What it would be like to be a ghost

[+Liquid Gardens]

On 7/17/2024 at 11:54 AM, papageorge1 said:

Pretty hard without a physical body.

Then how can they be seen by our physical eyes?  If physical light reflects off of ghosts so we can see them and video them, then seems like there must be something physical involved.

[XenoFish]

26 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

then seems like there must be something physical involved.

Shhh, we don't talk sense in this section of the forum. It ruins the illusion.

[XenoFish]

I don't think being a ghost would bother me all that much. If I had free mobility I wouldn't be on earth, I'd go where I wanted. The only thing that bothers me is if I'm still possessing this meat vessel as it rots and decays. While being able to feel every moment of it. Like that scene in Return of the Living Dead.

Edited July 18 by XenoFish

[papageorge1]

21 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Then how can they be seen by our physical eyes?  If physical light reflects off of ghosts so we can see them and video them, then seems like there must be something physical involved.

Yes, there is also the phenomena of materialization. It involves drawing energy from the environment for temporary physical-like qualities.

Here's one attempt at explanation for ghost materialization.

[the13bats]

1 minute ago, XenoFish said:

I don't think being a ghost we bother me all that much. If I had free mobility I wouldn't be on earth, I'd go where I wanted. The only thing that bothers me is if I'm still possessing this meat vessel as it rots and decays. While being able to feel every moment of it. Like that scene in Return of the Living Dead.

Ugh....it hurts to be dead,

In my way of thinking the ROTLD zombies were not ghosts, if I go by what many seem to deem ghosts to be it would I guess be like the movie ghost in a way,
Of course the movie showed the actors with bodies and vaguely tried to explain the body wasn't really there.
Life is weird my thoughts and such have changed come and gone I guess I don't fear being dead, I dnt like the idea but can't change it but I am terrified of dying.

[the13bats]

6 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Yes, there is also the phenomena of materialization. It involves drawing energy from the environment for temporary physical-like qualities.

Here's one attempt at explanation for ghost materialization.

I can explain unicorns, fairies the easter bunny.

[the13bats]

3 minutes ago, the13bats said:

Ugh....it hurts to be dead,

In my way of thinking the ROTLD zombies were not ghosts, if I go by what many seem to deem ghosts to be it would I guess be like the movie ghost in a way,
Of course the movie showed the actors with bodies and vaguely tried to explain the body wasn't really there.
Life is weird my thoughts and such have changed come and gone I guess I don't fear being dead, I dnt like the idea but can't change it but I am terrified of dying.

I will add I believe being scared of dying keeps some of us here longer, if you get my drift.

[XenoFish]

8 minutes ago, the13bats said:

Ugh....it hurts to be dead,

In my way of thinking the ROTLD zombies were not ghosts, if I go by what many seem to deem ghosts to be it would I guess be like the movie ghost in a way,
Of course the movie showed the actors with bodies and vaguely tried to explain the body wasn't really there.
Life is weird my thoughts and such have changed come and gone I guess I don't fear being dead, I dnt like the idea but can't change it but I am terrified of dying.

Let me explain it a bit simpler. You're dead. A ghost, yet you're still possessing your body till there is nothing left. You can't move, see, hear, but you can feel. With all those nerves still functioning. So you're trapped for a time in a decaying pile of flesh. 

Edited July 18 by XenoFish

[Piney]

Just now, the13bats said:

I can explain the easter bunny.

Keep my family out of it. 😠

[the13bats]

17 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Let me explain it a bit simpler. You're dead. A ghost, yet you're still possessing your body till there is nothing left. You can't move, see, hear, but you can feel. With all those nerves still functioning. So you're trapped for a time in a decaying pile of flesh. 

A zombie of sorts yeah, that idea sucks out loud.

[diddyman68]

If these ghost hunter programmes are to be believed,ghosts hang around in various locations but need the energy of the investigators and there equipment to communicate it must be so boring being a ghost.

[+Liquid Gardens]

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Yes, there is also the phenomena of materialization. It involves drawing energy from the environment for temporary physical-like qualities.

Here's one attempt at explanation for ghost materialization.

Okay, well that certainly wraps everything in a nice, pretty, unfalsifiable bow...  Why don't ghosts interact with humans?  Pretty hard without a physical body.  How can we see them then, why does light reflect off of them if they're not physical?  Well, they're kinda physical SOMEtimes, but only to a certain degree, not enough to be able to interact with you or do things you might expect them to if they were real. 

And Aesop may have thought he had the market on 'just so' stories.

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Here's one attempt at explanation for ghost materialization.

Not much of an attempt and nothing is explained there, or at least not explained just by kicking the can/question down the road by just invoking the idea of 'spectral energy'.  I realize it's just an opinion being shared but the link on materialization stages reads like someone assumed that ALL the ghost stories/pictures are true (heard of 'orbs' and maybe 'plasma' but 'vortex' is a new one for me) and tried to come up with a framework that would be consistent with all that.  That's not that difficult to do of course when there is no reality to have to check anything against, things like spectral energy can do whatever we need them to do.

[papageorge1]

3 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Okay, well that certainly wraps everything in a nice, pretty, unfalsifiable bow...  Why don't ghosts interact with humans?  Pretty hard without a physical body.  How can we see them then, why does light reflect off of them if they're not physical?  Well, they're kinda physical SOMEtimes, but only to a certain degree, not enough to be able to interact with you or do things you might expect them to if they were real. 

And Aesop may have thought he had the market on 'just so' stories.

Not much of an attempt and nothing is explained there, or at least not explained just by kicking the can/question down the road by just invoking the idea of 'spectral energy'.  I realize it's just an opinion being shared but the link on materialization stages reads like someone assumed that ALL the ghost stories/pictures are true (heard of 'orbs' and maybe 'plasma' but 'vortex' is a new one for me) and tried to come up with a framework that would be consistent with all that.  That's not that difficult to do of course when there is no reality to have to check anything against, things like spectral energy can do whatever we need them to do.

Well, the first question is 'are ghosts and poltergeist phenomena ever objectively real?'. If you say ‘No’ then no further theories are needed. If you answer ’Yes’ then something must exist that is really ‘out there’ to mainstream science.

I’m a Yes’, so the details of an. explanation must exist and be 'out there' to mainstream science. 
 

Observation can precede understanding in science.

Now from sources I respect of the Spiritualist, Theosophical, Vedic and other traditions research can dig up some common explanations involving things like an etheric plane of nature that is intermediary to the physical and astral and involves prana/qi energies.

Internet research can take you deeper into these esoteric fields. But as physical science is all you are interested in, then let’s call it a mystery for the future.

 

Edited July 19 by papageorge1

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Well, the first question is 'are ghosts and poltergeist phenomena ever objectively real?'.

And in real science, that's the last question.

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Observation can precede understanding in science.

Initial non-scientific interpretations based on observations are often shown to be wrong by science.

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Internet research can take you deeper into these esoteric fields. But as physical science is all you are interested in, then let’s call it a mystery for the future.

Internet research can also take you deeper into esoteric bull.  Physical science is of course not all I'm interested in, it's that there is just far more compelling fiction available.  

[papageorge1]

13 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

And in real science, that's the last question.

 

In science you can observe something not currently understood and then create new possible theories to explain. 

 

[the13bats]

5 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

In science you can observe something not currently understood and then create new possible theories to explain. 

 

In that science can not has not brought paranormal into the lab to observe in fact can you provide even one unbiased case where actual science looked at ghosts and came back with evidence to support it?

 

[openozy]

16 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Then how can they be seen by our physical eyes?  If physical light reflects off of ghosts so we can see them and video them, then seems like there must be something physical involved.

What about a rainbow, they aren't physical.

[+Liquid Gardens]

39 minutes ago, openozy said:

What about a rainbow, they aren't physical.

Of course they are, wavelengths of light are physical.  I'm sure you've probably had a sunburn before.

[openozy]

6 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Of course they are, wavelengths of light are physical.  I'm sure you've probably had a sunburn before.

But they are also an illusion of light and water. Being a ginger and a greenkeeper, sunburn was my middle name, lol.

[+Liquid Gardens]

9 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

In science you can observe something not currently understood and then create new possible theories to explain. 

 

Of course, and then you provide evidence to support those theories and those may lead you to be able to answer the 'last question', are ghosts objectively real.  All your theories are currently in competition with the theory, 'maybe the stories/things you read and see on the internet are not accurate'.

[+Liquid Gardens]

37 minutes ago, openozy said:

But they are also an illusion of light and water. 

Sure but those are both physical. It's only an illusion if someone is thinking that a rainbow is something more solid.

[papageorge1]

6 hours ago, the13bats said:

In that science can not has not brought paranormal into the lab to observe in fact can you provide even one unbiased case where actual science looked at ghosts and came back with evidence to support it?

 

As I said to another poster above:

Well, the first question is 'are ghosts and poltergeist phenomena ever objectively real?'. If you say ‘No’ then no further theories are needed. If you answer ’Yes’ then something must exist that is really ‘out there’ to mainstream science.

[papageorge1]

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Of course, and then you provide evidence to support those theories and those may lead you to be able to answer the 'last question', are ghosts objectively real.  All your theories are currently in competition with the theory, 'maybe the stories/things you read and see on the internet are not accurate'.

OK, then our difference can be boiled down to what I said originally:

Well, the first question is 'are ghosts and poltergeist phenomena ever objectively real?'. If you say ‘No’ then no further theories are needed. If you answer ’Yes’ then something must exist that is really ‘out there’ to mainstream science.

The quantity. quality and consistency of evidence (IMO) has made me a 'Yes' beyond reasonable doubt. 

 

 

[XenoFish]

16 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

The quantity. quality and consistency of evidence (IMO) has made me a 'Yes' beyond reasonable doubt. 

And that is why you fail. 

[+Liquid Gardens]

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

OK, then our difference can be boiled down to what I said originally:

Well, the first question is 'are ghosts and poltergeist phenomena ever objectively real?'. If you say ‘No’ then no further theories are needed. If you answer ’Yes’ then something must exist that is really ‘out there’ to mainstream science.

The quantity. quality and consistency of evidence (IMO) has made me a 'Yes' beyond reasonable doubt. 

I disagree with your boiling down, and you kinda indicate why here.  The first question, even in your view here, is 'does the evidence support the idea that ghosts are real'. That's really about the only important question actually.

Once proven yes then we can get into whether they go through materialization stages and if there's spectral energy and all that, but that's secondary to the big question.  My earlier mention of the theories on the link was to point out how empty they were; 'ghosts are magic' and 'ghosts are holographic projections from aliens' explains all ghost sightings and theories as well as 'ghosts have spectral energy', and they are both equally evidenced by absolutely nothing.