24 Mar 09
3 edits
Towards the end of your life the machine will reveal itself to you.
It will begin with coincidence and deja vu. Slowly you will begin to question
time and meaning. After a while you will understand neither.
This is death.
It is not the instant release we are led to believe it is but a gradual decline
throughout life.
Those that you love will remain intact and not know of your shift. They will
only see the inconsequence of a game unplayed.
But you are dead, believe me!
24 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckOut of curiosity, did you accidentally post this here meaning for it to be in the spiritual forum, or is this an attempt to start a flame war?
Towards the end of your life the machine will reveal itself to you.
It will begin with coincidence and deja vu. Slowly you will begin to question
time and meaning. After a while you will understand neither.
This is death.
It is not the instant release we are led to believe it is but a gradual decline
throughout life.
Those that you love will r ...[text shortened]... hift. They will
only see the inconsequence of a game unplayed.
But you are dead, believe me!
24 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI'm happy for it to be moved to spirituality if you can disprove it scientifically.
Out of curiosity, did you accidentally post this here meaning for it to be in the spiritual forum, or is this an attempt to start a flame war?
It has nothing to do with God.
24 Mar 09
3 edits
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI don't think it's possible to disprove the simple concept from a Descartian
What do you want us to disprove? Your first post is rather incoherent, so you'll have to be more specific.
point of view.
However, I'd like to see if you can disprove whether it's possible for one entity
to relay trans dimensional information to another.
If so, what would the implications be?
What would death mean?
If not then what is the purpose of a singular timeline?
24 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckWithout the assistance of Christ and without spitting it out, yes; please spell it out.
I'm talking of the greater anthropic principle.
In that universes split by chaos are also united by commonality.
Christ! Do I have to spell it out for you?
edit. Ask deepthroat. He gets it.
24 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckWell I beg to differ on the 'gradual decline' concept. Although physically and mentally we certainly decline, we maintain consciousness, and Isaac Asimov was heard to say just seconds before he died "I AM Isaac Asimov"
Towards the end of your life the machine will reveal itself to you.
It will begin with coincidence and deja vu. Slowly you will begin to question
time and meaning. After a while you will understand neither.
This is death.
It is not the instant release we are led to believe it is but a gradual decline
throughout life.
Those that you love will r ...[text shortened]... hift. They will
only see the inconsequence of a game unplayed.
But you are dead, believe me!
Signifying there was no gradual decline but a sudden drop off like a boat going over Niagra Falls.
25 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckSo you are asking us, a disparate group of engineers, chessplayers, and budding philosophers, not one true scientist, like an Ed Witten or Stephen Hawking, to answer questions that have gone unanswered for the last 2000 years or so. Good luck getting either a proof or a disproof of that. You are spouting nonsense to hear your head rattle, and to give the mistaken impression you have some kind of innate intelligence.
I don't think it's possible to disprove the simple concept from a Descartian
point of view.
However, I'd like to see if you can disprove whether it's possible for one entity
to relay trans dimensional information to another.
If so, what would the implications be?
What would death mean?
If not then what is the purpose of a singular timeline?
25 Mar 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI don't know how to make it any clearer.
Of course there is room for philosophy, but philosophy is not just some random babblings which come to mind. It's ordered and systematic, and you must clearly define the concepts you are introducing.
The greater anthropic principle theorises that the universe is continually splitting
into an infinite number of multiverses at each point in time so that each possibility
is played out.
My question is can and do each of these universes affect each other.
e.g. If a person dies in one universe, can they still influence another, like an unplayed
game of chess.
25 Mar 09
Originally posted by Thequ1ckI cannot understand you;
I don't know how to make it any clearer.
The greater anthropic principle theorises that the universe is continually splitting
into an infinite number of multiverses at each point in time so that each possibility
is played out.
My question is can and do each of these universes affect each other.
e.g. If a person dies in one universe, can they still influence another, like an unplayed
game of chess.
What is this so called "greater anthropic principle" and which philosophers brought it up?