Physicist says life after death possible + A deficiency that gives you super strength

[C C]

Life After Death? Physics Say Its Possible
http://sciencebomb.com/uncategorized/life-after-death/

EXCERPT: . . . Dr. Hans-Peter Dürr, former head of the Max Planck Institute for Physics in Munich, posits that, just as a particle “writes” all of its information on its wave function, the brain is the tangible “floppy disk” on which we save our data, and this data is then “uploaded” into the spiritual quantum field. Continuing with this analogy, when we die the body, or the physical disk, is gone, but our consciousness, or the data on the computer, lives on. Quantum physics is realising more and more that the material world we can see and interact with is but a tiny fraction of what is really going on. We now know there are many dimensions which interact with each other. This realisation has raised the question “do we live in on in another plane of existence as our spiritual quantum field”. If so we are all immortal....

---

Myostatin deficiency: A deficiency that gives you super strength
http://sciencebomb.com/biology/myostatin...-strength/

EXCERPT: Individuals with Myostatin deficiency have up to twice the usual amount of muscle mass in their bodies. They also tend to have increased muscle strength. Myostatin-related muscle hypertrophy is not known to cause any medical problems, and affected individuals are intellectually normal. The first human case documented is known as a baby Superman in Germany. He was born in Berlin with bulging arm and leg muscles. Not yet 5, he could hold seven-pound weights with arms extended, something many adults cannot do. He has muscles twice the size of other kids his age and half their body fat....

[Magical Realist]

For now this is just a theory which awaits some definitive evidence but it does support the claims of many brilliant scientist that they have tapped into the ether, a great body of knowledge maybe the for named “quantum spiritual field”. If this theory is proved to be true the implications will be monumental. If humans do “download” their consciousness into a thus far unobservable field, then a person’s consciousness could, in Dürr’s words mean we are “Immortal”.

I guess the obvious issue is if this abstract form of existing--as pure mind--can exist without an underlying substrate of interactive components. But it's an intriguing prospect nonetheless. Perhaps we are already acting from that quantum substrate already, drawing from the ever creative fizz of virtual particles the freedom to be at every moment. How would the template be preserved that channels this soul energy thru our being? Pure information preserved on some Platonic geometric level? We are fractalesce tesseracts composed of interwoven worldlines!

[C C]

I guess the obvious issue is if this abstract form of existing--as pure mind--can exist without an underlying substrate of interactive components. But it's an intriguing prospect nonetheless. Perhaps we are already acting from that quantum substrate already, drawing from the ever creative fizz of virtual particles the freedom to be at every moment. How would the template be preserved that channels this soul energy thru our being? Pure information preserved on some Platonic geometric level? We are fractalesce tesseracts composed of interwoven worldlines!

The mixed states of a human body are too incoherent to have or be described by a comprehensible wave function. So who knows what this is supposed to be referring to: ". . . just as a particle 'writes' all of its information on its wave function, the brain is the tangible 'floppy disk' on which we save our data, and this data is then “uploaded” into the spiritual quantum field."

Most people (except for a very small number of intelligent ones) don't even realize how much those "Macroscopic bodies" are just a metaphysical fiction of our own speech enhanced primate brains.

We have the ability to reduce enormously complex conglomerates of molecules into very short sequences of audio information like "table", "human" or "cup" Without such a huge data reduction factor of the visual information our eyes receive into just a few bytes, our brains wouldn't be able to do all the Object Oriented Processing it does. However, it comes at a cost of a build-in disability leading to faulty reasoning: If you talk about the wave-function of a human being, do you include or exclude his/hers: Glasses? Cloths? Teeth-fillings? The stomachs-filling? The internal bacterial ecosystem? The internal air and other gasses? Pace-makers? Transplanted organs? Which of the 27 components of the daily vitamin pill? The energy of the radio waves propagating in the body? and so on, and so on. (physics stack exchange)

Those degrees of freedom of a quantum system that are described by a pure partial state must be very well shielded from unwanted interactions with the environment, otherwise they will be decoherered to a mixed state in a moment. This shielding can be done for a few degrees of freedom (like a superconducting current) but not for position and momentum of macroscopic bodies. Therefore these are always described by density matrices. (physics stack exchange)

"As the follower of Prof. Werner Heisenberg, he [Dürr] specializes in nuclear physics, quantum physics, elementary particles and gravitation, epistemology and philosophy." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans-Peter_D%C3%BCrr

"[...] According to some quantum physicists (Hans-Peter Dürr, Amit Goswami, Michael König), there is behind the material world a hyperspace that can be regarded as an afterlife or a heaven. Basis of this assumption is the proved (verified) phenomenon of quantum entanglement. If two entangled (by contact "mentally" connected) photons (light particles) can communicate over a large spatial distance much faster than light (immediately), there must be a higher dimension (a hyper-space) through which this is possible. Because the special theory of relativity from Einstein shows that signals spread out in the traditional dimensions of space can do this not faster than light speed. Evidences for the nature of the hyperspace are not yet available. There are the string theory and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics. If they are verified a multi-dimensional universe (multiverse) can derived from them.... "

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/God_and_Re...um_Physics

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/God_and_Re.../Afterlife

In some roundabout way, what these guys are handwaving at seems to lead as much to pregeometry (that space is not fundamental) as much as the notion of "hyperspace".

- - - - - - -

http://spookyactionbook.com/2013/11/04/t...sil-hiley/

. . . What were you doing in that 10-year period?

BASIL HILEY: When I joined him, we had Roger Penrose in the maths department, and we had David Bohm and we had myself. We were looking at algebras; we were looking at general relativity; we were looking at pre-space. Pre-space is like pre-geometry, but David and I didn’t want to give the impression that we were thinking the same way as John Wheeler was.

Penrose had his twistors, and then he had his spin networks. Both of them were how to construct spacetime out of physical objects. He had some beautiful ideas with the twistors. He wanted a space where there were no points, so you start with the light rays, and then where the light rays intersect, you construct your points.

My contribution to twistors was how to spell it. He came into my room one day and he started talking about his idea. “I don’t know whether to spell it E-R or O-R.” And I said: “Roger. O-R.”

“Twister” is a party game, and “twistor” is a high-end concept.

[Laughs.] Anyway, that started me on the different algebras. I had come from solid-state physics, and I’d done a lot of work on lattices. Could it be that spacetime is structured like a lattice, but very small? Take the edge dislocations wandering through the crystal, and you find you get Riemannian geometry. So I did a lot of that, wondering about whether space was discrete.

[...]

So I am not a Bohmian in the Bohmian mechanics sense. Chris Fuchs came down to me once after a lecture and says, “How nice it is to meet a Bohmian.” And I said: “I beg your pardon? Where?” I’m not a Bohmian. What we are discussing is not mechanics. Bohm says in his quantum-theory book, the original one, quantum mechanics is a misnomer. It should be called quantum non-mechanics.

Because you shouldn’t think of it in terms of a mechanistic motion of particles?

Yes, it’s nothing like that. It’s not mechanism. It organicism. It’s organic. Nature is more organic than we think it is. And then you can understand why life arose, because if nature is organic, it has the possibility of life in it.

Let’s start this way. You’re looking for a fundamental particle. So you divide the material into atoms and think: this is where the real essence lies. Rutherford divided the atom and found the nucleus. OK. The nucleus is where matter resides. And then you look inside the nucleus and you find neutrons. OK, now we’re there. But then there’s quarks and we’ve never got a hold of a quark. We take a proton, an anti-proton, and it goes, poof, into radiation. So where is the solidity of matter? Where does it lie? Because wherever we look at it…

…it falls through our fingers.

OK. So you say, all right, suppose we start with something like process—no particles, just activity, just energy. Then the first battle was: what the hell do you mean?

I started reading. I read Grassmann, for example, and Grassmann was saying that mathematics was not about things in space and time, but it was about thought—it was about the order of thought. And he obtained his Grassmann algebra from that kind of consideration. And I read Clifford‘s original books, original papers, and it was all about process. Two times three is equal to six—it’s not two objects times three. It’s the doubling of three objects. It’s a process.

We’re not used to thinking about process. We communicate with an object-based language. David invented a thing called “rheomode“—language in which we speak to each other in a flowing mode. There are some ancient languages which do this—Hopi Indian and some others. In his book Wholeness and the Implicate Order, you’ll find a chapter on language, in which he discusses this rheomode. It didn’t work, because we were still thinking of objects.

How does this enter into quantum mechanics?

In noncommutativity. Every day in our life, we always have to be careful of the order. You’ve got a cup in the cupboard. You’ve got to open the cupboard door before you can the cup out. All our experience is doing things in the right order, so our activity is noncommutative. It comes into quantum mechanics because Heisenberg sought to explain atomic energy levels and what he found was he had to make his objects into things that didn’t commute with each other. The order was vital. There was a difference between first measuring the momentum and then measuring the position, from measuring the position and then measuring the momentum. That became the basis of his Uncertainty Principle.

It seemed to me that he was actually discussing a process. He was talking about how something goes from one to the other, and he called that a momentum transition, and a position from one position to another. In other words, it wasn’t x and p, p and x. It was rather x0 to x1, p1 to p2, and so on. The basic thing he discovered was a “groupoid,” and a groupoid is what is used in category theory nowadays. It’s to discuss process....

[Magical Realist]

Imagine a world where everyone could have Myostatin deficiency, everyone would be extremely strong and muscular. It is likely that any such treatments would be utilised in making more powerful soldiers for warfare than to make the general population stronger and more handsome.

Muscle freaks doing a fraction of the work-out to gain twice the muscle mass? A new age of hypermasculine idealization without the work! Would it last though? "Well, we all know he didn't really work that hard to look like a Greek god. Not as heroic as it used to be."