levels of consciousness or other planes or universes of existence?

Another example would be basic Boolean logic, for instance that Not [A or B] = [Not A and Not B]. Could there be somewhere in infinite existence where Not [A or B] = [A and Not B]? Or for that matter could there be somewhere where transcendental numbers pi and e were not transcendental but equal to exactly 3.1 and 2.7? Meaning that the logical steps in the derivations of these numbers are somehow different in these other realms.

I don't think so. Mathematical and logical truths seem to be absolute, things that could not be otherwise, with no explanation beyond themselves, or an unknowable God.

However, I would hate to say it but perhaps any discourse on these issues actually is ultimately futile because language and human thought themselves are built of and work through logical rational processes that operate in accordance with known mathematics and rules of logic.

Matt, actually, I guess you did respond to the 10:41 comment, come to think of it. What you said, though, didn't make much sense to me, because you've apparently abandoned your position that all worlds must be internally consistent, without really *acknowledging* that you've shifted position.

And you're now even making a big point of saying that consistency is NOT a requirement.

And that's why I was still asking for a response to the 10:41 question.

Bruce,

By request... :)

||How about if there were a world that was internally consistent by virtue of the fact that it operated in a completely inconsistent way? Is it then consistent or inconsistent?||

The issue is so big that one would probably need to write a big book on it to answer this. We know from Godel's incompleteness theorems that a mathematical system cannot be *both* complete and consistent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems). My intuition (which may or may not be correct) is that the Universe is, in the realm of infinity, working to complete itself with consistency. It succeeds, but only because it has infinity to work with. My intuition is that this final complete and consistent state is what is God/Source/Consciousness/Spirit/Nirvana/etc. It is what makes "everything OK" on a deep level despite suffering, etc. It is also backwards-causal (or rather, causal through any modality used to resolve contradictions or complete systems, as time is used in our world), thus making it *both* emergent and causal, per no one's observation.

Thus, any discussion from my perspective needs to be seen in light of this overall vector of the Universe. In this sense, I think we are already in agreement, and the details are largely irrelevant.

||And likewise, asking the question about God creating a duplicate universe, also presumes something: that God might be in the business of doing something as strange and inorganic as creating an entire universe to precisely duplicate another universe.||

Yes, well, I don't think "God" "does" anything, so I agree to that extent.

||We have absolutely no reason to believe that God does anything even remotely like that. So it's not only a hypothetical question, but it's a bizarre one: it presumes that God's power can be measured by his ability to perform the sort of task he would never do.||

True insofar as "God" transcends the need to "do" anything.

||And that's why I find your question to be so unappealing. Answering it doesn't get me thinking about the God that I know, in the least.||

Yet, "God" is also not omnipotent, in that "God" transcends the need to "do" anything.

||For me, speculating about God can be enjoyable and productive, but only when we ask questions that have to do with the sort of God we genuinely seem to be meeting (or at least approaching) in NDEs and other mystical states, rather than some hypothetical magician who may or may not be able to perform certain hypothetical, bizarre, and meaningless tricks.||

I agree. But I don't "meet" the kinds of inconsistent worlds you hypothesize, just as you don't "meet" the kind of God I was describing. It works both ways. So you wish to push back against that kind of God, and wish to push back against that kind of world.

doubter,

||This emphasis is primarily to invalidate the New Age belief that the Earth being a school for souls (which itself may be true) is a good or wonderful thing from the human perspective. This then goes to the claim that the human can legitimately consider himself to be the soul in any meaningful way.||

I don't see how the point follows.

||It must be nice to have such certainty. I can not be absolutely certain of anything other than that I exist.||

I wouldn't be so certain!

||This ignores the central mystery of consciousness - the so-called "hard problem". Consciousness cannot be the same as or completely explained by physical events in the brain, given the total separation as different types of existence between the sense of self and sensations like color, and the brain processes correlated with these things. Consciousness must then have some nonphysical explanation.||

I think both the "physical" and "nonphysical" are types of information processing. The division between them is largely illusory.

||Aside from that, psychical phenomena such as telepathy don't obey physical laws of matter like the inverse square law, the need to employ direct contact or field forces to apply force to an object, and most importantly, with precognition and retrocognition, the progress of time.||

You're correct.

doubter,

Yes, you get it! Lol.

“My intuition (which may or may not be correct) is that the Universe is, in the realm of infinity, working to complete itself with consistency. It succeeds, but only because it has infinity to work with. My intuition is that this final complete and consistent state is what is God/Source/Consciousness/Spirit/Nirvana/etc. It is what makes "everything OK" on a deep level despite suffering, etc. It is also backwards-causal” Matt

Surely all our intuitions need to be grounded in experience, and for me that means seeing the physical universe as a metaphor for whatever happens in other realms, because trying to explain what happens in other realms without reference to it is pure speculation (that’s why I earlier said that ideas must precede acts -it’s based on our own experience - As above, so Below – which has an honourable following). So since we’re headed for the Big Rip, the Universe is not apparently going to “complete itself with consistency”.

Suffering is only OK when it’s not us suffering it. That’s another intuition based on experience.

This emphasis is primarily to invalidate the New Age belief that the Earth being a school for souls (which itself may be true) is a good or wonderful thing from the human perspective.

I am not a follower of the New Age and as I wrote, no necessary connection between classes of phenomena that indicate some kind of afterlife and the various schools that try to make sense of human life.

Consciousness cannot be the same as or completely explained by physical events in the brain, given the total separation as different types of existence between the sense of self and sensations like color, and the brain processes correlated with these things. Consciousness must then have some nonphysical explanation. Aside from that, psychical phenomena such as telepathy don't obey physical laws of matter like the inverse square law, the need to employ direct contact or field forces to apply force to an object, and most importantly, with precognition and retrocognition, the progress of time.

It is true that consciousness cannot be completely explained by physical events in the brain, but this is a totally different issue if there is a material vehicle of consciousness that remains after death and whether psi abilities can be explained by properties of quantum mechanics. Put another way: the various evidence indicates that the spirits of the dead are physical entities, only made ​​of material unknown to modern physics and psi abilities may be related to certain quantum properties of the universe, so I think that the non-physical is really physical but currently unknown.

Juan - I am not a follower of the New Age and as I wrote, no necessary connection between classes of phenomena that indicate some kind of afterlife and the various schools that try to make sense of human life.

I agree.

the various evidence indicates that the spirits of the dead are physical entities, only made ??of material unknown to modern physics and psi abilities may be related to certain quantum properties of the universe, so I think that the non-physical is really physical but currently unknown.

The definition of "physical" is of or pertaining to that which is material, pertaining to the properties of matter and energy. If the spirits of the dead are physical material entities they would have to be affected by extreme physical forces and energies. For instance, victims at ground zero of a nuclear explosion would not have an afterlife since the multi- million degree temperatures of the fireball instantly transform the physical bodies and physical spirits into ionized plasma. In order for the physical spirits of the dead not be destroyed in this event they would have to be composed of some hypothetical physical material substance not interacting with matter/energy and therefore not composed of any atoms of the periodic table, or any subatomic particles, or any fields. All of these physical entities would be disrupted by such extreme energy release.

Such a physical soul substance that survives the nuclear explosion would have to have absolutely no (or vanishingly little) interaction with matter and fields and subatomic particles. But this means it couldn't interact with the physical brain. But the spirit obviously does. So, logically, the "substance" of the spirit is not physical. I would conclude that it interacts with the brain in some way associated with it being of a higher order of existence beyond matter and energy. This interaction may simply not be understandable by any physical science.

If the spirits of the dead are physical material entities they would have to be affected by extreme physical forces and energies. For instance, victims at ground zero of a nuclear explosion would not have an afterlife since the multi- million degree temperatures of the fireball instantly transform the physical bodies and physical spirits into ionized plasma. In order for the physical spirits of the dead not be destroyed in this event they would have to be composed of some hypothetical physical material substance not interacting with matter/energy and therefore not composed of any atoms of the periodic table, or any subatomic particles, or any fields. All of these physical entities would be disrupted by such extreme energy release.

This is speculative, but a comment on this blog I read that in case of violent death by explosion, the astral body is destroyed and then be regenerated. Also if I wrote that the spirits of the deceased seem physical beings, is because in some cases of apparitions occur systematically severe drops, the apparition is seen by several witnesses from different perspectives, the apparition blocks light sources and causes shadows, among other aspects.

Furthermore, you're assuming that if the spirits of living and dead beings are physical, then they are in the same plane as ordinary matter, and therefore are likely to be destroyed by explosions that destroy ordinary matter. But it seems that this is not so because the spirits of the living and dead beings are on another plane than the plane of normal matter, so try to destroy them would be like trying to mix water and oil. The interaction between planes is possible, but no explosion in the plane of ordinary matter can destroy the spirits of the living and dead beings that are in another plane. It is true that the notion of plane is not modern physics, but is a basic notion in theosophy and I think the edge physics to make something similar will eventually if not already done it.

"This is speculative, but a comment on this blog I read that in case of violent death by explosion, the astral body is destroyed and then be regenerated."

Yes, that's from one of Robert Crookall's books, probably Intimations of Immortality. It was a communication that purportedly came from a soldier who'd been blown up by a grenade. The idea was that the impact of the blast caused the astral body to dissipate, but then the scattered fragments came back together again via some natural attraction. During the interval when the body was broken up, the spirit was in an unconscious state, and after the body was reconstituted, the spirit was disoriented for a while.

@ Matt

Sorry to have abandoned our conversation in this thread. It was losing its "juice" for me.

Thanks, Michael, for the information.

Juan - ....some cases of apparitions occur systematically severe drops, the apparition is seen by several witnesses from different perspectives, the apparition blocks light sources and causes shadows, among other aspects.


......The interaction between planes is possible, but no explosion in the plane of ordinary matter can destroy the spirits of the living and dead beings that are in another plane.

I agree that there are apparently good observations that apparitions cause temperature drops, block light, etc. This indicates that they interact with matter and elementary particles and fields. This seems to indicate that apparitions could not be the actual spirits of the dead, but effects produced by a soul substance that is still of another order of existence or in another "plane" as you suggest. I would contend that it is unlikely that the science of physics can ever penetrate the mystery of this other order of substance or other plane of existence, because whatever the soul essence is it can't in principle be affected by physical matter and energy (or it could be destroyed by explosions, etc.), which is required for it to be detectable in the lab.

It was a communication that purportedly came from a soldier who'd been blown up by a grenade. The idea was that the impact of the blast caused the astral body to dissipate, but then the scattered fragments came back together again via some natural attraction. During the interval when the body was broken up, the spirit was in an unconscious state, and after the body was reconstituted, the spirit was disoriented for a while.

Very interesting. Then, the astral body would indeed be physical in that it is affected by matter and energy and is capable of being destroyed. But for it to be reconstituted there would have to be some underlying soul essence giving it form remaining after the explosion, which is independent of the physical world. The question is whether this soul essence could be considered "physical" in any sense and be detected by any possible physics lab apparatus.

I would contend that it is unlikely that the science of physics can ever penetrate the mystery of this other order of substance or other plane of existence, because whatever the soul essence is it can't in principle be affected by physical matter and energy (or it could be destroyed by explosions, etc.), which is required for it to be detectable in the lab.

I think it is difficult but possible for physics discover planes of non-ordinary matter that constitute the spirits of the living and the deceased, because as in particle accelerators are detected exotic particles that interact very weakly with ordinary matter, is possible discover other material planes.

Then, the astral body would indeed be physical in that it is affected by matter and energy and is capable of being destroyed. But for it to be reconstituted there would have to be some underlying soul essence giving it form remaining after the explosion, which is independent of the physical world.

You are right that the astral regeneration seems to imply that there remains a blueprint that allows astral regeneration, but this blueprint would still be physical that would interact with ordinary matter through the astral body, but it is true that their interaction would be very weak and very difficult to detect in laboratory. This can be understood as an increase of dimensionality: the plane of ordinary matter has three dimensions, the astral plane has four dimensions, while the plane of the blueprint has five dimensions, so that the physics may not be so far from discover the matter of higher dimensions.

The comments to this entry are closed.