• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

So,life after death IS proven?

Alexander1304 said:
Hello All,
For awhile I was absent from the forum but now I am back.
So,scientist Robert Lanza claims that quantum physics prove there IS life after death and uses the famous double slit experiment to make his point:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ics-proves-IS-afterlife-claims-scientist.html

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

In addition to what others have said, I cannot see where Lanza himself says that his theory proves anything (at least no quotes in that particular article). That seems to be a word supplied by the Daily Mail.

Generally speaking, proofs are difficult to come by in science. Theories or hypotheses are much easier to come by.

Some other posters mentioned "not even wrong". Has he made any statement which is testable by some sort of experiment? "Life after death" does not appear to be testable by any sort of scientific means, and thus seems to be beyond the reach of scientific inquiry.
 
I suppose it really comes down to what life after death means. Certainly my atoms will continue to exist after I die, and when I become worm food, part of me will live on in other creatures, probably until the universe dies a heat death.

As far as any of my memories living on, the jury is out because nobody can possibly know for sure, but I am in the not bloody likely! camp.

Norm
 
In summary, space and time are 'simply tools of our mind.'
Click to expand...

I think I see the problem. (At least with the first part of the article.)

It should say: In summary, our perceptions of space and time are 'simply tools of our mind.'

The second part of the article is more problematic:
Lanza added that everything which can possibly happen is occurring at some point across these multiverses and this means death can't exist in 'any real sense' either.
Click to expand...

This doesn't quite follow either. Even assuming the assertion that "everything which can possibly happen is occurring at some point across these multiverses" is correct (it almost certainly isn't), it's making the false assumption that there must always be some possible universe in which we're still alive. This isn't necessarily true.

There are physical limits to how long we can live, so there'll always be a point at which it's not possible for us to be alive in any universe. Of course, you could postulate universes where these limits don't apply, but we're clearly not living in one of those universes, otherwise there'd be people thousands of years old living in the world today.
 
If you're having thoughts of solipsism, you're the only one who is!


And, quickly!, before Dancing David says it: WORD WANG!
 
Whether 'tis tubular in the mouth to pepper
with sprigs and shallots of buttery fortune,
Or to baste spuds against a sea of nibbles,
And by nomming tend them?

:)
 
dasmiller said:
But . . . but . . . he's an MD!

I know what whenever I have questions about particle-wave duality, many-worlds, or the role of the observer in quantum mechanics experiments, I say to myself, "I should ask my doctor about this!"
Click to expand...

As long as your doctor is Stephen Hawking you are good to go there!!!
 
From the linked article in the Daily Mail:
Lanza cites the double-slit test, pictured, to backup his claims. When scientists watch a particle pass through two slits, the particle goes through one slit or the other. If a person doesn't watch it, it acts like a wave and can go through both slits simultaneously. This means its behaviour changes based on a person's perception
Click to expand...

The only bit in the article that attempts to back up his claims with science, fails badly. A person's perception does not change a particle's behavior, it's the interaction with measurement equipment.

There's one book I won't need to waste time with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom