Do You Believe In Life After Death ?
- added June 15, 2008
- 13 responses
-
-
embed code
-
-
-
- soleil10
- added this
-
-
- related topics
-
- News and Politics (33675)
- Not News (25199)
- Politics (21677)
- Random (19940)
- Art and Style (17546)
- Culture (13394)
- Current (1709)
- Religion (1612)
- Life (492)
- Family (435)
- Spirituality (242)
- Philosophy (115)
If you think that life is temporary, can you share what you are living for ?
-
Very true. Life is short, temporary, fragile.
But this is nothing more of another example of people letting things other than themselves define them, when surely, they should define what their own life is. -
The finite nature of life should not inhibit one's search for meaning. In fact, I would think it enables. If our lives are endless, regardless of what we do, then there is no point. If we don't die, there's no deadline, no reason to do anything. You can procrastinate for the rest of eternity. I understand that the heaven/hell dichotomy provides some incentive to behave in a productive manner, but nonetheless. If one dies eventually, there is reason to squeeze in as much of the feeling we call happiness as possible, because once we're gone, there is no more. I live for the fact that I CAN live.
-
i do believe in something else. Life? dunno?
-
We are all energy beings living a material existence in this flesh, our consciousness will continue if we have honored it and nurtured it with love.
-
jubsl - No offense, but at face value, that doesn't make any sense. I acknowledge that fundamentally, all matter can be reduced to nothing more than energy, and vica-versa, but this is irrelevant when discussing afterLIFE. Once we die, we continue to exist through energy and matter, but it cannot be said that these contain our consciencious Self. Thus we do not continue to LIVE after we die, but EXIST. In my mind the differentiation between these two is that the former implies a self-awarenes, whereas the latter is simply presence. I don't see the argument from posthumous existance as a viable reasoning for afterlife. The second half of your statement was considerably less comprehensible. You say that our consciousness will continue to exist, in addition to matter and energy, if we honor and nurture it with love. The meaning of this is somewhat ambiguous. Do you mean that we must cherish our self-awareness and not take it for granted? If so, I cannot see why this would cause consciousness to transcend. This passes into the realm of metaphysics, of which I have little conception. I don't suppose you could elaborate?
-
I guess you have to believe in the spiritual world, the unseen intelligences surround us and interact with us on some level as yet undefined. I personally have experienced supernatural events so I am convinced of the existence of spiritual beings. That is the language I choose to describe it, but others may call them transdimensional beings or some other scientific term I am not aware of.
I have been reading some of the projections written about by some of the more interesting quantum physicists and yes it does border on metaphysics in the way that two electrons can be connected even though they are separated by great distances. It is called particle duality, the particles are split so that they remain connected through time, space, and probably dimensions; that is if parallel universes can ever be proven, maybe they already have but the knowledge is top secret.
I have formulated my hypothesis from much exhaustive reading into many subjects, including science fiction. But I will tell you this if you are skeptical of science fiction. Many of the things I read in my youth 8 to 16 are now or already have come to pass. Many more things are in the technological pipeline and others are still in the conceptualization stage. Whatever man can imagine with his mind he can create without limits.
My only hope is that man, when he does flee this earth in search of greener pastures, will not take the machinations of war with him into the universe.
You might even think that I probably watched too many episodes of Stargate or Atlantis. I have watched the shows but I wouldn't consider that my ideas were derived from the show, even though they coincide.
Remember the old question which came first the chicken or the egg? Well what about this question which came first mind or matter? Mind is matter but its also electrochemical energy and it is yet even something else, the flesh that breathes is a soul, but the essence within is spirit. -
Do you like to read I could suggest some interesting books.
-
Every particle has an anti particle. This website will give you some insight into what is understood thus far and the theories around elementary particles.
Some of the theories even suggest that these particles react to human thoughts and actually want to cooperate with the human mind to create reality.
There is so much you can learn about the universe and the true nature of God; if you are brave enough to use that word. I prefer Loving Heavenly Father of Lights but when in Rome...
I can use whatever language is comfortable for the listener if they really want to listen. I won't cast my pearls before swine. -
String or M Theory
Another recent attempt to form a TOE is through M (for membrane) or string theory. String theory is actually a high order theory where other models, such as supergravity and quantum gravity, appear as approximations. The basic premise to string theory is that subatomic entities, such as quarks and forces, are actually tiny loops, strings and membranes that behave as particles at high energies.
One of the problems in particle physics is the bewildering number of elementary particles (muons and pions and mesons etc). String theory answers this problem by proposing that small loops, about 100 billion billion times smaller than the proton, are vibrating below the subatomic level and each mode of vibration represents a distinct resonance which corresponds to a particular particle. Thus, if we could magnify a quantum particle we would see a tiny vibrating string or loop.
The fantastic aspect to string theory, that makes it such an attractive candidate for a TOE, is that it not only explains the nature of quantum particles but it also explains spacetime as well. Strings can break into smaller strings or combine to form larger strings. This complicated set of motions must obey self-consistent rules and the the constraint caused by these rules results in the same relations described by relativity theory.
Another aspect of string theory that differs from other TOE candidates is its high aesthetic beauty. For string theory is a geometric theory, one that, like general relativity, describes objects and interactions through the use of geometry and does not suffer from infinities or what is called normalization problems such as quantum mechanics. It may be impossible to test the predictions of string theory since it would require temperature and energies similar to those at the beginning of the Universe. Thus, we resort to judging the merit of this theory on its elegance and internal consistence rather than experiment data. -
In the matter of theoretical particle and astrophysics, I tend not to throw my full support behind any theory. The majority are at best a shot in the dark, because we simply can't do any better at this junction. Ever since I read Einstein's "Relativty," I have loved learning about the theories, but I find it thard to wholeheartedly believe any of them. Antimatter in particular is quite a promising concept though. Since Gene Rodenburry first chose it as the essential warp core componant, it has held as the most likely method of space travel - matter/antimatter reaction. It would be 100% efficiency, but we have no proven means of producing antimatter. Ultimately, even this, I am too skeptical to endorse. Not that my opinion matters in the grand scheme of things, I just try to avoid false hope (or faith for that matter). As far as your hypothesis goes, I'm afraid I find it difficult to concieve of such trans-dimensional, transendential concepts. It is, I agree, boardering on theology when one contemplates quanum physics, and that is my shortfall. I am far too doubtful to accept an idea as prolific as transcendance. I understand what you're getting at, though. Thanks for the explanation.
-
There is a great book by Depak Chopra where he talks about how the "self" actually remains aware after death. Very interesting to think about.
Login/Registration is required to add a response.
