Proof that reincarnation is what happens after you die through

>>722626092
I hope so much that you are right. Being dead and thats it sucks
Maybe the universe recycles soules

>>722626457

Souls aren't even necessary. If your particular conscious could manifest once then it can manifest again.

>>722626595
Hm yes but this manifestation = soul. And during this process you loose all memory?

>>722626092
Idiot! The sun will kill us off way before that.
Go get your shit peer reviewed and collect you massive price if you believe it so strongly.
fucker

>>722626790

Most likely. Memory appears to be a component of our current physical brains

>>722626904

>we will always reincarnate on Earth cuz gravity

>>722626092
Existence is a state dependent upon consciousness or an aware observer.
Checkmate.

There are other planets that support life. It's not inconceivable that we may also be reincarnated to different worlds. It would explain why the Earth's population is growing. Maybe on another world it's shrinking

>>722627509
K and...

>>722626092

>through logic
>starts spouting unknowable odds and uncorrelated non-sequitur bullshit.

Leave.

>>722627509
Is it? Some animals dont know about their existence. Does that make them nonexistant?

>>722626092
Your math is wrong faggot.
Very wrong.

>>722628113
Prove it faggot

>>722626092
>Reply
>"The chance of you being alive right now is 1/infinity"
>It's not zero though

>>722627907
thank you
the term "logic" is being used to inflationary

>>722628179
Right now is not 50% of the time the universe can support life.

Also considering after all stars are dead, the universe won't just disappear, it will remain infinitely so the amount of time it can support life as a percentage is the smallest possible number that can exist before being 0%

>>722628113

Just trying to give you the general point of how unlikely Christianity and Atheism are compared to reincarnation. Is there are multiple universes spanning even longer then the chances of reincarnation increase by a fuckton.

>>722628435
Sounds okay to me. But not existing in a physical form doesnt mean you dont exist at all. Maybe there is some room/space between existence (in the universe) and you being dead. So its not important if the universe can support life forever

>>722628509
No it wouldn't, because all of those universes will exist Infinitely longer than it can support life.

Reincarnation % is lower than the number you gave to atheism.

Your idea is bad, and you should feel bad for sharing it

>>722626092
What complete fucking nonsense.

>>722628670
When you are expressing possibilities as a percentage it most definitley does matter.

>>722628840
What are the percentages based on? Where do they come from?

>>722628840
Well since Im not OP, I dont care because I didnt bring in percentages. But I like OPs idea.

File: pottestoflels.jpg (15KB, 243x250px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 243x250px

>>722626092
>Everything that OP said
Is this what the American education does to people?

>>722628907
OP's are made up obviously.

Mine came from the universe existing for an infinite length of time after nothing can live in it.

>>722626092
The numbers are meaningless for events that happen only once.
Therefore, your logic is garbage.

>>722629046
Yeah it's completely retarded and frankly pretty scary. I can't believe this is what people think logic is.

>>722628765

All you need is ONE universe sustaining life for it to make up for the billions of universes infinitely dead. The math to can easily stay correct.

There is a detailed desciption on how reincarnation works in Mark Booth's Book "The Secret History of the World

>>722628907

The percentages are made up of dividing the time we are alive by the time the universe will live.

>>722629046

I'm not American.

>>722629046
Sadly, those animals in the usa don't appear to know any better.
Laugh at them and pity them with equal vigor.
It is crueller to let them live.
They're so entertaining...

>>722629264
>The percentages are made up of dividing the time we are alive by the time the universe will live
And how is that connected in any way to the reincarnation hypothesis?

>>722629264
Your bullshit description of how you arrived at your bullshit figures, based on no evidence whatsoever, regarding a bullshit phenomenon... was bullshit.

>>722629420

> the universe will die at age 20 billion
> A human can live for 100 years
> the current year is 2017.
> we are currently alive in this year.
> What are the chances of us being alive the same year the universe is currently in?

Reincarnation makes that chance much higher then other theories.

File: 1477411972878.jpg (85KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 640x480px

>>722629264
>I'm not American.
That makes it even more sad. I'm going to let it pass, if you are living in a developing country or something. What are you then? BR?

>>722628082
From their poinr of view, yes. Since, you know "their pont of view" doesn't exist to begin with.

>>722626790
>>722626910
you may very well regain memory of a past life though, i mean if the information making up your consciousness can manifest again then so can the information making up your memories

also, if you regard soul not as something energetic or material like a ghost sitting in your body but more like a blueprint for the essence of your personality then the concept of soul becomes something that is perfectly acceptable even froma scientific point of view

>>722629701
Pssst! That's not how probabilities work...

>>722629742
>poinr
>pont
Fuck my typing skills right now.

>>722629701
Reincarnation is a hypothesis, not a theory.

File: 1awUqms.png (174KB, 784x591px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 784x591px

>All those retarded calculations

Care to elaborate, OP? Want to teach me how you came up with those mentally disabled %s?

>>722629768
That's not how science works. What you or I believe is irrelevant. You are shifting definitions to make ideas you made up seem more believable.

>>722629768
Memories don't float around.
They are structures and connections in living tissue.
There's no such thing as the soul.
There is no mechanism for putting old memories into a new brain, no radio transmitter or receiver in among brain tissue.

Reincarnation doesn't exist and every time it's been tested it fails dramatically.

What makes you think it's real, OP?

>>722629768

Memory seams to be very set in our biological brains. We can remove memory very easily by damaging the brain and can follow memory being developed in brain scans.

I don't think consciousness from one brain to the next is in any way related. Just whatever was right to form the consciousness you have how can be replicated.

>>722629895
A disproven one.

>>722630086
>What makes you think it's real, OP?
Fear. Or at least an unwillingness no concede that they don't have all the answers. Or maybe they're just dumb and bored, wth do I know.

>>722626092
So is reincarnation only for human?
If not, where is the cutoff, if any? Dolphins? Chimps? Dogs? Reptiles? Fish? Bacteria?

i was a squirrel in my last life ama

Daily reminder that you are a biological machine, and when that machine is gone so are you. You are your brain. Why do people want more than this?

>>722630184

OP here (People are getting confused)

Actually I'm more fearful of reincarnation and blank death. There's no telling the horrors that could await us in the next life.

I believe OP is a faggot and you cant prove me wrong.

>>722629157
That's wrong.
That's not how percentages work.

>>722630235

OP again

Conscientious.

If a thing can perceive reality then you may be perceiving it's reality in the next life.

>>722630184
Fear is meaningless.
I'm scared of heights.
I don't stop being on the 8th floor just because I close my eyes and wish it away.

Death is final.
These chumps should just get over it and do something good in the world, to the best of their abilities, like the rest of the normal folks.

>>722629264
> The percentages are made up of dividing the time we are alive by the time the universe will live.

And that's why your math was so very very wrong.

>>722630495
I agree. And I'm not afraid of heights I'm afraid of falling.

Why cant anyone actually accept that one day they'll be actually dead?

>>722630328
What next life, OP?
Got evidence there is one?

>>722630566
Hubris

>>722629701
Now explain how that equals 50% you dummy

>>722626092
Op is dumb. Or Troll. Or dumb troll. Or reincarnated dumb troll v.235245

>>722630433

Op here

If it when dealing with time.

As long as there is constantly one universe after the other sustaining life then it doesn't matter how many universes die out.

The percentages are relating to living and not living over time.

>>722630566
>>722630595
disagree.

I answer Fear

>>722630573

Here you go:

>>722626092

>>722630566
Selfishness and greed is typically behind the desire to live forever...

>>722626092
Each time you are reincarnated you come back as a lesser life form.
Looks like this is OP's last trip.

>>722629768
I agree with you except of what you said about memory. Memory is something that just exists as long as you physical body (especially your brain) exists. Since we can all agree on the soul being something that is able to exist without a physical shell, memory just geta deleted when you die

>>722630615

I was being hard on reincarnation. If the universe can sustain life for 50% of it's lifespan then you will be alive 50% of the time.

It's most likely much higher.

>>722626092
You're dumber than a kid with Down Syndrome.

>>722630777

Op here.

I agree.

>>722630641
Of course it does because every one of those universes exist for infinity.

Imagine a piece of string that is infinite in length.
The very tip at the beginning is the amount of time anything can live in that universe.

What is the percentage of that out of infinity?
> it's almost zero

You can add as many universes as you like, the answer doesn't change

>>722630807
But it can't sustain life for 50% of its lifespan.
It's lifespan is infinite

>>722626092
>Thinking that an insignificantly small chance equates to zero
>Not thinking that a one-in-a-billion chance happens seven times a day for humanity.

The massive scale of time makes percentage chances redundant. Everything that can happen, will happen.

>>722630904

If there are generally a trillion universes existing at any given time only one of those universes needs to sustain life for you to reincarnate into it.

Why would the time frame be so small when universes could pop into existence every second.

>>722631211
You are fucking retarded.
As a percentage that is irrelevant.

I'm not convinced you grasp the concept of what a percentage is actually representative of

>>722630777
There's no such thing as the soul.
Got any evidence to indicate it exists?

>>722631211
welp. had my daily dose of retardation. Thanks man; now I can go out into the world with a renewed sense of purpose. I mean, if there are idiots like you running around, I can do anything I set my mind to.

>>722631461
People who already believe it don't require evidence. That's why they can't ever provide any.

>>722631211
And what transmits your memories and imaginary 'soul' to these other universes?

Something in the brain?
So folks who get shot in the head don't get a chance to be... 'transmitted'?

Your argument makes no sense...

>>722626092
the chances of me being alive right now are 100%, because I am alive
the probabilities you're giving are for me (or anyone else) being alive at any given point in time, which you're then applying them to a certainty (i.e. I am alive) at a specific point in time, and then you're using that to say how unlikely it is that I'm alive right now, which is ridiculous (as the probability is clearly 100%)

btw how does reincarnation account for increasing human population? If the being one is reincarnated as is dependent on behaviour in past life (as in Buddhism), then how come so many people have led good lives following the Industrial Revolution, leading to a population of 7billion+?

Also, Christian belief is that the Earth won't exist in its current state after the second coming of Jesus, and existence in Heaven or Hell is not the same as existing on Earth, so the sample space would not be eternity.

Furthermore, where do you live where life expectancy is 100 years?

bit of a mess, better than most of this shit on this board though

>>722631378

In a day there is a 4.16% chance it will be 5pm.

Change day to universe and 5pm to your existence and you'll get where I'm coming from.

>>722631211
> universes existing at any given time
You don't understand time, infinity nor math.
I can see why religion appeals to you

>>722631664
...and cuz the idea has a few fans that automatically means it's true?

Is that how reality works?

File: 1d5dEkB.jpg (39KB, 720x445px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 720x445px

>>722626092
>>The earth will be 20 billion years old when it dies.
It's 4.6 billion years old now, and liquid water on Earth has been possible since the end of the Hadean, 4 billion years ago.
But in a billion years, the sun will be so much brighter that the Earth will be too hot to have liquid water on the surface.
We've used up 80% of Earth's time frame where life is possible.
The rest of your bullshit is also wrong, but I assume you've already been told that.

>>722631682

There is no soul or transmitting of any kind required.

If a universe can form your conscious once, another will do it again.

>>722631765
Magic and religion... don't forget the magic.
That makes religion work... like a 9V battery in a vibrator.
Without magic, religions are just bad ideas that can't work.

>>722631794
>is that how reality works
For most people, yes. It's natural for humans to associate popularity with validity.

>>722631746
Except a Day is finite, it has a set time that it ends.
You can divide one second by 24 hours and express it as a percentage.

You cannot do that for a universe with dividing by infinity which will always give you a percentage of near zero

This is fucking basic maths for fucks sake

>>722631909
Why would that other universe create another you?
Why assume it would have the same rules, and assume the same structures and forms will arise?

>>722629768
When you get rid of an old computer without backing up your files and then you buy a new computer, you dont get your old files back. and even if you downloaded the same files from the internet, the new computer wont associate it with files you previously had and wont know the difference between any other file

>>722632034
Because retard

>>722631933
So if 1000 people pray real hard, Elvis will rise from the grave and do jazz hands?

Belief makes the impossible real, does it?

So why do folks die in accidents?
Don't they believe hard enough?

File: singularity.jpg (247KB, 900x578px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 900x578px

>>722631909
>If a universe can form your conscious once, another will do it again.
Aside from your really poor grasp of both the size and scale of the universe, AND how bad you are at math, here's another reason you're wrong:
Identical twins.
If you have an identical twin, it STILL ISN'T YOU.
"You" don't get control of their actions, nor do you share their memories.

>>722632034

It doesn't need the same rules or anything it like. It wont be an exact copy of you

It just needs the ability for consciousness.

>>722632241

You are somewhat correct. But when I talk about 'you' the only thing I mean is your particular consciousness. Nothing else.

>>722630676
That's not evidence. That's writing fantasy about numbers.

The odds of you existing now are 100%. Proof is you existing.

>>722626092
Actually my "chance" of being alive right now is 100% because I am alive. Your math is meaningless.

>>722628082
We are the conscious observers of the animals. Also, they have some for of consciousness as well. They express emotions and can have memories.

>>722632176
Ask them. I was just explaining that anyone who isn't a skeptic tends to believe in things simply because other people believe them too. I'm definitely not one of those people.

>>722632428
How is it your consciousness if nobody has any memory or knowledge of this happening?

How is that any different than the difference between you and me right now.

That's not reincarnation, that's just a different person.

>>722632270
The same brain patterns requires the same brain.
That means the same chemistry and the same shape of tissue.
That means the same physics.
That means that universe has to HAVE THE SAME RULES AS OURS.
Capiche?

Do you imagine a slug's brain can hold the same info and patterns in the same way as a human brain?

>>722632577
> only sceptics have an opinion that differs from the majority.

This thread has become increasingly retarded the longer it's gone on.

I'm having trouble believing this isn't a very good elaborate troll thread.

>>722632758
Godders often appear to be trolling because their responses are so lame, that normal humans mistake them for jokes.

>>722632592

You wont have any memory or knowledge of your past life. The only thing related to this life and next if your ability to personally perceive it.

I wont experience you now or in the next but you will.

It is the same person.It's just you waking up one day without any memories of the past.

>>722632596

That's clearly not the case as twins do not share the same consciousness.

>>722631211
> no anon, anything divided by infinity is essentially zero.
>what if there were 2 infinities

This shit is golden

>>722632959
That's a different person.
That's no different than whatever baby just got born while I typed this post

>>722633140

Different genes, different name whatever.

But one day you will wake up as that different son of a bitch.

>>722633007
but that is due to enviromental factors they could possibly share the same consciousness if they experiance the exact same stuff

>>722633288
With no memory or knowledge of existing before, and absolutely nothing to connect the experiences of the two lives.

How is that any difference than being a completely different/new person, and how exactly has the previous life not dead and gone forever?

>>722633007
Which part?
I agree... reincarnation is bullshit.

>>722633454

The previous life IS dead and gone forever.

The difference is in conscience.

One day:

I will wake up as baby A
You will wake up as baby B

you will be a completely different/new person. Only your conscience will be the same.

>>722633288
>Different.
>Same.
Pick one?

>>722633731
How is it the same >consciousness?
Conscience is your moral/ethical thought process

How is it the same when you just said there is nothing connecting them?
You've just renamed biological life and death to make yourself feel better without realising that there's difference between the 2

>>722633731
How?
What makes you 'you', are your memories.
Without those, in a different brain, it is definitely not 'you'.

Thus reincarnation is bullshit.

You do know every human brain has different patterns and connections, right?
One brain cannot be another by holding what it held.
They all have different connections.

But it's all a theory...

>>722633952

I don't mean consciousness in that sense. I mean it in your ability to perceive reality.

>>722633731
So when my pet dies, I then buy a newbie baby one, I can make the claim it is indeed the same animal?

It follows the same rules of reincarnation your giving.
It's the exact same animal reincarnated, just completely different in every possible way with nothing linking the 2

>>722634117
Reincarnation is simply a failed and faulty hypothesis... nothing more.

>>722634042

If you awake from a coma with no memory whatsoever it is still your mind experiencing it. Same goes with reincarnation.

>>722634188
Every human has that ability.

You might as well say there is and only was/will be 1 person, it just lives in every body at all times.

>>722627509
inanimate objects are not aware of their existence....

>>722634188
You mean you want to close your eyes when you die and open them as a newborn?

Doesn't happen.
Consciousness dies with your brain as it rots.

Get over your fear...

>>722634238

If has the same mind (minus the memories) then technically yes.

>>722634296
It's also a completely different person.
This is why many cases of amnesia in married couple lead to divorce.

It is not the same person anymore

>>722634402
But it obviously doesn't have the same mind.
The dead ones mind got burnt or buried inside it's skull.

>>722634342

Only you have your particular mind. That mind will wake up again after you die.

>>722634296
You do realise that can't happen because the brain isn't fully formed at birth and isn't complete until the infant is 6months old, right?

Does you mind hang around in space until the brain is developed enough to be uploaded to it?

>>722634538

Your mind dies with the body but it can be reformed later on. Just as it did this time.

>>722634503
How?
By what mechanism does it transfer?

>>722634503
That mind developed as a result of my experiences.
A newborn doesn't have those experiences.

You have become so convicted I think you've confused yourself to be honest.

If you cannot explain how or why it's not a completely different person, then by default you have to believe that it is.

You keep saying it's the same mind but you can't offer any explanation of what that actually means or how it is relevant

>>722634620
You got evidence you've lived a life before you were born?
Great.
We can check this...

>>722634633

There is no transfer.

Your mind formed in a physical life form.

You die

Your mind again forms in another life form.

Law of the universe:

If it happened once it will be repeated.

>>722634796
That's not what that law means.
Please stop using science you obviously can not understand

>>722634701

The only with similar between the two organisms will it's you experiencing being them.

Other than that there is nothing the same. If you want to call that a completely different person then that's up to you.

>>722626092
If something is more likely, that doesn't mean it's true. It is very likely, that the Riemann Hypothesis is true, but we don't have a proof yet

>>722634117
>just a theory
Theorys have reasons to be believed until disproved.
Don't confuse them with hypothesis, which is literally just a wild guess.

>>722634796
Every brain is different and has a completely different set of neural pathways.
One brain simply cannot store the contents of another... the circuitry isn't there. Similar on the large scale but not the same at the neuron level.
No new brain can be 'you' ever again.

Get over your infantile fear of not being alive... give up this magical garbage, OP.

Even you can't make your bullshit unsupportable story straight...

>>722626092
Cool topic!
Though, some fundamental flaws in your thinking.

Reincarnation in a physical sense is logical: "you" as a being, are composed of "atoms", physical elements. Upon destruction of "your" body, the ingredients which comprise you are returned to the source from which they came (the Earth, in a physical sense). Now, atoms don't really die; and even if they did, their fundamental essence would be returned to its source... Now, because this is a closed system, "you", being a composition of elements, have been around since the beginning of time, and will exist until the end of time.

>>722634979
That is the only defining difference between identical twins, and you already agreed they were not the same person.

You're talking about a soul or some magical connection, which is why you consistently have been unable or u willing to explain What your concept of this mind actually is and how each are connected in any relevant way to be defined as reincarnation.

>>722635085
There's no point in arguing. The really sad thing is that he probably thinks you're the one in denial.

>>722626092
>You die, you go to heaven or hell for eternety.
>The chance of you being alive right now is 1/infinity. 0.000000000001^infinity %
Pick a rational number, any rational number between 0 and 1.
Say you picked 1/2. Since there are infinite rational numbers between 0 and 1, the chance of 1/2 occurring is zero. Yet 1/2 was picked
:^)

>>722635085

I fear reincarnation more then blank death. God knows what the next life will have in store for me.

>>722635181

I've explained multiple times, you are just not getting it..

>>722632085
but you could in theory still completely recreate all files and links between them and if you somehow managed to do that, you'd have the same system again

it just has to be possible and when you add to that an infinite amount of time, more likely than not it will happen

>>722635125
Not accurate.
Atoms are made in stars.
Not every atom around today is from the early stages of the BigBang.

Most in you were made in a local supernovae about 7billion-ish years ago by the star system that was here before our solar system and sun...

Plus atoms get compressed into other atoms via fusion or ripped into energy by blackholes all the time.

>>722634979
Wait...
Are you saying that all the previous me's are in my head experiencing what I do, but I can't perceive they are there?
But when I die I will be like they were in the next me's head, but he won't k ow I'm there?

File: 690FED1B-EE7F-4EEA-A42A-B2D9F2DDD4AA-11988-0000139E10044D37_tmp.jpg (150KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1280x720px

>>722635413

>>722635413
you obviously have no connection to a former self in your current state

>>722635342
You haven't explained it at all.
You've just said it's the same mind, you haven't explained what that is not in what we is it the same.

>>722635342
...cuz your bullshit story only makes sense to you and you can't explain how it works, which should tell you something.

>>722635402
You're thinking of elements.
Atoms are what elements are made of

>>722635342
You didn't explain anyting. What makes that other person ("incarnation") "you"? You experience the world around just as I do, yet we're not the same person. Unless you believe that. I'd get that. Wouldn't believe it, but I'd understand your logic.
Other Anon, btw. I just read your conversation, jumping in now. Just saying to avoid confusion.

>>722635125
>>722626092
cont:
Now, in a non-physical sense of "soul" or even "mind" or "conscience" the idea of reincarnation is more challenging...
I will kind of start off by saying that your thoughts and soul are eternal (just think of the butterfly effect). Who we are and what we do echo through eternity (at least for the foreseeable future of humanity, and all the strings to which it is connected).

Reincarnating as a frog or bug for example may be the result of your atoms being consumed by these animals, and thus "you" (atoms) has now taken the form of a frog or bug... HOWEVER, this "conscience" or "mind" that you possess now as a human would not transfer to the creature. Just like when a computer is shut down, the applications shut down. The mind/conscience is the application, and our body is the device running them.

Soul is a tougher concept to tackle, but at my current understanding, it is the essence of "who we are". In life, we have the opportunity to change who we are; at the moment of death, the ability to change is no longer available. What follows the moment of death is eternity.
If you have a soul which lived life in God's will (even the Tao has the concept of "The Way" which is similar to God's Will), then you spend eternity in Heaven. If you lived separated from God, you spend eternity in Hell.

(<=>-)1=0=1<ψ ITS DIMENSIONAL dose not concern you.

>>722635402
>Atoms are made in stars
Anon, please stop posting and grab a book

>>722635125
>>722635402
Let alone the fact that the atoms in your body get completely replaced multiple times(?) in your lifetime. I don't know if it's likey any of the atoms that make up "you" that were present at your birth are left.

File: wha.jpg (32KB, 464x266px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 464x266px

what

>>722635413
Sounds like "Being John Malkovich"?

File: 1487018299806.png (353KB, 631x542px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 631x542px

>>722626092
>The earth will be 20 billion years old when it dies.
Are you from the future?

>>722635446
>>722635495
I don't believe that's in anyway true and I agree there is no connection to a previous self.

It's starting to sound like that's what this retatd is trying to get at.

>>722635413
/b/ is actually your previous (You)s all shitposting in sync

File: p.png (11KB, 873x580px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 873x580px

>>722626092

>>722635533
Explain.
Thanks in advance.

>This will be good... I sense some severe keks are heading for us, boys! Brace yourself...

>>722635402
>Not every atom around today is from the early stages of the BigBang
Energy is neither created nor destroyed, only changing form.

Everything in existence today existed since the beginning.

>>722626092

You should do statistics for the Trump administration....

>>722635669
Holy shit. We are actually THE hacker known as 4chan.

>>722626092

So there's half a million dead people's souls in my ballsack right now waiting to be squirted into existence?

The word logic and anything religious should never be used in the same sentence. NEVER. It's incredible that in 2017 there are still people who believe in magic and a magical sky daddy.

>>722635500
>>722635536

It's your stream of thought. only it will be reset after you die.

>>722635746
Anyone that doesn't need to have it explained to them just got all the keks they needed from your post.

>>722626457

Recycles, recycles...but u was born with zero memory...

>>722627907
beat me to it

>>722635582
Good point.
Through this process though, "we" in an atomic sense consume and are consumed by the world around us

>>722635579
Really?
Are you sure?

>kek
>stellar fusion processes
>supernovae generation of metals
>Aluminum condensation after supernovae

>>722635746
Do you know why the elements on the periodic table each have a different atomic weight?

Think about that and realise how fucking stupid you just were

>>722635765
Not the atoms... only the energy.

Books... you have to open them to get the full effect.

>>722635860
Sounds exactly the same as a new person if it has been reset

>>722627718
What makes our consciousness so special? Sounds religion like to me.

>>722635928
>Atoms
>Elements

You picked ONE?

Unitarianism
You = Me = We = Rocks = Planet = Dark Matter .....
Everything is one.
Chances of you existing 100%.
My bullshit is right according to OPs 'logic'.

>>722635928
>Protons.

...keks flow as anon looks up the word in his homeschool library of one book, beginning with B.

>>722635904
You really don't know, what you are talking about?

The big bang made every atom in existence today. Back then they were only simple atoms like b and h. Then suns started to fusion them to heavier atoms. You may want to look up the definition of fusion: the fusion of two atom nuclei.
How can a sun make new atoms, if they only fuse two atoms. Even atom splitting only brings back the previous fused atoms.

>>722635987
Energy is the fundamental building blocks of the physical world. How could it be otherwise?

Don't be silly telling me to open a book

Hahahaha. No.

>>722635860
But, in this reset analogy, "you" (your mind, what makes you "you", etc.) is stored in the temporary memory storage, while the HDD or whatever permanent one you want would be the universe (or at least the matter and energy you are made of).
Meaning the next bootup would create a different person. It's still a person, but it's not you. You were lost during the reset. The same way you have to create new sessions of everything during a restart.

At least that's how it would seem to me. For the record, I would consider a quantum teleported human to be a completely new, different person too. Since, you know, the last one was destroyed with the body during the scanning process.

>>722636099
So you're a rock made out of dark matter?

Good luck getting a gf in that state, anon.

>>722627718
>It would explain why the Earth's population is growing
Also because people are reproducing sexually.
On a long enough timeline, if every 2 persons creates 5 persons, and only 1 of the 5 die, then 2 persons created 4 persons, which as x-->infinity, then you have population growth... And the ARABS have about 18 per 2

>>722636099
>Unitarianism
Isn't that simply a christian group not believing in the trinity?

>>722626092

This is riddled with logical fallacy..

I have a 5% chance of dying in a car accident...

And I have a 75% chance of meeting a unicorn in my life.

The one I totally made up is a higher chance, therefore car accident fatalities are impossible and I am bound to meet a unicorn.

>>722636484
Take a picture when it happens.

>>722636233
I'm pretty certain you'll enjoy explaining where Helium3 and Iron come from.

Thanks in advance for the keks....

File: [email protected] (16KB, 137x384px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 137x384px

>>722636484
>5%

seemed high, I read my source wrong. its 0.001%

Sorry everybody.

File: 200_s (1).gif (45KB, 306x200px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 306x200px

>>722626092
>But sir, the chances of you being alive at this very moment are...
Other than that figure not actually representing the real chance of your life at this very moment (you would need to calculate all of the conditions of each planet and how prior history of events might lead up to you being created). The change (which is also probably fairly small) is still irrelevant. You can ask "what is the chance of our earth existing the way it is right now?" And get an equally tiny % chance, but that doesn't mean that the planet will reincarnate when it is obliterated by the sun...

Crazy shit happen in the universe and the pure coincidence of things happening the way they did can be mind-boggling to some people, but this is just the way things turned out for us. If it had been any other way (which was extremely plausible) we wouldn't even exist to consider not existing was the most likely outcome. Every so often someone has to win the lottery, but it doesn't mean they will come back to life when they die.

File: 295px-Spacetime_dimensionality.svg.png (28KB, 295x295px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 295x295px

...WTF ( ...you stupid FAGGOT have clearly never heard of the :

anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle anthropic principle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

File: fusion2.gif (7KB, 708x455px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 708x455px

>>722636633
Just for you anon. But now I want to ask you a question too: show me the process where new atoms are built, that never existed before in another atom form

File: 1476042928802.jpg (331KB, 1470x1116px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1470x1116px

>>722626092

>Proof

>much more likely scenario

Proof never includes "much more likely". Proof is "this IS what happens/will happen/has happened". Fuck off, nigger.

>>722636852
He doesn't get it, and he is too smug and pretentious to admit it when he finally does

>>>722635904
>You really don't know, what you are talking about?
>
>How can a sun make new atoms, if they only fuse two atoms. Even atom splitting only brings back the previous fused atoms.

Really?
It only splits along some "fault line" at the nucleus, right anon?

Are you suggesting Feinman was wrong and his diagrams are useless?

>>722636852
Same old story friend.

You know shit, and someone else can't begin to imagine the shit you know, and has done zero research, and because they can't imagine it, its not real.

Sadder, the anon you're arguing with is probably a smart guy.

There is no one more aggressively ignorant than an uneducated intelligent person.

>>722637085
I never pretended that, my wording for splitting is off, I have to admit. It sounds like the two previous atoms get recreated. I rather ment, splitting in general only makes the previous atom. But the rest still stands.

>>722637338
BTW how do you imagine CERN is making ANTI-atoms.

Thanks in advance, out-of-your-depth anon?

Maybe if you weren't illiterate, pompous and ignorant I wouldnt have had to destroy you, anon.

>>722636852
>show me the process where new atoms are built
You're aware that humanity has reached the point where even we can create new atoms from subatomic particles, right?

>>722637547
>pompous
>thanks in advance for his douchness
>destroy you

The cringe us real

>>722637702
The butthurt is real.

>>722637563
I am aware, wasn't it some anti atom? Theoretically we could even completely destroy an hydrogen atom.

But anon said, it happens in suns every second.

>>722637547
>>722637942

I hate people not following a comment chain. Anon said, it happens in suns and that offended me

File: Katelyn-Nichole-Davis-260x350.jpg (20KB, 260x350px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 260x350px

The hell do atoms have to do with reincarnation

File: jesuslovesyou.jpg (29KB, 521x509px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 521x509px

>>722626092
Heaven and Hell coexist here on Earth actually. Tell me if someone was not afraid to die, or suffer for eternity, or even stop existing all together--completely wanting to experience and be absorbed into whatever God gives him to experience--would he care about a damn Heaven or Hell?

You know how dreams seem right when you're in them? It's because you come up with all sorts of funny conclusions to believe the nonsense you're experiencing is real. That's what's happening to you right now, delayed-choice-quantum-eraser style.

It's okay if you want to keep dreaming, anon. It's kinda hard to do inception and communicate with you, but just know we'll be waiting for you when you wake up so don't fear anything and have a nice dream!

>>722637868
I'm the thhhe anon you replied to so that makes no sense.

You're being a dick anon.
If you want to have a discussion with him, he appears happy to do so.
You don't need to act like a total faggot about it though

>>722637702
...and now in English?

>>722638122
> Not the anon you replied to

Apologies in retrospect

>>722638186
> Acts the genius
> misspelled 2 letter word confuses him

>>722638100
The OP was suggesting we get reincarnated in other universes.

It kinda grew from there when I stated some facts and someone who hadn't studied astrophysics decided to try to punch above their weight with real humans...

>>722638346
>can't spell two-letter word
>gets angry

We understand your pain.

>>722626092
You weren't actually serious were you OP? Right? Nobody could be this retarded

We all die, no recycled souls, we're barely even sentient because it's a simulation.

>>722638510
Yes yes anon.
Every ones angry and you are epic troll

Nobody cares and you're actually embarrassing yourself, but regardless you will believe you have achieved some kind of victory in a battle you were the only one fighting.

This conversation can serve no purpose anymore

>>722637547
Rather interesting to talk about would be, why is there matter? It shouldn't be. The baryon asymmetry is always fun to discuss, because we don't know for a certain

>>722636901
My thoughts.

That being said, my beliefs or considerations for modes of existence shouldn't be stratified into three general boxes of generalized thought about existence. That's also stupid.

>>722635392
The same system. A similar system. Not the identical system, never the identical system.

If I die today, and by mere chance someone "recreates" every sufficient aspect of my mind/brain/self within another system (whatever should it be), I won't be the me that died today- it won't be the me that died today. It will be something that remembers "itself" being in the process of dying, and then suddenly being wherever it can perceive itself to be at that moment in time.

We will never be the same entity, if we take it down most of the functionalist flavors. I'm not even the same entity I was a mere second ago.

You're dumb. Stop posting meme logic just to get a reaction. Stop existing and see for yourself.

>>722638676
Simulation makes more sense than any religion or any reincarnation bullshit.

Sadly, I suspect "Game Over" means we get fed to Neo as he sleeps.

>>722638729
Bye.

>>722638635
why does the concept of incarnation seem so "hippy spiritual garabage to everyone"
i mean it makes perfect sense
think about it
when we think of death we think of the little picture , here, on earth
but think about it in the grand scheme of things
the building blocks of our body our tiniest of atoms that make us our very nature of consienceness does not disappear when we die its an energy that came from this universe which as long as the universe exists will travel and in the very sense of the word may be recycled

>>722638122
>You're being a dick anon.
Yeah. Problem? You're on /b/, faggot. Besides, I'm not the one having a discussion with him, and it's not like saying "haha you're cringe" is not being a dick.
So, in conclusion, fuck you, stop whining.

>>722638863
Feinman suggested anti-matter is simply normal matter travelling backwards through time.

Maybe the asymmetry tells us something about the END of the universe we haven't realised yet?

>>722638676
If everything we can know is an illusion, then we cannot know a more true reality to make reference towards. Therefore, you do not know/can not know what "real sentience" is, to which then you can only display the illusion of sentience. What you allegedly possess right now. Since you can never be "truly sentient", whatever that may be, then the only form of sentence that is ever real, for you and I and anyone else observing within whatever one would take this to be, is the illusion of sentience.

Therefore, the illusion is the only reality you can meaningfully have a care towards. There is no anti-illusion for us to experience. You're sentient. This is all that can be said of you, because there does not exist in this system, a "real sentience". Only the sentience I keep referring towards. Because, you do not have the words, or the concepts, or the mere ability, to describe "real-sentience". And neither do I.

Nothing you do is trivial with respect to the total possible things you can do. You will never not be a part of the simulation. So, why concern yourself with the meta? This is allegedly a simulation.

>>722639035
simulation is as close to being religious theory than anything else
simulation - means someones running it
someones running means its a higher being with higher intelligence
does that not seem familiar?
god? = the higher being
creating life? = simulation?

....watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwk1DogcPmU&t=0s

>>722639100
Oh I don't mean your general Idea of reincarnation, just your reasoning for the chance of it being correct are complete bullshit

File: I u c.png (173KB, 452x422px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 452x422px

>>722626092
>proof

>>722639437

Everyone we know is experiencing this 'illusion of sentience'. This is what people refer to when talking about it. No one ever suggested it was more than that,

>>722639100
Universe began.
If reincarnation is true, then we began too.
So it's not cyclic.... it had a start and has an end.
Now the problem with reincarnation is to explain where these 'consciousnesses' came from and where they'll ultimately go to.

Reincarnation doesn't work with a single finite universe.

Suddenly, more and better fantasies are required to make it work.

Its the old "turtles all the way down" problem again...

>>722639552
I was going to watch that, but WTF has that got to do with this thread?

>>722639501
Someone... as in same "magic beings" that write your XBox games?

Why not just humans?

>>722639826

>>722638676
>we're barely even sentient
That statement implies that there is something more knowable than the "illusion of sentience". Which, following the earlier premises, would be ironic.

>>722639826
OMFG this. So much this.
We're machines that think we're special or magic 'n' shit. We're not.

>>722639997
I don't remember being a granite boulder. I think being a collection of machines is special enough.

>>722639831
what makes you think the universe is finite
what makes you think this is not like the 5th or the 100th or the 1000th time our universe just began from the big bang, expanded, then radiated and contracted back to go through another big bang what if the whole universe eternally recycles, theres even a scientific theory for this i forgot what it was called

>>722640114
Yeah, but most people think we have this weird intangible quality that makes us not "just machines". Soul, sentience, etc. OP here seems to think that one quality somehow carries over multiple lifetimes, and fails to put it into words. Not surprising really, it's and illusion based on another illusion.
>I don't remember being a granite boulder.
I don't even know what you mean by that. It has the same ring of "we're not monkeys" though.

I think therefore I am.
You think noticeably differently to me therefore you are.
That means there are at least two of us in this universe... meaning I can postulate there are many others.

Sentience is a curse.
Better to be an unknowing rock.

This doesn't make sense because what atheism defines as "you" is different to what Buddhism defines as "you". It's goalpost moving or making one team's net a lot smaller.

>>722640400
The energy that it was created from was finite.

The portion of that energy tied up in space itself, space-time, thus size, is likewise likely to be finite too.

QED

>>722640400

That wouldn't change my theory. All there has to be is a possibility for life to sustain itself for over half of all time.

why did u make this thread OP
u knew it would just be infested with fedora faggots

>>722640400
If you mean infinite wrt age, I can't disagree with you.

We have no evidence either way.

>>722640494
Well, we really aren't monkeys, if we're going to use the term "monkeys". We're "great apes". Getting more "specific", we're "Humans". Though, yes, the whole soul thing is something else.

And I mean, my whole mentioning of the not being a granite boulder was an attempt to portray the notion that, while not having "a soul", I am still more magnitudes complex/contrived/energetic/functionally capable than a granite boulder. Maybe, at the most basic level, me and the boulder are one in the same. It's just that the boulder has yet to "get up" and compete against me, in the same way that I compete against other "Humans". And, "monkeys". And "plants".

>>722626092
Wait what?

Scientists say the Earth will be supernova in <100,000 years. The Earth won't be 20bn years old when it dies.

>>722640719
Got any evidence it has or can?

The heat-death of the universe is not going to be good for living things as stars grow old and die and the cold reigns.

>>722640893
Technically we are monkeys

At least that's what my bio prof said when we were talking about the hominid phylogenetic tree

>time is infinite
>'you' are a certain arrangement of energy and matter concentrated in your brain
>since time is infinite, matter and energy will eventually be rearranged into the arrangement it is now

only problem is you wont have memory, so basically starting afresh

I think atheists lean more towards reincarnation. Nothing in the universe is wasted

>>722640986
Bollocks.
Who says?

We have billions of years before the sun expands to a red giant, anon.

>>722641036
What's so special about consciousness that the universe needs to recycle it?

All that wood. Interesting plant cells.
Does the universe reincarnate wood?

All those bacteria? Intricate.
Does the universe reincarnate those?

All those flies? Magnificent flying creatures with little brains.
Does the universe reincarnate those?

No.
So what makes us special?
Vanity?

>>722641093
8 billion is far from 20 though.
OP couldn't get that number correct, made up percentages that are wrong and doesn't understand infinity.

>>722640893
Yeah, my confusion came from the fact that I never equated not having a soul to being a boulder. I specifically said we're machines, but nothing special. As in, nothing special among machines. As opposed to granite boulders, I guess. LOL.

>>722626092
I was hitler once i remeber that little nigger steiner ruined my whole fucking campaign

>>722638879

You either think you're a special snowflake or you are a diagnosed retard. Probably both.

>>722641448

So after wood has fulfilled its niche on the earth it just disappears out of existence?

Or does it eventually return to the earth and become more wood?

>>722641013
Well, may I ask why we're technically monkeys?

>>722641448
Us make the ability to form our environment and the philospohing about death special.

>>722641036
Here comes another rather interesting theory. There is already a second (You) in the universe, that looks like you, behaves like you and has the same memory. The theory is googolplex universe and states, since the universe is big enough, if you travel far enough (ignore speed limits) you will find a planet, just like ours simply by math.

>>722641618
Neither. Also, not a boulder.

Yet.

>>722641572
No worries.

>>722641945

>if you travel far enough (ignore speed limits) you will find a planet, just like ours simply by math.

ok... and how did you arrive at this conclusion?

>>722642392
By misunderstanding a clickbait article on Facebook posted by a group that misunderstood a scientific theory they heard about

>>722642392
Some mathematician and informatics researcher made that assumption.
It is based on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincar%C3%A9_recurrence_theorem

So since there being a second you is not 0, there is the chance for that to happen.
Now either the universe is finitie or infinite.
Infinite:
everything that could happen, happens simply by the size of the universe.
Finite:
Then you have to look into possible other paralel universes.

>>722642883
Fuck off with your passive agressive ad hominem shit. Search your next trap thread for this shit.

>>722643320
Someone making fun of you doesn't mean they like traps anon.

It's jumping to assumptions based on assumed evidence is why I insulted you to begin with.