Nov 292013
 

Question by Ralph: Is there a scientific explanation for consciousness?
Many theistic beliefs will rationalize that your consciousness is your soul. It’s you! Your personality, your activity…except when you leave your body, your consciousness moves on in SOME form eternally. An atheist will say that when you die, your consciousness will seize to exist, similar to the shutting down of a computer. I was wondering if anyone knew of a scientific explanation for how consciousness began…or is it just anyone’s guess?

Best answer:

Answer by Sincerity – Bane of Scooterpoop
There might currently, there might not.

Regardless of whether there is, it gives no right to anyone to spout out which ever answer they please, simply because the demonstrated one is absent.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Jul 252013
 

Question by Jayden’s ♥mommy♥: Does the idea that the universe exists for the conscious observer have some scientific merit?
I’m talking as either an intelligent being created the universe *for* us, or we are in some kind of computer simulation.
I also would like your own interpretations, outside of what the religion says is preferable, though religious opinions are good answers too, just insert some independent thought if you can.
(props to BlueSkies)

Best answer:

Answer by Alexis
There is no evidence to suggest this.

That doesn’t necessarily mean that it *isn’t* true. But there’s no reason to believe there is.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Nov 262012
 

Question by Future: Why do scientific discoveries raise philosophical problems?
i.e. Quantum mechanics and the problem of free will.

Best answer:

Answer by jezzi_fun
The touchstone of the value of philosophy as a world-view and methodology is the degree to which it is interconnected with life. This interconnection may be both direct and indirect, through the whole system of culture, through science, art, morality, religion, law, and politics. As a special form of social consciousness, constantly interacting with all its other forms, philosophy is their general theoretical substantiation and interpretation.

Can philosophy develop by itself, without the support of science? Can science “work” without philosophy? Some people think that the sciences can stand apart from philosophy, that the scientist should actually avoid philosophising, the latter often being understood as groundless and generally vague theorising. If the term philosophy is given such a poor interpretation, then of course anyone would agree with the warning “Physics, beware of metaphysics!” But no such warning applies to philosophy in the higher sense of the term. The specific sciences cannot and should not break their connections with true philosophy

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Jun 242012
 

Question by Clam Crunchy: Best scientific evidence for an afterlife?
(1) Materialistic Resurrection: Boltzmann’s Brain.

There is a hypothesis in thermodynamics and cosmology that if we wait for an EXTREMELY long time, a random entropy decrease in a cold, thin gas could produce a human brain. The amount of time for a human brain to appear from a random entropy decrease has been estimated by Andrei Linde to be on the order of 10^10^50 years.

(2) Materialistic Resurrection: Poincare Recurrence Theorem.

The Poincare Recurrence Theorem states that after some finite time, a dynamical system will eventually return arbitrarily close to some state in the past. This essentially means that the history of a dynamical system will repeat itself.

The amount of time it would take for the universe to undergo a Poincare Recurrence (loosely, the time it takes to repeat itself)
has been estimated to be between 10^10^10^10^2.08 and
10^10^10^10^10^1.1 years, which is vastly longer than the time for a entropy decrease to create a Boltzmann’s Brain.

Materialistic Resurrection depends on a certain philosophical problem, though. If we kill someone, and then recreate their body perfectly, down to the individual atom, would that person come back to life, or would another person come into existence?

(3) Near Death Experiences.

It is possible that NDEs are a glimpse into an afterlife, and that people who have come close to death really have experienced an afterlife.
There is some, although dubious, experimental support for the notion of consciousness existing outside the body. People have verified details about their operation while having earplugs in, eyes tapes closed, etc.

A possible mechanism for consciousness existing outside the body is the idea of a “consciousness field”. The brain does not generate consciousness, but simply receives the field. As an analogy, one may consider a radio receiving EM waves. The radio doesn’t generate the waves, but receives them, and the content of the waves depends on both the waves themselves and the radio.

One could even imagine that things like mental disorders could be explained in the context of this radio analogy; changes in the content of consciousness depends on how the brain changes in its ability to “receive” consciousness.

The idea of a consciousness field, however, is far from proven, and I can think of no way of testing the theory.

However, NDEs should be treated with skepticism, as it may turn out that even exceptional NDE cases that don’t seem explainable in naturalistic terms may have a mundane explanation.

Source(s):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_E19_s

Information Loss in Black Holes and/or Conscious Beings?, Don N. Page, Heat Kernel Techniques and Quantum Gravity (1995), S. A. Fulling (ed), p. 461. Discourses in Mathematics and its Applications, No. 4, Texas A&M University Department of Mathematics. arΧiv:hep-th/9411193. ISBN 0963072838.

“Sinks in the Landscape, Boltzmann Brains, and the Cosmological Constant Problem”, Andrei Linde, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 0701 (2007) 022 (at arXiv)
My question is, how strong is the evidence that I have presented, in your opinion, for an afterlife?

Best answer:

Answer by Vaes
omg!!! wooo hooo!! im on level 2!!!!!!! yeahhh!!!!!!

Add your own answer in the comments!

Jan 162012
 

Question by oooooooooo a korean in cokato: Renaissance encouraged the scientific revolution and the enlightenment?
In particular, what changes in interest, outlook and thinking during the renaissance and the reformation encouraged the scientific revolution and the enlightenment?

Best answer:

Answer by Spinoza
It must be a desire for better life must be the driving force for the scientific advancement, and of course there was a kind of rivarly between Ottoman Empire and Constantinople; and there already crusades took place and it went on more than 100 years or so, these things do play role in driving people to reach much higher heights in life.

No doubt Renaissance did played a pivotal role in spread of scientific temper and advancement; and even the renaissance is also indirectly influenced by the crusades and the battle for the constantinople in the Europe.

One thing is very important in the human life, a kind of healthy competition should be always there and should be welcomed, that healthy competition and contest is very important in the human life, otherwise people become lethargic and complacent.

That’s it my friend.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Jan 052012
 

Question by : From a scientific view point, could reincarnation be hypothetically possible?
So I’m really stoned right now and I had an incredible epiphany while thinking about reincarnation. The epiphany gave an idea of a hypothesis explaining reincarnation with quantum physics.

I don’t have any qualifications in science, I’m in my first year of university studying business but I’m interested in quantum physics and I have a fair understanding of it, but of course I’m still learning though (with the resources available on the internet).

I’m an athiest and I personally don’t believe in reincarnation because there is no evidence to back it up, but I’m still open to the idea of reincarnation being hypothetically possible. If we could somehow prove that consciousness does not depend on brain chemicals, but instead depends on the sub-atomic particles within the mollecule, you could think that, hypothetically (and only hypothetically) that consciousness moves through dimensions similarly to how electrons move through dimensions (i’ll provide the mathematical proof at the end so you know that I’m not just making this up).

In other words, you could say that after you die, your consciousness (independent of neurology) will move forward a unit through one of the extra dimensions explained with quantum physics and string theory, so you can live in another body in a different dimension to the previous one. This would not only say that reincarnation is possible but it would also explain the quantum physics of how reincarnation happens.

This can only hypothetically be possible at this point because modern technology isn’t advanced enough to be able to test it and prove it. It’s not evidence otherwise. Maybe sometime in the future we’ll know for sure if reincarnation is possible or impossible to happen. Until then, for me there’s no point believing in reincarnation.

**************
Like I said, here’s the proof so you can test it at home if you happen to have enough money to set up an experiment. I’m still seeing this from a scientific viewpoint and I’m trying my best to keep it as scientific as possible without making it sound too philosophical, spiritual or religious.

The Schrodinger equation (see equation 1) explains that an electron is a particle that moves through different dimensions beyond what we can perceive.

Everything is uncertain at a quantum scale because order does not exist (see equation 2) so the electron moves through depending on probability and it’s impossible to accurately predict where it’s going to be, we can only predict the maximum probability (see equation 3).

The electron wave function is basically a graph of how the electron waves in and out of existence, away and towards the space and time that we perceive as one universe. For each time it changes it moves through a unit in an extra dimension beyond all space and time, so it moves forward through a 5th dimension (see equation 1).

What I’m saying hypothetically is that consciousness (OR you could think of it as your ‘spirit’ if that’s what you’d like to call it) may be able move through dimensions at random (depending on equation 3 and equation 1) and each time you die your consciousness/spirit moves a unit through the 5th dimension, a you perceive a new life in our 4 dimensional reality that we’re in now.

You would have to tweak the definition of ‘reincarnation’ and ‘consciousness’ a bit to properly understand this.

____

Equation 1: Schrodinger’s equation -

[i x Ρ](σ/σt)Ψ = Η x Ψ

Equation 2: The Uncertainty Principle Inequation -

▲(x)▲(p) > P/2

Equation 3: Maximum Probability Amplitude Equation

Ψ = [(Ψone)(a)] x [(Ψ(two)(b)] + or – [(Ψone)(b)] x [Ψ(two)(a)]

NOTE: (+) for boson particles, (-) for fermion particles

Discuss.
You could say that your consciousness/spirit is a fermion particle.

Best answer:

Answer by George Vann silvers
Neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed, everything that exists can only change forms, everything that is, was or ever will be is here right now at the present. Not even a black hole can destroy matter, most theories say that stuff that is sucked into a black hole comes out somewhere.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Dec 092011
 
spirituality
by momez

Question by DesiDani(Nowandforever): Is there scientific evidence of spirituality and what scientific research has been done regarding spirituality?
Not in the context of religious beliefs, but more of in the context of those with no religious beliefs and atheists. How do you scientifically explain or prove spirituality?

Best answer:

Answer by Michael Hunt
Define “spirituality”.

What do you think? Answer below!

Dec 052011
 

Question by Fester: How can Scientific Method be used to disprove Astrology if it cannot be used to prove what is phenomenal?
Reading through articles about astrology and its validity leads me to a question. How can Scientific Method be used to disprove Astrology if it cannot be used to prove what is phenomenal? Ghosts, weeping Jesus statues, demonic possession and many other things supernatural.

Best answer:

Answer by Venus is a Fly Trap
It cant, its a concept, theory, thought, belief, its much like people say they believe or dont in religion due to facts for or against it. faith feeds religion and creates belief, same for astrology there are things some feel prove astrology and there are things others say disprove astrology. either way there isnt a solid enough proof or foundation to say anything as a fact, instead it faith and personal veiwpoints that make it something you believe in or do not. its completely personal because you could find info to fight for or against but its all subjective so science cant make it a fact or fiction.

Give your answer to this question below!

Nov 072011
 

Question by frozen-heart: Doesn’t this sound like a scientific experiment?
I mean people now are “dead”, and when they get back, they tell the doctors what was happening when they were unconscious. Now, I know that lights and “Angels” (In Islam, they are the same; We Muslims believe, as the Qur’an states, that Angels are created from light) maybe due to more Carbon dioxide in the blood, but what science can’t explain is the fact that those people tell others what was happening when they were “Dead”. I don’t base my knowledge of God on such things. In fact, I don’t even need the Qur’an to know that there is a God, but the evidence is overwhelming, especially now that there are very known non-religious Neuroscientists talking about out-of-body consciousness.

Now let’s get to the question.

In Physics, we know that Dark Matter and Energy must exist, although we don’t see them; we know them by their effects, but nobody says: “We don’t see them, so they don’t exist”. Doesn’t the same thing apply here: We don’t see the out-of-body-consciousness, but we have its effects. When a Doctor is faced by his ex-”dead” patient telling him about everything that happened when he was Physically unconscious, why do you think we should eliminate the option that an out-of-body consciousness can be responsible for that? In fact, it’s the only comprehensive explanation.

Best answer:

Answer by The Least of Jesus’ Brothers
We cannot see/measure the effects. It comes down to a bare assertion fallacy.

No fMRI testing has backed up an un-dead person’s claims.

Key science words here are:
1. Falsifiable (these claims are not)
2. Verifiable (these claims are not)
3. Repeatable (good luck with this one)

What do you think? Answer below!

Aug 292011
 

Scientific Explorer’s The Magic Science for Wizards Only

  • Includes everything you need to do 11 magical activities
  • Amaze your friends and family with these impressive tricks and experiments!
  • Comes with everything you need to make your own personalized magic wand
  • Comes with laminated cards with magic tricks to baffle your audience
  • Also includes lab equipment and mysterious wizard powders that will mix together to mystify you!

Cast real smoke from your fingertips, make a wizard wand, and whip up color-changing potions in your test tube laboratory. Also included are laminated cards with magic tricks to baffle all your friends, an instruction booklet with 11 activities, lab equipment, and mysterious wizard powders that will mix together to mystify you!

List Price: $ 19.99

Price: $ 12.58

[wprebay kw="magic" num="0" ebcat="all"] [wprebay kw="magic" num="1" ebcat="all"]

Related Magic Products

Powered by Yahoo! Answers