Does the physical universe exist before conception and after death?

[Loren Booda]

If conception and death can be defined as the bounds of life in terms of conventional physics,

either 1.) there must be, as we have all witnessed, an outside observer to ascertain (measure) them, and thus some external universe exists beyond this span of life. Observers would neither be conserved nor be essential to the overall existence of the universe.

or 2.) contrariwise, if we as observers fail to exist before and after life, then we cannot maintain our former worldview and with it our exhaustively unique universe. We would need a big bang and big crunch to accompany the creation and demise of the observer, i. e., their conservation would be of global consequence. This 2nd perspective may exist with the individual undergoing the life transformation, rather than the lovers or grievers at conception or death with the 1st. These relative viewpoints are reminiscent of observers approaching closely to or at a distance from a black hole.

Can one accommodate both of these positions? Possibly we carry with us the projection of the macrocosm onto a microcosm, in which case the concerns above are more compatible.

 

[Thor]

If conception and death can be defined as the bounds of life in terms of conventional physics,

either 1.) there must be, as we have all witnessed, an outside observer to ascertain (measure) them, and thus some external universe exists beyond this span of life. Observers would neither be conserved nor be essential to the overall existence of the universe.

or 2.) contrariwise, if we as observers fail to exist before and after life, then we cannot maintain our former worldview and with it our exhaustively unique universe. We would need a big bang and big crunch to accompany the creation and demise of the observer, i. e., their conservation would be of global consequence. This 2nd perspective may exist with the individual undergoing the life transformation, rather than the lovers or grievers at conception or death with the 1st. These relative viewpoints are reminiscent of observers approaching closely to or at a distance from a black hole.

Can one accommodate both of these positions? Possibly we carry with us the projection of the macrocosm onto a microcosm, in which case the concerns above are more compatible.

Do you REALLY believe you didn't exist before birth? Do you REALLY think you will cease to exist when you die?

One must exist in order to experience, and the fact that you experience is convincing proof you exist.

Your body is not a single "thing". It is comprised of billions of elemental particles - individual existences each with its own identity. Two independent elements cannot share their existence or experience a common identity any more than they could simultaneously occupy the same space. It is not possible to 'be' more than (or less than) a single existence, so the identity you experience must be that of a single element - or entity - hidden within the assemblage of your body.

This isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with religion. It is simple reasoning and elementary deduction. You are a single entity - an elemental particle which some call a 'soul'. You don't have a soul, you are a soul. And while you are alive, you have a body. When you die, it will fall off (which can be VERY embarrassing as well as downright inconvenient).

http://theory-of-reciprocity.com/sum.htm