/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10469400
Once it dies, it's dead, it only lives in your memories, it's dead. Just dead. That means no living. It don't exist anymore. Deal with it.

It could reincarnate into a chicken, you probably eat your loved one you sick fuck.

>>10469400
There’s no afterlife, but the many-worlds interpretation is correct, so there is probably an Everett branch in which your loved one is fine.

Also, sign up for cryonics. It’s cheap if you use insurance and your relatively young and healthy.

>>10469416
*you’re

>>10469416
Yes, and there is a branch where he got raped by army of midgets with dildo's bigger than them.

Welcome to multiverse.

>>10469400
Sorry for your loss, mate. I can't think of any evidence for an afterlife, but I reckon their complete non-existence and immateriality is a kind of bliss in itself. If heaven is a place totally without pain or suffering... they're there, you know?

>>10469400
You will feel better if there's hell?

Everything is going to be alright.

>>10469496
Probably, yes. But I didn’t want to bring it up.

It baffles ne thaat people fail to realize that eternal life is inevitable. Every person that ever lived will be brought back to life someday.

Who we are and what we feel is determined by the matter that is our brain. Eventually, humanity will have the technology to recreate every brain that has ever existed, and we will all live in our own peronal heaven on a computer server somewhere.

It's inevitable that this will eventually happen, So the people that are dead now will only be dead for a relatiely short period of time compared to the eternity that awaits us

>>10469580
But won't they only be a copy? Also, where are you getting all that data to recreate their brains from?

>>10469580
Identical brain in identical observable enviroment is still different observer, it won't be "you" or your dead mate who's gonna get uploaded, it's just some brand new copy.

>>10469591
You think the atoms that you are made of are the same as those of 20 years ago? You are a copy of yourself.

As for getting the data, I'm sure what seems impossible now will be very easy in a couple of million years. We've only been doing real science for a couple hundred years, we cannot even imagine what will be possible in a million

>>10469414
Ultra mega chicken?

>>10469596
You wake up everyday as a "copy". There is no point in differentiating between two physically identical person. They are the same

>>10469416
Death is a classical process though, no branches there really.

>>10469599
Persistence of experience is key in achieving true imortality of consciousness. While to the outside observer and even the copy they effectively are the original but this is not the case for the original, their experience ended and is never to return.

>>10469416
Reminder if this is true you're bound to eventually endure the worst tortures you can imagine.

>>10469400
Sorry for your loss anon, just know others have felt your pain and you're not alone.

>>10469630
So we die everytime we sleep now? On my last day on this earth I will close my eyes knowing I will return some million years later. When my "copy" is brought to life I will remember that last day as if it was yesterday. There will be no difference as to waking up from a good night's sleep

>>10469400
Sorry to hear that, anon. Memories can live forever. You might want to read this:
http://stefangagne.com/twoflower/fwls/FWLS65.TXT

>>10469648
>So we die everytime we sleep now?
We are dead when we die.
While we may not be fully aware of it much goes on in our brains while we sleep, among them is the review of the days events and winnowing out what is and isn't relevant. Sleep akin to entering maintenance mode.

Like I said, should the copy be identical to that at the time of death it would indeed believe itself to be a continuation of the original, but ultimately it cannot be as it is merely a copy the original died, it's neural electrical impluses ceased, it's flesh decayed.

What we have here is an existential quandary, are we merely a unique patterned network of matter or are we the "spark" that acts upon and forms that pattern?
Personally I believe we are somewhere inbetween.

>>10469400
OK:

I want to mention that >>10469580 should look into Nietzsches concept of eternal recurrence as it bares some similarities to what they posted.

>>10469400
Listen, perhaps you can find some solace in that there is no scientific case for the afterlife.
Science does not attempt to answer such questions.
Science asks what and how, science does not ask why.
There will always be room for religion, to some extent.

>>10469790
>legit schizo
>great philosopher

Accepting ideas of schizophrenic person could make you crazy, won't it?

>>10469817
His concept was a thought experiment, its not intended to be taken literally, and I only mentioned it as that post has some similarities to it. Also not to get side tracked from the topic but he was trying to get his readers to create thier own meaning and philosophy not subscribe to that of another.

>>10469640
And the greatest pleasures imaginable.
Thus proving Christianity right

>>10469400
There’s no evidence of the afterlife. Just get over it

>>10469640
>You're
No, the alternate version will but not the instance of sensory input YOU are experiencing. That other you is not you.

>>10469783
What about people who died but were brought back to life? You fail to take them into account.

>>10469400

So many non-answers. Here you go, anon.

Just because religions are demonstrably silly, it does not mean that materialism is true and that death implies oblivion. There is a tremendous amount of empirical evidence that suggests that our mind or consciousness continues past the point of physical death and that there is an infinitely amazing afterlife awaiting unconditionally around the corner of a ceased heartbeat for everyone.

Easily digestible tier:

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/day-i-died/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwyVFW9kT8k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bw3oaNUR1iI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhANf60Y4Nk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W-PLmMwl2o
https://vimeo.com/7464750
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PX2x0FxDTs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nzz-nG5pjFg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnoIf2NwaRY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5or66dI6akU

World-leading research tier:

http://www.horizonresearch.org/Uploads/Journal_Resuscitation__2_.pdf
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc799144/m2/1/high_res_d/vol21-no1-5.pdf
https://www.amazon.com/Science-Near-Death-Experience-Consciousness-Survives/dp/1594773564/
https://www.amazon.com/Self-Does-Not-Die-Experiences/dp/0997560800/
https://www.amazon.com/Art-Dying-Peter-Fenwick/dp/0826499236/
https://trans4mind.com/spiritual/Does-consciousness.pdf

In essence, the purpose of these lives is to learn to be an infinitely loving and kind person despite the fact that the world is demonstrably shitty and it is really hard to develop character here. But the person who is infinitely happy, kind, loving, accepting, and forgiving while they are being tortured, to take the ultimate example, will quite figuratively explode from happiness in heaven. So use your challenges as gifts to develop your character. After all, you had the multiverse as your smorgasbord while you were still in paradise, and yet you chose this life; being this character, in this society, in this world.

>>10470031
I said if his interpretation is correct you fucking autist. Kill yourself you arrogant little shit. No one cares what you think the answer is.

Regardless of your view on the metaphysical, you live on in the memories of your family and friends. As long as you aren't forgotten, you live on.

>>10469400
The sadness of losing a loved one is hard to deal with but you should realize that this person lives on in your memories and gives you another reason to live your life better. Think about all the good that person has brought to your life and remember them like that instead of focusing on where they went, because no one really knows.

>>10469400
Sadly their is no scientific case for an afterlife. Closest thing really is your memories of them.

>>10469400
tl:dr of the below: The consciousness is independent from the physical body. This opens up ideas not only of the survival of the consciousness after death, but also of things like ESP and remote viewing. The essence of your loved one is probably still in existence, even if their physical body and memories aren't.
overview - https://imgur.com/a/BgAXeWC
studies - https://pastebin.com/HPVPTX4u

>>10470669
Thank you so much

>>10469580
>It baffles ne thaat people fail to realize
etc
etc.
There's no guarantee humanity will still exist in a million years, or even if they do that they will possess the ability or desire to make copies of long forgotten people.
And then they'd just be copies, YOU would still be dead. An identical twin is a "copy" of a person in a sense, but try to talk one into suicide on the basis that their twin will live on.

>>10469603
>They are the same
I honestly wonder if the people who post this are actually AI's turned loose on the internet, or are they just soulless psychopaths.

>>10469400
Well, we can never know what happens after we die. But, in dreams where I die, after a long period of blackness, something tells me to come back.

>>10469648
>There will be no difference as to waking up from a good night's sleep
It will seem that way to the copy, but not to the original.
Consider nano-engineering.
Let's keep it simple (and _really_ small).
Say we come up with a transistor using a dozen atoms (yes, I know there's an allegedly "single atom" transistor out there, but that's not counting the source and drain electrodes).
If I make a transistor out of a dozen atoms, and then take it back apart, then (years later) I make another transistor with the same design, is it the SAME transistor?
No. It isn't.
Functionally equivalent, yes.
Identical, sure, why not.
The same transistor? No, obviously not.
Still not convinced?
What If I never dismantled the original?
If I make two dozen-atom transistors with the same design, are they the both the same transistor?
If you can Xerox people, and make a thousand copies of Will Ferrell, are they all the "same person"?

>>10470222
>What about people who died but were brought back to life? You fail to take them into account.
Not him, but...
You're referring to "clinical death", the termination of heartbeat and breathing.
Does the brain stop functioning when you hold your breath?

>>10469418
*kys

Conservation of mass and momentum.

>>10470234
This here is the truth, consciousness is one universal thing. It makes more sense than anything if you research it.

>>10470234
Your last bit reminds me of another story by Andy Weir, author of The Martian, that most people don't realize is his first truly popular work: The Egg.
>http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html
It reminds me a little of the idea of the one-electron universe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

>>10470983
I wonder about that, if advance technology could do the process one piece at a time to maintain continuity.

>>10471115
Ship of Theseus.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

>>10471127
Is the mind really comparable to the ship?, if we had enough advance understanding of the mind and how continuity work wouldn’t we be able to preserve it?

>>10470669
>>10470234
Hot damn, Anon brought the goods today. I can't wait to read these this week. Please keep this thread alive.

>>10471149
You posted
>I wonder about that, if advance technology could do the process one piece at a time to maintain continuity.
Let's say we do that by inventing an electromechanical device that behaves just like a neuron does, and it's the same size as a neuron. Now, let's say I slowly replace all of your brain's neurons over a period that takes several years, being very careful to ensure that your neural network doesn't change in a significant way through the process. Do you think you would notice the difference between the biological brain you started with and the artificial construct that slowly replaced it?

>>10469410
>dumb atheist has never played a vidya

>>10471168
I guess you would feel yourself get smarter or something, if it’s completely harmonius you wouldn’t feel anything different.

>>10471188
>dupple dubs
nice digits. But yes, you shouldn't feel a difference if the artificial neurons work so similarly to the originals that doing signal analysis across them can't distinguish them.
That's how Ship of Theseus immortality might work: slowly replace the substrate of the human mind with one that is much more durable, but otherwise works the same way. Once you've completed the substrate transition, you could even engage in slow (hours-long) transference of your conscious mind to very distant objects, like a satellite network, and then all the way out to other planets in the solar system. The point of doing it while conscious would be to get you used to the process to avoid things like the transporter paradoxes, you could do it in your sleep just as well.

>>10471210
Anon mind if I talk to you, I’ve gone balls deep into /Sci/ and a touch into spiritualism, but It’s Left me a wreck IRL struggling to eat just staying in my bed all day looking at this information, how do I get to normal life?

>>10471229
First off, I recommend taking an hour's walk outdoors when the sun is up. You don't have to go anywhere specific, just make sure you're not in the shade: the point is to get more vitamin D, a deficit can cause severe disruptions in mood. It really doesn't even have to be a contiguous hour, but if you're stuck in bed all day I think it's best to make an event of it.
Second, what did you enjoy before this malaise? If you have a favorite food, after your walk in the sun go and get it in the best form accessible to you. Even if it's at a restaurant, plenty of people travel for work so eating alone can be brushed off without any significant attention.
I can offer other tips, but I suggest doing those first.

>>10471239
On it, I thought thinking about these things put my mind at ease but looking through science has left me with more questions then ever.

>>10471277
Existential thoughts plague us all. I think it's best to use the time we _definitely_ have well, to maximize our experiences within it. There may be times to experience events beyond what we understand, but that is uncertain.

Learn to enjoy the Now, even in the simplest ways, and you will be happier for it.

>>10471304
I hope that we do get to experience those events.

>>10471304
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1jhv6yG6_E
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams#Last_years_and_death
sauce
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams_(miniseries)#Part_VII:_Peacefield_(1803%E2%80%931826)

>>10469400
Keep relics of them close to you and in sight.
They will invoke memories of the deceased.
Thus the deceased person is reborn as memories in your minds eye.
That is as real as you could get anon.
Trust me, i know.
Keep these relics close fren, keep the memories closer.

>>10469400
One way to see it is that, you as a human, still grasp this world with the concept of multiple entities. That is, each consciousness is distinct from another by some fundamental deviance. But really the processes all obey the same laws. His consciousness has ended, but what was that consciousness? Just the iterations of chemical and physical processes. His end, but many still continue, the universe lives on. He was just a part of the bigger being.

I've also seen many worlds theory brought up, I'm inclined to believe that anything possible will happen, either by many worlds or my own belief that the universe is infinite, and that in its infinite vastness, I will repeat with slight variations (I know that this may not necessarily be true). To what extent are those alternate timelines "you"? To keep living where you had otherwise died, interesting to ponder over. Say I die of cancer here, in another universe, it doesn't kill me, and in some other universe beyond that, I never get it. In both cases I'm alive, but in one, I've underwent a life-changing ordeal that will ultimately change who I am and give me a newfound appreciation. I'm not providing answers because there are none. No one knows the answers, not to anything about nature. We can only answer questions that other men have constructed, and we can only answer them because the construction asks for something in particular to be shown given the questioners own beliefs and logical understanding. I don't know your understanding of the world. Only you do, and you need to find out what that is to answer your own questions. Sometimes it helps to get other people's perspectives. In the end there's no decided upon answer. Men are all different in their own ways.

A bit less scientific than others response, and a bit more occult: science knows of mass-energy conservation. If consciousness is a separate form of energy as some esoteric people say, it must be conserved somewhere, an afterlife, and never destroyed.

Also, it is almost certain we're in a simulation. The designers, having struggled with their own existential crises, would hopefully implement an afterlife for us too, knowing of its importance to sentient life.

>>10471354
The creators don't seem to give a shit about us when babies are being tortured and women raped throughout eternity. Bugs slowly picked apart by bigger bugs and animals left for days to die of dehydration. Maybe the creators have some sense of morality and intend to "pay back" the suffering but I just don't see that at all happening.

>>10469400
Read up on CTMU.

>>10471360
More importantly, if you don't think bugs are worthy of an afterlife, then why would the creators think we're worthy of one when we're just like bugs? Even bacteria should get one.

>>10471362
You may be overestimating the complexity of insect brains, and underestimating the additional computational capacity offered by a single higher dimension.

>>10471361

>>10471371
what if the gods see our brains the same way we see insect brains? If you don't think insects deserve a special place where they can be eternally satisfied, then why would an all powerful (at least in our eyes) being do the same for us? I'm not saying they can't, but what would motivate them? Maybe at some point in the future an advanced human gets their attention and they feel some kind of compassion for us and grant us all a personal happiness.

>>10470983
>It will seem that way to the copy, but not to the original.
The original is no linger there so it does not matter what the original thinks about it.

Your example of the transistors asks me what outside observers think of the transistor. To the transistor itself there is no difference.

It does not matter if anybody besides the resurrected brain itself thinks that it is different. The brain thinks that he is the same person thus he is the same person

>>10469640
like the mental capacity to experience my existence and enjoyment coupled with the knowledge that it‘s worthless and finite?

>>10469410
>Implying I know shit
>Deal with it.
>acting like a true retard

>>10469648
>So we die everytime we sleep now?
When exactly?
I'm clearly aware in my dreams and sometimes even outside of dreams during deep sleep or between 2 consecutive dreams. It feels like my consciousness is floating through black space and I'm not able to have any thoughts in my usual mind voice but only logical ones.

>>10471092
is this the primordial isekai?

>>10470273
cope and gay as fuck

>>10470669
Cia documents are garbage.
They're a complete mess and are probably psy ops

>>10469416
>many-worlds interpretation is correct
No it's not, it's based on fiction. Somehow, an infinite number of dimensions wouldn't collapse reality.
Something can't come from nothing and even the Universe might stretch towards its own destruction.

We're a bunch of primates who don't know anything about the world/ space and somehow we're supposed to have figured out the meaning of everything. Bog-wash is what it is.

>>10469400

This is the person who had the deepest NDE ever, Christian Andréason:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bw3oaNUR1iI
https://www.broadjam.com/artists/songs.php?artistID=14702&mediaID=460764
https://www.near-death.com/experiences/exceptional/christian-andreason.html
http://www.allaboutchristian.com/spirituality/index.html

>>10469580
>humanity will have the technology to recreate every brain that has ever existed

>>10470237
Do you suppose this you is conscious of all alternate reality yous?

>>10469599
The makeup of a former person's brain, once the data is lost by decomposition, is just that: lost data. There is no conceivable way to determine what that information was. Thanks to the uncertainty principle we can't determine where a particle will go when emitted; the best we can determine is probabilities (wave functions).

You ask the wrong question on the wrong place bro

>>10469630
>>10469648
Idk how to articulate this but i feel like we are constantly dying. we are never truely alive, we are just a complex pattern.

Why does everyone care so much if there is an afterlife? No reason to waste even a second of thought on the answer. One day (soon) you will die and find out. As we eat your soul. Oh man you are making me hungry.

>>10469400
Well friend, since you asked... Something can't come from nothing, therefore the creationists probably have the wrong idea. What's more likely is that there's an infinitum in which everything always has and will exist. With regard to the concept of infinity, there are probably planets identical to this one including every life on it as well as every possible variant of each of those lives located somewhere, some-time in the universe. That's my take on reincarnation. Now... How do the dead link to that?

Perhaps your persons consciousness halted when their brain stopped. What is more likely is that their brain, being the electromagnetic radio tower it is, has interacted with the universe in some very subtle way that will change the course of universal history - perhaps even linking to those other distant dopple-gangers across the infinitum using some frequency undetectable by modern electroencephalogram. That is most likely, though we are still unsure if consciousness is even a chemical product. It may very well be an integral part of the universe, which means we never die or live in the way we often perceive it as humans but rather in some universal... Centrally-decentralized network of being.

tl:dr your Granny isn't "gone"

They will no longer experience suffering

>>10469496
This was discussed on /sci/ recently. Multiworlds interpretation does not predict any describable world or even every nomologically possible world. It predicts any world that is consistent with being a causal consequence of an initial physical state that lead to our possible world. If p is a state such that one of its possible CAUSAL consequences is our world, then any then any causal consequence of p is a oossiboe world according to the many worlds intepretation.

In full disclosure, I dont know much physics but I believe this is, roughly speaking, a correct description of the MWI.

>>10469400
A time war where two factions diametrically opposed to the existence of the other due to differences in interpretation of metaphysics will certainly prevent you from attending the exact same afterlife as all your other family members.

>>10469640
You’re also bound for her to fall in love with you

After you die, the time travellers can go back and divert your timeline. They can make it better or worse, and when they change someone else's timeline, that might change yours too. If your timeline tells a good story, then the time travellers might want to make your timeline better. If your timeline tells a sorry story, then no one will care if other changes make your timeline worse.

I'm probably on the retroactively improved timeline now. It is good and I can hardly even tell about that other timeline where I went to hell for three days.

>>10473615

Technically incorrect. In eternity, we will all probably choose to incarnate again and again.

They will probably not choose to do so for octillions of eons, though.

>>10474469
>Technically incorrect.
>we will all probably...
>They will probably...

Sure thing, bud.

>>10474625

I am just saying, eternity is really long, and everyone may want a vacation from paradise eventually. It can never be guaranteed or predicted with 100% absolute certainty, but it is not an unreasonable assumption.

Again, given eternity.

>>10469400
Something will never turn into nothing. Mass turns to energy, light becomes heat, mass becomes other mass, everything changes, re-combines, evolves, dissolves, and so on.
So, I assume, the consciousness or soul of a person won't just disappear but either go somewhere else or transform into something else. What that could be, no clue.

>>10469630

Your "memory" is still a physical property that can hypothetically be duplicated. But for brains that have long since decomposed I doubt that's retrievable in any way.

>>10475517
Nope. The consciousness does “disappear”, as the chemical energy of the body is no longer used to sustain it when it dies. Souls aren’t real.

>>10475544
Well, obviously I am real. So, where does my consciousness go or what does it transform to when I die? I guess we both can't say but for sure it won't just become nothing.

>>10471170
Kek