Re: DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
George Hammond
Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
Froehlich�s frequency could easily contain a year of human
experience, and thus even though the bedside observer would
see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
departed would subjectively live on for a year in
cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
demise.
I�ve been thinking some more about the death dream
download after talking to Stuart Hameroff by e-mail.
Supposedly the death dream would be pre-recorded in a
running-edit mode during your entire life, every hour, every
second of every day. It would constantly be edited and
distilled, sort of the same process that they use to cut and
edit a Hollywood movie. This in fact, might even be the
primary function of nocturnal dreaming.
So this edited life after death scenario, or dream, is
residing in the microtubule system of the brain ready to
download in a few milliseconds at a moments notice should
death occur. The question then arises as to why this dream
would automatically download when you die. My answer to
that is that it must be completely natural, that is a
default mechanism of the death process itself. Supposedly,
the death dream is created by a natural mechanism having to
do with the growth deficit of the brain, and then when you
die, this pent-up font of "flat space" reality, by the same
token, just automatically bursts forth and floods the entire
cytoskeleton of the brain. And this is what produces "life
after death" so-called.
The underlying idea here is that the well-known Secular
Trend growth deficit causes a neuron shortage and therefore
the brain cannot actually perceive "true reality", that is
"flat subjective space"�.. it can only perceive a "curved
version" (truncation) of subjective space-time� a "curved
version" of reality as it were. However, our brain is able
to detect that what we are seeing is not completely real,
i.e. is curved rather than flat, so what it does, in some
analog fashion or other, is compute the "flat space
extrapolation" of what we actually see. Of course the
microtubule system cannot present this extrapolation to the
neuronal system because the neuronal system is not big
enough to display it. But it remains "pent-up" or "latent"
somewhere in the cytoskeleton, and through some process of
subconscious mentation, dreaming etc., it gets composed and
edited into what we are now calling "an afterlife dream
world".
Okay, that is how and why it gets composed. Now we have
to address, how and why it downloads at death. Presumably,
death occurs from the top down. That is, the neuronal
system shuts down or "flat lines" first. And then begins
the slower process of the disintegration of the
cytoskeleton-microtubule system. My first intuition would
be that the flat lining of the neuronal system is what
triggers the afterlife download in the cytoskeleton. Perhaps
for instance, the neuronal-cytoskeletal system is originally
a "closed loop" feedback system and when the neuronal system
flatlines at death the cytoskeleton system goes "open-loop"
and this simply causes the cytoskeleton system to "dump" any
heretofore undisplayed information into the entire
cytoskeleton whereas previously it was negative feedback
from the neuronal system that was truncating that
information and keeping it in check, i.e. keeping it pent-up
in the microtubule memory. That�s one of certainly many
possibilities.
And I must add here, that this death dream signal may
not only flood just the cytoskeleton of the brain, it could
just as easily flood the cytoskeleton of the entire body
since the entire cytoskeleton of the brain is interconnected
by microwave �gap junctions�. This means that your entire
body and your entire brain, your entire sensory apparatus,
motor apparatus, and cognitive system would be experiencing
this dream firsthand. It would in other words, be
completely real! This is why the microtubule computer in
the brain is sufficient to do the job of Tipler�s
"astronomical sized"computer". His computer was designed to
synthesize a human being from scratch, while nature has the
advantage of having the actual physical body in the form of
the cytoskeleton actually present in the microtubule
computer! This reduces the size of the necessary computer
by a "double exponential" sized factor! And this literally
brings the problem down to earth.
Serious intellectual commentary is invited, hecklers will be
killfiled.
========================================
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
=======================================
Olrik
> LOG 12-9-09 THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>
> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
<snip for decency>
> Serious intellectual commentary is invited
You're insane. Seriously. Thank you for your cooperation.
Otto Bahn
> LOG 12-9-09 THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>
> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
>
> In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
> millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
> Froehlich's frequency could easily contain a year of human
> experience, and thus even though the bedside observer would
> see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
> departed would subjectively live on for a year in
> cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
> demise.
This is eerily exactly the opposite what one experiencing
crossing a black hole's event horizon and what others
observe of the event.
What happens when you suffer traumatic head injury, say
the brain is complete blown asunder.
--oTTo--
haiku jones
> Serious intellectual commentary is invited, hecklers will be
> killfiled.
Which raises an interesting physics question: what is
the Chandrasekhar limit of a killfile? I suspect we
may soon empirically find out.
Haiku JOnes
> ========================================
> GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
> Primary sitehttp://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond
Olrik
> On Dec 9, 6:13 pm, George Hammond<Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>> LOG 12-9-09 THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>>
>> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
>>
>
>> Serious intellectual commentary is invited, hecklers will be
>> killfiled.
>
> Which raises an interesting physics question: what is
> the Chandrasekhar limit of a killfile? I suspect we
> may soon empirically find out.
I see an answer coming on the event horizon...
> Haiku JOnes
George Hammond
wrote:
>"George Hammond" <Nowh...@notspam.com> wrote
>
>> LOG 12-9-09 THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>>
>> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
>>
>> In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
>> millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
>> Froehlich's frequency could easily contain a year of human
>> experience, and thus even though the bedside observer would
>> see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
>> departed would subjectively live on for a year in
>> cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
>> demise.
>
>This is eerily exactly the opposite what one experiencing
>crossing a black hole's event horizon and what others
>observe of the event.
>
>
[Hammond]
In fact you are correct and it is not just a "
similarity", there is in fact a physical connection.
>
>
>What happens when you suffer traumatic head injury, say
>the brain is complete blown asunder.
>--oTTo--
>
>
[Hammond]
It turns out that the theory I have outlined is actually
" failsafe". This is because the fastest a person can
possibly die is 1 nanosecond, because that is how long it
takes a light beam to cross the human brain (e.g. a gamma
ray burst from an atomic bomb). Taking the ratio of
Frohlich's frequency to neuronal frequency gives us
10^14/10^3 = a time dilation of 100 billion (microwaves or
IR vs. brain waves). 1 ns times 100 billion is a couple of
minutes. This means that the absolute minimum duration of a
condition of " eternal life" is a couple of minutes. In fact
it may be longer than that, because the death dream may read
out at optical frequencies and not microwave frequencies,
which adds another couple of factors of 10. The minimum
duration could easily be as long as an hour. Point is this
is still "eternal" life.... because eternal life is like 1/2
of infinity is still infinity, or 1/10 of infinity is still
infinity. So it doesn't matter if you stay there half an
hour, or or a month.... you still have eternal life... you
get everything. Like I say, it's FAILSAFE!
Of course the average person doesn't get hit by an atomic
bomb, so the average person will probably spend days, weeks,
months, or even years in the afterlife, some of it in a
condition of Purgatory by the way. But it would be nice to
know that any innocent people who died at Hiroshima got to
Heaven for at least an hour.
Mark
> >This is eerily exactly the opposite what one experiencing
> >crossing a black hole's event horizon and what others
> >observe of the event.
>
> [Hammond]
> In fact you are correct and it is not just a "
> similarity", there is in fact a physical connection.
Didn't I just point this out last week?
Don't I get a royalty or something?
---
Mark
Nicko
Uncle Vic
> 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.
haiku jones
> One fine day in alt.atheism, George Hammond <Nowhe...@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.
But of course. I mean, what's the point of having a crackpot
theory that no one listens to unless it gets you the smug
and righteous head rush of feeling unjustly persecuted?
Haiku Jones
Androcles
"haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d4b14d8e-dd93-42eb...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 10, 12:59 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
> One fine day in alt.atheism, George Hammond <Nowhe...@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.
But of course. I mean, what's the point of having a crackpot
theory that no one listens to unless it gets you the smug
and righteous head rush of feeling unjustly persecuted?
Haiku Jones
=============================================
'Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good,
you'll have to ram them down people's throats.' - Howard Aiken
If your ideas are stupid, people will justly rag you mercilessly.
=============================================
eric gisse
> X-No-Archive: Yes
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:11:58 -0000
Wouldn't it just be easier to ignore the huge volume of people who think you
are insane and stupid rather than respond with 'snip heckler' over and over?
Cue 'snip heckler' in 3...2...1...
Mark
> Mirror site
> http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
> HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto
> http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
> =======================================
Hello George. First let me say that this is the real
Mark, and I'm aware that the troll may have replied to
you in recent posts, none of which I read, so I can
only hope you knew it was him. I've only responded
to you I think 2 times ever. Now, I wanted to say...
I enjoy your speculations in that your attention to
detail is paramount so as to present a reasonable
explantion of precisely one thing, which is mechanism...
and my gut instinct is that your underlying impetus
to construct these hypotheses is born of an awareness
of something greater, unseen, and beyond the radar
of typical comprehension. This happens to me a lot,
and it tends to leave one lonely. Therefore I find it pays to
be versatile, a chamelion if you will and hope to speak
the language of your audience.
Back to the mechanism. Where is life after death stored?
I'd say you have to look beyond physiology to quantum
mechanics, or string theory just to envision this other
dimension beyond space and time. Could one explain
a soul in terms of electro-chemical frequencies? I
would only say that every single activity of animal
and plant life emits a different energy, and with regard
to humanity...morality, evil and love come into play.
I imagine a collective reservoir, a repository of amplitudes
which were exacted by our own personal experiences.
To the extent that we choose life and love, we etch our
own database, and it isn't within a context of self
determination, but rather a reliance and compliance
upon a consequential reality which emcompasses
all that we understand, but mostly what we don't.
Best wishes,
Mark
Uncle Vic
wrote:
>
> "haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d4b14d8e-dd93-42eb...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com..
> . On Dec 10, 12:59 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>> One fine day in alt.atheism, George Hammond <Nowhe...@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.
>
> But of course. I mean, what's the point of having a crackpot
> theory that no one listens to unless it gets you the smug
> and righteous head rush of feeling unjustly persecuted?
>
Notice how Hammond has only responded to his replies with his sock
puppet, Snip Heckler. No one wants to talk shop with him. What a sad
sack.
George Hammond
>Hello George. First let me say that this is the real
>Mark, and I'm aware that the troll may have replied to
>you in recent posts, none of which I read, so I can
>only hope you knew it was him. I've only responded
>to you I think 2 times ever. Now, I wanted to say...
>
>
>
[Hammond]
First of all, anyone who is not using their full name and
doesn't have an identifying website listing their
credentials is considered a "pseudo-anonymous" poster, and
that includes you.
Secondly, Mark is the second most common name in the
English language after John, which is why two of the four
Gospels are named Mark and John.
Thirdly, there is only one other post from a "Mark" on
this thread and it's from the same IP address as this one,
so I assume that's you also.
Fourth, I am dictating this at 120 words per minute so
please don't flatter yourself by thinking that I would
actually be sitting here typing this computer science crap
discussion on a keyboard.
>
>
>I enjoy your speculations in that your attention to
>detail is paramount so as to present a reasonable
>explantion of precisely one thing, which is mechanism...
>and my gut instinct is that your underlying impetus
>to construct these hypotheses is born of an awareness
>of something greater, unseen, and beyond the radar
>of typical comprehension.
>
>
[Hammond]
Of course it is. I'm 67 years old and have been studying
psychology, theology and physics 10 hours a day for my
entire adult life 24-365
>
>
>This happens to me a lot,
>and it tends to leave one lonely. Therefore I find it pays to
>be versatile, a chamelion if you will and hope to speak
>the language of your audience.
>
[Hammond]
look Mark, you're just a kid with no experience and
possibly not even any college degrees. I've got 2� in
physics which I obtained by the age of 25.
So me tell you something that you're not old enough to be
aware of. The common term "schizophrenia" refers to a
mental instability whereby the person has discovered that
there is more than one reality... that is, that human
perception is capable of seeing more than one world.
Schizophrenics see visual hallucinations and hear auditory
hallucinations. Great mental stress and life failure is
what causes this condition. The person is looking for a new
reality, and lo and behold, he has discovered that there is
such a thing.
Meanwhile of course, most of these people are poorly
educated,impractical and not very intelligent. What they
don't know is that this is exactly what religion and
theology are all about; the fact that every single person is
in a DIFFERENT reality depending on their personality and
physical growth, and once you discover this it is possible
to actually slip into one of those other worlds and take a
look around.
Of course such exploration is extremely dangerous which
is why most people who finally get to the stage of
schizophrenia wind up in a mental hospital taking
psychotropic drugs.
I am the other hand have the benefit of an advanced
education, and enlightened family background, and high
measured intelligence. Consequently I was able to discover
this invisible world without falling victim to
schizophrenia. And I'm not the only one who knows about
this, psychiatrists know about it, priests know about it,
actors know about it and even many of our elected political
leaders know about it, and finally certainly all of
history's great religious leaders knew ALL about it.
What is interesting in my case is that I happen to be a
PHYSICIST, and for a physicist to discover this kind of
knowledge is extremely RARE and the singular fact is the
unique origin of my work.
Meanwhile of course I am a published author in the
peer-reviewed literature and has been an invited speaker at
international symposium was along with the other scientific
luminaries, and M. in regular contact with many of the
world's leading scientists. Don't worry about me kid!
>
>Back to the mechanism. Where is life after death stored?
>
>
[Hammond]
Neuropsychology has been searching for the "Engram" of
memory for a least 100 years. They have concluded (Kandel,
Lashley and others) that there is no such thing at the
neuronal level. Memory is not stored at the neuronal level.
Now with the discovery of the microtubule switching and
signal mechanism with 15 orders of additional computation
power, the smart money has concluded that the microtubules
of the neuronal cytoskeleton is in fact the long lost
"Engram" of memory storage.
This then is where the life after death movie is stored.
>
>
>I'd say you have to look beyond physiology to quantum
>mechanics, or string theory just to envision this other
>dimension beyond space and time. Could one explain
>a soul in terms of electro-chemical frequencies?
>
>
[Hammond]
Na, na, na... don't go "ga ga" on me. Listen, we had to
discover CLASSICAL physics before we could discover QUANTUM
physics. You have to take it one step at a time.
This means that we are going to have to discover a
classical scientific explanation of God BEFORE we plunge
headlong into a quantum scientific explanation of God.
This is your mistake, you don't realize that there is a
classical physics explanation of God, you simply ignore
that, and leapfrog headlong into the unknown with ridiculous
speculations about a quantum explanation of God long, long,
long before its time has come. and this is what every other
scientists in the field is doing. And it's ludicrous!
>
>
>would only say that every single activity of animal
>and plant life emits a different energy, and with regard
>to humanity...morality, evil and love come into play.
>I imagine a collective reservoir, a repository of amplitudes
>which were exacted by our own personal experiences.
>To the extent that we choose life and love, we etch our
>own database, and it isn't within a context of self
>determination, but rather a reliance and compliance
>upon a consequential reality which emcompasses
>all that we understand, but mostly what we don't.
>
[Hammond]
Well when you have just said comes under the heading of
poetry or philosophy or science fiction, it does not come
under the heading of hard science which is what I'm here to
talk about.
But don't take offense if you happen to be a
philosopher... in the end it is the philosophy department
that is going to have to negotiate a reaproachmont between
science and religion when news of this discovery hits the
streets. So stick around.
>
>
>Best wishes,
>Mark
>
>
Likewise I'm sure,
Hammond
George Hammond
<add...@withheld.com> wrote:
>One fine day in alt.atheism, "Androcles" <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_q>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> "haiku jones" <575j...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:d4b14d8e-dd93-42eb...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com..
>> . On Dec 10, 12:59 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>>> One fine day in alt.atheism, George Hammond <Nowhe...@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.
>>
>> But of course. I mean, what's the point of having a crackpot
>> theory that no one listens to unless it gets you the smug
>> and righteous head rush of feeling unjustly persecuted?
>>
>
>
>Notice how Hammond has only responded to his replies with his sock
>puppet, Snip Heckler. No one wants to talk shop with him. What a sad
>sack.
>
>
[Hammond]
I posted shop talk to being with and got nothing but crap
from you. I'll start talking shop when you do.
George Hammond
<The_...@everywhere.com> wrote:
>>Reply to article by: darwinist <darw...@gmail.com>
>>Date written: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:22:24 -0800 (PST)
>>MsgID:<3666888c-bc57-409b...@u1g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
>
>>> 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.
>
>By definition, it isn't a "theory". It is speculation based on no observable
>facts whatsoever. He is just making all this up as he goes along. Just because a
>story sounds good, won't make it true, but George doesn't understand this simple
>truism. He is lost in his own ego.
>
>The Sage
>
[Hammond]
Look, you half to baked pseudo-intellectual potato head.
You're talking to a figment of your imagination, you're not
talking to me. Objective fact shows that I have 2� in
physics from accredited universities, that I have published
this theory in 2 peer-reviewed academic journals and
presented it as an invited speaker at international academic
symposiums. These published papers date from 1994... only a
screwball would assert that I'm "making it up as I go
along".
Fact is, no one in the entire history of the world from
the time of the Pyramids down to the present day has any
credible scientific or even psychological double digit
assurance that there either IS or IS NOT such a thing as a
literal life after death.
There is only one way to find out and that is this:
1. Discover a realistic and plausible mechanism that would
cause such a thing.
2. Investigate the mechanism experimentally.
Okay, I have accomplished step one, and that is what we are
here to talk about.
So either start talking shop or take a hike.
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
[snip]
> Look, you half to baked pseudo-intellectual potato head.
> You're talking to a figment of your imagination, you're not
> talking to me. Objective fact shows that I have 2� in
> physics from accredited universities, that I have published
> this theory in 2 peer-reviewed academic journals
IIRC, one was a journal on psychiatry.
> and presented it as an invited speaker at international academic
> symposiums.
Not everyone on stage at such a symposium are scientists. Some are the
subjects.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Leap and the net will appear.
Jared
[...]
> Of course such exploration is extremely dangerous which
> is why most people who finally get to the stage of
> schizophrenia wind up in a mental hospital taking
> psychotropic drugs.
> I am the other hand have the benefit of an advanced
> education, and enlightened family background, and high
> measured intelligence. Consequently I was able to discover
> this invisible world without falling victim to
> schizophrenia.
To other people, it looks like what is technically known as "lack of
insight".
Schizophrenia is not caused by being a failure or uneducated. I
suggested you read Schreber's memoirs, and he is a good example of
someone who was highly intelligent, successful and well educated
before he started having delusions.
Alan Ford
> On Thu, 10 Dec
<SNIP HECKLER
--
If you don't beat your meat
You can't have any pudding
How can you have any pudding
If you don't beat your meat?
Alan Ford
> I posted sh
Tiger Would
> >Hello George. First let me say that this is the real
> >Mark, and I'm aware that the troll may have replied to
> >you in recent posts, none of which I read, so I can
> >only hope you knew it was him. I've only responded
> >to you I think 2 times ever. Now, I wanted to say...
>
> [Hammond]
> First of all, anyone who is not using their full name and
> doesn't have an identifying website listing their
> credentials is considered a "pseudo-anonymous" poster, and
> that includes you.
I'm not a pseudo-anonymous poster. I'm an actual
anonymous poster. It isn't wise to be giving out one's
whereabouts and whatnots for an entire world to ponder for
exploitation.
> Secondly, Mark is the second most common name in the
> English language after John, which is why two of the four
> Gospels are named Mark and John.
> Thirdly, there is only one other post from a "Mark" on
> this thread and it's from the same IP address as this one,
> so I assume that's you also.
> Fourth, I am dictating this at 120 words per minute so
> please don't flatter yourself by thinking that I would
> actually be sitting here typing this computer science crap
> discussion on a keyboard.
There's no flattery aspect to be considered. Your writing reminded
me of a childhood friend of mine who was misunderstood by others.
I have a gift for looking past the obvious and discussing the abstract
so I replyed to you. Nothing more.
> >I enjoy your speculations in that your attention to
> >detail is paramount so as to present a reasonable
> >explantion of precisely one thing, which is mechanism...
> >and my gut instinct is that your underlying impetus
> >to construct these hypotheses is born of an awareness
> >of something greater, unseen, and beyond the radar
> >of typical comprehension.
>
> [Hammond]
> Of course it is. I'm 67 years old and have been studying
> psychology, theology and physics 10 hours a day for my
> entire adult life 24-365
>
> >This happens to me a lot,
> >and it tends to leave one lonely. Therefore I find it pays to
> >be versatile, a chamelion if you will and hope to speak
> >the language of your audience.
>
> [Hammond]
> look Mark, you're just a kid with no experience and
> possibly not even any college degrees.
I see I've misjudged you. I assumed you were above the
judgemental level that seeks gratification or validation
by taking a competetive stance with others.
> I've got 2° in
> physics which I obtained by the age of 25.
Congratulations. I can relate.
> So me tell you something that you're not old enough to be
> aware of. The common term "schizophrenia" refers to a
> mental instability whereby the person has discovered that
> there is more than one reality... that is, that human
> perception is capable of seeing more than one world.
> Schizophrenics see visual hallucinations and hear auditory
> hallucinations.
George, I'm 54 years old and am well aware of what
schizophrenia is, and it's various manifestations apart from
other psychological abberations.
>Great mental stress and life failure is
> what causes this condition. The person is looking for a new
> reality, and lo and behold, he has discovered that there is
> such a thing.
You are incorrect about this. The causality is genetic and
the seperate reality is merely an interpretation of and
further creation of a sensory experience which
links the practical to the hypothetical to the nonsensical.
> Meanwhile of course, most of these people are poorly
> educated,
I've seen schizophrenics which are very educated.
>impractical
Ha. Yes, by definition.
>and not very intelligent.
Many seem highly intelligent.
> What they
> don't know is that this is exactly what religion and
> theology are all about;
Religion and theology are about man's quest to internalize
that sense of infinity necessary to live within one's own
looming mortality, and yet, we see historical events and
supernatural evidences beyond the test of scientific
repeatablility which suggest that the life, death and
resurrection of Jesus Christ are a real event. Even the
shroud of Turin is an unexplained artifact. So in this
respect all religions aren't able to be classified together.
>the fact that every single person is
> in a DIFFERENT reality depending on their personality and
> physical growth, and once you discover this it is possible
> to actually slip into one of those other worlds and take a
> look around.
An altered state of consciousness, or heightened imagination
has no affect on the external reality beyond one's vantage point
except to the extent that one's telepathic energy or gift can
influence another's senses. I suspect this is how prayer
begins to work, yet going further.
> Of course such exploration is extremely dangerous which
> is why most people who finally get to the stage of
> schizophrenia wind up in a mental hospital taking
> psychotropic drugs.
Imaginaton doesn't create schizophrenia. Neuropathways
leading to psychosis does. I've taken LSD hundreds of
times and walked in an alternate reality yet always
returned to my normal boring self.
> I am the other hand have the benefit of an advanced
> education, and enlightened family background, and high
> measured intelligence. Consequently I was able to discover
> this invisible world without falling victim to
> schizophrenia.
I know what it is to draw the attention of educators, and
be selected for I.Q. testing and advanced placement.
> And I'm not the only one who knows about
> this, psychiatrists know about it, priests know about it,
> actors know about it and even many of our elected political
> leaders know about it, and finally certainly all of
> history's great religious leaders knew ALL about it.
Personally I find most psychiatrists to be unbalanced, often
alcoholics and pathological introverts.
Priests often have savior complexes, and once given power
cater to their own proclivities.
Actors have a voice inside that screams...LOVE ME, but
yes, some such as Robin Williams have "the gift".
Elected political leaders, that's just showbiz for ugly people.
History's greatest religious leaders? Only Jesus stands out.
The rest were unique due to their circumstance of wisdom,
activism and opportunity. Muhammed was a warlord.
> What is interesting in my case is that I happen to be a
> PHYSICIST, and for a physicist to discover this kind of
> knowledge is extremely RARE and the singular fact is the
> unique origin of my work.
Yes I agree. This is why I bothered to talk with you.
> Meanwhile of course I am a published author in the
> peer-reviewed literature and has been an invited speaker at
> international symposium was along with the other scientific
> luminaries, and M. in regular contact with many of the
> world's leading scientists. Don't worry about me kid!
Ok then, that's fine, except that I'm no kid.
> >Back to the mechanism. Where is life after death stored?
>
> [Hammond]
> Neuropsychology has been searching for the "Engram" of
> memory for a least 100 years. They have concluded (Kandel,
> Lashley and others) that there is no such thing at the
> neuronal level. Memory is not stored at the neuronal level.
> Now with the discovery of the microtubule switching and
> signal mechanism with 15 orders of additional computation
> power, the smart money has concluded that the microtubules
> of the neuronal cytoskeleton is in fact the long lost
> "Engram" of memory storage.
I'd say it still takes a little looking into.
> This then is where the life after death movie is stored.
Regardless of the feaseability of a "replay moment", which
is a theoretical abstract, to the outside observer, to reality,
you're still dead as a box of rocks. Now, is there a soul
which transcends that shell and exists in another dimension?
Yes.
> >I'd say you have to look beyond physiology to quantum
> >mechanics, or string theory just to envision this other
> >dimension beyond space and time. Could one explain
> >a soul in terms of electro-chemical frequencies?
>
> [Hammond]
> Na, na, na... don't go "ga ga" on me. Listen, we had to
> discover CLASSICAL physics before we could discover QUANTUM
> physics. You have to take it one step at a time.
Mm, this sounds like good advice. We do tend to thoroughly
overlook what's before us sometimes.
> This means that we are going to have to discover a
> classical scientific explanation of God BEFORE we plunge
> headlong into a quantum scientific explanation of God.
I've been trying to tie God and Science together all my
life. Ultimately I was forced to live with a dual belief
system in which I'm resigned to accept that no one can
crack the code and explain the mechanics of God.
>This is your mistake, you don't realize that there is a
> classical physics explanation of God, you simply ignore
> that, and leapfrog headlong into the unknown with ridiculous
> speculations about a quantum explanation of God long, long,
> long before its time has come. and this is what every other
> scientists in the field is doing. And it's ludicrous!
All I can tell you is that I don't have a degree in physics,
so maybe if I did then this "genius" thing which I've been
assigned might be put to better use on this subject.
> >would only say that every single activity of animal
> >and plant life emits a different energy, and with regard
> >to humanity...morality, evil and love come into play.
> >I imagine a collective reservoir, a repository of amplitudes
> >which were exacted by our own personal experiences.
> >To the extent that we choose life and love, we etch our
> >own database, and it isn't within a context of self
> >determination, but rather a reliance and compliance
> >upon a consequential reality which emcompasses
> >all that we understand, but mostly what we don't.
>
> [Hammond]
> Well when you have just said comes under the heading of
> poetry or philosophy or science fiction, it does not come
> under the heading of hard science which is what I'm here to
> talk about.
I feel I've described the nature of our connection to God, and
I think there is probably a scientific breakdown to how this
actually occurs, however...look, God wouldn't expect us to
all to be brilliant to know or receive him. He transcends that
requirement so that we're all equal. When you can take
love and put it in a bottle, then you've cracked the code.
>But don't take offense if you happen to be a
> philosopher... in the end it is the philosophy department
> that is going to have to negotiate a reaproachmont between
> science and religion when news of this discovery hits the
> streets. So stick around.
No offense taken. I live to understand and achieve, but
humbly acknowledge the impossibility that one can ever
sufficiently explain God.
> >Best wishes,
> >Mark
>
> Likewise I'm sure,
> Hammond
> ========================================
> 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
> =======================================
Mark
Just passin' thru (life)
George Hammond
<pa...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
>George Hammond wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>
>> Look, you half to baked pseudo-intellectual potato head.
>> You're talking to a figment of your imagination, you're not
>> talking to me. Objective fact shows that I have 2� in
>> physics from accredited universities, that I have published
>> this theory in 2 peer-reviewed academic journals
>
>IIRC, one was a journal on psychiatry.
>
>
[Hammond]
_New Ideas In Psychology_ is a Psychology journal, not a
psychiatry journal... there's a difference. Psychology
today includes Physics, Biology, Chemistry and even pure
Mathematics.
_New Ideas in Psychology_ is a very highly respected and
throughly peer-reviewed journal published by Elsevier
Science Ltd. one of the world's largest academic publishers.
It contains some now legendary historical papers, such as
physicist Ian Marchall's 1989 paper on Bose-Einstein
Condensates in Microtubules which is one of the most cited
papers in the field:
MARSHALL I.N., 1989.
Consciouness and Bose-Einstein Condensates.
New Ideas In Psychology. 7, 73-83
as well as my (now legendary) discovery of the Physics
origin of the Structural Model of Personality:
http://tinyurl.com/ygqopj5
You don't know what you're talking about. By the way, what
does "P.E." stand for; Pedophile Rabbi ?
>
>
>
>> and presented it as an invited speaker at international academic
>> symposiums.
>
>Not everyone on stage at such a symposium are scientists. Some are the
>subjects.
>
>
[Hammond]
Hans Eysenck was sitting next to me for two hours on the
dais at a symposium in Montr�al where we were both invited
speakers. At the time he was the world's most famous and
most cited living psychologist. Those are the kinds of
people that I rub elbows with, not USENET rabble and
heckling scumbags like you.
By the way, I only bother to respond to you because I'm
using voice dictation and can flap my lips in your face
without lifting a finger and then watch you work up a sweat
pounding away on your Stone Age keyboard like the futz that
you are trying to post your halfwit impudent back talk...
aggravated fuckwit.
George Hammond
<theoreti...@aol.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>Mark
>Just passin' thru (life)
>
>
[Hammond]
Thanks for your amateur commentary, I'm sure it will be
of interest to someone. Given your lack of credentials and
scientific achievements however your caf� style monologue is
of little relevance to this hard science investigation into
life after death. But thanks for at least posting
on-topic.
George Hammond
<jare...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 11, 1:59�am, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>[...]
>> � �Of course such exploration is extremely dangerous which
>> is why most people who finally get to the stage of
>> schizophrenia wind up in a mental hospital taking
>> psychotropic drugs.
>> � �I am the other hand have the benefit of an advanced
>> education, and enlightened family background, and high
>> measured intelligence. �Consequently I was able to discover
>> this invisible world without falling victim to
>> schizophrenia.
>
>To other people, it looks like what is technically known as "lack of
>insight".
>
>
[Hammond]
That's because you're a half wit with no scientific
credentials, a vicious and aggravated wannabee who doesn't
even have a real name much less professional credentials.
Your problem is that you're not even intelligent enough
to ask a serious question, much less refrain from acting
stupid.
>
>
>Schizophrenia is not caused by being a failure or uneducated.
>
>
[Hammond]
Who told you that your grandmother?
>
>I
>suggested you read
>
>
[Hammond]
Cut the shit. I'm write books not read them.
Otto Bahn
> >Hello George. First let me say that this is the real
> >Mark, and I'm aware that the troll may have replied to
> >you in recent posts, none of which I read, so I can
> >only hope you knew it was him. I've only responded
> >to you I think 2 times ever. Now, I wanted to say...
>
> [Hammond]
> First of all, anyone who is not using their full name and
> doesn't have an identifying website listing their
> credentials is considered a "pseudo-anonymous" poster, and
> that includes you.
<
<I'm not a pseudo-anonymous poster. I'm an actual
<anonymous poster. It isn't wise to be giving out one's
<whereabouts and whatnots for an entire world to ponder for
<exploitation.
What on Earth do you mean?
--oTTo--
Glenn Knickerbocker
> Secondly, Mark is the second most common name in the
>English language after John, which is why two of the four
>Gospels are named Mark and John.
Well, nobody can accuse George of a "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.
�R http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/zangelding.html "When there's
a nuclear attack, that's when buckets are used." --Tim Brown, IUSD
Doctroid
Glenn Knickerbocker <No...@bestweb.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:59:39 -0800, George Hammond wrote:
> > Secondly, Mark is the second most common name in the
> >English language after John, which is why two of the four
> >Gospels are named Mark and John.
>
> Well, nobody can accuse George of a "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.
It's a little known fact that those Gospels were written by John Smith
and Mark Jones.
--
Sig available on request.
- Doctroid
Glenn Knickerbocker
>It's a little known fact that those Gospels were written by John Smith
>and Mark Jones.
In earlier language, they went by Joshua and Thaddeus, though their names
were actually Hannibal and Jed. Alas, all anybody remembers now are Mel
and Griff.
"It's not the size of the boat, it's Matt McIrvin" -- Joe
�R / http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/ny2001.html / Manfre
haiku jones
> One fine day in alt.atheism, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_q>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "haiku jones" <575jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:d4b14d8e-dd93-42eb...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com..
> > . On Dec 10, 12:59 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
> >> One fine day in alt.atheism, George Hammond <Nowhe...@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.
>
> > But of course. I mean, what's the point of having a crackpot
> > theory that no one listens to unless it gets you the smug
> > and righteous head rush of feeling unjustly persecuted?
>
> Notice how Hammond has only responded to his replies with his sock
> puppet, Snip Heckler. No one wants to talk shop with him. What a sad
> sack.
Ah, but the pleasures of assumed martyrdom are not inconsiderable.
("Why's everybody always pickin on me?" -- C. Brown)
Haiku Jones
Mark
> "Tiger Would" (if that is your REAL name) <theoreticalfo...@aol.com> wrote
When I was young, someone tricked me into selling
my underwear on E-Bay. I'm not proud of it, but it
kept me in Eggos for over a month.
---
Mark
Mark
> It's a little known fact that those Gospels were written by John Smith
> and Mark Wesson.
IFYPFY
---
Mark
Otto Bahn
> > >Hello George. First let me say that this is the real
> > >Mark, and I'm aware that the troll may have replied to
> > >you in recent posts, none of which I read, so I can
> > >only hope you knew it was him. I've only responded
> > >to you I think 2 times ever. Now, I wanted to say...
>
> > [Hammond]
> > First of all, anyone who is not using their full name and
> > doesn't have an identifying website listing their
> > credentials is considered a "pseudo-anonymous" poster, and
> > that includes you.
>
> <
> <I'm not a pseudo-anonymous poster. I'm an actual
> <anonymous poster. It isn't wise to be giving out one's
> <whereabouts and whatnots for an entire world to ponder for
> <exploitation.
>
> What on Earth do you mean?
<
<When I was young, someone tricked me into selling
<my underwear on E-Bay. I'm not proud of it, but it
<kept me in Eggos for over a month.
You are a teenage Japanese girl...?
Who knew?!
--oTTo--
Mark
> "Mark" <blueriver...@yahoo.com> wrote
Love you long time, 20 dallah, same as
in town.
---
Mark
George Hammond
<zeen...@gate.net> wrote:
>On Dec 9, 6:30�pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>> LOG � 12-9-09 � THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>>
>> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
>>
>> � �In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
>> millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
>> Froehlich s frequency could easily contain a year of human
>> experience, and thus �even though the bedside observer would
>> see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
>> departed would subjectively live on for a year in
>> cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
>> demise.
>> � �I ve been thinking some more about the death stream
>> download after talking to Stuart Hameroff by e-mail.
>> Supposedly the death dream would be pre-recorded in a
>> running-edit mode during your entire life, every hour, every
>> second of every day. �It would constantly be edited and
>> distilled, sort of the same process that they use to cut and
>> edit a Hollywood movie. �This in fact, might even be the
>> primary function of �nocturnal dreaming.
>> � �So this edited life after death scenario, or dream, is
>> residing in the microtubule system of the brain ready to
>> download in a few milliseconds at a moments notice should
>> death occur. �The question then arises as to why this dream
>> would automatically download when you die. �My answer to
>> that is that it must be completely natural, that is a
>> default mechanism of the death process itself. Supposedly,
>> the death dream is created by a natural mechanism having to
>> do with the growth deficit of the brain, and then when you
>> die, this pent-up font of �"flat space" reality, by the same
>> token, just automatically bursts forth and floods the entire
>> cytoskeleton of the brain. �And this is what produces "life
>> after death" so-called.
>> � �The underlying idea here is that the well-known Secular
>> Trend growth deficit causes a neuron shortage and therefore
>> the brain cannot actually perceive "true reality", that is
>> "flat subjective space" .. it can only perceive a "curved
>> version" (truncation) of subjective space-time a "curved
>> version" of reality as it were. �However, our brain is able
>> to detect that what we are seeing is not completely real,
>> i.e. is curved rather than flat, so what it does, in some
>> analog fashion or other, is compute the "flat space
>> extrapolation" of what we actually see. �Of course the
>> microtubule system cannot present this extrapolation to the
>> neuronal system because the neuronal system is not big
>> enough to display it. �But it remains "pent-up" or "latent"
>> somewhere in the cytoskeleton, and through some process of
>> subconscious mentation, dreaming etc., it gets composed and
>> edited into what we are now calling �"an afterlife dream
>> world".
>> � �Okay, that is how and why it gets composed. �Now we have
>> to address, how and why it downloads at death. �Presumably,
>> death occurs from the top down. �That is, the neuronal
>> system shuts down or "flat lines" first. �And then begins
>> the slower process of the disintegration of the
>> cytoskeleton-microtubule system. �My first intuition would
>> be that the flat lining of the neuronal system is what
>> triggers the afterlife download in the cytoskeleton. Perhaps
>> for instance, the neuronal-cytoskeletal system is originally
>> a "closed loop" feedback system and when the neuronal system
>> flatlines at death the cytoskeleton system goes "open-loop"
>> and this simply causes the cytoskeleton system to "dump" any
>> heretofore undisplayed information into the entire
>> cytoskeleton �whereas previously it was negative feedback
>> from the neuronal system that was truncating that
>> information and keeping it in check, i.e. keeping it pent-up
>> in the microtubule memory. �That s one of certainly many
>> possibilities.
>> � �And I must add here, �that this death dream signal may
>> not only flood just the cytoskeleton of the brain, it could
>> just as easily flood the cytoskeleton of the entire body
>> since the entire cytoskeleton of the brain is interconnected
>> by microwave gap junctions . �This means that your entire
>> body and your entire brain, your entire sensory apparatus,
>> motor apparatus, and cognitive system would be experiencing
>> this dream firsthand. �It would in other words, be
>> completely real! �This is why the microtubule computer in
>> the brain is sufficient to do the job of �Tipler s
>> "astronomical sized"computer". �His computer was designed to
>> synthesize a human being from scratch, while nature has the
>> advantage of having the actual physical body in the form of
>> the cytoskeleton actually present in the microtubule
>> computer! �This reduces the size of the necessary computer
>> by a "double exponential" sized factor! �And this literally
>> brings the problem down to earth.
>>
>> Serious intellectual commentary is invited, hecklers will be
>> killfiled.
>
>
>
>[Zinnic]
>Your small step in the physicalist world from neuronal networks to
>cytoskeletons does not begin to address the leap of faith required to
>cross over from the mundane to the imagined miracle of 'life' after
>death.
>
>
[Hammond]
The first thing I wish to determine is where you're
posting from. I posted my message to:
Newsgroups:
sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,alt.philosophy,rec.org.mensa,alt.religion.christian
Your use of the word "physicalist" would indicate that
you are not a physicist. So you are not posting from the
physics newsgroups. On the other hand your use of the term
"imagined miracle" tends to indicate that you are not
posting from the religious newsgroup. That leaves either
Philosophy or Mensa. Since you don't appear to be a
wannabee genius, this indicates that most likely you are
posting from alt.philosophy. So I assume that I am talking
to a Philosophy major of some kind.
But to address your specific comment above about passing
from the "mundane to the miraculous" vis-�-vis passing from
the neuronal to be microtubule system, what you fail to
realize is that the latter amounts to passing from curved
reality to uncurved reality. This, you are unaware, means
passing from here into heaven.
This does not involve woo woo science. It simply means
that part of reality is INVISIBLE to us because of the
Secular Trend growth deficit of the brain. That the
neuronal system sufferers from this shortfall but the
microtubule cytoskeleton system does not. Hence a
"miraculous" transformation of reality.
>
>
>After "curved" neuronal function transfers to spend a millisec as the
>"un-curved reality" of cytoskeletal function, what then?
>
>
[Hammond]
I have edited your statement above so that it now reads:
coherently and correctly.
What you fail to understand is that the cytoskeleton
system runs at 1 billion times faster than the neuronal
system. This means that millisecond in the cytoskeleton
brain is EQUIVALENT time wise to a year in the neuronal
system. Meanwhile, this year is spent in "un-curved" or
(eternal/paradisicle) reality, otherwise known as "eternal
life" or Heaven!
>
>
>When the physical cytoskeleton disintegrates and rots, is the 'soul'
>distilled from the ferment and condensed by some miraculous procecess
>into pure disembodied spirit ?
>
>
>
[Hammond]
Na, na, na, na.... I can see that you are not familiar
with the physicists terminology of a "time dilation". As
far as the coroner is concerned, the person died in a matter
of seconds. However, as far as a physicist is concerned,
DURING THAT SPLIT SECOND the dearly departed actually
existed for a solid YEAR in another world.
Hence, it absolutely does not matter when, where, or what
happens to the body beyond one split second after death.
>
>
>Seems to me you still have some explaining to do!
>Zinnic
>
>
[Hammond]
Well, I am not a teacher and I certainly don't give
private tutorials. I am right in the middle of writing a
300 page book using this voice recognition dictation
equipment, and perhaps you'll simply have to wait for the
book.
Meanwhile, I like your style Zinnic (more evidence that
you are probably a Philosophy major). You appear to be
polite, interested and serious.
I WILL REPLY to polite, intelligent and serious
questions.
Jared
> >I
> >suggested you read
>
> [Hammond]
> Cut the shit. I'm write books not read them.
You must read _some_ books, for instance ones about microtubules and
such. Reading about the lives of very unusual people would provide
insight into what the mind is capable of.
Jared
>
> You are incorrect about this. The causality is genetic and
> the seperate reality is merely an interpretation of and
> further creation of a sensory experience which
> links the practical to the hypothetical to the nonsensical.
Identical twins are not 100% concordant for schizophrenia; that is, if
one has it, the other may not. So it is not correct to say "the
causality is genetic".
Tiger Would
Identical twins are not identical.
---
tiger
Tiger Would
John Forbes Nash Jr.
---
tiger
George Hammond
<jare...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 11, 10:57�am, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>> >I
>> >suggested you read
>>
>> [Hammond]
>> � Cut the shit. �I'm write books not read them.
>
>You must read _some_ books, for instance ones about microtubules and
>such.
>
>
[Hammond]
Hey Jerko, I'm already an expert in the field throughly
familiar with the entire literature and in direct
communication with the world's leading a authority on the
subject.
>
>
> Reading about the lives of very unusual people would provide
>insight into what the mind is capable of.
>
>
[Hammond]
I've already read half the books in the Library of
Congress Jerko.
I'm a PhD level physicist, 67 years old and I've read
half a dozen books a week for the past 40 years.
Ask some intelligent questions and quit trying to act
like an authority, it makes you look stupid.
George Hammond
[Hammond]
The genetic heritability of schizophrenia is quite low.
For one thing schizophrenics are known to have very low
fecundity. If so, why hasn't the condition disappeared? The
answer obviously is that schizophrenia is predominantly
caused by environmental effects rather than genetic effects,
same as bullet wounds.
Besides, this discussion is off topic not to say
completely amateur and boring.
George Hammond
[Hammond]
No shit Sherlock. That's because people are subject to
both NATURE and NURTURE. "Nature" refers to genetics.
"Nurture" refers to the growth deficit. even though two
people can be genetically identical does not mean that they
have the same growth curve deficit. "God" incidentally is
ENTIRELY caused by Nurture.... i.e. the growth curve
deficit.
>---
>tiger
Mark Edwards
>Identical twins are not identical.
What about inimical twins?
Mark Edwards
--
Proof of Sanity Forged Upon Request
Mark
> >Identical twins are not identical.
> No shit Sherlock.
Precisely my dear Watson.
>That's because people are subject to
> both NATURE and NURTURE. "Nature" refers to genetics.
> "Nurture" refers to the growth deficit.
In my writings where I reference the nature vs. nurture
component, of course nurture also refers to the exceptional
ability to overcome chromosome deficiencies and malformations.
> even though two
> people can be genetically identical does not mean that they
> have the same growth curve deficit. "God" incidentally is
> ENTIRELY caused by Nurture.... i.e. the growth curve
> deficit.
My research has found that it is made very clear that some
people are born predisposed, "gifted", or predetermined
to receive the Holy Spirit, not by character trait, but by
divine selection.
The growth deficit you speak of isn't scale specific.
It translates sociologically across cultures and nations
causing them to crumble through an immorality poverty, a
catylist which leads to natural and spiritual de-evolution.
Plural systems of science and God are always at play,
often the same components, referenced by different
names. Life after death exists for everyone. Only you
will decide if you sit in the smoking section.
---
tiger
( if you can't read this post, type the letters you
see in the box below)
Mark
> No cluons were harmed when Tiger Would wrote:
>
> >Identical twins are not identical.
>
> What about inimical twins?
Only if they charge each other.
Identical charges repel.
[15th century. Via French < Latin repellere "drive back" < pellere "to
drive"]
--
Mark
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
A systematically one way or an other
As the define as the definite matter
Details of a life after death is a crucial
Especially as does a definitely
First of all along the westerners
Got a name which is the eugenics
As which is a crucial for a money as matter
As a primordial matter along the others
As for the army along the industrial
Pharmacology covered as a goal
Along an economical pattern of a matter
A just as a definitely an among the others
--
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
Best Regards!
"Mark" <blueri...@yahoo.com> kirjoitti
viestiss�:00258e7f-f716-46b2...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
George Hammond
<Mark-E...@comcast.net> wrote:
>No cluons were harmed when Tiger Would wrote:
>>Identical twins are not identical.
>
>What about inimical twins?
>
>
>Mark Edwards
>
>
[Hammond]
Wikipedia says:
"Personality characteristics show heritabilities in 30�50
percent range; hence, showing substantial degree of
environmentality�50�70 percent"
Which is well in line with the academic literature on this
subject. Roughly speaking personality is probably, in my
opinion, 60% "Nature" and 40% "Nurture".
This means that you could easily have identical twins with
inimical personalities. Take left-right brain
lateralization for instance. This causes the
Republican-Democrat personality divide. I'm sure you can
find many identical twins who are registered in the opposite
political party, just as you can find many brothers who were
on opposite sides of the Civil War.
If you have taken the time to look at hundreds of
photographs of identical twins as I have, you can easily see
a noticeable difference in the two personalities. usually
one of the twins is dominant over the other, despite their
genetic identity. the dominant twin tends to be more right
wing or right brain dominant wildly subordinate twin tends
to be more left-wing or left brained dominant. this has
been known for thousands of years, you can even find it in
the Old Testament. in the New Testament, Jesus says " don't
let the right hand know what the left hand is doing". this
fact is as old as the hills.
Uncle Vic
> X-No-Archive: Yes
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:43:48 -0800
<SNIP SPAM>
--
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.
Uncle Vic
wrote:
> [Hammond]
> The first thing I wish to determine is where you're
> posting from. I posted my message to:
>
> Newsgroups:
> sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,alt.philosophy,rec.org.mensa,alt.rel
> igion.christian
LIAR! Here's the list, copy/pasted from the OP.
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,alt.sci.proof-of-
god,alt.atheism,alt.religion.kibology
Alan Ford
> X-No-Archive: Yes
<SNIP HECKLER
--
If you don't beat your meat
You can't have any pudding
How can you have any pudding
If you don't beat your meat?
Jared
So what's your point? In what relevant sense are they not identical?
The operative word here is _genetic_.
Jared
> In article <n705i5pafgcbk8gro29089a9bvvk9i3...@4ax.com>,
> Glenn Knickerbocker <N...@bestweb.net> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:59:39 -0800, George Hammond wrote:
> > > Secondly, Mark is the second most common name in the
> > >English language after John, which is why two of the four
> > >Gospels are named Mark and John.
>
> > Well, nobody can accuse George of a "post hoc ergo propter
> >hoc" fallacy.
Pre hoc fallacy?
Mark
wrote:
> ***** Th-Eo-Th-Ers *****
>
> A systematically one way or an other
> As the define as the definite matter
> Details of a life after death is a crucial
>
> Especially as does a definitely
> First of all along the westerners
> Got a name which is the eugenics
>
> As which is a crucial for a money as matter
> As a primordial matter along the others
> As for the army along the industrial
>
> Pharmacology covered as a goal
> Along an economical pattern of a matter
> A just as a definitely an among the others
>
> --
> Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
> Best Regards!
> tiger
> ( if you can't read this post, type the letters you
> see in the box below)
snap snap snap
---
Mark
George Hammond
<Z...@erkonx.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 16:30:08 -0800, George Hammond wrote:
>
>> even though the bedside observer would see the person expire in a
>> fraction of a second,
>
>All your details rest upon this. The idea of linear time as it relates to
>a linear (film strip) existence. Why not?
>
>However, for your human as apparatus position to be solid you must
>equally account for birth. The film just can not be rewound until it
>falls off the real reel, or [pun alert!] can it?
>
>
[Hammond]
Okay, yours is a meaningful post which contains
intelligent on-topic material. I appreciate that. In order
to see this full thread you have to read it on sci.physics.
relativity. There you will discover that this thread is
under a NIMBY attack from alt.atheism. So your on-topic
post is especially appreciated.
Birth is irrelevant to life after death. This is because
memory and experience before the age of a few months old
cannot be recalled by the average person.
Secondly, we are not talking about a "linear filmstrip"
when we talk about life after death. what exactly life
after death looks like, we don't know. we can reasonably
presume the following characteristics:
1. The dream contains elements of a "life review" but it
is not a linear format. Similar to a dream, it may
jump around, flashback to the past, and shift
abruptly from scene to scene.
2. We assume that life after death, while intuitively
a form of "virtual reality" is neither identical
to ordinary reality, nor identical to an ordinary
nocturnal dream. It is we may suppose, a
THIRD REALITY somewhere between the two.
3. Above all else, we must remember that the
core purpose of life after death is to see and
experience a " Beatific Vision" of reality; What
the physicistsrefer to as an un-curved version
of reality.
4. The magnificence, glory, and subframe splendor
of such an experience is practically beyond human
imagination, although it is well within the reach
of a mathematical physics description.
>
>
>A Test:
>
>Since you rely so heavily on what seem to be computer metaphors, how
>would you or could you explain this to some one living in, say, the mid
>1800's?
>
>
[Hammond]
The1800s are nothing! 2,000 years ago St. Paul in
First-Corinthians chapter 15 verses 35-55 described
Life after Death as being a " spiritual body appearing
at the instant of death, in the twinkling of an eye;
going directly to heaven."
"Spiritual body" was the term used in the 1800s, but
today We can replace that term with a scientific term
" Virtual-body" or " cyberspace- body". The new term
means exactly the same thing as the old term except
That the new term incorporates a scientific comprehension
of what actually scientifically happens.
This is based on the fact that in recent decades it
has been discovered that the cytoskeleton of the neurons
in the brain consist of a gigantic digital computer
running at microwave/optical speeds and containing
15 orders of magnitude of heretofore unknown
switching speed and memory power.
It is now believed that the cytoskeleton-microtubule
system is the " Engram" of memory that neuropsychology
has been searching for unsuccessfully for seven decades.
Likewise, it is now intuitively obvious to even a casual
observer that this system is identically the
"unconscious mind" of Psychology and the "Soul" of
Theology.
Any further coherent and logical analysis that you may wish
to provide, or even basic inquiry, will be highly
appreciated by intelligent bystanders reading this
discussion.
Mark
> LOG 12-9-09 THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>
> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
>
> In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
> millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
> Froehlich’s frequency could easily contain a year of human
> see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
> departed would subjectively live on for a year in
> cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
> demise.
Hello.
I haven't seen you or anyone else address the fact
that a replay of one's life in the framework of what
seems like real time to that indivdual, is only just
a replay, without actual new interactions, new actual
people and places.
So really life after death should be NEW life, and
for eternity, which being outside of one's own
experience would have to occur in real time, as
we measure it on the wall clock, and with the
input of other actual people who are also enjoying
life after death.
And finally, even if one's memory were perceived
in 10^50 times faster than measured time, it still
will run out eventually, whereas eternity last to
infinity
---
Mark
---
Mark
George Hammond
<blueri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 9, 8:13�pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>> LOG � 12-9-09 � THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>>
>> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
>>
>> � �In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
>> millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
>> Froehlich�s frequency could easily contain a year of human
>> experience, and thus �even though the bedside observer would
>> see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
>> departed would subjectively live on for a year in
>> cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
>> demise.
>
>Hello.
>
>I haven't seen you or anyone else address the fact
>that a replay of one's life in the framework of what
>seems like real time to that indivdual, is only just
>a replay, without actual new interactions, new actual
>people and places.
>
>
[Hammond]
Look Mark, it is time for you to dummy up and listen. You
don't have any idea what the term " eternal life" actually
means. But don't feel stupid, 99.999% of the human
population doesn't understand what it is either, and that
includes almost every PhD level physicist in the world.
Let me try to explain it using simple terminology. Look
at the dashboard of your car and you will see a SPEEDOMETER
and an ODOMETER. The speedometer goes up to 100. but the
odometer goes to infinity ( it goes to 100,000 and then
starts over again). let us call 100 mph the absolute
maximum design speed of the automobile. then you could
label the speedometer in % so that the dial would read 10%,
20%, 30%............ 100%, a full design speed.
Okay then, what I'm trying to tell you is that " eternal
life" is a speedometer reading, it is NOT an odometer
reading. when you are going at full maximum design speed (
100%) then you are in a condition of " eternal life". the
odometer reading is ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT to the question of
internal life.
Okay, so now let me translate that into the physicists
jargon of relativity. the speedometer is measuring a " time
dilation" while the odometer is measuring a " time
duration".
ETERNAL LIFE IS A
TIME DILATION
NOT A
TIME DURATION
You have to remember that the average person in the world is
very uneducated and only of average intelligence. it is all
he can do to comprehend the difference between a speedometer
and an odometer much less try to comprehend the difference
between a time dilation and a time duration.
Time duration of course is much easier to understand
therefore eternal life which is actually a condition of "
zero time dilation" is referred to as a condition of "
infinite time duration" simply because the average person
does not know the difference between TIME and a TIME-RATE.
In terms of the human machine, the clock-rate is called "
mental speed" (aka intelligence), and it is known that the
Secular Trend growth deficit directly reduces one's mental
speed. therefore if you have a large growth deficit your
mental speed speedometer may be only running at 80%. and in
fact, this causes 20% of all visible motion in the world to
be an invisible to you because of the lower Fourier cutoff
frequency individual-perceptual system. This is the
celebrated INVISIBLE WORLD of religion.
Needless to say, if you had a zero growth deficit, your
mental speed speedometer would read 100%. this would mean
that every single motion your body was designed to see, you
would actually see! this is referred to as a condition of
ETERNAL LIFE. and you would be God in the flesh!
Needless to say, the Secular Trend data assures us that
there never has been any such thing as a full-grown person
on the face of the earth, ever! the average growth
shortfall ( growth deficit) in the human race today is about
20%. this means that not only 20% of our height and weight
is missing, it means 20% of our brain is missing, and hence
20% of reality is INVISIBLE to us.
>
>
> life after death should be NEW life, and
>for eternity,
>
>
[Hammond]
As I just explained above and tedious detail, it
certainly is " new life" and it is " eternal".
Consider this, if you had the other 20% of your brain
that is actually missing, you would be personally
INVINCIBLE. you would not know what the word " fear" means.
you would not know what the word " pain" means. the world
would look to you like a glorious and splendorous
magnificent creation. the wind in the trees and the rustle
of the leaves would sound like the world's most magnificent
symphony. you would scarcely feel the pull of gravity, your
movements and motions would be instantaneous and completely
unfettered. your mind would be in a constant state of
fascination and brilliant wonder and entertainment. there
would be no such thing as " suffering", " terror" or "
dread". every single second would be an explosive symphony
of wondrous possibility and fascination. this is known to
the theologians as " the beatific vision" and what
relativity calls " flat subjective space time".
>
>
>
> which being outside of one's own
>experience would have to occur in real time, as
>we measure it on the wall clock, and with the
>input of other actual people who are also enjoying
>life after death.
>
>
[Hammond]
That's exactly what you're going to see old boy, if my
theory of life after death is correct. You're going to see
everybody you want to see, probably in their original
condition AND in their " beatified" condition.
And by the way, if there is a Heaven, their certainly
must be a Hell. if you think that terrorists, Nazis and
serial killers are good at dreaming up forms of torture, you
haven't seen nothing until you come face-to-face with God
and the Devil!
I heard of a case in New York were some criminal through
a cupful of acid in a showgirls face. You know what the
Devil is going to do to him in Hell? Allow me to exercise
my imagination. I would imagine that they would suspend him
naked face down by the hands and feet so that his pecker was
actually the lowest part of his body. Then they would
slowly lower his shlong in and out of a stainless steel bowl
filled to the brim with a mixture of warm hydrofluoric and
sulfuric acid. This would go on for days and days until his
donk actually corroded off from the acid. Needless to say
we would be encouraged to scream endlessly at the top of his
lungs for the entertainment of the demons.
And believe me, God Is far far more imaginative than I
aml!
>
>
>
>
>And finally, even if one's memory were perceived
>in 10^50 times faster than measured time, it still
>will run out eventually, whereas eternity last to
>infinity
>
>
[Hammond]
Well you should know the answer to this one after my
relativity lecture above. " eternal" refers to the RATE of
time, not the DURATION of time.
100% RATE on the speedometer is equivalent to " full
design mental speed" in a human being which is only achieved
when that person has a ZERO GROWTH DEFICIT !!
>---
>Mark
>
>---
>Mark
>
>
George
Put on your thinking cap Mark, and asked some more logical
questions. I don't know yet whether there is a logical
loophole in this theory or not. Naturally, if such a
logical loophole exists, the theory would have to be
abandoned. I defy you to find one, I haven't been able to
yet!
Mark
> >> In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
> >> millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
> >> Froehlich’s frequency could easily contain a year of human
> >> experience, and thus even though the bedside observer would
> >> see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
> >> departed would subjectively live on for a year in
> >> cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
> >> demise.
>
> >Hello.
>
> >I haven't seen you or anyone else address the fact
> >that a replay of one's life in the framework of what
> >seems like real time to that indivdual, is only just
> >a replay, without actual new interactions, new actual
> >people and places.
>
> [Hammond]
> Look Mark, it is time for you to dummy up and listen. You
> don't have any idea what the term " eternal life" actually
> means. But don't feel stupid, 99.999% of the human
> population doesn't understand what it is either,
Lol, I don't put myself in that ol' crowd!
> and that
> includes almost every PhD level physicist in the world.
> Let me try to explain it using simple terminology. Look
> at the dashboard of your car and you will see a SPEEDOMETER
> and an ODOMETER. The speedometer goes up to 100. but the
> odometer goes to infinity ( it goes to 100,000 and then
> starts over again). let us call 100 mph the absolute
> maximum design speed of the automobile. then you could
> label the speedometer in % so that the dial would read 10%,
> 20%, 30%............ 100%, a full design speed.
> Okay then, what I'm trying to tell you is that " eternal
> life" is a speedometer reading, it is NOT an odometer
> reading. when you are going at full maximum design speed (
> 100%) then you are in a condition of " eternal life". the
> odometer reading is ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT to the question of
> internal life.
Alright, in your model, QUALITY, not QUANTITY.
> Okay, so now let me translate that into the physicists
> jargon of relativity. the speedometer is measuring a " time
> dilation" while the odometer is measuring a " time
> duration".
>
> ETERNAL LIFE IS A
>
> TIME DILATION
> NOT A
> TIME DURATION
>
> You have to remember that the average person in the world is
> very uneducated and only of average intelligence. it is all
> he can do to comprehend the difference between a speedometer
> and an odometer much less try to comprehend the difference
> between a time dilation and a time duration.
You overestimate most people. I'd say the difference
between their ass, and a hole in the ground remains
an enigma. But, there are different tiers of smartness.
> Time duration of course is much easier to understand
> therefore eternal life which is actually a condition of "
> zero time dilation" is referred to as a condition of "
> infinite time duration" simply because the average person
> does not know the difference between TIME and a TIME-RATE.
This smacks of Chronos time vs. Kristos time, which is
cool with me.
> In terms of the human machine, the clock-rate is called "
> mental speed" (aka intelligence), and it is known that the
> Secular Trend growth deficit directly reduces one's mental
> speed. therefore if you have a large growth deficit your
> mental speed speedometer may be only running at 80%. and in
> fact, this causes 20% of all visible motion in the world to
> be an invisible to you because of the lower Fourier cutoff
> frequency individual-perceptual system. This is the
> celebrated INVISIBLE WORLD of religion.
> Needless to say, if you had a zero growth deficit, your
> mental speed speedometer would read 100%. this would mean
> that every single motion your body was designed to see, you
> would actually see! this is referred to as a condition of
> ETERNAL LIFE. and you would be God in the flesh!
> Needless to say, the Secular Trend data assures us that
> there never has been any such thing as a full-grown person
> on the face of the earth, ever! the average growth
> shortfall ( growth deficit) in the human race today is about
> 20%. this means that not only 20% of our height and weight
> is missing, it means 20% of our brain is missing, and hence
> 20% of reality is INVISIBLE to us.
You're scaring me. This all makes perfect sense.
> > life after death should be NEW life, and
> >for eternity,
>
> [Hammond]
> As I just explained above and tedious detail, it
> certainly is " new life" and it is " eternal".
> Consider this, if you had the other 20% of your brain
> that is actually missing, you would be personally
> INVINCIBLE. you would not know what the word " fear" means.
> you would not know what the word " pain" means. the world
> would look to you like a glorious and splendorous
> magnificent creation. the wind in the trees and the rustle
> of the leaves would sound like the world's most magnificent
> symphony. you would scarcely feel the pull of gravity, your
> movements and motions would be instantaneous and completely
> unfettered. your mind would be in a constant state of
> fascination and brilliant wonder and entertainment. there
> would be no such thing as " suffering", " terror" or "
> dread". every single second would be an explosive symphony
> of wondrous possibility and fascination. this is known to
> the theologians as " the beatific vision" and what
> relativity calls " flat subjective space time".
I became aware of the state you describe back in
1979, as touched upon by J.Krishnamurti, a lucid
and penetrating observer. His rare originality offered me
a liberation from my self which I combined with the agape love
transformation offered by Christ. Taking this fresh awareness
in combination with lysergic alkaloids allowed me to
"see" and "feel" and "know" beyond the natural human
experience. Purely breathtaking.
> > which being outside of one's own
> >experience would have to occur in real time, as
> >we measure it on the wall clock, and with the
> >input of other actual people who are also enjoying
> >life after death.
>
> [Hammond]
> That's exactly what you're going to see old boy, if my
> theory of life after death is correct. You're going to see
> everybody you want to see, probably in their original
> condition AND in their " beatified" condition.
How do you correlate zero growth deficit to an
interconnectivity with other individuals?
> And by the way, if there is a Heaven, their certainly
> must be a Hell. if you think that terrorists, Nazis and
> serial killers are good at dreaming up forms of torture, you
> haven't seen nothing until you come face-to-face with God
> and the Devil!
> I heard of a case in New York were some criminal through
> a cupful of acid in a showgirls face. You know what the
> Devil is going to do to him in Hell? Allow me to exercise
> my imagination. I would imagine that they would suspend him
> naked face down by the hands and feet so that his pecker was
> actually the lowest part of his body. Then they would
> slowly lower his shlong in and out of a stainless steel bowl
> filled to the brim with a mixture of warm hydrofluoric and
> sulfuric acid. This would go on for days and days until his
> donk actually corroded off from the acid. Needless to say
> we would be encouraged to scream endlessly at the top of his
> lungs for the entertainment of the demons.
I can relate, having worked extensively with muratic, acetic,
sulfuric and various acids, alkaline corrosives and hypochlorates.
> And believe me, God Is far far more imaginative than I
> aml!
Surely you jest.
> >And finally, even if one's memory were perceived
> >in 10^50 times faster than measured time, it still
> >will run out eventually, whereas eternity last to
> >infinity
>
> [Hammond]
> Well you should know the answer to this one after my
> relativity lecture above. " eternal" refers to the RATE of
> time, not the DURATION of time.
> 100% RATE on the speedometer is equivalent to " full
> design mental speed" in a human being which is only achieved
> when that person has a ZERO GROWTH DEFICIT !!>---
> >Mark
>
> >---
> >Mark
>
> George
>
> Put on your thinking cap Mark, and asked some more logical
> questions. I don't know yet whether there is a logical
> loophole in this theory or not. Naturally, if such a
> logical loophole exists, the theory would have to be
> abandoned. I defy you to find one, I haven't been able to
> yet!
It's all interesting George. I'm working on a project right now which
is demanding me to memorize formulas and data which have life
or death consequences. My internet time is pure procrastination.
What amazes me is to meet someone who is articulating thoughts
which seem so familiar to me.
I'll be back.
---
Mark
Autymn D. C.
> Fact is, no one in the entire history of the world from
> the time of the Pyramids down to the present day has any
> credible scientific or even psychological double digit
> assurance that there either IS or IS NOT such a thing as a
> literal life after death.
IS or IS NOT -> is so or not
What is literal life? and figural life? Which one is a ghost/fetch/
wraith/doppelganger?
[snip spurius God site]
George Hammond
[Hammond]
ABSOLUTELY QUINTESSENTIALLY TRUE..... AND DON'T EVER
FORGET IT!!!
>
>
>> � �Okay, so now let me translate that into the physicists
>> jargon of relativity. �the speedometer is measuring a " time
>> dilation" while the odometer is measuring a " time
>> duration".
>>
>> ETERNAL LIFE IS A
>>
>> � � � � � � � �TIME DILATION
>> � � � � � � � � � � �NOT A
>> � � � � � � � TIME DURATION
>>
>> You have to remember that the average person in the world is
>> very uneducated and only of average intelligence. �it is all
>> he can do to comprehend the difference between a speedometer
>> and an odometer much less try to comprehend the difference
>> between a time dilation and a time duration.
>
>You overestimate most people. I'd say the difference
>between their ass, and a hole in the ground remains
>an enigma. But, there are different tiers of smartness.
>
>
>
[Hammond]
There sure are, it is a known experimentally measured
fact that IQ measurement run about as follows:
140-180 Mathematical physicists
120-130 Doctors, Senators
100-120 Skilled trades
90-110 Manual laborers
This just tells us that theoretical physics is more
essential and vital to society than theology.... because you
can bet your bottom dollar if theotetical physicists had
decided it was more important to find a proof of God than an
Atomic Bomb, we'd have one by now!
>
>
>> � �Time duration of course is much easier to understand
>> therefore eternal life which is actually a condition of "
>> zero time dilation" is referred to as a condition of "
>> infinite time duration" simply because the average person
>> does not know the difference between TIME and a TIME-RATE.
>
>This smacks of Chronos time vs. Kristos time, which is
>cool with me.
>
>
[Hammond]
No, What it smacks of is your complete and total ignorance
of RELATIVITY.
Note that every one of my posts has a follow-up to
sci.physics.relativity.
Unbeknownst to you RELATIVITY is ALL ABOUT THE PHENOMENON
OF TIME DILATION.
THE THEORY OF GOD IS ALL ABOUT THE PHENOMENON OF TIME
DILATION.
Until you know what a Time dilation is in relativity, it is
absolutely HOPELESS for you to try and understand what God
is.
>
>
>> � �In terms of the human machine, the clock-rate is called "
>> mental speed" (aka intelligence), and it is known that the
>> Secular Trend growth deficit directly reduces one's mental
>> speed. �therefore if you have a large growth deficit your
>> mental speed speedometer may be only running at 80%. �and in
>> fact, this causes 20% of all visible motion in the world to
>> be an invisible to you because of the lower �Fourier cutoff
>> frequency individual-perceptual system. �This is the
>> celebrated INVISIBLE WORLD of religion. �
>> � �Needless to say, if you had a zero growth deficit, your
>> mental speed speedometer would read 100%. �this would mean
>> that every single motion your body was designed to see, you
>> would actually see! �this is referred to as a condition of
>> ETERNAL LIFE. �and you would be God �in the �flesh!
>> � �Needless to say, the Secular Trend data assures us that
>> there never has been any such thing as a full-grown person
>> on the face of the earth, ever! �the average growth
>> shortfall ( growth deficit) in the human race today is about
>> 20%. �this means that not only 20% of our height and weight
>> is missing, it means 20% of our brain is missing, and hence
>> 20% of reality is INVISIBLE to us.
>
>You're scaring me. This all makes perfect sense.
>
>
[Hammond]
Betch your ass it does!
[Hammond]
Oh please spare me the hippie talk. this is a high-level
scientific discussion involving PhD level physicists ( me)
and world famous M.D. biology researchers such as Prof.
Stuart Hameroff whose communications have appeared on this
thread.
>
>> > which being outside of one's own
>> >experience would have to occur in real time, as
>> >we measure it on the wall clock, and with the
>> >input of other actual people who are also enjoying
>> >life after death.
>>
>> [Hammond]
>> � �That's exactly what you're going to see old boy, if my
>> theory of life after death is correct. �You're going to see
>> everybody you want to see, probably in their original
>> condition AND in their " beatified" condition.
>
>How do you correlate zero growth deficit to an
>interconnectivity with other individuals?
>
>
[Hammond]
The death dream is populated with people just like a
nocturnal dream is and just like your everyday life is.
every person you meet or talk to makes a permanent memory
trace in your brain is not only shows up in ordinary visual
recall, it also shows up in nocturnal dreams, and it will
INDUBITABLY appear in life after death.
>
>
>> � �And by the way, if there is a Heaven, their certainly
>> must be a Hell. �if you think that terrorists, Nazis and
>> serial killers are good at dreaming up forms of torture, you
>> haven't seen nothing until you come face-to-face with God
>> and the Devil!
>> � �I heard of a case in New York were some criminal through
>> a cupful of acid in a showgirls face. �You know what the
>> Devil is going to do to him in Hell? �Allow me to exercise
>> my imagination. �I would imagine that they would suspend him
>> naked face down by the hands and feet so that his pecker was
>> actually the lowest part of his body. �Then they would
>> slowly lower his shlong in and out of a stainless steel bowl
>> filled to the brim with a mixture of warm hydrofluoric and
>> sulfuric acid. �This would go on for days and days until his
>> donk actually corroded off from the acid. �Needless to say
>> we would be encouraged to scream endlessly at the top of his
>> lungs for the entertainment of the demons.
>
>I can relate, having worked extensively with muratic, acetic,
>sulfuric and various acids, alkaline corrosives and hypochlorates.
>
>
>
[Hammond]
You either try working with psychotics and serial
killers... remember there are people reading this whose
parents died in Nazi concentration camps.
[Hammond]
Everybody is busy, this is all pro bono public service
work you know. I'm busy dictating a 300 page book entitled:
THE
SCIENTIFIC
PROOF OF GOD
Into this computer using Dragon-10 voice recognition
equipment. and believe me it's keeping me busy 24-7.
>
>
>What amazes me is to meet someone who is articulating thoughts
>which seem so familiar to me.
>
>
>
[Hammond]
That goes for ANYONE who is listening to me, and everyone
knows it. the theory of life after death is the world's
oldest scientific- psychological speculation and EVERYBODY
can relate to it.
>I'll be back.
>
>---
>Mark
>
>
[Hammond]
I'll be baauck!
Mark
(snippy)
Your hypothesis is riddled with flaws. I completely understand
your theory but it limits eternal life to the past experiences of
one, and that isn't new life. A replay of one's past with a new and
perfectly enlightened perspective isn't new life.
New life must contain external stimulus from actual different
unpredictable meetings and experiences in new locations.
You have mixed a LOT of truth in your hypothesis, and most of
it is beyond the grasp of the average person. But still, in order for
you to be right, God would have to be a liar.
In your model, people in the blast radius of a nuclear bomb
would have no Heaven or Hell. What you've done is tried to make
man the source of his own heaven and hell. This all sounds
like a Roman Catholic construct with a physics/Hindu twist.
Ironically, muslim suicide bombers who blow themselves
up would reach neither my understanding of heaven nor
yours.
---
Mark
Otto Bahn
> > You are incorrect about this. The causality is genetic and
> > the seperate reality is merely an interpretation of and
> > further creation of a sensory experience which
> > links the practical to the hypothetical to the nonsensical.
>
> Identical twins are not 100% concordant for schizophrenia; that is, if
> one has it, the other may not. So it is not correct to say "the
> causality is genetic".
<
<Identical twins are not identical.
Close enough to swap wives now and then?
--oTTo--
Mark
> "Tiger Would" <theoreticalfo...@aol.com> wrote
Swap them for what?
---
Mark
George Hammond
<blueri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 1:37�pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>
>(snippy)
>
>Your hypothesis is riddled with flaws.
>
>
[Hammond]
WRONG.... there isn't a single flaw in it.
>
>
> I completely understand your theory
>
>
[Hammond]
WRONG.... you're level of misunderstanding is LUDICROUS!
>
>
>your theory but it limits eternal life to the past experiences of
>one, and that isn't new life. A replay of one's past with a new and
>perfectly enlightened perspective isn't new life.
>
>
[Hammond]
WRONG..... the raw stored sensory input of a lifetime is
easily capable of synthesizing an infinite range of totally
new life-experience.
The point is yours is an ODOMETER argument, and not a
SPEEDOMETER argument. "odometer" arguments are completely
irrelevant and a priori ruled out of court as being
incompetent.
>
>
> New life must contain external stimulus from actual different
>unpredictable meetings and experiences in new locations.
>
>
[Hammond]
WRONG.... that's like saying the laws of mathematics or
physics LIMIT the range of mathematical physics discovery.
That statement is ignorant and absurd!
>
>
>You have mixed a LOT of truth in your hypothesis, and most of
>it is beyond the grasp of the average person. But still, in order for
>you to be right, God would have to be a liar.
>
>
[Hammond]
WRONG...... you are still laboring under the misconception
of the "odometer" theory of life after death, because
apparently you are incapable of understanding the
"speedometer" theory of life after death.
Look, the average growth deficit in the human population
is somewhere around 20%. Let us use simple arithmetic to
demonstrate a few facts concerning that. It means that we
can compute the theoretical human lifespan by dividing the
actual human lifespan by 0.8:
Theoretical lifespan lifespan= 75/.8 = 93.75 years
A lifetime of sensory input stored in memory is EASILY able
to extrapolate today's reality another 18.75 years. Besides
which, "factual of events" are of ABSOLUTELY NO SIGNIFICANCE
to life after death. The simple proof of that is a fact
that a newborn baby who accidentally dies and has virtually
no conscious memory at all, is STILL resurrected to a
condition of eternal life.
I'm sure you've heard the expression:
"It doesn't matter what you say
it only matters how you say it"
Well that is a LITERALLY EXACT DESCRIPTION of life after
death! Facts, circumstances, objects, people, situations
and so forth are absolutely SECONDARY to the fact of moving
into a world with a ZERO-DILATED TIME RATE.
The problem is that you are intellectually INCAPABLE of
understanding that. This is not a new phenomenon, you can
tune into sci.physics.relativity and listen to amateurs
argue until they are blue in the face all day long simply
BECAUSE they are INCAPABLE of understanding Relativity.
Your problem is that you are still under the misconception
of the odometer theory of life after death and think that
eternal life means living for hundreds, thousands, millions,
billions, or trillions of years.
DON'T BE RIDICULOUS..... there isn't a normal person in
the world who would believe that a person was designed to
live for a billion years........ don't be STUPID!
>
> In your model, people in the blast radius of a nuclear bomb
>would have no Heaven or Hell.
>
>
[Hammond]
WRONG, a simple numerical calculation shows that the theory
is FAILSAFE. This because a person cannot be killed in less
than one nanosecond which is how long it takes light to
cross the human skull. An atomic bomb CANNOT kill you
faster than one nanosecond because of the Einstein limit on
the speed of light.
In this theory ONE NANOSECOND translates into an HOUR in
Heaven . And it is immediately obvious to any competent
scientific mind that "an hour of eternal life is just
that--- eternal life"; for the same reason that any fraction
of infinity, is still infinity! Now just because you are
too uneducated and too much of a Relativity Newbie to
understand that, does not by any means negate the truth of
that statement.
>
>what you've done is try to make
>man the source of his own heaven and hell.
>
>
[Hammond]
Get off it, that's like saying the laws of physics limit
the phenomena that can exist. The statement is stupid.
obviously the laws of physics allow an ABSOLUTELY INFINITE
number of phenomena, structures and circumstances to exist.
Your statement is intellectually incompetent.
>
>
>This all sounds
>like a Roman Catholic construct with a physics/Hindu twist.
>
>
[Hammond]
I happen to be a New England Congregationalist by birth.
However scientifically speaking, I find the canonical
explanation of religion as put forth in the Catholic
Catechism (e.g. Aquinas et al.) to be the most
scientifically advanced version of religion that
civilization possesses.
>
>
>Ironically, muslim suicide bombers who blow themselves
>up would reach neither my understanding of heaven nor
>yours.
>
[Hammond]
Horseshit... suicide bombers go straight to hell just like
all other criminal mass murderers.
>
>
>---
>Mark
>
[Hammond]
Well I'm sorry that you can't afford to play this game
because of your other obligations and concerns.
However, just because you can't afford to ante up in this
game DOES NOT MEAN that I'll tolerate hit-and-run
harassment. I CAN afford to play this game, I'm using 150
words per minute voice-recognition dictation, and can blow
your pathetic Stone Age keyboard efforts right off the
Internet using it.
However, you are invited to continue your ill motivated
and futile efforts, by all means.
Mark
> Well I'm sorry that you can't afford to play this game
> because of your other obligations and concerns.
Well, we all persue what intrigues and rewards us. Physics
just hasn't crossed my path much, although many other
fields have and I've absorbed more knowledge than most.
> However, just because you can't afford to ante up in this
> game DOES NOT MEAN that I'll tolerate hit-and-run
> harassment.
Harrassment? I simply laid out my after-dinner cliff note
version of perceived logic in order for you to accept or
disagree and explain for the general public. Yes, it's a
bit cafe-style, and yes...I'm drinking coffee. Heh.
> I CAN afford to play this game, I'm using 150
> words per minute voice-recognition dictation,
Yes, I know. You said it before, and I don't
forget much.
>and can blow
> your pathetic Stone Age keyboard efforts right off the
> Internet using it.
That's nice for you. I could buy one too, but have
no use for it. I can also do a lot of other things which
*you* cannot do. How do I feel about being able to do
things which you cannot do? I'm glad you asked. I
hope that you accomplish anything and everything
good which you desire. My path is mine alone, and
yours is yours.
> However, you are invited to continue your ill motivated
> and futile efforts, by all means.
If by "ill motivated" you mean a nice fellow that ponders
life, reality, the unseen, and that which he knows but
cannot prove, so he banters a little on the intertube,
then maybe. But if you think I have time to play internet
angst, you're mistaken.
Futile efforts? Ok George. I've already used my genius
to create a reality around me that few people in the history
of man have or ever will have. Good luck with your book.
I'm headed to heaven, both daily and ultimately.
---
Mark
haiku jones
> On Dec 14, 7:43 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>
> > Well I'm sorry that you can't afford to play this game
> > because of your other obligations and concerns.
>
> Well, we all persue what intrigues and rewards us. Physics
> just hasn't crossed my path much, although many other
> fields have and I've absorbed more knowledge than most.
>
> > However, just because you can't afford to ante up in this
> > game DOES NOT MEAN that I'll tolerate hit-and-run
> > harassment.
>
> Harrassment? I simply laid out my after-dinner cliff note
> version of perceived logic in order for you to accept or
> disagree and explain for the general public. Yes, it's a
> bit cafe-style, and yes...I'm drinking coffee. Heh.
>
> > I CAN afford to play this game, I'm using 150
> > words per minute voice-recognition dictation,
>
> Yes, I know. You said it before, and I don't
> forget much.
And, he brings it up constantly. It appears to
be a big dick-swinging thing in his mind. Why
this should be so remains a mystery.
Haiku Jones
Olrik
> X-No-Archive: Yes
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:02:15 -0800
You shouldn't have, Mark was the only one trying to have a dialog with you!
But you probably only deserves insults, little organ.
Mark
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:32:44 -0800 (PST), Mark
>
> >On Dec 14, 1:37 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>
> >(snippy)
>
> >Your hypothesis is riddled with flaws.
>
> [Hammond]
> WRONG.... there isn't a single flaw in it.
Ah, but the flaw is obvious.
> > I completely understand your theory
>
> [Hammond]
> WRONG.... you're level of misunderstanding is LUDICROUS!
You're not talking over my level of comprehension here. We've just
not reached the point of dissecting relativity or a zero-dilated
time rate because that's putting the cart before the horse.
> >your theory but it limits eternal life to the past experiences of
> >one, and that isn't new life. A replay of one's past with a new and
> >perfectly enlightened perspective isn't new life.
>
> [Hammond]
> WRONG..... the raw stored sensory input of a lifetime is
> easily capable of synthesizing an infinite range of totally
> new life-experience.
OK. RIGHT HERE. You say..."synthesizing". Ask yourself,
what does synthetic mean? Let's examine further:
syn·thet·ic [sin théttik]
adj
1. made by chemical process: made artificially by chemical synthesis,
especially so as to resemble a natural product
2. insincere: not genuine, especially expressed but not genuinely
felt , synthetic expressions of sympathy
n (plural syn·thet·ics)
1. chemically produced substance or material: a substance or material
produced by chemical processes and not occurring naturally
2. artificial fiber: a synthetic textile fiber, or an item of
clothing made of this (usually used in the plural)
[Late 17th century. Via French or modern Latin < Greek sunthetikos
"component" < sunthetos "combined" < suntithenai (see synthesis)]
* * *
If I go on the radio and inform the population in a large
town that we're being invaded by Martians, and make the
story so real, so vivid, so believeable, for millions of people
this will become their reality. They will grab their guns,
load up the truck and in terror, run for the hills. Now for
these people, Martians ARE invading earth.
But in REALITY, there is no Martian attack.
Yes I understand the speed of your frequency download.
If mankind creates a holographic display of immense
resolution, and gives us an interactive computerized
naked woman, we may have digital sex. It may meet
a preponderance of the evidence to our senses, but
it's still...
Synthesized.
Many of the people in my eternal life are already there.
They are waiting for me. They exist now. They are real.
It is in another time-space dimension. Mankind has no
control over any of this.
* * *
Ok, here is my perspective. I use the KISS principal.
Keep It Simple Stupid. First my thoughts have to pass
muster on basic logic. If it meets the criteria, then we proceed
forward and break down all parameters and start to pull
in the minutiae.
Again, I congratulate you on your studies in physics.
Myself, I also enjoy engineering, psychology, history,
aerodynamics, all earth sciences, mixed martial arts,
string instruments, real estate speculation, high speed
racing, free diving, fireplaces, rocket planes and kitty cats.
I've also noticed a few repeating logarithms in the numerical
sequencing of the spaces between winning lottery numbers.
I've never played but if I did, the numbers would have to
fit a reoccuring spacing sequence.
Life after death? I defer to Lazarus and Jesus.
---
Mark
.
Otto Bahn
> > > You are incorrect about this. The causality is genetic and
> > > the seperate reality is merely an interpretation of and
> > > further creation of a sensory experience which
> > > links the practical to the hypothetical to the nonsensical.
>
> > Identical twins are not 100% concordant for schizophrenia; that is, if
> > one has it, the other may not. So it is not correct to say "the
> > causality is genetic".
>
> <
> <Identical twins are not identical.
>
> Close enough to swap wives now and then?
<
<Swap them for what?
Some questions are answered by pondering, "What
would Tiger Woods do?"
Okay, replace "What" with "Who".
--oTTo--
Mark
> "Mark" <blueriver...@yahoo.com> wrote
Ok, let me muse.
<pondering>
I think Tiger Woods would get in a time machine,
and go back to Mayberry, setting his sights on
Frances Bavier. Then with that conquest, he would
work his way into the social fabric of a caucasian
town, eventually running for mayor, and disavowing
any trace of his African heritage which haunts him
terribly.
http://ant.sillydog.org/blog/pic/time_machine.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:First_Episode_Aunt_Bee_10101.JPG
---
Mark
George Hammond
<darw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 4:11 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:04:20 -0800 (PST), Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> <blueriver...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 9, 8:13 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.com> wrote:
>> >> LOG 12-9-09 THE DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER DEATH
>>
>> >> Copyright December 2009, George Hammond
>>
>> >> In a previous USENET post (above) I detailed how a short
>> >> millisecond signal in the microtubule system of the brain at
>> >> Froehlich�s frequency could easily contain a year of human
>> >> experience, and thus even though the bedside observer would
>> >> see the person expire in a fraction of a second, the dearly
>> >> departed would subjectively live on for a year in
>> >> cyber-paradise despite his Frohlich-speed millisecond
>> >> demise.
>>
>> >Hello.
>>
>> >I haven't seen you or anyone else address the fact
>> >that a replay of one's life in the framework of what
>> >seems like real time to that indivdual, is only just
>> >a replay, without actual new interactions, new actual
>> >people and places.
>>
>> [Hammond]
>> Look Mark, it is time for you to dummy up and listen. You
>> don't have any idea what the term " eternal life" actually
>> means. But don't feel stupid, 99.999% of the human
>> population doesn't understand what it is either, and that
>> includes almost every PhD level physicist in the world.
>> Let me try to explain it using simple terminology. Look
>> at the dashboard of your car and you will see a SPEEDOMETER
>> and an ODOMETER. The speedometer goes up to 100. but the
>> odometer goes to infinity ( it goes to 100,000 and then
>> starts over again). let us call 100 mph the absolute
>> maximum design speed of the automobile. then you could
>> label the speedometer in % so that the dial would read 10%,
>> 20%, 30%............ 100%, a full design speed.
>> Okay then, what I'm trying to tell you is that " eternal
>> life" is a speedometer reading, it is NOT an odometer
>> reading. when you are going at full maximum design speed (
>> 100%) then you are in a condition of " eternal life". the
>> odometer reading is ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT to the question of
>> internal life.
>> Okay, so now let me translate that into the physicists
>> jargon of relativity. the speedometer is measuring a " time
>> dilation" while the odometer is measuring a " time
>> duration".
>>
>> ETERNAL LIFE IS A
>>
>> TIME DILATION
>> NOT A
>> TIME DURATION
>>
>> You have to remember that the average person in the world is
>> very uneducated and only of average intelligence. it is all
>> he can do to comprehend the difference between a speedometer
>> and an odometer much less try to comprehend the difference
>> between a time dilation and a time duration.
>> Time duration of course is much easier to understand
>> therefore eternal life which is actually a condition of "
>> zero time dilation" is referred to as a condition of "
>> infinite time duration" simply because the average person
>> does not know the difference between TIME and a TIME-RATE.
>> In terms of the human machine, the clock-rate is called "
>> mental speed" (aka intelligence), and it is known that the
>> Secular Trend growth deficit directly reduces one's mental
>> speed. therefore if you have a large growth deficit your
>> mental speed speedometer may be only running at 80%. and in
>> fact, this causes 20% of all visible motion in the world to
>> be an invisible to you because of the lower Fourier cutoff
>> frequency individual-perceptual system. This is the
>> celebrated INVISIBLE WORLD of religion.
>> Needless to say, if you had a zero growth deficit, your
>> mental speed speedometer would read 100%. this would mean
>> that every single motion your body was designed to see, you
>> would actually see! this is referred to as a condition of
>> ETERNAL LIFE. and you would be God in the flesh!
>> Needless to say, the Secular Trend data assures us that
>> there never has been any such thing as a full-grown person
>> on the face of the earth, ever! the average growth
>> shortfall ( growth deficit) in the human race today is about
>> 20%. this means that not only 20% of our height and weight
>> is missing, it means 20% of our brain is missing, and hence
>> 20% of reality is INVISIBLE to us.
>>
>>
>>
>> > life after death should be NEW life, and
>> >for eternity,
>>
>> [Hammond]
>> As I just explained above and tedious detail, it
>> certainly is " new life" and it is " eternal".
>> Consider this, if you had the other 20% of your brain
>> that is actually missing, you would be personally
>> INVINCIBLE. you would not know what the word " fear" means.
>> you would not know what the word " pain" means. the world
>> would look to you like a glorious and splendorous
>> magnificent creation. the wind in the trees and the rustle
>> of the leaves would sound like the world's most magnificent
>> symphony. you would scarcely feel the pull of gravity, your
>> movements and motions would be instantaneous and completely
>> unfettered. your mind would be in a constant state of
>> fascination and brilliant wonder and entertainment. there
>> would be no such thing as " suffering", " terror" or "
>> dread". every single second would be an explosive symphony
>> of wondrous possibility and fascination. this is known to
>> the theologians as " the beatific vision" and what
>> relativity calls " flat subjective space time".
>>
>> > which being outside of one's own
>> >experience would have to occur in real time, as
>> >we measure it on the wall clock, and with the
>> >input of other actual people who are also enjoying
>> >life after death.
>>
>> [Hammond]
>> That's exactly what you're going to see old boy, if my
>> theory of life after death is correct. You're going to see
>> everybody you want to see, probably in their original
>> condition AND in their " beatified" condition.
>> And by the way, if there is a Heaven, their certainly
>> must be a Hell. if you think that terrorists, Nazis and
>> serial killers are good at dreaming up forms of torture, you
>> haven't seen nothing until you come face-to-face with God
>> and the Devil!
>> I heard of a case in New York were some criminal through
>> a cupful of acid in a showgirls face. You know what the
>> Devil is going to do to him in Hell? Allow me to exercise
>> my imagination. I would imagine that they would suspend him
>> naked face down by the hands and feet so that his pecker was
>> actually the lowest part of his body. Then they would
>> slowly lower his shlong in and out of a stainless steel bowl
>> filled to the brim with a mixture of warm hydrofluoric and
>> sulfuric acid. This would go on for days and days until his
>> donk actually corroded off from the acid. Needless to say
>> we would be encouraged to scream endlessly at the top of his
>> lungs for the entertainment of the demons.
>> And believe me, God Is far far more imaginative than I
>> aml!
>>
>> >And finally, even if one's memory were perceived
>> >in 10^50 times faster than measured time, it still
>> >will run out eventually, whereas eternity last to
>> >infinity
>>
>> [Hammond]
>> Well you should know the answer to this one after my
>> relativity lecture above. " eternal" refers to the RATE of
>> time, not the DURATION of time.
>> 100% RATE on the speedometer is equivalent to " full
>> design mental speed" in a human being which is only achieved
>> when that person has a ZERO GROWTH DEFICIT !!>---
>> >Mark
>>
>> >---
>> >Mark
>>
>> George
>>
>> Put on your thinking cap Mark, and asked some more logical
>> questions. I don't know yet whether there is a logical
>> loophole in this theory or not. Naturally, if such a
>> logical loophole exists, the theory would have to be
>> abandoned. I defy you to find one, I haven't been able to
>> yet!
>[...]
>
>
>
>[Darwinist]
>Hi George. Writing from the philosophy newsgroup: It might help us all
>to examine the logic of your theory more easily, and to attempt your
>above challenge of searching for logical loopholes, if the theory were
>presented in a formal set of logical steps. For example (forgive me if
>I get some details wrong, this is just an example):
>
>1. A person's speed-of-perception is inversely proportional to their
>physical growth deficit.
>2. A maximum perception speed would mean seeing 100% of reality.
>3. (From 1, 2) A person with a zero growth deficit would see 100% of
>reality
>4. When the brain dies it does so at the neuronal level before the
>microtubule level
>5. The microtubule system operates at a billion times the speed of the
>neuronal system.
>...
>etc.
>
>That way we can make our questions more specific and relevant. It
>might even be worth doing this in a new thread to keep things
>organised.
>
>
[Hammond]
I'm not surprised that you're from the Philosophy
Department. I say that because yours is the first positive
and constructive message that I have received on USENET in
years, and that takes me back to Prof. Richard F. Kitchener
then chair of the Philosophy department at the University of
Colorado who, after 21 journals turned down my discovery of
the Structural Model of Personality published it in New
Ideas In Psychology: http://tinyurl.com/ygqopj5
Ever since that day I have been aware thay when the chips
finally go down and the discovery of the world's first
scientific proof of God hits the streets, that it is going
to be the PHILOSOPHY department who are going to have to
mediate the final reapproachmont of Science and Religion. It
looks like you have just moved to start that process.
At any rate, let me outline what were up against. The
discovery of the world's first scientific proof of God is a
fait accompli. It is signed sealed and delivered and has
been published in the peer-reviewed literature.
However, the question of life after death is a separate
issue! I actually have no idea whatsoever whether or not
there is such a thing as life after death. I now know that
there is a God, that the entire Old Testament, is absolutely
true.
However, ( St. Paul's) theory of life after death as
outlined in I Corinthians chapter 15 verses 35-55, remains
scientifically TOTALLY UNPROVEN!!
Now my problem is this, I'm writing a 300 page book
entitled the Scientific Proof of God using this spiffy
voice recognition equipment at 150 words per minute), and
the problem I'm up against is this: In the final chapter I
am going to HAVE TO say something about the theory of life
after death! And I don't know the answer.
Over the past few years I have realized that the
discovery of the microtubule-cytoskeleton "computer" in the
brain uncannily provides just such a startling possibility
for such a thing. Even Prof. Stuart Hameroff agrees with me
as he says in the message I posted to this thread.
In fact, I have been able to find no scientifical
loopholes in the argument after years of investigation!
But beyond that there is another dilemma, I am not
personally convinced that I like the idea of life after
death. And, historically it is well-known to be a METAPHOR
to the transcendental world that the scientific proof of God
now proves exists. The whole thing may be like "walking on
water" which is simply a METAPHOR to the transcendental
(invisible) world. I could easily be committing a classic
folly here, of looking for something that doesn't exist....
such as perpetual motion, or Noah's Ark, or a carburetor
that gets 500 miles to the gallon! I SIMPLY DON'T KNOW!
Right now, I put the probability that there is a literal
life after death at about 35%.
On the other hand, St. Paul believed there was a literal
life after death and outlined how it works in some detail.
And today that is the central belief of Christianity and the
1.5 billion followers of Christianity.
And, from a strictly scientific point of view it seems to
be a COLOSSAL COINCIDENCE that out of the blue Hameroff and
Penrose and 100 other scientists suddenly discover that
there is a cytoskeleton-microtubule computer in the brain
which increases the switching capacity and memory by 15
orders of magnitude.... making a "virtual reality"
("spiritual resurrection") of the body actually physically
possible!
So to get to the bottom line, your suggestion does
interest me..... because I DON'T KNOW if there is life
after death or not, and I NEED TO FIND OUT.
I'll think it over for a couple of days and maybe I'll
start another thread and include the philosophy newsgroups.
Meanwhile of course I'm going to continue writing my book
and working my way towards the "final chapter" on life after
death, And THANK YOU for stepping up and making a positive
and constructive suggestion.
Mark
> Le 2009-12-14 22:19, <SNIP HECKLER> a écrit :
>
> > X-No-Archive: Yes
> > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:02:15 -0800
>
> You shouldn't have, Mark was the only one trying to have a dialog with you!
>
> But you probably only deserves insults, little organ.
That's ok, this only helps me to enhance my new thesis
on: DETAILS OF LIFE AFTER BIRTH: DOES IT EXIST?
There are many theories on life after birth, most of them
just crude representations of the REALITY concept.
First though, we must define when does life begin? The
Baptists say it occurs at the moment of conception.
The Pro-choice movement defines life as having occured
once the baby has left the womb. And the Jewish community
offically recognizes the inception of life at the moment
you graduate from medical school.
Now birth itself traditionally has been acknowledged once a
BABY DADDY is established, or the hospital mails an
invoice to the responsible party. Regardless of who steps
forward it remains to be seen if there is a differentiation
between LIFE and EXISTENCE. In my book I speak of
"key indicators" which reveal the existence of life or
nonlife after birth. For example, we can look to the
thread count of one's sheets, or if they drink wine from
a bottle, or...a box. Do they watch PBS or wrestling?
Etc...
(to be continued...LIFE AFTER BIRTH?)
---
Mark