Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
sean6

Quantum physics proves that there IS an after

153 posts in this topic

Quantum physics proves that there IS an afterlife, claims scientist

Most scientists would probably say that the concept of an afterlife is either nonsense, or at the very least unprovable.

Yet one expert claims he has evidence to confirm an existence beyond the grave - and it lies in quantum physics.

Professor Robert Lanza claims the theory of biocentrism teaches that death as we know it is an illusion created by our consciousness.

http://www.dailymail...-scientist.html

Edited by sean6
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans are being taught about death, have been all the time. Though my parents weren't nor ain't religious, not my mother at least, she told me about death when I was 3 or 4 or so. I remember that clearly, it's not something we learn through experience. It would be probably different if we figured those things out ourselves, I dont think animals know of death the same way we do though they too may sense danger and all that. There's a stigma attached to what is being taught about death. That you need to be good to avoid something you dont know, or that it's this big scary unknown place, a vast emptiness that makes your heart shrink. I know because that feeling haunted me for a good while when I thought I was supposed to be atheist. Life itself is unpredictable and unknown but we're not so afraid of life.

I can fathom time and space being in the eye of the beholder instead of hard-fixed things in our reality. His bottom line seems to be that observing things causes them to change. And to observe is to be conscious of something, observing is merely the link to our consciousness. I'm thinking it's not an either-or thing whether you're conscious or not of something, but how conscious you are of that something. It's just when certain tresholds in how strongly things are observed, those tresholds being breached, we see changes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what i see can not be present without my consciousness thats ok but I dont understand how consciousnes doesnt die with death in the explained article though. perhaps I read fast and missed a part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

doesent sound like science to me, more like philosophy.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The theory seems like garbage to me, especially since Prof. Lanza's interpretation of the double slit experiment has been definitively disproven (it doesn't matter whether any conscious observer sees which slit the photons pass through, only that a machine capable of making that measurement is available).

Although it is possible that the article is trivializing Lanza's arguments...

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lanza is a medical doctor, not a physicist. There's no reason to publish his misguided wafflings about quantum physics over anyone else's.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So something non-conscious such as a camera should not record the illusion of space? And yet it does.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is Dr Lanza's website where he discusses his 'theory' of Biocentrism.

I remain unconvinced of his premise - that "life creates or defines the universe". It seems to me to be little more than a nod to anthropocentrism - with a lot of 'sciencey' language thrown in to sound good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The theory seems like garbage to me, especially since Prof. Lanza's interpretation of the double slit experiment has been definitively disproven (it doesn't matter whether any conscious observer sees which slit the photons pass through, only that a machine capable of making that measurement is available).

[...]

Thats just a minor obstacle for quantum woos, i.e. experimenters consciously built experiment, ergo - conscious observer (observation).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL @ "quantum woos". It's pretty funny how people attempt to apply science to ideas that are actually based on faith/belief. This kind of thing never works, but it certainly doesn't stop some people from trying.

Edited by Lilly
spelling error
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL @ "quantum woos". It's pretty funny how people attempt to apply science to ideas that are actually based on faith/belief. This kind of thing never works, but it certainly doesn't stop some people from trying.

... and selling quantum spinal alignment (whatever that means), and similar stuff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing but some psycho-babble nonesense.

Why doesnt he show evidence by contacting a dead person, ask some questions unknown

to scientists, such as cure for AIDS, closest planet with life, where are Jimmy Hoffa, Emilia Earnhardt, that missing black kid in NYC, who Jesus really was, etc.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have got a headache trying to wrap my head around this idea...

or have I fabricated myself a headache to represent my inability to wrap my head around this idea?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The theory seems like garbage to me, especially since Prof. Lanza's interpretation of the double slit experiment has been definitively disproven (it doesn't matter whether any conscious observer sees which slit the photons pass through, only that a machine capable of making that measurement is available).

Although it is possible that the article is trivializing Lanza's arguments...

A measuring instrument bringing into existence particles from waves doesn't disprove that human observation can have the same affect. All it proves is that anything conducting measurements (eyes, ears, other human senses, non human senses) can do it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in practice this man is saying that life and death space-time universe are just illusions created by the mind and for all we know will cease to exist along with us after death .. I do not know about you, but I see a slight contradiction in this theory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So something non-conscious such as a camera should not record the illusion of space? And yet it does.

That's true, but lets say the camera takes a picture in outer space, and sends it back to us. The observation the camera made is pointless without a human observing the picture it took, so as far as we would be concerned, without us, there would be no picture. We, as humans, would never know unless the picture was sent back to us.

I also meant to say, that you can take the above example and replace the picture with the entire physical universe that we've observed. I believe it's pointless without a conscious observer, and without us, it simply wouldn't exist. Based only on the fact that we wouldn't also.

Edited by andy4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll reserve comment until after I die...

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll reserve comment until after I die...

Good luck on commenting back to us! Lol

I don't understand why some are so hard on his theory, I mean if you weren't alive or ever born, nothing would exist, relative to you. So relative to us, without us, the universe wouldn't exist.

Quantum physics is a very strange thing to delve into.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quantum physics is a very strange thing to delve into.

Indeed it is, and most don't fully appreciate that quantum physics is the the foundational under-pinning of all "macro-existance"

The quantum world is very strange, to be sure.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed it is, and most don't fully appreciate that quantum physics is the the foundational under-pinning of all "macro-existance"

The quantum world is very strange, to be sure.

Most definitely, and we really dont even know why particles act the way they do or how they even got here. And it's the basis for all of our physical realities! What a mind boggle.

Row your boat gently down the stream, merrily merrily, life is but a dream.

We all knew this once upon a time.

Edited by andy4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The quantum world seems indeed very strange.

I have read what information is freely available about Robert Lanza's biocentrism theory, and, although it is interesting, I don't think he really provides much by way of concrete evidence to support his ideas.

I believe, however, that Einstein himself thought that time was an illusion. When one of his good friends Michele Besso died, Einstein supposedly said "Now Besso has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion". I don't know what exactly Einstein meant by this, or what it tells us about his understanding (or ideas) about death. It does, however, show that he believed time to be an illusion. What this really means, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This **** went way over my head. Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe, however, that Einstein himself thought that time was an illusion. When one of his good friends Michele Besso died, Einstein supposedly said "Now Besso has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion". I don't know what exactly Einstein meant by this, or what it tells us about his understanding (or ideas) about death. It does, however, show that he believed time to be an illusion. What this really means, I don't know.

Einstein was a brilliant physicist, but it doesn't follow from that, that everything he thought about concerning physics was true, or that everything he said and is quoted as saying) was also true, or even profound.

Take what he said above, that you quoted. If it is what he actually said, then I would disregard the statement as something to be automatically taken as "profound truth", or even simply "truth" - because no-one believes in physics, except those who don't have any understanding of it.

Physics isn't something you believe in, it's something you comprehend - because it is demonstrable.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So something non-conscious such as a camera should not record the illusion of space? And yet it does.

Only because we perceive it does. This gets back to your perception finally being your reality whether it's actually perceived as real by anyone else. If this wasn't the case we wouldn't need the looney bins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This **** went way over my head. Just saying.

No worries... no one really understands it anyway. It's chock-full of mysteries.

I once heard by some noted physicist(to paraphrase)... "If you understand quantum physics, you don't understand it at all"

So, you're in good company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.