Email
Password
Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter

article imageDeath doesn't exist, a scientist said

By Eko Armunanto     Mar 16, 2013 in Science
For most humans of the 15th century, the notion of Earth as ball of rock was nonsense. It was argued that if the earth were really round, then the people at the bottom would fall off.
A theory called Biocentrism says that everything we see and experience right now is a whirl of information occurring in your mind. Space and time are simply the tools for putting everything together. Space and time are not the hard objects we think. Biocentrism may change what we believe, turning the planet upside down again with the revolutionary view that life creates the universe instead of the other way around.
Biocentrism is a concept proposed in 2007 by American Doctor of medicine Robert Lanza, a scientist in the fields of biology and regenerative medicine, and a professor at Wake Forest, North Carolina. "By treating space and time as physical things, science picks a completely wrong starting point for understanding the world," Lanza declared. He said we believe in death simply because we’ve been taught we die, because we associate ourselves with our body and we know bodies die, end of story.
He claimed to have found that death may not be the terminal event we think as the end of life. "if you add life and consciousness to the equation, you can explain some of the biggest puzzles of science. For instance, it becomes clear why space and time – and even the properties of matter itself – depend on the observer. It also becomes clear why the laws, forces, and constants of the universe appear to be exquisitely fine-tuned for the existence of life", he said.
He said that when our brains think the weather feels hot and humid, at the same time a tropical frog would feel it cold and dry. This logic applies to virtually everything. Bottom line: What we "see" could not be present without our consciousness.
Biocentrism says there are an infinite number of universes, and everything that could possibly happen occurs in some universe. Death does not exist in any real sense in these scenarios. All possible universes exist simultaneously, regardless of what happens in any of them. Death does not exist in a timeless, spaceless world. In the end, even Einstein admitted, “Now Besso (his late old friend) has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.” Biocentrism says immortality doesn’t mean a perpetual existence in time without end, but rather resides outside of time altogether.
Consider an experiment that was recently published in the journal Science showing that scientists could retroactively change something that had happened in the past. Particles had to decide how to behave when they hit a beam splitter. Later on, the experimenter could turn a second switch on or off. It turns out that what the observer decided at that point, determined what the particle did in the past. Regardless of the choice you, the observer, make, it is you who will experience the outcomes that will result. The linkages between these various histories and universes transcend our ordinary classical ideas of space and time. Think of the 20-watts of energy as simply holo-projecting either this or that result onto a screen. Whether you turn the second beam splitter on or off, it’s still the same battery or agent responsible for the projection.
Some of the reactions to Lanza's ideas branded them as "pseudo-scientific philosophical claptrap" or "no better than any religion". Lanza admitted that the reviews haven't all been glowing, particularly among some physicists. "Their response has been much how you'd expect priests to respond to stem cell research," he said.
In The American Scholar, Lanza wrote:
It’s important here to address a fundamental question. We have clocks that can measure time. If we can measure time, doesn’t that prove it exists? Einstein sidestepped the question by simply defining time as what we measure with a clock. The emphasis for physicists is on the measuring. However, the emphasis should be on the we, the observers. Measuring time doesn’t prove its physical existence. Clocks are rhythmic things. Humans use the rhythms of some events (like the ticking of clocks) to time other events (like the rotation of the earth). This is not time, but rather, a comparison of events. Specifically, over the ages, humans have observed rhythmic events in nature: the periodicities of the moon, the sun, the flooding of the Nile. We then created other rhythmic things to measure nature’s rhythms: a pendulum, a mechanical spring, an electronic device. We called these manmade rhythmic devices 'clocks'. We use the rhythms of specific events to time other specific events. But these are just events, not to be confused with time.
Therefore, following Lanza's logic, the whole universe is not somewhere out there, but inside our head. Nothing can be perceived that is not already interacting with our consciousness. Just because the perceived images are experientially real, not imaginary, doesn't mean it exists "physically" somewhere out there:
The eye and retina gather photons that deliver their payloads of bits of the electromagnetic force, these are channeled through heavy-duty cables straight back until the actual perception of images themselves physically occur in the back of the brain, augmented by other nearby locations, in special sections that are as vast and labyrinthine as the hallways of the Milky Way. This, according to human physiology texts, is where the actual colors, shapes, and movement “happen”. This is where they are perceived or cognized.
However, there are also other physicists who pointed out that Lanza's view is fully in line with the perspective from quantum mechanics that the observer plays a huge role in how reality is observed. Richard Conn Henry, a physics and astronomy professor at Johns Hopkins University, said in his review that Lanza was not telling new ideas. "Then why does Robert have to say it at all? It is because we, the physicists, do not say it - or if we do say it, we only whisper it, and in private - furiously blushing as we mouth the words. True, yes; politically correct, hell no!".
More about Biocentrism, Life after death, Universe
 
Latest News
Top News