- This topic has 7 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Near-death experiences occur when the soul leaves the nervous system and enters the universe, claim two quantum physics experts
Ground-breaking theory holds that quantum substances form the soul
They are part of the fundamental structure of the universeBy Damien Gayle
PUBLISHED: 05:38 EST, 30 October 2012 | UPDATED: 06:26 EST, 30 October 2012
Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, advanced the theory on a television documentary
A near-death experience happens when quantum substances which form the soul leave the nervous system and enter the universe at large, according to a remarkable theory proposed by two eminent scientists.
According to this idea, consciousness is a program for a quantum computer in the brain which can persist in the universe even after death, explaining the perceptions of those who have near-death experiences.
Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology and the Director of the Centre of Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, has advanced the quasi-religious theory.
It is based on a quantum theory of consciousness he and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose have developed which holds that the essence of our soul is contained inside structures called microtubules within brain cells.
They have argued that our experience of consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in these microtubules, a theory which they dubbed orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR).
Thus it is held that our souls are more than the interaction of neurons in the brain. They are in fact constructed from the very fabric of the universe – and may have existed since the beginning of time.
The concept is similar to the Buddhist and Hindu belief that consciousness is an integral part of the universe – and indeed that it is really all there may be, a position similar to Western philosophical idealism.
With these beliefs, Dr Hameroff holds that in a near-death experience the microtubules lose their quantum state, but the information within them is not destroyed. Instead it merely leaves the body and returns to the cosmos.
Shocked back to life: The theory holds that when patients have a near death experience their quantum soul is released from the body and re-enters the cosmos, before returning when they are revivedShocked back to life: The theory holds that when patients have a near death experience their quantum soul is released from the body and re-enters the cosmos, before returning when they are revived
Dr Hameroff told the Science Channel’s Through the Wormhole documentary: ‘Let’s say the heart stops beating, the blood stops flowing, the microtubules lose their quantum state.
‘The quantum information within the microtubules is not destroyed, it can’t be destroyed, it just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large.
‘If the patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says “I had a near death experience”.’
He adds: ‘If they’re not revived, and the patient dies, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body, perhaps indefinitely, as a soul.’
Evidence: Dr Hameroff believes new findings about the role quantum physics plays in biological processes, such as the navigation of birds, will one day prove his theoryEvidence: Dr Hameroff believes new findings about the role quantum physics plays in biological processes, such as the navigation of birds, will one day prove his theory
The Orch-OR theory has come in for heavy criticism by more empirically minded thinkers and remains controversial among the scientific community.
MIT physicist Max Tegmark is just one of the many scientists to have challenged it, in a 2000 paper that is widely cited by opponents, the Huffington Post reports.
Nevertheless, Dr Hameroff believes that research in to quantum physics is beginning to validate Orch-Or, with quantum effects recently being shown to support many important biological processes, such as smell, bird navigation and photosynthesis.
Hello,
This is the most plausible explanation I’ve read from “scientists”.
>our soul is contained inside structures called microtubules within brain cells.<
It makes more sense that any cell in all parts of the brain or body would contain
all of our experience/intelligence=soul.I've read of memories being passed on to people who have received organ transplants
from the donor. If all of the experiences contained in the heart are exclusive to
that organ, it would make you double think being a donor.Qi,
AdelI think there are probably some aspects that are local.
E.G. lower dantian gut brain has different perspective
than the heart, which has a different perspective than
the headE.G.#2 If a person’s liver gets poisoned from alcohol,
the liver might not know why the person is drinking.
There may not be sufficient communication amongst the
five shen for the real understanding to have been shared.
Certain things are known by parts of the body, but not
by others.But on the core aspects, experiences that shape who you
on a core soul level, I think that is integrated through
the whole matrix. This type of core consciousness, I think,
is uniformly distributed through the whole body.Qi,
StevenGood point. All of the communication issues that fusion addresses,
with the five shen. But I definately agree that what you call
the “core aspects” are thruout the entire body/heart/mind.Adel
Hello Steven:
on the core aspects, experiences that shape who you
on a core soul level, I think that is integrated through
the whole matrix. This type of core consciousness, I think,
is uniformly distributed through the whole body.
******************
Can you define the soil. And how it is different than spirit?>>>Can you define the soil. And how it is different than spirit?
I assume you meant to say soUL. 😉
In any case, in my post, I was not using the term “soul”
in any kind of rigorous fashion. I was being quite
colloquial, trying to appeal to intuition.Since discussions of this type tend to revolve around
which world-view a person has, let me be clear about
the model I use. I’ve mentioned it before, but it
doesn’t hurt to say it again.I believe that a person has two aspects of self.
They are:(A) The part that has awareness, has a sense of
consciousness, has a sense that it is alive(B) A part that has emotions, memories, personality,
and ego.(*) In my view–regardless of whether someone does alchemy
or not–aspect (A) is IMMORTAL and aspect (B) is MORTAL.The closest approximant to Daoist terms would be
(A)=ling and (B)=xin,
but this may not be an exact match to my model,
and I consider my model to take precedent over any
pre-defined linguistic terms.This cosmological model, as indicated by (*), for
me is based on my personal experience in the following sense:
For the most part, I never experience any interruption in (A).
When I go to sleep at night, no matter which dream I am in,
I have awareness, a sense of being alive, of having a
consciousness . . . so in that sense, I have no experience
of a discontinuation of (A), and I therefore expect that
this will always continue [possible end of the human body or not].
My experience suggests to me that (A) is IMMORTAL.Similarly, when I go to sleep at night, (B) dissolves.
Except in rare instances, I do not have a memory of
my waking life while dreaming. My emotions, personality,
“who I define myself in reality as”, are all wiped away.
Since this does not stay with me when I sleep at night,
I have no expectation that it would stay with a person
upon their death either. So my experience suggests to
me that (B) is MORTAL.Zen meditation, for example, is designed to help
one more clearly see their (A) self within, and be
more self-identified with it . . . As least to my
experience.Now what does alchemy do?
1. It indirectly helps one to see the (A) self
clearer by removing toxic clouds of stuck
energy and emotions that obscure (A)2. (##) Some believe that alchemy helps to create
an energetic vessel, to hold a “fused” xin
(five shen), so that this will continue to live
in after death, like (A). In other words, some
view alchemy to hold the promise of keeping the
(B) self alive after death along with (A), or
at least some part of it.Comments on item 2:
(&) Some of those that believe in (##), promote this
as “if successful, you will become immortal”.(&&) Some of those that don’t believe in (##), say
that (##) is a fantasy and a delusion, that
it is not possible. In that way, some would
argue that only (A) is important anyway, and
one should focus on this “to realize that you
are already immortal”.IN TOTAL, my view is this:
I believe in (*), as indicated above, and I feel
it to be true based on evidence from my personal
experience. As for alchemy, I believe in item #1,
and I leave item #2 as an open question, rather
than jumping on the train of belief of (&) or (&&).
This is the model I use.
In terms of the original post, I am colloquially
using the term “core soul” to be (A), and the
rest is (B).As to “spirit”, to me this is just another word for (A).
Some have completely different models in which
soul and spirit are different from each other and/or
are different from the way that I am using them.
I can not comment on them, because they are not in my
model.Qi,
StevenIts good you state they are your views.
I think adel was trying to understand MW’s view. I believe in that view the souls experience life, these experiences are processed. If we do alchemy, they are processed in a way that benefits your life, and your spirit, which allows you to transform and grow.
If you don’t process them well, you get bogged down and stuck and trapped in them.
So your experiences in life and your ability to process them contributes to your spiritual growth and immortality. Six healing sounds, fusion 1.
If anybody wants to add to that please do.
>>>Its good you state they are your views.
>>>I think adel was trying to understand MW’s view.No, I don’t think adel was trying to understand
MW’s view in this thread. It was the other thread
entitled “I’m confused” where that was the case.
In this thread, Adel gave an opinion after reading
an article, and I followed with one of my own.
Please don’t correct me when there is nothing to correct.Thanks,
Steven
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.