If Einstein was correct, then how can death be "The End"?

[closeupready]

If you believe that consciousness is a real thing that exists, then it would have to continue existing in some form AFTER the body turns back into an inanimate pile of rotting meat, correct?

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. it's the end of what we know, and the beginning of what we don't!

[arcane1]

2. No more than the movie continues to play on my TV when the power goes out :)

[closeupready]

4. Einstein postulated that mass can not be extinguished;

it merely changes form.

Therefore, if consciousness exists, then what form does it take at the point of bodily death?

[arcane1]

8. Consciousness doesn't have mass, I'm pretty sure.

Energy changes form too, but it would change to the chemical processes of decay, and the physical bodily functions of worms and micro-organisms.

[closeupready]

11. E = mc(2) means that energy is a form of mass,

and vice versa. That is, energy IS mass, and mass is energy.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

[Avalux]

15. You're not wrong, according to this three dimensional physical world.

Yet Einstein himself talked about 'spooky action at a distance' - where two related objects (protons) separated by distance, have an unseen connection. When one of them is manipulated (thousands of miles away), the changes are seen in the other one as well. We don't know why. At the quantum level, the laws of physics act strangely.

I think we must accept that there are phenomena we can't see, hear, taste, touch, and smell, but they exist nonetheless.

[closeupready]

18. The little I've read about quantum physics is, again,

to use my word of the day, fascinating.

"Timeline" and "Interstellar" were two fun sci-fi stories based upon quantum theory, though I thought Crichton, in "Timeline", did a much better job explaining quantum theory and physics than the film "Interstellar" did at incorporating quantum physics into its plot. I watched that film with friends, who were really lost at so many points during the film.

[drm604]

26. Einstein talked about "spooky action at a distance" in his rejection of the idea.

The phrase "spooky action at a distance" was his way of ridiculing the ideas of quantum mechanics. He rejected the idea. As it turns out, he was wrong, but he was not a proponent.

[Avalux]

32. I didn't say he was. He coined that phrase, and it ended up being true.

His discoveries were just the tip of the iceberg; he wasn't perfect and he didn't agree with quantum physics, but he was instrumental in getting to where we are now.

[Warren Stupidity]

47. The organized energy and mass that is consciousness

disorganizes when your brain is severely damaged, for example when you die and no more oxygen and nutrients arrive.

Nothing about the conservation of matter and energy is violated.

You might as well argue that zombies must exist because Einstein.

[closeupready]

48. Okay. Thanks for your input here.

[uppityperson]

3. Does individual consciousness exist after the body dies? Death is the end of life as we have

experienced it in this body here now.

[closeupready]

5. If it exists (and most of us would argue, duh, of course it exists),

then it must have mass (or else it doesn't exist). If it has mass, then it must continue existing, basically forever.

[uppityperson]

6. I do not agree that "duh, of course it exists" as far as individual consciousness after death

I do not know what happens, do not know if we keep our individual consciousness or become part of the great whatever or are simply dead. For me the question of whether or not we retain individual consciousness after death is an unknown.

The other thing is I disagree that something need have mass to exist. Does every thought have mass? Does every emotion have mass? My dog's joy when I return home is real, but while the dog has mass, I do not know that the joy does.

[closeupready]

9. These are really interesting questions!

It's doubly interesting that nobody seems to know - not even Einstein, although Einstein DID have curious ideas about what happens at death, and after it.

[uppityperson]

14. Eventually we will find out, but will we know?

My current theory is time is variable. A minute can be forever, or it can pass like a flash. How can that be?

Time after death is different than time before death. Being conscious forever, floating on a cloud playing a harp and watching little Billie wander, grow and die, forever, seems like hell to me. Forever is a really long time and can you imagine that harp after 1029390636470326490445678909865434568908754578997653456 years?

Reincarnation is a possibility but then is time linear, one life after another, or does it all happen at once, now, with the different parts being kept apart as individuals? So all there is is "now". Again forever? Though if time is not linear, then there is no forever because it is only now.

Einstein was something. I'd've like to have met and talked with him, and Charles Darwin.

[closeupready]

16. Your reference to reincarnation -

I was kind of prompted to post this question from watching this particular segment of Unsolved Mysteries from the early 90's:

Now with regard to this particular case, I can think of some alternate explanations for what happened. But more generally, the underlying notion got me thinking a bit.

Anyway, cheers.

[Major Nikon]

21. Consciousness is an abstract concept of a state of being

It has no more mass than being awake or asleep.

[closeupready]

22. Modigliani's art was abstract, but

as real as a piece of paper.

[Major Nikon]

23. What made it abstract was not

The whole idea of abstract art is the departure from things as real as a piece of paper.

[closeupready]

42. But then coming full circle, have you proven consciousness is

"an abstract concept" as you asserted (and not a measurable thing)?

You're certainly entitled to your beliefs, of course.

[phantom power]

6. It can be real, without being mass (or energy)

I think a better working model for consciousness is an emergent pattern. For example, a hurricane is a temporarily self-sustaining pattern of matter and energy. It does not last forever, but it's plenty real while it does. When the pattern is gone, the matter and energy it was composed of remain, but it's the pattern that's important.

[closeupready]

13. I want to think about this, and get back to you.

Thanks.

[Avalux]

10. It's not 'the end'; it's just the end of our physical body.

Now before I say anything - I am not religious. There's a part of us - consciousness - that science has yet to explain. It can be called a soul, higher self, whatever you want to call it, but we can't deny there's something going on that sets us apart from other mammals. We have an awareness of self. It's why human beings have sought to answer the questions "who am I" and "where did I come from" for eons.

I think this energy that lives in our bodies does not die, it just goes somewhere else.

Maybe this energy is connected to the dark energy that makes up most of the multiverse, we just can't see it in our physical form. Maybe we merge with that when our bodies die. We still aren't exactly sure what dark energy is, and we know that at a quantum level, the laws of physics get wonky. There's so much we just don't know yet.

[closeupready]

12. Thanks for your post. I nearly failed chemistry in college, lol.

Yet, these kinds of philosophical questions fascinate me.

[Avalux]

17. You're welcome. That we have the ability to even ponder the questions is amazing.

I believe that not too far in the future, there will be a merging of science and spirituality - in that we will be able to explain what consciousness really is. And when we do, it will free us from the fear of death. If that were possible, it would change how we live our lives, it would change everything.

[seveneyes]

19. Infinity allows for a repeat

[Paulie]

20. The mass you are seeking is the body.

Food energy is used by the body and that energy is changed from electrical to chemical back and forth to eventually turn into heat. You die, the body disassembles via bacteria and insects into food and heat through them. One day, everything in the universe will cool so no more heat and that's that. Though our star will expand and consume our planet way before then if that's a comfort.

[Ron Obvious]

24. Nothing can survive death

Look how brain damage (through strokes or drugs) can radically alter memories and personalities. It's all stored in the fleshy bits. Once they're gone, so are we. I don't see how it could be otherwise.

[CanSocDem]

28. Why are you here??? (eom)

[Ron Obvious]

29. I don't believe in any greater purpose

We have to make our own lives meaningful. I don't think there's any more to it than that.

If I'm wrong, I'd be delighted to be proved so.

[CanSocDem]

30. That's a start.

Not having a "greater purpose" prevents you from sacrificing your consciousness and "fleshy bits" to some hare-brained anti-democratic ideology like the suicide bombers.

However, if we ALL were "make-ing our own lives meaningful" it would help to free ourselves from the only available templates, science and religion, and at least discuss other alternatives.

My life is 'meaningful' because I believe in the power of "consciousness" both before death and after death. Neither Science nor Religion support my personal 'consciousness' so, like you, I'm left to make my own life meaningful.

It was in the 70's when I first discovered that my consciousness was separate from my body. Knowing that, has kept me focused and healthy for the last 40+ years and has given me the confidence that my consciousness will indeed survive the death of my body.


.

[Ron Obvious]

31. I think science vs religion is not really a valid dichotomy

Science is a method by which we try to eliminate our human and cognitive biases and subjective experiences from our analysis of the universe we live in, and it has stood us in good stead. Through science, we've more than doubled our human lifespan just since 1900 and have immeasurably improved the quality of lives for most of us. I'd say that's a rather better track record than religion has given us.

When I was a teenager, I was visited by ghosts in the night. Though these experiences were terrifying, they certainly gave my life meaning. I thoroughly believed in the afterlife. After all, the dead had contacted me personally. I've spoken of these experiences elsewhere.

When I was in my thirties, I read about sleep paralysis. It fit my experiences to a T. I felt relieved, but also a bit let down and robbed of the ghostly narrative that made my life special. Still, life is not about believing what we want to be true, but what actually is. Science makes the scales fall from our eyes to open them to reality.

As I said, our memories, our personalities, our consciousness, our morals, all of them are tied up in those fleshy bits. By what mechanism could they survive death? What else, other than those things, are we?

[CanSocDem]

34. I use a broad brush...

...when I talk of "religion" and "science". Basically, as per this topic, I mean the choice between the scientific definition of 'death' and the religious notion of an after-life.

I disagree that science has "stood us in good stead". Doubling a life span that you have already deemed essentially meaningless, isn't really working that well is it? We are on the verge of adding our own to the list of species we have destroyed through greed. Are we getting dumber as we get older?

And while I pay lip service to 'science' in getting me through the day, I also have to thank 'religion' for keeping a sense of 'morality' in the social consciousness.

I'm sorry your experiences as a teenager were subverted by 'science'. If you were to give them another chance you would find that at least as much study and attention that has gone into "sleep paralysis", has gone into communication with the departed. There are a ton of shows on television and a growing horde of ordinary people who believe they are in contact with the consciousness of dead people.

I believe in the power of BELIEFS. My own as well as those of others. I didn't do well with high school science so I never acquired that unshakable religious like faith in science. I did however meet people who completely believed a never-ending array of wacky ideas. Scientists, academics, religious zealots and everyday people.

[surrealAmerican]

25. not correct

Consciousness is like a fire. It's real, but once it's done, it does not keep burning "on some other plane of existence".

It is a process, not a product.

[Avalux]

33. Can you provide evidence that "once it's done, it does not keep burning..."

There is zero proof either way - we don't know if consciousness continues and we don't know if it doesn't.

For me personally, I think it does (that's my opinion, not a fact). From what I've experienced in my life from the mundane to the extraordinary, I feel strongly about this. We know there are other dimensions - why isn't it possible that consciousness continues on another dimension? Quantum physics, particularly string theory, shows us the possibility of other dimensions. And if we take time out of it - everything exists all at once, on all dimensions. Time is what keeps us stuck where we are, thinking there's a beginning and an end.

[surrealAmerican]

35. If you argue that time is an illusion ...

... then continuity would have no meaning. I'm not sure what consciousness would mean under those circumstances.

[Avalux]

36. I am not saying that time is an illusion.

Time is very real in our three dimensional world, but there are other dimensions where time, and even distance may not have any bearing whatsoever.

If time is irrelevant in other dimensions, it means that there is no beginning and no end; it just is, NOW. The idea of continuity only matters while we are in physical form.

So maybe my choice of words wasn't correct - after we die, our consciousness just IS, as it always has been. Do you disagree that there's a part of you that has not changed since you were a child, even though your body has aged?

[surrealAmerican]

40. I do disagree.

What I consider my consciousness has changed since I was a child.

[Avalux]

46. Hmmm...interesting.

See for me, my consciousness, my inner compass, my intuition....the part of me that just knows things....hasn't changed at all no matter how much my body ages.

[surrealAmerican]

49. Did you "just know things" in the same way when you were an infant?

We adults can't usually remember our own infancy, but perhaps you've known somebody else from infancy to adulthood.

A baby does not have the fully formed personality they will have five years later. A five-year-old child likewise will go through many changes before they develop the "spirit" that is the base of their adult identity.

[Avalux]

50. Personality/ego development is not consciousness. nt

[Fla Dem]

52. If there is no beginning or end to our consciousness, then why do we not have an awareness of our

consciousness before our consciousness embraced a physical form?

[Avalux]

53. Those who have transcended have this awareness.

Let's say transcended means that they've learned to quiet their thinking mind, turn off their five senses, and allow their consciousness through. Meditation is a tool for doing this.

Throughout recorded history of all peoples and irrespective of religion, there are those who have been able to tap into their consciousness. I don't know if Jesus was a real person or not, but his story is one of transcendence. We are told he knew where he came from and where he was going, therefore he was not afraid no matter what happened to him in the physical world. His message to us was that we are the same as him and we can transcend too. Same as Buddha and many others.

[closeupready]

39. Time isn't an illusion, but quantum theory talks about time

in weird ways. "About Time" by Adam Frank is a really accessible pop-sci book you may want to look at.

[drm604]

27. Which of Einstein's theories do you think implies this?

I don't see how either relativity or special relativity say anything about consciousness.

[closeupready]

38. Okay, Einstein's theories imply that things that exist change form

but do not UN-exist.

In other words, take a piece of paper and throw it on the fire - Einstein's theory implies that you've helped that paper change form, but that essentially, what it was is still what it is.

Therefore, if consciousness exists, then it must have mass - or else it doesn't exist. And if it does have mass, then death precipitates the metamorphosis of it into ... something else, right?

[drm604]

41. I think you're talking about conservation of mass. That wasn't Einstein.

Antoine Lavoisier demonstrated it in the 18th century. It has nothing to do with consciousness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Lavoisier

[closeupready]

43. Oh, okay, right - thanks. BUT:

This principle would apply to consciousness if consciousness has mass, no matter how small.

[drm604]

44. There is no evidence that consciousness has mass.

It requires mass (brain tissue), but if that mass is altered enough (death and eventual dissolution of that tissue) then the patterns of consciousness embedded in it are destroyed.

Even if consciousness had mass that doesn't mean that it can't be destroyed. A car has mass. If it's in a bad enough accident it will be destroyed. The mass will still exist, but it's no longer a usable car.

If you destroy a brain, the mass still exists, but not the consciousness.

[closeupready]

45. I'm not communicating my question well, and I apologize for that.

Peace!

[olddots]

37. Life is a Twinky

[DryHump]

51. Consciousness simply IS

you can't grok it except with a still mind and open heart