Dead or Existence? Questions on Life After Death

[Imparcticle]

I JUST posted this in the Michio Kaku forum two minutes ago under a thread about the god-like powers of a pan-dimensional creature & I thought you might get a kick out of it. I recently read an account by cartoonist Grant Morrison. While in the Far East, he had apparently been abducted, not by aliens, but by higher dimensional creatures. His initial "ride" was much as previosly described in this thread, being lifted from the familiar, moving through blob-like regions and seeing space, time and the universe all at once in its infinity. The beings caused him to know that we (humans) are all basically larvae being bred in the lower three dimensions, planted in time, so we can eventually become higher dimensional beings like them, outside of time.

Kidnapped by higher dimensional beings??! LOL! That's interesting, 'cause according to M-theory, the higher dimensions are all at Planck's length in a calibi-yau orbifolds. these higher demensional creatures must be smaller than Planck's length. Planck's length, by the way is the smallest size anything can theoretically assume. When I say theoretically, I mean it has been proven mathematically at least.

 

[Phi For All]

these higher demensional creatures must be smaller than Planck's length.

Actually, the way I thought about it was more like these creatures, rather than "existing" in the higher dimensions (at Planck length), simply had access to them. They existed in more than 3D but were visible to us in only 3D unless they chose to take us into the higher dimensions the way Grant says they did with him.

My problem with this was the whole "outside of time" thing. Doesn't time exist in all spatial dimensions because time and space are interdependent, that time=space? The idea of time and entropy being manipulated does pose some intriguing possibilities...

 

[Iacchus32]

I JUST posted this in the Michio Kaku forum two minutes ago under a thread about the god-like powers of a pan-dimensional creature & I thought you might get a kick out of it. I recently read an account by cartoonist Grant Morrison. While in the Far East, he had apparently been abducted, not by aliens, but by higher dimensional creatures. His initial "ride" was much as previosly described in this thread, being lifted from the familiar, moving through blob-like regions and seeing space, time and the universe all at once in its infinity. The beings caused him to know that we (humans) are all basically larvae being bred in the lower three dimensions, planted in time, so we can eventually become higher dimensional beings like them, outside of time.

Grant claimed he wasn't "on" anything...

I think what you're referring to here are spirits, and yes, I think this is what accounts for most instances of "alien abduction."

 

[Kerrie]

If someone is dead, do they still exist?

"they" exist in memory :shy: physically, the body will not remain existing due to the process of decay...which begs the question: does our "soul" keeps our physical body alive along with our personality?

 

[honestrosewater]

Shakespeare's 74th Sonnet

But be contented: when that fell arrest
Without all bail shall carry me away,
My life hath in this line some interest,
Which for memorial still with thee shall stay.
When thou reviewest this, thou dost review
The very part was consecrate to thee:
The Earth can have but earth, which is his due;
My spirit is thine, the better part of me:
So then thou hast but lost the dregs of life,
The prey of worms, my body being dead,
The coward conquest of a wretch's knife,
Too base of thee to be remembered.
The worth of that is that which it contains,
And that is this, and this with thee remains.

 

[Thor]

If someone is dead, do they still exist?

"Cogito ergo sum". I think, therefore I am.

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 a myriad of things - billions of elemental particles - individual existences each with its own identity and unique history. Two individual elements cannot share a common experience or become a single identity any more than they could simultaneously occupy the same space. If you could disassemble your body and remain conscious as each of those particles were removed one-by-one and reassembled twenty feet away - at what point would you - yourself - experience a change in location? It is not possible to 'be' more than (or less than) a single existence, so the identity you experience must only be that of a single Entity - an element hidden within the assemblage of your body.

This isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with religion. It is simple logic and elementary deduction. 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).

 

[loseyourname]

As far as I know, these spirit-beings are said to have no spatial extent, so size isn't an issue with them. Of course, if this is the case, then they do not exist in any spatial dimensions, lower, higher, normal, or otherwise. I'm pretty sure what these guys are calling "dimensions" are really something else that they just don't have a word for.

 

[Imparcticle]

physically, the body will not remain existing due to the process of decay...

"A body" is a body if it is intact then?

which begs the question: does our "soul" keeps our physical body alive along with our personality?

This is what I do not understand. The "soul" is apparently presumed to be a separate entity from a living being. What makes a person alive is generally environmentally and physically based...I don't recall ever hearing an explanation involving souls keeping our bodies "alive".
What is the difference between the personality and the soul?

 

[Imparcticle]

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

So to experience is neccesarily tied in with cosciousness.
According to what you have said, I may conclude that inanimate objects such as rocks do not exist because they do not experience. Of course, rocks exist and so do other inanimate objects.

This isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with religion. It is simple logic and elementary deduction. You don't have a soul, you are a soul. And while you are alive, you have a body.

So a soul is physical?

 

[loseyourname]

So to experience is neccesarily tied in with cosciousness.
According to what you have said, I may conclude that inanimate objects such as rocks do not exist because they do not experience. Of course, rocks exist and so do other inanimate objects.

What he is saying is that due to the fact that a rock does not consciously experience, it cannot prove its own existence. That does not mean he is concluding that a rock does not exist.