everything is energy
- Thread starter Asguard
- Start date
Asguard, you're not technically wrong to say that, but it's pointless. The only way we know how to define energy is in terms of other things, so saying "everything is energy" doesn't put us in any different of a spot from saying "everything is everything." We aren't any closer to knowing what things are, unless someone can define energy in terms of something other than its effects which we derived the idea of energy from in the first place.
I'll agree with Ismu's amazing controversial theory, except with the modification that in addition to the fact that everything is something, it should be noted that non-things aren't anything.
Banshee,
Sorry to bother you again. It's my usual thing with evidence. You said:
<i>You have all your memories of your past life(s) still with you, only you can't remember them</i>
What I wonder, then, is how you can know that we have these memories?
I suppose you have another "special pleading" along the lines of "some people can access those memories, and I'm one of the special ones". (?)
Or did the aliens tell you?
Or what?
Sorry to bother you again. It's my usual thing with evidence. You said:
<i>You have all your memories of your past life(s) still with you, only you can't remember them</i>
What I wonder, then, is how you can know that we have these memories?
I suppose you have another "special pleading" along the lines of "some people can access those memories, and I'm one of the special ones". (?)
Or did the aliens tell you?
Or what?
scilosopher
Registered Senior Member
JR,
I believe Banshee already said in a post, "Most humans don't remember the memories of a former life-time." ie some do. I would be curious as well whether Banshee has had recollections of past lives myself, but there is no reason to be so agressive about it. I've heard some remarkable examples about people deemed to be the reincarnation of a buddhist holy person to pick out personal objects and such. There are of course alternative explanations.
I think it is a major failing of many, particularly those considering themselves to be hard nosed and scientific, to overly discount the possibility of things not explained by current science. Not even necessarily extending the argument to things ruled out by current scientific dogma.
Scientific theories often can't explain phenomena completely and then the general rule is to stick with the best current theory as a working hypothesis. A lot of disagreement on these matters is based on acceptance of data.
Especially since no one could predict the type of thing that could trigger memories of past lives, there is no reason to think one can readily test this in a lab (unless there is good historic documentation of the person's life and they can answer questions they shouldn't be able to, and couldn't possibly had access to the data). For those who experience these things directly, it would make some sense to accept the best explanation even if it isn't well substantiated by the common societal perspective.
This same happens often in science. Even in the lack of data some follow intuitions and suggestions put forth in the environment. I admit sometimes people may even believe things because some people say cool shit you want to have be real.
Maybe you do people a favor to force them to be critical about it - especially speaking to a scientist who really seems to be out there on a limb. On the other hand if they aren't forcing their beliefs on anyone, there's no reason to be so argumentative.
Having an open mind is very important in the actual practice of science. I'm not saying that I accept that past life memories exist, but there is no reason to be rude to people who do believe in them. If you are actually curious you should be nicer and if you just want to be argumentative you should just be quiet.
Then again there seems to be some anecdotal evidence on sciforums that at least some people enjoy combative debate with those who don't hold their views ...
(Not sure if I'm one of them or not ; )
I believe Banshee already said in a post, "Most humans don't remember the memories of a former life-time." ie some do. I would be curious as well whether Banshee has had recollections of past lives myself, but there is no reason to be so agressive about it. I've heard some remarkable examples about people deemed to be the reincarnation of a buddhist holy person to pick out personal objects and such. There are of course alternative explanations.
I think it is a major failing of many, particularly those considering themselves to be hard nosed and scientific, to overly discount the possibility of things not explained by current science. Not even necessarily extending the argument to things ruled out by current scientific dogma.
Scientific theories often can't explain phenomena completely and then the general rule is to stick with the best current theory as a working hypothesis. A lot of disagreement on these matters is based on acceptance of data.
Especially since no one could predict the type of thing that could trigger memories of past lives, there is no reason to think one can readily test this in a lab (unless there is good historic documentation of the person's life and they can answer questions they shouldn't be able to, and couldn't possibly had access to the data). For those who experience these things directly, it would make some sense to accept the best explanation even if it isn't well substantiated by the common societal perspective.
This same happens often in science. Even in the lack of data some follow intuitions and suggestions put forth in the environment. I admit sometimes people may even believe things because some people say cool shit you want to have be real.
Maybe you do people a favor to force them to be critical about it - especially speaking to a scientist who really seems to be out there on a limb. On the other hand if they aren't forcing their beliefs on anyone, there's no reason to be so argumentative.
Having an open mind is very important in the actual practice of science. I'm not saying that I accept that past life memories exist, but there is no reason to be rude to people who do believe in them. If you are actually curious you should be nicer and if you just want to be argumentative you should just be quiet.
Then again there seems to be some anecdotal evidence on sciforums that at least some people enjoy combative debate with those who don't hold their views ...
(Not sure if I'm one of them or not ; )
scilosopher
Registered Senior Member
I think I made a better argument for souls being order than energy ...
Whether everything is energy ... again I think the fundamental nature of the universe is the interaction of various bits of order and their dynamic interaction and evolution. Possibly produced through the simple instability of nothing (realistically I've always thought it would be tough for nothingess to stabilize itself with nothing to work with ; ) and some type of stochastic critical mass/chain reaction process that every once in a while creates a big bang that eventually returns to nothingness.
Maybe each big bang is like a cylinder on a car pushing on alternate dimensions producing a perpetual motion machine when viewed outside the system of our universe (this possibility is definitely not ruled out by science).
Maybe the creation of the universe is like that moment of artistic inspiration ... speaking of which I might just have to paint a picture of my a** that wonderous part I can pull so much crazy sh*t out of ... or is it my head ... I always got them confused (then again my teachers were always saying I had a wise a**).
Go ahead Asguard, though after this post I may have lost credability due to inability to restrain the tendency to go off on bizarre rants ...
Whether everything is energy ... again I think the fundamental nature of the universe is the interaction of various bits of order and their dynamic interaction and evolution. Possibly produced through the simple instability of nothing (realistically I've always thought it would be tough for nothingess to stabilize itself with nothing to work with ; ) and some type of stochastic critical mass/chain reaction process that every once in a while creates a big bang that eventually returns to nothingness.
Maybe each big bang is like a cylinder on a car pushing on alternate dimensions producing a perpetual motion machine when viewed outside the system of our universe (this possibility is definitely not ruled out by science).
Maybe the creation of the universe is like that moment of artistic inspiration ... speaking of which I might just have to paint a picture of my a** that wonderous part I can pull so much crazy sh*t out of ... or is it my head ... I always got them confused (then again my teachers were always saying I had a wise a**).
Go ahead Asguard, though after this post I may have lost credability due to inability to restrain the tendency to go off on bizarre rants ...
Hi scilosopher,
I'm sorry you perceived my post as aggressive. I see nothing aggressive in it. In fact, I even apologised up-front about interrupting the discussion to ask for an explanation. I did so to request clarification on how anybody could know things about something we've all forgotten. That seemed strange to me.
I have not discounted that possibility that past lives could be real. However, I have many reservations about the accounts of past lives given by those who claim to remember them, as well as some in-principle objections.
You said: <i>Maybe you do people a favor to force them to be critical about it...</i>
That is one of my aims. I think people are far too accepting. I have yet to find a single pseudoscience which Banshee does not embrace enthusiastically, and I think that speaks volumes. I think Banshee may have the best of intentions, but I feel that a bit of critical thinking could be very helpful.
I do not believe I have ever been rude in urging anybody here to think about some of the paranormal claims they seem to accept so readily. Debate on such matters need not be combative. You put your case. I put mine. Then we eventually either reach a consensus or agree to disagree. Either way, we understand each other a little better. Where's the harm in that?
EDIT - typos.
I'm sorry you perceived my post as aggressive. I see nothing aggressive in it. In fact, I even apologised up-front about interrupting the discussion to ask for an explanation. I did so to request clarification on how anybody could know things about something we've all forgotten. That seemed strange to me.
I have not discounted that possibility that past lives could be real. However, I have many reservations about the accounts of past lives given by those who claim to remember them, as well as some in-principle objections.
You said: <i>Maybe you do people a favor to force them to be critical about it...</i>
That is one of my aims. I think people are far too accepting. I have yet to find a single pseudoscience which Banshee does not embrace enthusiastically, and I think that speaks volumes. I think Banshee may have the best of intentions, but I feel that a bit of critical thinking could be very helpful.
I do not believe I have ever been rude in urging anybody here to think about some of the paranormal claims they seem to accept so readily. Debate on such matters need not be combative. You put your case. I put mine. Then we eventually either reach a consensus or agree to disagree. Either way, we understand each other a little better. Where's the harm in that?
EDIT - typos.
scilosopher
Registered Senior Member
JR,
The special pleading ... the did aliens tell you ... or the "Or what?" which after the first two just seems to create an antagonistic triad. If I misinterpretted I apple-o-gize. Man now I really wish I had an apple. And I just brushed my teeth and was going to go to bed and now I'm hungry. Damn munchees.
Are past lives even psuedo-science? I never heard anyone claim they were scientifically proven. Believing in something and making a scientific claim are two different things. Someone can state something is real simply because they believe it and not make a scientific claim.
I just want people to play nice. I find when people get personal arguments become too much a matter of pride over being right and lose track of open minded reasoning and contemplation of the possible. Which is the type of discussion I prefer.
The statement of possible interesting mechanisms more so than "this is the facts - the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth because I read it somewhere in a book so it must be right", which unless you are actually a scientist and have thought about something a fair bit is about all one can do. Even then one runs the major risk of not having understood what was said let alone understanding the assumptions and limitations of the analysis. (I'm not accusing you of this JR, just speaking in generalities)
From chatting with some physicists even physics, one of the more understood and straight forward sciences, is very poorly understood in many ways. Lots of assumptions, bounding, numerical tricks like perterbation analysis, etc. once you start getting into more complex systems.
Not only an argument for keeping an open mind because of the limits of what science can currently be assumed to adress, but an argument for not assuming the scientific knowledge one possesses always means what one thinks.
But yeah think critically ... just as long as one avoids being narrow minded and assured of being right. But enough speaking in generalities, I'm going to try and go to sleep hungry or not ...
The special pleading ... the did aliens tell you ... or the "Or what?" which after the first two just seems to create an antagonistic triad. If I misinterpretted I apple-o-gize. Man now I really wish I had an apple. And I just brushed my teeth and was going to go to bed and now I'm hungry. Damn munchees.
Are past lives even psuedo-science? I never heard anyone claim they were scientifically proven. Believing in something and making a scientific claim are two different things. Someone can state something is real simply because they believe it and not make a scientific claim.
I just want people to play nice. I find when people get personal arguments become too much a matter of pride over being right and lose track of open minded reasoning and contemplation of the possible. Which is the type of discussion I prefer.
The statement of possible interesting mechanisms more so than "this is the facts - the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth because I read it somewhere in a book so it must be right", which unless you are actually a scientist and have thought about something a fair bit is about all one can do. Even then one runs the major risk of not having understood what was said let alone understanding the assumptions and limitations of the analysis. (I'm not accusing you of this JR, just speaking in generalities)
From chatting with some physicists even physics, one of the more understood and straight forward sciences, is very poorly understood in many ways. Lots of assumptions, bounding, numerical tricks like perterbation analysis, etc. once you start getting into more complex systems.
Not only an argument for keeping an open mind because of the limits of what science can currently be assumed to adress, but an argument for not assuming the scientific knowledge one possesses always means what one thinks.
But yeah think critically ... just as long as one avoids being narrow minded and assured of being right. But enough speaking in generalities, I'm going to try and go to sleep hungry or not ...
Hello scilosopher,
<i>The special pleading ... the did aliens tell you ... or the "Or what?" which after the first two just seems to create an antagonistic triad.</i>
Ok, I admit I was trying to provoke a response by going a little over the top. However, I think it is fair to say that Banshee believes in aliens, and certainly in past life memories, so getting information from aliens would not be out of the question.
<i> Are past lives even psuedo-science? I never heard anyone claim they were scientifically proven. Believing in something and making a scientific claim are two different things.</i>
A pseudoscience is something which is dressed up as scientific, but which has no true scientific basis. Examples include things like pyramid power, cold fusion, "free lunch" zero point energy, ghosts, and (sometimes) past lives.
<i>...unless you are actually a scientist and have thought about something a fair bit is about all one can do.</i>
I am actually a scientist. Does that excuse me?
<i>The special pleading ... the did aliens tell you ... or the "Or what?" which after the first two just seems to create an antagonistic triad.</i>
Ok, I admit I was trying to provoke a response by going a little over the top. However, I think it is fair to say that Banshee believes in aliens, and certainly in past life memories, so getting information from aliens would not be out of the question.
<i> Are past lives even psuedo-science? I never heard anyone claim they were scientifically proven. Believing in something and making a scientific claim are two different things.</i>
A pseudoscience is something which is dressed up as scientific, but which has no true scientific basis. Examples include things like pyramid power, cold fusion, "free lunch" zero point energy, ghosts, and (sometimes) past lives.
<i>...unless you are actually a scientist and have thought about something a fair bit is about all one can do.</i>
I am actually a scientist. Does that excuse me?
scilosopher
Registered Senior Member
JR,
I know what psuedoscience is, I just don't consider something to be such unless it is actually being presented that way (ie only if Banshee was presenting some sort of evidence that was purportedly scientific validation of the existence of past life memories existing, but was full of gaping holes [lot's of real science is filled with at least little ones]).
Whether you are excused because you're a scientist, is up to you. The only person I really judge is myself ...
(okay that's probably not true, but I'm the only person I have enough evidence to judge fairly and I recognize that fact)
Out of curiosity, what kind of scientist are you/ what do you research specifically?
(not to wander of topic as I often do, but that's why I tend to visit free thoughts most ...)
I know what psuedoscience is, I just don't consider something to be such unless it is actually being presented that way (ie only if Banshee was presenting some sort of evidence that was purportedly scientific validation of the existence of past life memories existing, but was full of gaping holes [lot's of real science is filled with at least little ones]).
Whether you are excused because you're a scientist, is up to you. The only person I really judge is myself ...
(okay that's probably not true, but I'm the only person I have enough evidence to judge fairly and I recognize that fact)
Out of curiosity, what kind of scientist are you/ what do you research specifically?
(not to wander of topic as I often do, but that's why I tend to visit free thoughts most ...)
James R...
* I think it is fair to say that Banshee believes in aliens, and certainly in past life memories, so getting information from aliens would not be out of the question.*
Banshee does not believe in Aliens. She knows there are extraterrestrials. Believing is as in religion. I am not a believer, I am sorry to disappoint you.
If you want to talk about reincarnation and past memories, then start a thread in the right Forum, Parapsychology. This thread is called: Everything Is Energy...
Parapsychology is NOT pseudo science. It is NOT science. It IS parapsychology, the unknown. As soon as something becomes science, there has to be solid evidence. That is not necessarry in the study of the unknown. There is a lot on this Earth and in the Cosmos what scientists cannot explain with evidence. Try an open mind and a different view. And have respect for humans who are a little different than you. Everybody has to live her/his life. The world would be a better place if humans could only respect eachother a little more.
I guess we can be gentle to eachother here on the boards...
Asguard, my apologies for being off-topic here.
* I think it is fair to say that Banshee believes in aliens, and certainly in past life memories, so getting information from aliens would not be out of the question.*
Banshee does not believe in Aliens. She knows there are extraterrestrials. Believing is as in religion. I am not a believer, I am sorry to disappoint you.
If you want to talk about reincarnation and past memories, then start a thread in the right Forum, Parapsychology. This thread is called: Everything Is Energy...
Parapsychology is NOT pseudo science. It is NOT science. It IS parapsychology, the unknown. As soon as something becomes science, there has to be solid evidence. That is not necessarry in the study of the unknown. There is a lot on this Earth and in the Cosmos what scientists cannot explain with evidence. Try an open mind and a different view. And have respect for humans who are a little different than you. Everybody has to live her/his life. The world would be a better place if humans could only respect eachother a little more.
I guess we can be gentle to eachother here on the boards...
Asguard, my apologies for being off-topic here.
<b>en·er·gy</b>
n. pl. en·er·gies
The capacity for work or vigorous activity; vigor; power.
Exertion of vigor or power: a project requiring a great deal of time and energy.
Vitality and intensity of expression: a speech delivered with energy and emotion.
Usable heat or power: Each year Americans consume a high percentage of the world's energy.
A source of usable power, such as petroleum or coal.
<b>Physics. The capacity of a physical system to do work. </b>
n. pl. en·er·gies
The capacity for work or vigorous activity; vigor; power.
Exertion of vigor or power: a project requiring a great deal of time and energy.
Vitality and intensity of expression: a speech delivered with energy and emotion.
Usable heat or power: Each year Americans consume a high percentage of the world's energy.
A source of usable power, such as petroleum or coal.
<b>Physics. The capacity of a physical system to do work. </b>