Notices
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Reincarnation linked to Laws of Thermodynamics?

  1. #1 Reincarnation linked to Laws of Thermodynamics? 
    2112
    Guest
    First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
    Second Law of Thermodynamics (or the Law of Entropy): a law stating that mechanical work can be derived from a body only when that body interacts with another at a lower temperature; any spontaneous process results in an increase of entropy. Heat moves to the lower temperature. Energy can change form, but as in the first law, not created or destroyed.

    This law seems to either deal with heat in a closed system, or energy.

    So if energy cannot be created or destroyed, but only change form, does that affect the energy of the soul? Although we may believe in an afterlife, where does the energy come from to create a complete and separate organism from a main organism? Is this proof of reincarnation, or simply the way energy is transferred?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    133
    deep ....
    Soul = construct

    Mechanical motion in the body is caused by the burning (which increases the temperatur}e of body A (ACH?) and body B (ACH Receptors?) --I need to brush up on my anatomy-- which causes a muscle to contract ... etc etc etc.

    Create a complete and separat organism .... energy comes from ... burning calories. The system isn't sealed. We can take in more energy from the outside to give us this energy.

    I don't have a completely clear idea of what you are discussing (the deep part, I understand the thermodynamics) but this is my best attempt to answer it.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    3
    This assumes that there is a soul, and that it contains energy and/or information. Everything we know and remember is stored as chemical potential energy, unless we're actively using it, of course. When we die, we decompose which releases that energy, so no violation of the rules occur. Of course, I am assuming that there is no energy containing soul. Not really a science discussion, though

    Dogg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    I don't think that if a soul exists it complies with the laws of physics that we know. Therefore I would have to say this doesn't apply. Just my theory at least
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    2112
    Guest
    This is just something I had been thinking about in Biology 110 in college, I always wondered if souls are made of another kind of energy, the kind that is intangible to us, but energy that may resemble and react similarly to the energy we know about, that it doesn't come from a source and arrive at a destination. That it can't appear out of nowhere (God) and end up at it's final destination (Heaven/Hell). But that it is recycled just like energy on Earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    Quote Originally Posted by 2112
    This is just something I had been thinking about in Biology 110 in college, I always wondered if souls are made of another kind of energy, the kind that is intangible to us, but energy that may resemble and react similarly to the energy we know about, that it doesn't come from a source and arrive at a destination. That it can't appear out of nowhere (God) and end up at it's final destination (Heaven/Hell). But that it is recycled just like energy on Earth.
    I always wondered whether someone could prove the existence of a soul. Ocham's razor (one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything) would rule out a soul, and thus I believe that if a discussion about a soul as some new kind of energy is started, the existence should first be made 'considerable'.

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    2112
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by HomoUniversalis
    Quote Originally Posted by 2112
    This is just something I had been thinking about in Biology 110 in college, I always wondered if souls are made of another kind of energy, the kind that is intangible to us, but energy that may resemble and react similarly to the energy we know about, that it doesn't come from a source and arrive at a destination. That it can't appear out of nowhere (God) and end up at it's final destination (Heaven/Hell). But that it is recycled just like energy on Earth.
    I always wondered whether someone could prove the existence of a soul. Ocham's razor (one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything) would rule out a soul, and thus I believe that if a discussion about a soul as some new kind of energy is started, the existence should first be made 'considerable'.

    Mr U
    I agree. It may not be possible to prove the existence of a soul at all. Perhaps our consciousness does not exist after death, but no dead person can tell us this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    This is a tough one for sure, I for one have had enough experiences in my life to be convinced their is some other form of energy that we just can't identify, I can't prove this however nor can anyone else. It's hard to prove something that can't be identified by science.

    We have to look at the countless things that have happened to people throughout history, a good example would be Nostradamus and his predictions of the future. Such predictions could not have occurred via the normal laws of physics that we know. How many haunted houses have had numerous witnesses experience things that could not be explained away with science.

    I think it's good to at least keep an open mind to the possibility of this other form of energy, it's hard to fathom we know everything there is to know about the universe, so this may just be another piece we have not unlocked yet.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    Hmm.. Read nostradamus. He can be interpreted in so many ways it is not even funny. He was no prophet, he was just vague.

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    Quote Originally Posted by HomoUniversalis
    Hmm.. Read nostradamus. He can be interpreted in so many ways it is not even funny. He was no prophet, he was just vague.

    Mr U
    I can't say I'm an expert on Nostradamus, so I'm going to take your word for it. You appear to be a smart guy, so it's a pretty safe call.

    It still doesn't explain some other things. I'll give you an example.

    When I was about 13 we moved into a new house, the following morning after our first night spent in the house my mother told us about someone who visited her that night, this visitor was a little boy about 11 or 12 with brown hair and brown eyes and he was looking for his friends to play with. Turns out the neighbor directly in back of us had recently lost their son who use to play with the two little girls that lived in the house, he would spend a great deal of time in that house. Now my mother could not of known about this little boy, what he looked like, his age, etc. She identified him to the point the neighbors were freaked out for a while. The little boy stopped visting after a few days. This is just one of many happenings that science would try to explain away with "coincidence". I for one am not convinced. So if I ever appear to view things a bit different, it's because my life experiences have shown me evidence countless times of things that can't be explained.

    Another good example would be when my sister woke up screaming that their was a white dove flying around in her room, turns out my grandfather right at that exact moment had just got in a car crash and had died for a short time. We didn't find this out until shortly after.

    Weird stuff..I know.
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman Swaroop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    currently India
    Posts
    26
    dear friend, there is no need to try and apply the known laws of physics to the 'soul'

    Soul, may not belong to the plae of existance we are accustomed to. . . it may be an astral / etheral realm .. where there is no need to apply laws of physics to every event and thing
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Sophomore spidergoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    165
    Isn't it interesting that the same questions come up here that are going around other forums. I've heard people trying to relate the laws of physics to all kinds of fields that they were not meant to address. Besides, the first law of thermodynamics is probably wrong. This is one of the scandals in science- that the world of physics is supposed to be separate from biology or anthropology. Given the laws of physics, why can't we extrapolate from that the existence of butterflies?

    What energy of the soul? Nothing you could call a soul has been measured, and there is no scientific need for one. Our center of consciousness is the product of our brain, which always emerges from another person. We inheret much of our thinking process from people, too, we are as much a product of culture as the brain's physical structure. The energy of the body is chemical and heat energy, not "soul energy". The heat energy goes into your surroundings upon death, and the chemical energy slowly gets released into the dirt, or as food for untold numbers of microscopic organisms. You might as well ask where the computing power of your CPU goes when the computer is off.

    The afterlife is highly doubtful, given the emotional immaturity of humans, and their need for a stabilizing metaphor. More likely we experience strange things in extreme circumstances such as sickness or under entheogenic drugs, and make up stories to try and explain it. I'm not saying those experiences aren't real, just that they might not relate to us personally in the way we think.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat
    Isn't it interesting that the same questions come up here that are going around other forums. I've heard people trying to relate the laws of physics to all kinds of fields that they were not meant to address. Besides, the first law of thermodynamics is probably wrong. This is one of the scandals in science- that the world of physics is supposed to be separate from biology or anthropology. Given the laws of physics, why can't we extrapolate from that the existence of butterflies?

    What energy of the soul? Nothing you could call a soul has been measured, and there is no scientific need for one.
    Also, I think its probably a mistake to try and analyze unknowns solely by applying what we already know to them. Perhaps some part of us continues. If there is such a thing, perhaps what kind of thing it is is entirely unknown to us.. nothing we already know can be said of it. Certainly there is always more.
    The one thing Ive read about and read about that even makes me consider the possibility that some part of us persists beyond this life is the way that Buddhism is so full of accounts of beings who are incarnated with specific memories of their former selves in previous lives. Sort of like how the young Dalai Lama was asked to recognize his possession from among duplicates, etc. The Buddhists are as honest about relating their experiences as any group that Im aware of. Stories like the Dalai Lamas are common in Buddhism back thousands of years. Id really like to meet someone who claims to have something of an unbroken stream of consciousness from one lifetime to the next. I cant say I believe this is the truth tho, because Ive never experienced it directly or second hand even, Ive only read of it. Still it makes me wonder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Sophomore spidergoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    165
    I think the direction of Buddhist practice is towards the activiation of genetic memory. This is the next evolutionary step in humans, the awareness of the information in their own genes, and perhaps conscious control over them.

    A thought about entropy- life is negative entropy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14
    doesn't the body lose 21 grams when at the moment of death and energy does have mass?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    Quote Originally Posted by phephiphophum
    doesn't the body lose 21 grams when at the moment of death and energy does have mass?
    Do you realy think the amount of energy contained in 21 grams of matter is enough to fend of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics where entropy always increases. so after a long time the ordered state that would be your soul would become a highly disorded one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    Quote Originally Posted by phephiphophum
    doesn't the body lose 21 grams when at the moment of death and energy does have mass?
    No, this is a complete myth.

    http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/moments/s1105956.htm
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Sophomore 8873tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    UK, south-east.
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat
    The afterlife is highly doubtful, given the emotional immaturity of humans, and their need for a stabilizing metaphor. More likely we experience strange things in extreme circumstances such as sickness or under entheogenic drugs, and make up stories to try and explain it. I'm not saying those experiences aren't real, just that they might not relate to us personally in the way we think.
    I’m absolutely loving that paragraph spidergoat; “stabilizing metaphor” – great.

    I tend to agree with you, but I find that there a number of awkward phenomenon that can’t be explained by anything - science, extreme circumstances or psychology. I good example of this would be these damn ‘light orbs’ that appear in supposedly ‘haunted’ locations. Fair enough, these orbs can be created using a dusty rug, a camera with a flash and a dark room, but how is it these light anomalies tend to show up when asked? For example: “Is there anyone in the room with us?” and then suddenly a light orb will fly across the screen…I think there have been too many of these incidents for it just to be a coincidence.

    I want to believe that there is nothing after we die, however due to un-explainable phenomenon like the light orbs, my mind will always be opened. Unless they are all solved, which with today’s understanding, will never be.

    The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. - Albert Einstein
    What was God doing before He created the Universe?
    Before He created Heaven and Earth, God created Hell to be used for people such as you who ask this kind of question.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    i personaly would like to believe that there is an afterlife where i would live happily ever after, or miserably for all eternity, but i don't.

    i think that after we dye there is nothing, just as there was nothing before.
    i think this because there is just to many problems with the concept:

    1.) the absence of evidence of it being physical.

    2.) if it is not physical then it is most likely to be mental, in which case i'm the only one there. no one but me for all Eternity .

    3.) it can't be mental because there is no more energy fueling my consiousness, hence i can't be there.


    thats just all i could think of at this time, but there are others.

    it just breaks down to to many unanswered questions and a lack of undeniable evidence, by undeniable i mean that it would make the most stuborn person belive the claim.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •