Physics and the Immortality of the Soul

[Norman321]

don't bother challenging this now, this is too incredible for you to understand.

Actually Paul says to: "Test all things; hold fast what is good." So at what point do we determine what can be tested and what can not be tested?

 

[Guy1]

The point Carrol was making is that there is NOTHING in science to back that up. You can not store memory using pure energy. My response was that it's a mute point because of the resurrection of the dead. The physical body is raised.

Yes the decaying body that long ago lost all of it's brain cells.

 

[Norman321]

Yes the decaying body that long ago lost all of it's brain cells.

Valid point no doubt. They had all the bases covered in a sermon back in the 1700's. R U ready to go into that right now? Because no matter how you slice it or dice it, substance has been dedicated. Still, enlighten me. When you cremate someone what is left? Molecular substance. R U trying to suggest that there is no molecular memory storage? That memory storage does not take place on a Nano scale?

 

[Guy1]

Valid point no doubt. They had all the bases covered in a sermon back in the 1700's. R U ready to go into that right now?

idk. r u rly guna tlk about a surmn in the 1700s in a science 4em?

Still, enlighten me. When you cremate someone what is left?

Mostly carbon.

Are you trying to suggest that there is no molecular memory storage?

Instead of snarking again, I just fixed your typo. Last I checked, ashes don't hold memories.

That memory storage does not take place on a Nano scale?

It takes place at the micro scale.

 

[Norman321]

Last I checked, ashes don't hold memories.

You do not know if they hold memory or not, just because you have no way to retrieve that memory.

R The atoms destoyed when you burn the body? How many atoms make up a person? A 70 kg body would have approximately 7*1027 atoms.

"The world’s smallest magnetic data storage unit is made of just 12 atoms, squeezing an entire byte into just 96 atoms"

So what is 7*1027 divided by 96?

 

[Guy1]

You do not know if they hold memory or not, just because you have no way to retrieve that memory.

We have good reason to believe they don't, since all chemicals and cells known to hold them are gone.

Are the atoms destoyed when you burn the body? How many atoms make up a person? A 70 kg body would have approximately 7*1027 atoms.

This is what would happen if we actually destroyed a single gram of matter (minus the robots of course):

GIGA DRILL MAXIMUM! - YouTube

"The world’s smallest magnetic data storage unit is made of just 12 atoms, squeezing an entire byte into just 96 atoms"

So what is 7*1027 divided by 96?

Congratulations. You've found a device specifically designed by nanotech engineers to store data. How does this relate to ashes?

 

[Norman321]

How does this relate to ashes?

You have failed to prove that the ashes do not hold memory.
Because ashes are made up of atoms and atoms can store memory.

DNA needs 32 atoms to store one bit

Video will do me no good. I am on my old computer and the sound is not working right now. I am to lazy to go into my bios to remover a virus.

 

[Guy1]

You have failed to prove that the ashes do not hold memory.
Because ashes are made up of atoms and atoms can store memory.

You've failed to prove ashes can do so in the first place. So far you're citing one material that can- then turning around and saying a completely different one can. A good analogy to this is "Aluminum is great for making soda cans. This proves that chalk is too."

DNA needs 32 atoms to store one bit

Source?

 

[Norman321]

You've failed to prove

Actually Carrols challange failed. If you can not see that, then your in denyal.

He says:"there’s no way within those laws to allow for the information stored in our brains to persist after we die." I have shown many ways that memory can be stored at a level where there is no decay or corruption. In molecules, carbon and in atoms. All that is lost by death is the ability to retrieve memory. This is an issue that can be resolved by the resurrection power of God. So Carrols point that pure energy does not store memory becomes a mute point because that is not how the memory (soul) is stored.

The funny thing is you have not even reached the point yet where they were 300 years ago.

So when Carrol says: "NO Way". I say wrong Carrol. there are three ways. Carbon, Molecules and Atoms. Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus represents the Carbon, the Holy Spirit: Molecules. God the Father represents the Atoms.

My question is: What is happening when people claim their whole life flashes before them? Just where does all that memory come from and why does it flash past them so fast? If every cell in your body contains all the DNA that makes up you. Then does ever cell in your body contain all the information needed to make up a soul? R the stories from people that receive organ transplants true? I am sorry Sean Carrol, you have WAY to many questions to answer before you can claim that there is no immortal soul.

So Again, Carrols challange was not to PROVE anything. Simply to show a mechanism for how it COULD be done. Then we find out this whole issue was resolved 300 years ago. Long before Modern Physics came along.

 

[Norman321]

Source?

"DNA needs 32 atoms to store one bit" Just do a google search. Clearly you have not researched any of this at all.

 

[3rdHeaven]

We see only a small part of any thing, and we think it's a lot. There is much more we don't see or know or capable of understanding.

What are the laws of physics to God? He created them. Our universe is enough for us to get lost in, how can we imagine any thing beyond that?

 

[Norman321]

Congratulations. You've found a device specifically designed by nanotech engineers to store data. How does this relate to ashes?

Ashes are carbon. So it relates to carbon as it has been shown that carbon can store memory. The challange was not to prove that carbon does store immortal memory (soul). The challange was that carbon COULD store that memory. Now they are telling us that Graphene memory can store for up to 100,000 years at 1000 times the speed. It has been tested for 20,000 reps and is only 10 atoms thick making conventional memory look huge and ungainly.

 

[mzungu]

Ashes are carbon. So it relates to carbon as it has been shown that carbon can store memory. The challange was not to prove that carbon does store immortal memory (soul). The challange was that carbon COULD store that memory. Now they are telling us that Graphene memory can store for up to 100,000 years at 1000 times the speed. It has been tested for 20,000 reps and is only 10 atoms thick making conventional memory look huge and ungainly.

considering that all matter is made up of atoms and all living things contain atoms that originated from inorganic and dead organic matter then suffice it to say that all our atoms contain memory of bacteria, plants, dinosaurs, shrimps, rocks, air, etc Wow! No wonder I keep dreaming I am an amoeba in the Cretaceous marshes!

 

[Guy1]

Ashes are carbon.

You are correct for once.

So it relates to carbon as it has been shown that carbon can store memory.

Graphene can store memory. Carbon in general cannot.

The challange was not to prove that carbon does store immortal memory (soul).

It doesn't store any memory aside from electronic.

Now they are telling us that Graphene memory can store for up to 100,000 years at 1000 times the speed. It has been tested for 20,000 reps and is only 10 atoms thick making conventional memory look huge and ungainly.

Which is why molecular computers are all the rage. You're basically looking at a study that says "Graphene can store computer memory." and insisting it means "All carbon can store every kind of memory known to man." Ignoring the fact that memory in a computer and memory in the brain are stored completely differently, that only a special kind of carbon can hold memory at all; and that even if you were right on all accounts, this would only apply to people who have been cremated.

I'm wondering why you're trying so hard to make these ridiculous ideas sound plausible. "God miraculously brought people back from the dead with their memories." is at least honest in that it outright states magic is at work. Yours just denies reality in favor of what you would like to believe.

 

[Norman321]

considering that all matter is made up of atoms and all living things contain atoms that originated from inorganic and dead organic matter then suffice it to say that all our atoms contain memory of bacteria, plants, dinosaurs, shrimps, rocks, air, etc Wow! No wonder I keep dreaming I am an amoeba in the Cretaceous marshes!

Yes, very good, that is the direction we are heading in. But I am in no hurry to get there. Because there are some theories out there that ALL life has cognitive ability. For example they have done experiments with talking to plants and the plants do seem to thrive better then the control group that received negative energy. Also the point that different organisms share the same atoms was the biggest part of the paper from the 1700's on this subject. So we are getting into the real issue here.

 

[Norman321]

I'm wondering why you're trying so hard to make these ridiculous ideas sound plausible. "God miraculously brought people back from the dead with their memories." is at least honest in that it outright states magic is at work. Yours just denies reality in favor of what you would like to believe.

Carrol is not asking us to show that the soul is immortal. He is only asking us to show that their is a soul that COULD be immortal. This so called "ridiculous ideas" is pretty much the only ball game I can find when it comes to any scientific evidence to show that memories continue after death. My father always believed hard line science. When we die the memory in our brain is erased as if it had never been there. Yet up to 98% of the people believe in eternal life and that memory continues on after death. So when you have that many people believe something that has NO scientific support, then I think Carrol's request is a very reasonable one. Also I think it is reasonable to ask if every atom in our Body does in some way store memory. I do not think that is a ridiculous idea at all. There is lots of unexplained scientific observances to work with here. For example what is the cause of Phantom pain? How can you feel pain in something that is not there.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Carrol is not asking us to show that the soul is immortal. He is only asking us to show that their is a soul that COULD be immortal. This so called "ridiculous ideas" is pretty much the only ball game I can find when it comes to any scientific evidence to show that memories continue after death. My father always believed hard line science. When we die the memory in our brain is erased as if it had never been there. Yet up to 98% of the people believe in eternal life and that memory continues on after death. So when you have that many people believe something that has NO scientific support, then I think Carrol's request is a very reasonable one. Also I think it is reasonable to ask if every atom in our Body does in some way store memory. I do not think that is a ridiculous idea at all. There is lots of unexplained scientific observances to work with here. For example what is the cause of Phantom pain? How can you feel pain in something that is not there.

We perceive pain in the brain, and we have memories of pain, even in the absence of a limb.

You state that the majority of people believe in an afterlife, even in the absence of scientific evidence, have you considered that maybe superstitious beliefs have in some way benefited man's survival? One observation that can be made, is that every culture throughout history has devoloped superstitions and beliefs about the afterlife. This doesn't necessarily prove anything, other than we need beliefs. As Dennett says, 'we believe in beliefs.'

Shermer's book explains all of this.

 

[Guy1]

Carrol is not asking us to show that the soul is immortal. He is only asking us to show that their is a soul that COULD be immortal.

He wants you to show there's a soul to begin with. This all started with your quoting him and insisting that his point that energy can't store information is a moot point. After that you try to equate ashes to computers and act as if this somehow proves your point (It's unsubstantiated. And even if it were it wouldn't help your case.) All that's being asked is for evidence of the existence of a soul. Period.

This so called "ridiculous ideas" is pretty much the only ball game I can find when it comes to any scientific evidence to show that memories continue after death.

So you admit you're just looking for something that conforms to your beliefs. There is no evidence that memories continue after death. At least try being like AVET. He's at least honest and makes it entirely clear that he doesn't care about the evidence.

My father always believed hard line science. When we die the memory in our brain is erased as if it had never been there.

This is going to sound odd coming from a rebellious 17 year old but ... listen to your father. He's wiser than you.

Yet up to 98% of the people believe in eternal life and that memory continues on after death.

Source? Not that it would change anything. Reality isn't a democracy. It doesn't matter if 100% of people believed in it; it's not going to magically become true.

So when you have that many people believe something that has NO scientific support, then I think Carrol's request is a very reasonable one.

It's a reasonable one no matter what. Ask the necessary questions and demand evidence from those who insist it's true. Don't allow anyone to misrepresent or deliberately warp the truth.

Also I think it is reasonable to ask if every atom in our Body does in some way store memory.

Just in our body?

I do not think that is a ridiculous idea at all. There is lots of unexplained scientific observances to work with here.

You're better off leaving those to trained scientists. Don't that one guy who insists he know's what he's talking about when speaking to people who either have careers in science, or are studying for one.

For example what is the cause of Phantom pain? How can you feel pain in something that is not there.

No clue.

 

[Norman321]

He wants you to show there's a soul to begin with.

I do not think that is important now. Science has been working on that for 2500 years and if they have not made any substantial progress then that is their problem, not mine. Carrol said:

""Claims that some form of consciousness persists after our bodies die and decay into their constituent atoms face one huge, insuperable obstacle: the laws of physics underlying everyday life are completely understood, and there’s no way within those laws to allow for the information stored in our brains to persist after we die. If you claim that some form of soul persists beyond death, what particles is that soul made of? What forces are holding it together? How does it interact with ordinary matter?" Sean Carrol (Phd Physics Harvard)

He claims there is no way for information stored in our brains persists after we die. I do not agree with that. Because Adams and Molecules are not subject to delay and the exact way memory is stored in not that well known. Also there is some indication that information is stored in area of our body other than out brain. I am afraid the Carrol with his Physics degree from Harvard does not well prepare him to deal with neurology. People just got though deriding Gifted neurosurgeon Ben Carson for his lack of knowledge about neurology. How much more is Carrol not qualified to offer opinions about this area of study?

All that's being asked is for evidence of the existence of a soul. Period.

What Carrol is asking for is to show that information stored in our brains to persist after we die.

So you admit you're just looking for something that conforms to your beliefs.

Not at all, we are looking at what science has to say about it.

There is no evidence that memories continue after death.

There is no evidence that memory does NOT exist after death. We do know that memory can exist for up to 100,000 years.

This is going to sound odd coming from a rebellious 17 year old but ... listen to your father. He's wiser than you.

He died 7 years ago, so he is not here to defend or clarify what he believes anymore. Both my brothers believe memories continue after death, so they did not go along with my dad on that belief.

Source? Not that it would change anything.

Run a google search and check out the surveys. "According to a Gallup opinion survey, nearly all Americans, 98% of them, believe in a higher power".

Just in our body?

Oh no, I am ready to discuss if all life has cognitive ability. Not just people.

You're better off leaving those to trained scientists.

I do, I just study the research and read articles by journalists that study the research.

 

[Norman321]

have you considered that maybe superstitious beliefs

Someone recommended a book on where beliefs come from. The book has not gotten here yet.