Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 27, @05:11PM (23 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 27, @05:11PM (#1394609)

    I fear death. I admit it, even if some might ridicule me for this. I don't greatly fear the future in general, just this specific aspect of it. I don't think anyone can really say with certainty what happens from a spiritual standpoint, and the thought of ceasing to exist is a bit horrifying to me.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Underrated=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 27, @06:52PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 27, @06:52PM (#1394624)

    the thought of ceasing to exist is a bit horrifying to me.

    Don't worry... it won't last

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @05:25AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @05:25AM (#1394678)

    have you experienced dreamless sleep? that's death in the long term, except you don't wake up.

    if you have a heart condition the few minutes before death can be painful (or it may be painless).
    if you get cancer then the few weeks before can be painful.

    but it's the people around you who experience you as dead; you will not be able to experience anything.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 04, @01:30AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 04, @01:30AM (#1395147)

      have you experienced dreamless sleep?

      But is dreamless sleep really dreamless or it's just your memory isn't working well for that phase?

      After all there's evidence that lots of people dream and then soon forget their dreams.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 11, @11:46AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 11, @11:46AM (#1395988)

        I was thinking more like "general anesthetic", whatever the spelling is. the thing where the brain is reduced to low-level stuff like heart beating and breathing.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Hartree on Friday February 28, @05:41AM (15 children)

    by Hartree (195) on Friday February 28, @05:41AM (#1394680)

    Where were you before conception?

    You were not alive; thus, you were dead. And so, you've been dead an awful of a lot longer than you've been alive.

    (Not original to me: I don't fear death. It's having to stay dead all that time that scares the hell out of me.)

    • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Friday February 28, @03:44PM

      by acid andy (1683) on Friday February 28, @03:44PM (#1394714) Homepage Journal

      Yes and I notice there are hundreds of thousands of individuals leaving such a state (of being not alive, before conception) every day, all over the world. The being not alive losing its permanence seems to be rather commonplace. Hey, it even happened to you at least once already.

      --
      Welcome to Edgeways. Words should apply in advance as spaces are highly limite—
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @09:56PM (13 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @09:56PM (#1394755)

      It's having to stay dead all that time that scares the hell out of me.

      Time doesn't exist for the dead. An infinite amount of time goes infinitely fast. You sleep, and instantly wake up in a different universe. How long you were out, you will ever know. What scares me is that the cycle repeats indefinitely. Maybe the purpose of religion is to break the cycle by biulding a "consciousness" without the flesh

      "We never really die" - Lucy

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by hendrikboom on Saturday March 01, @02:53AM (4 children)

        by hendrikboom (1125) on Saturday March 01, @02:53AM (#1394786) Homepage Journal

        Are photons dead?

        • (Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 03, @12:02AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 03, @12:02AM (#1395040)

          Would we call the ceremony a requiem or a rest mass?

        • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday March 03, @03:22PM (2 children)

          by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 03, @03:22PM (#1395106) Journal

          Are photons dead?

          Life on a photon would be timeless.

          Unless I am misunderestimating something (to borrow a G W Bush'ism), a photon could travel 13.7 billion light years from the edge of the universe to our position and when it arrives, from the photon's point of view, zero time has passed since it is moving at speed C.

          --
          The Centauri traded Earth jump gate technology in exchange for our superior hair mousse formulas.
          • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Wednesday March 05, @09:01AM (1 child)

            by pTamok (3042) on Wednesday March 05, @09:01AM (#1395317)

            Life on a photon would be timeless.

            ...to an external observer.

            If you look at the half-life of a stationary muon, it is very short.
            If you look at the half-life of cosmic-ray muons that are moving at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light, they are seen/measured/calculated as much longer*. That's relativistic time dilation. BUT the muon experiences the half-life as being the same duration in both scenarios.

            Asking what the frame of reference of a photon is cannot be answered (easily) in relativity because it requires doing things like dividing by zero or adding infinite quantities to things.
            Discussion here:
            https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/54162/how-does-a-photon-experience-space-and-time [stackexchange.com]
            and here (note 'affine parameter' and 'limit of proper time'):
            https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/27794/is-a-photon-fixed-in-spacetime [stackexchange.com]

            Note that external observers always see photons as travelling at the speed of light relative to themselves, no matter what sub-lightspeed velocity they themself have. Photons will be red- or blue- shifted according to the velocity of the observer. Anything with rest-mass cannot accelerate to light-speed as that would require infinite energy.

            So yes, asking about a photon's point of view with respect to time is a bit like asking "What colour is an idea?": the question can be posed, but is difficult, if not impossible to answer.

            If you want to know more about the behaviour of photons, try reading Richard Feynman's book "QED: the strange theory of light and matter", which is available from the Internet archive, here: https://archive.org/download/richard-feynman-pdf-library/Feynman%2C%20Richard%20%2837%20books%29/QED/Feynman%2C%20Richard%20-%20QED%20%28Princeton%2C%202006%29.pdf [archive.org]

            It's is aimed at the interested (and committed) layman - to quote from the preface:

            It is a straightforward, honest explanation of a rather difficult subject-the theory of quantum electrodynamics-for a nontechnical audience. It is designed to give the interested reader an appreciation for the kind of thinking that physicists have resorted to in order to explain how Nature behaves.
            If you are planning to study physics (or are already doing so), there is nothing in this book that has to be "unlearned": it is a complete description, accurate in every detail, of a framework onto which more advanced concepts can be attached without modification. For those of you who have already studied physics, it is a revelation of what you were really doing when you were making all those complicated calculations!

            *It's interesting how this is done. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon#Muon_sources [wikipedia.org] - it is either time dilation from the point-of-view/frame-of-reference of the observer, or length contraction according to the point-of-view/frame-of-reference of the muon. The descriptions/explanations are mutually exclusive/complementary, but equally valid.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 11, @09:27AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 11, @09:27AM (#1395982)

              Anything with rest-mass cannot accelerate to light-speed as that would require infinite energy.

              To paraphrase Leonard Susskind; "Photons have no mass because they are massless particles". Joking aside, a Photon would have an estimated rest-mass on the order one quintillionth that of a Neutrino. We cannot hope to measure it so we correctly say "practically massless", the implication being that the momentum of Photons or hypothetical Gravity messenger particle could be slightly slower than the ultimate quantum speed of causality.

              Which is to say; we're all with Lenny on this!

      • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Saturday March 01, @10:44AM (7 children)

        by acid andy (1683) on Saturday March 01, @10:44AM (#1394808) Homepage Journal

        That's a good summary of what I believe, or at least want to believe. As I've said before, the problematic bit is if a universe can get stuck in an eternally lifeless state a.k.a. Heat Death. I have a hunch it can't but no hard evidence. But then, you did say an infinite amount of time goes infinitely fast, so are we to imagine reaching an end to an eternal Heat Death after instantly traversing an entire eternity? That's a wacky idea but if Achilles can catch the tortoise I suppose it might be conceivable. Any mathematicians care to weigh in?

        --
        Welcome to Edgeways. Words should apply in advance as spaces are highly limite—
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 01, @08:37PM (6 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 01, @08:37PM (#1394876)

          We could be dead for an infinite number of eternities, it's still instantaneous. The chronometer is inoperative. You'll never know it happened

          • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Saturday March 01, @09:29PM (5 children)

            by acid andy (1683) on Saturday March 01, @09:29PM (#1394884) Homepage Journal

            I guess it comes down to a question of how stable is reality? Will the laws of physics change if you wait enough eons? It likely depends on what layers of complexity exist outside of observable physics. If the universe was just a game running on some kid's computer, eventually it will be switched off or crash.

            --
            Welcome to Edgeways. Words should apply in advance as spaces are highly limite—
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by nostyle on Friday February 28, @05:53PM (2 children)

    by nostyle (11497) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 28, @05:53PM (#1394720) Journal

    Material science is, as yet, unable to distinguish betwween the mortal and immortal bits of us. It is apparent that our bodies begin, develop and end within the confines of this material world, but that which is variously described as one's consciousness, soul or spirit has never been physically identified, nor operationally delineated other than to suggest that it seems intimately associated with the function of our brains. Signs of this immortal bit include the dream and the "mear-death-experience".

    A notable scripture discussing this can be found here [ibiblio.org], which includes the curious assertion:

    O Son, if thou art able not to sleep, then thou art able not to die. And if thou art able not to waken after sleep, then thou shalt be able not to rise after death.

    Naturally, opinions will vary, and, of course, the things of which we are uncertain will forever prove daunting.

    --

    I can't lose when I'm with you
    How can I snooze and miss the moment?
    You just too important
    Nobody do body like you do

    -Sza, Snooze

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @09:16PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @09:16PM (#1394748)

      Sorry for typos. [ s/tww/tw && s/mear/near ]. Fat fingers. Old eyes.

      I wasn't aiming for funny, but thanks.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @09:45PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28, @09:45PM (#1394753)

      "The mind is what the brain does" - Nat Geo, March 2005

      The parietal cortex is where all the "spiritual" stuff is processed.