(real) Scientific reincarnation?

[Eos of the Eons]

Now we're defining spontaneous in different ways. There is a reason uraniam would be able to fission, and water can't.

 

[PixyMisa]

Just snipped all the stuff I agree with.

Finally, with the apparent acceleration of the expansion of the universe, there could be a big rip. This happens when the expansion of space becomes fast enough to overcome the attraction between particles in space, and all matter is pulled apart and becomes isolated. This would happen gradually, with first clusters seperating, then galaxies falling apart and so on until even individual atoms and their nucleons were torn apart.

As I understand it, this depends on the precise nature of dark energy (which is uncertain at the moment). Some models predict a big rip; others predict the local cluster (us, Andromeda, Triangulum, and sundry small fry) coalescing into a single galaxy while the rest of the Universe disappears beyond the horizon. This is the only case that is congruent with current cosmology (as I understand it, at least!) that would allow for this quantum reincarnation concept to work.

In the second, the particles still exist, but with energy spread out so thinly, nothing would ever be able to leave its lowest energy state, and so complex molecules would not be able to form.

In this case, it could still happen, but it would take a lot longer, because the probabilities of interactions would be vastly smaller.

 

[PixyMisa]

Now we're defining spontaneous in different ways. There is a reason uraniam would be able to fission, and water can't.

Don't get too hung up on "can" and "can't" when you're talking about quantum events. Spontaneous fission of oxygen (hydrogen can't fission, because it only has one nucleon) is thermodynamically impossible, but thermodynamics is a statistical theory, and doesn't necessarily apply to every individual quantum event.

So yes, water can fission. No, you're not ever going to see it happen. Yes, for everyday conversation, it makes far more sense to say it can't happen. It's only in weird topics like this that the difference matters.

 

[Eos of the Eons]

Don't get too hung up on "can" and "can't" when you're talking about quantum events. Spontaneous fission of oxygen (hydrogen can't fission, because it only has one nucleon) is thermodynamically impossible, but thermodynamics is a statistical theory, and doesn't necessarily apply to every individual quantum event.

So yes, water can fission. No, you're not ever going to see it happen. Yes, for everyday conversation, it makes far more sense to say it can't happen. It's only in weird topics like this that the difference matters.

The difference is I was talking H20, not just oxygen. Water can't fission, and just because water molecules contain oxygen does not mean it can fission-technically. You're talkign oxygen, I wasn't. It's like saying anything can fission, and why does this whole conversation sound absurd now-just because it contains water just because water contains oxygen.

oy.

 

[sol invictus]

The OP's idea is valid, and correct if dark energy is a positive cosmological constant as observations indicate. That would prevent both a crunch and a heat death, ensure the eternal presence of particles which can recombine, and there is no big rip either.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics does not apply to such fantastically improbable events.

 

[~enigma~]

The idea is actually entirely valid. Given infinite space and time, everything that is possible within the laws of physics will eventually happen. Even things with ridiculously low chance of happening, such as an entire living human being coming together by random particle motion. However, the big problem is that there is almost certainly not either infinite space or infinite time. The probabilities we are talking about here really are very small, the current age of the universe is nothing in comparison. It wouldn't need just billions of times longer, but billions of orders of magnitude longer for something like this to have even a tiny chance of occuring just once.

However, while we are still not sure exactly what will happen, we are pretty sure that the universe is going to end, one way or another. The three classic possibilities are a big crunch, where the universe has enough mass to collapse back in on itself. We are fairly sure this won't happen, but it can't be ruled out. Until recently the most likely outcome seemed heat death. The universe would expand forever, but always slowing down so it never reached infinite size. This would end up with all the energy being spread out thinner and thinner until it was no longer possible for any work to be done. Finally, with the apparent acceleration of the expansion of the universe, there could be a big rip. This happens when the expansion of space becomes fast enough to overcome the attraction between particles in space, and all matter is pulled apart and becomes isolated. This would happen gradually, with first clusters seperating, then galaxies falling apart and so on until even individual atoms and their nucleons were torn apart. There are also various other possibilties, such as things like phase change, but they often involve the laws of physics changing and so it isn't really possible to say what could happen.

Although these are all very different and we're not sure which one will happen, they all have the same consequence for the OP. In the first case, particles can't randomly form humans because the particles themselves will no longer exist and neither will space for them to exist in. In the second, the particles still exist, but with energy spread out so thinly, nothing would ever be able to leave its lowest energy state, and so complex molecules would not be able to form. In the third case, the fundamental particles would still exist, but they would not be able to interact with each other and so again, complex molecules would not be able to form.

Of course, if you start adding in multiple universes, either through a multiverse or through expand-collapse cylces of one (or many) universes, things are different. If there are an infinite number of universes then even if each one only exists for a limited extent, there can still be infinite time and space for things to happen in. Many idea like this even include variation, often infinite, in the laws of physics, so things that are unlikely or impossible in the universe we know are actually extremely common. The big problem with this is that it is all pure speculation. There is often valid maths describing this sort of universe, but we have no reason to believe any of it actually eixsts in reality.

IOW it isn't going to happen nor does this paranormal bs belong in the science forum.

 

[PixyMisa]

The difference is I was talking H20, not just oxygen. Water can't fission, and just because water molecules contain oxygen does not mean it can fission-technically. You're talkign oxygen, I wasn't. It's like saying anything can fission, and why does this whole conversation sound absurd now-just because it contains water just because water contains oxygen.

oy.

Molecules don't fission by definition, but if that's what you're saying, it's irrelevant to the subject at hand. Any atom with more than one nucleon can fission. In most of the lighter, naturally occuring isotopes, though, it's fantastically improbable.

 

[sol invictus]

IOW it isn't going to happen nor does this paranormal bs belong in the science forum.

While I agree this probably has no physical consequences, it is of considerable interest to mathematicians (e.g. ergodic theory), so I think it's approriate for this forum.

 

[Third Eye Open]

Thank you very much to PixyMisa and Cuddles for being able to say what I was thinking much more clearly than I was able to!

 

[not_so_new]

While I agree this probably has no physical consequences, it is of considerable interest to mathematicians (e.g. ergodic theory), so I think it's appropriate for this forum.

It is called "Science, MATHEMATICS, Medicine, and Technology" after all right?



And....

It's like saying monkeys typing randomly on a typewriter will get something resembling even a paragraph. It can't and won't happen because writing is not a random process that accidently gets us these posts or any books. You actually have to know words and how to use them.

Unless I have a complete misunderstanding of the basic concept of probability curves, given enough time and enough monkeys it isn't just possible it is probable that a monkey could type every post on this site. No event is completely impossible given enough time and resources, some are just more probable than others and some are much less probable.

The meaning of the words the monkeys type (and their understanding of the meaning) is irrelevant.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Righto. Like you said, it's just an idea, not a belief. I'm not sure why so far it has seemed to offend everyone so much. I really don't care if its torn to shreds, I would just like it to be torn apart with ideas as opposed to insults.

Welcome to the JREF. While it is true that you will find very intelligent people around, it is also true what you report here. Some members will simply trash (or attempt to!!) anything you say if there is a woo word in your ideas.

Now, regarding the interesting people, if you don't use woo terminology you will get better answers.

For example, I believe using "reincarnation" for what you argued is incorrect. If I understand you correctly, one of your main questions is if consciousness (whatever it is) could be "re-assembled" on another body? (leaving aside that about millions of years and other stuff from your OP).

Well, I believe we don't know the answer because we are unable to even properly define what, exactly, constitute your "consciousness". That said, we would need a working model and only then we would be able to start talking about possible "relocations" of "you".

 

[Third Eye Open]

Welcome to the JREF. While it is true that you will find very intelligent people around, it is also true what you report here. Some members will simply trash (or attempt to!!) anything you say if there is a woo word in your ideas.

Now, regarding the interesting people, if you don't use woo terminology you will get better answers.

For example, I believe using "reincarnation" for what you argued is incorrect. If I understand you correctly, one of your main questions is if consciousness (whatever it is) could be "re-assembled" on another body? (leaving aside that about millions of years and other stuff from your OP).

Well, I believe we don't know the answer because we are unable to even properly define what, exactly, constitute your "consciousness". That said, we would need a working model and only then we would be able to start talking about possible "relocations" of "you".

Thanks, and yes, reincarnation was definitely the wrong word to use! It has way to much craziness attached to it.

Yes, one of my main questions is if memories are stored due to some physical property of the brain. I don't know how else they could be stored myself.

If we could create a working brain, and somehow arrange the parts in that brain so that it had a set of memories, and if those memories were exactly those of someone who had died -would that be any different than creating that person?

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Thanks, and yes, reincarnation was definitely the wrong word to use! It has way to much craziness attached to it.

Exactly. Now, the funny thing is that you are making intelligent questions, and these are completely invisible to some members because of the words you chose. The sad thing about this is that it demonstrate that some members will attack anything that resembles woo, without taking the time to attempt to understand what the other person is saying, and where does the question comes from.

Yes, one of my main questions is if memories are stored due to some physical property of the brain. I don't know how else they could be stored myself.

Presumably, yes. Still I believe there are to many things that are not "proper properties" and can't even be called physical (nope, I'm not implying some metaphysical notion at all, just talking about processes, relations, information, data and such kind of "things"), that are currently unknown. We simply don't have a clue o what "a memory" is. Can it be "isolated"? Does it necessarily depend on certain kind of structure? can it be "transplanted"? We simply don't know!

If we could create a working brain, and somehow arrange the parts in that brain so that it had a set of memories, and if those memories were exactly those of someone who had died -would that be any different than creating that person?

I don't know what you mean by "creating" a person (another word with a strong woo smell). If you mean that it would "BE" that person, I believe the question doesn't make sense, because, again, we don't know enough about what constitutes "a person" in the first place.

 

[AkuManiMani]

Presumably, yes. Still I believe there are to many things that are not "proper properties" and can't even be called physical (nope, I'm not implying some metaphysical notion at all, just talking about processes, relations, information, data and such kind of "things"), that are currently unknown. We simply don't have a clue o what "a memory" is. Can it be "isolated"? Does it necessarily depend on certain kind of structure? can it be "transplanted"? We simply don't know!

Could really use some input from this discussion on this thread. Some fresh perspectives like yours will go a long way towards keeping it from becoming repetitive

 

[Cuddles]

As I understand it, this depends on the precise nature of dark energy (which is uncertain at the moment). Some models predict a big rip; others predict the local cluster (us, Andromeda, Triangulum, and sundry small fry) coalescing into a single galaxy while the rest of the Universe disappears beyond the horizon. This is the only case that is congruent with current cosmology (as I understand it, at least!) that would allow for this quantum reincarnation concept to work.

Yeah, there are a fair few possibilities that I didn't cover, some of which allow infinite time and/or space.

In this case, it could still happen, but it would take a lot longer, because the probabilities of interactions would be vastly smaller.

Not neccesarily. The trouble with heat death is that as time increases, the probability of things happening decreases. If the probability of a certain interaction decreases fast enough with time, then it won't be guaranteed to happen even given infinite time, since the probability can converge to less than one.

 

[Old Bob]

Dear third eye, at least you are thinking. Now being a know all , what if our spirit carries memory and travels through families entering a baby and staying with that body for life unless tossed out or destroyed by say heavy elec. shock. Our brains don't carry memory our cells and spirit do. Transplant people some times remember bits of the donor life. Thats why some religous orders won't have transfusion. We reincarnate as many times as it takes to get it right. Then we can, maybe assend, look at your dollar bill and see the allseeing eye at the top of the pyramid and the 13 steps to the top. Some of us remember other lives. Your spirit knows,hence water dousing. You need a spirit for that to work. Cheers Old Bob

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Dear third eye, at least you are thinking. Now being a know all , what if our spirit carries memory and travels through families entering a baby and staying with that body for life unless tossed out or destroyed by say heavy elec. shock. Our brains don't carry memory our cells and spirit do. Transplant people some times remember bits of the donor life. Thats why some religous orders won't have transfusion. We reincarnate as many times as it takes to get it right. Then we can, maybe assend, look at your dollar bill and see the allseeing eye at the top of the pyramid and the 13 steps to the top. Some of us remember other lives. Your spirit knows,hence water dousing. You need a spirit for that to work. Cheers Old Bob

Sure. Sure.

{Gord backs away slowly.}