/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10322817
Pittsburgh?

>>10322817
Nothing. You cease to exist.

>>10322817

>>10322817
>believe
After death comes decay, decomposition, and
dissipation - none of which is a matter of belief.

>>10322823
If you were brought from non existence to life and made conscious once, why shouldn‘t it be possible another time after death? Even with a materialist worldview.

You become the lowest energy in Atomic 2 universe and return to Atomic 1 format naturally, energy is just an existence complex; greater energy supports smaller energies; when you die you become the smallest energy, or some amount, and this is like a cooling phase and revert to Atomic 1, dead-recognizable by energy species of Atomic 1.

>>10323422
I read your post in another thread already and your view isn‘t making much sense to me really. What do you mean by „Atomic 1/2“? And where did you get that information from?

>>10322817
Nothing

>>10323360
>If you were brought from non existence to life
except that you weren't
you didn't exist before you existed
and you won't exist after you die
death is the end of existence
if you don't like it, don't ask about it

>>10322823
Are you 5 years old?
If you didnt exist in the future you wouldnt exist now since all events are really happening at the same time

>>10323360
The concept of "life after death" attempts to change the definition of "death" from the original "your life ends" into "your life continues, you just eventually transport into another location and transform into another body." It's invented partly by those who are afraid to die, and partly by those who can't wrap their head around the highly-abstract and rather absurd notion of one's own non-existence. It would be a lot more honest to just say "I don't (want to) believe in death" rather than "I believe in life after death."

>>10323465
This guy gets it.

>>10323472
every clock is proving you wrong every second, retard

Hopefully if panpsychism is true (consciousness is a property of the universe, so the universe is always able to appreciate its own beauty even when there are no sentient life forms to see it), then there will be a way to observe the universe even after death

>>10323482
I REFUSES to be labelled a retard by a simpleton who cant tell time exists only in his mind.
Clocks prove nothing,they move because of a machine not because time actually elapses

You immediately reincarnate into a new life. This goes on until eventually in one of your lives you attain enlightenment.

>>10323477
No he doesnt.
He doesnt properly adress the quantum vi bration of microtubules in the brain and NDEs

>>10323359
Yes,its belief.
Thinking you can die relies on a single-universe interpretation of quantum P

>>10323513
>I REFUSES
Kek

>>10322817
> /sci/
> believe
Wrong board

>>10323522
>woah, he made a typo, let's make fun of that
Underage

>>10323465
You essentially repeated what I said and then pretended it‘s a definitive refutation
>if you don't like it, don't ask about it
? I think you made up a narrative in your head regarding this exchange.

>>10323535
Petty semantics. If there is no definitive answer to a question and you are asked to give an answer it will be a thought/belief.

>>10322817
>What does /sci/ believe comes after death?
Not a clue. I lack any frame of reference to answer that question. I bet its not unlike what your existence was like prior to your conception.

>>10323584
>If there is no definitive answer to a question and you are asked to give an answer it will be a thought/belief.
Or you could just accept your ignorance and say "I dunno" eventually we're all going to be dead so I don't see the benefit of dwelling on the subject since its only a question of time before you know the answer with 100% certainty.

>>10323642
Perhaps pondering over these questions will eventually lead to discovering the truth. Like the greeks pondered over atoms and conceptualized their model without having any means to verify their theory thousands of years ago. Also, when I die I might never know the answer if death actually ends up being eternal non existence.

>>10322817
how would you know that you died? logically, death, as we often think about it, doesn't make sense.

>>10323818

>death is a special effect
>this is Atomic 2 universe where we experience this special effect - because our universe is supermassive rather than super.

>>10323843
You still haven‘t answered my post: >>10323462

>>10323843
you must really be fucked up to read that kind of bullshit out of my statement.

tell me then how you would know that you died. tell me not how you would know how any other person but yourself died, but you. Your self. How would you know?

>>10323513
retard

>>10323462
Atomic 2 is the second model atomic universe based on bigger space phenomenon.

Atomic 1 is where stars and planets are simulate, i.e. universes are not bound to star and planet; there are unlimited physics - star and planet are created but in a simulation not after the massively intense big bang which inflates space phenomena, making the Atom more signfiicant - restricted to atomic rather than incorporated in a limitless physic.

Everything in Atomic 2 has a slight wobble from supermassive interference. Try standing still and you'll wobble (a slang term is to say that the wobble is because of the 7th; the enigma of Atomic 2); in Atomic 1 stillness is literal.

>>10323465
>you won't exist after you die
>death is the end of existence
Prove it.
>>10323477
Everyone who believes in life after death makes the distinction between the worldly life and the afterlife.

https://theunexplained.tv/paranormal-podcasts/edition-96-anthony-peake

Listen that one. The guy has some ideas that we are basically fucking sheep herded by the clockwork elves who use as to feed off our energy. But the guy investigates things through science and is very different from likes of Icke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Howqcv6tH3c

Consciousness, Life after Death, Artificial intelligence, Akashic Records - Anthony Peake

>>10324258
>>death is the end of existence
>Prove it.
Death being the end of one's existence is literally in the definition of death. And this definition has been used for thousands of years, for example by the Greek philosopher Epicuros. On the other hand, if the anon had claimed that death indeed existed, i.e., that your existence could cease, then that would be something he would need to justify.

>Everyone who believes in life after death makes the distinction between the worldly life and the afterlife.
It's completely OK with me if someone believes in things like being born again or that their soul will go to heaven and so forth. It's also OK with me if someone doesn't believe in death at all and thinks that his/her life will last forever. However, suggesting that there is any kind of life after death is wrong simply because it directly violates the definition.

>>10324427
>suggesting that there is any kind of life after death is wrong simply because it directly violates the definition.
>Death being the end of one's existence is literally in the definition of death.
You and I don't have the same definition of death. Death is the end of worldly life, the separation of the soul from the body, and many people, including Socrates as he claimed in Phaedo(when he stated that people were dead but still existent as souls before they were living), thoughts so too.

>>10324492
>You and I don't have the same definition of death.
Then we have nothing further to discuss, sonny.

>b-but uncle Socrates said....
lmao get a load of this faggot

>>10324524
You brought up Epicurus first. Your definition of death, as complete annihilation, is only compatible with your view of the afterlife, or your view of its falsity specifically.

>>10324538
>Your definition of death ...
It's not just my definition, it's _the_ definition. Just look at this thread: there are more people using my definition than your definition. There's a reason for this.

>... is only compatible with your view of the afterlife, or your view of its falsity specifically.
No. The beauty of our definition of death is precisely that it's compatible with absolutely everything, including the idea of afterlife. It's just that you should not use incorrectly the word "death" to describe the transition from worldly life to afterlife, but should instead use some other expression such as "separation of the soul from the body" like in >>10324492

>>10324715
>you should not use incorrectly the word "death" to describe the transition from worldly life to afterlife
Many cultures have done so for centuries.

>>10323422
What the fuck are you blabering about?

>>10326058
Many cultures have also called the Earth flat.

>>10323818
This

If perception ends you won’t know, by definitIon

If perception continues in any form you didn’t die

>>10322817
decomposition

>>10322817
Adds

>>10322817
Your wife, with your best friend.

>>10322823
keep fearing, fedora tipper.

>>10322823
>>10323465
tip*
You will just keep fearing death without believing in an afterlife.

>>10322817
It's probably some gay, 1000 year long, DMT trip that gets annoying after the first twenty minutes, after which you are just reincarnated into another banal unsatisfying life.

>>10326515
this

>>10326238
stop sucking your thumb, sucker

>>10323360
No continuity.

How do you know you're not dead? How do you know we're alive? Are we in the Matrix? We'll all find out someday.

>>10322817
your consciousness will transcend our 3-spatial dimensions and 1-temporal dimensions and you will be will God or Ohm; that is to say your energy will reunite with the singularity. And there is nothing to fear.

Believe in what let's you sleep at night m8s, we're all gonna find out anyway.

The simulation ends for you and you have to pay to play again, obviously

>>10322817
You stop existing. Kind of obvious. There was no prelife so there’s no afterlife.

>>10322817
>/sci/
>believe
>>10324258
>believes
>>10324098
>when uneducated people take acid
the word 'energies' sends you to /x/, do not pass go, do not escape the rules of thermodynamics.

We don't have to die, but we have so far, there is no afterlife of any kind. Beings descended from us in the far future will argue which is the most poignant phase of human development: this first phase, where we are sentient but mortal, the next, where we are immortal but destructible, or the last, where we will be immortal and indestructible.

>>10326763
>there is no afterlife of any kind.
Prove it.

>>10323516
>NDEs
Watch me shiggy

>>10322817
a big bill and just more alcohol

Trillions of years pass and then you're back again after the big crunch thanks to determinism.
Feels good man.

>>10326763
Your emphasis on "believes" makes me cringe. Every strong scientific theory and discovery started with a belief.

>>10322817
The rest of the universe

>>10323472
Sure, but in the future you won't be sentient, have memory, or even be human. Your body will decay, all the living tissue will die off, begin to rot, and some of it will be consumed by other living tissue. Then eventually the sun expands and engulfs whatever remains of the molecules that were once your body and they turn to plasma.

Matter cannot be created nor destroyed. Your lifeforce enters the collective lifeforce recycle bucket and used to create another substance be it a dog, water, or another human.

God is a living lifeforce and anti-lifeforce in one. It is limited and was used to create everything you see and dont see. When you die you rejoin this lifeforce with no fear as you are returning to your creator which in of itself is you as you and I are gods perception. You dont see god as a physical manufestation as its existance is in the force you see around you.

>>10322823
well what is the you?

>>10322817
Well, just look what happens to deceased relatives.

>>10327104
Literally this

>>10327104
>>10329754
This except you might be back as another lifeform. Or then you might keep looping the same life infinitely. Whichever it is, it'll never end.

>>10322817
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return

http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html

tl;dr: reincarnation

>>10322817

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6TdBLIhTEk

>>10322817
What does /sci/ think of Chris Langan?

>>10322817
Your bubble will pop and (You) will dissolve back into the universal cosmic conscious experience, anyone who suggests anything else is likely clinically retarded.

>>10322817
>assuming that closed individualism is true
If empty individualism is true, "you" don't even persist from moment to moment. The continuity of consciousness might just be an illusion.

https://qualiacomputing.com/2015/12/17/ontological-qualia-the-future-of-personal-identity/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=5WKqO16mkGE

>>10330571
Based and boofheaded

>>10322817
YOUR MOM ON MY POST MORTEM DICK HAHA

>>10322817
If quantum immortality is true, your consciousness might just shift to another Everett branch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincar%C3%A9_recurrence_theorem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YsjrA87Cno
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za_b9UQoz6E

>>10322821
But I'm already there!

>>10327104
Determinism isn't true though, so this makes no sense

>>10330974
Proof? And don't bring up any of that QM bullshit.

>>10330996
>Proof?
If a human has a dick she will eventually learn to masturbate.

>>10322817
The same thing that happens at the end of a dream: you suddenly become aware, in some scenario or another, just like you have done endlessly before this moment, and just like you'll do from eternity onward. All of existence is just an illusion, give up your attachment to the world and it's trickery. Mark Twain said it best.

>>10331160
>“Nothing exists; all is a dream. God—man—the world—the sun, the moon, the wilderness of stars—a dream, all a dream; they have no existence. Nothing exists save empty space—and you!”

>“I!”

>“And you are not you—you have no body, no blood, no bones, you are but a thought. I myself have no existence; I am but a dream—your dream, creature of your imagination. In a moment you will have realized this, then you will banish me from your visions and I shall dissolve into the nothingness out of which you made me....

>“I am perishing already—I am failing—I am passing away. In a little while you will be alone in shoreless space, to wander its limitless solitudes without friend or comrade forever—for you will remain a thought, the only existent thought, and by your nature inextinguishable, indestructible. But I, your poor servant, have revealed you to yourself and set you free. Dream other dreams, and better!(1/2)

>>10331163

>“Strange! that you should not have suspected years ago—centuries, ages, eons, ago!—for you have existed, companionless, through all the eternities. Strange, indeed, that you should not have suspected that your universe and its contents were only dreams, visions, fiction! Strange, because they are so frankly and hysterically insane—like all dreams: a God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave his angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice and invented hell—mouths mercy and invented hell—mouths Golden Rules, and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself;

>“You perceive, now, that these things are all impossible except in a dream. You perceive that they are pure and puerile insanities, the silly creations of an imagination that is not conscious of its freaks—in a word, that they are a dream, and you the maker of it. The dream-marks are all present; you should have recognized them earlier.

>“It is true, that which I have revealed to you; there is no God, no universe, no human race, no earthly life, no heaven, no hell. It is all a dream—a grotesque and foolish dream. Nothing exists but you. And you are but a thought—a vagrant thought, a useless thought, a homeless thought, wandering forlorn among the empty eternities!” (2/2)

>>10322817
Nothing, until the universe starts again, I am born again and do the same things, as I do now.

>>10331200
You don't experience the nothingness, so the reincarnation will be instant in your (our) perspective.

>>10330583
Isn't the fact that all my perceptions seem to be from the same perspective and no other enough to suppose a permanent self? Even if it has no qualities in itself.

imagine having a strong opinion on such a topic that allows for no definitive truth. very strange!

You turn into a skeleton unless you're retarded and creamaid yourself

>>10322817
Who can know for sure, who knew it had no doubt already dead, and we who don't know are obviously alive.

>>10322817
Your brains stops working and your body decay.

>>10323360
You actually can. Technically you have a lot of matter in your made that used to be part of another person. This way your consciousness emerged from what used to be other system that emerged another consciousness.

>>10331693
>creamaid

I am a really attractive male 8 or 9/10 i believe that after my death some gay necrophile will jerk off to my decomposing budy and cum into the hole he cuts out into my ribs

>>10331160
His head was really fucked after all those people he loved started dying off one by one.

>>10322817
You return to existence as a Boltzmann brain almost instantaneously, because you don't experience time while unconscious.
This fact alone can remove some of the weight on one's shoulders that death's inevitability brings. As we wait for biomedical research to defeat aging and cancer, we can take solace in the fact that if literally any reincarnation or afterlife is true, no matter how long it takes, we will instantaneously be inducted to it, whether we keep our memories or not.