Below is my take of a chapter of an evil book written by and for Brigands:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anfaal = war plunders
****************
Allah: they ask you about anfaal tell them :
"Anfaal belong to allah, mamad, relatives of mamad, etc ... If you believe in allah, whenever or wherever his name is mentioned you get shit scared (rough translation). Same allah that is Bakhshandeh va mehrabaan ???

Whenever or wherever you hear his name bend down and stick your ass up in the air and praise his idols in the arabian desert. Chapter 41 mentions, at the day that you were faced with enemies and destroyed them 20% of the plunder, which includes women and children of the enemies belong to allah. This you could only achieve because allah came to your dreams the night before the battle and DECEIVED YOU IN THINKING THAT THEIR LEGIONS WERE INSIGNIFICANT comapred to the RAPIST ARMY OF ALLAH, othewise you would be scared like mangy dogs and would have run away from the battlefield. (khodaye bakshandeye mehrabaan is LYING AGAIN).

The only reason you became victorious in your RAPE battle was due to allah. For the same reason your enemies were defeated....it goes on and then finally it orders:
"Az allah va mamad eta-at koneed"

The 20 percent that allah has been collecting from all arabs, and OLAAGHS in Iran, Hamaals in indonesia, and IDIOTS in africa would be able to feed the whole population of palestine, Olaagh land (iran) for two thousand centuries,

Why is it that this allah that is BAKHSHANDE VA MEHRABAAN not distributing the wealth amongs muslims which are probably the most miserable and poverty stricken people on earth ???

If allah doesn't do it, why don't his representatives on earth such as saudis, OLAAGH HERDERS IN olaagh land (iran), pakistani army, or Emarati fat sheykhs perform this?

The BOOK OF RAPE AND PLUNDER had told the idiots (muslims) to donate 20% percent after killing and raping your fellow human beings and they have been making these donations but where is all the money?

Akounds have been raping Iranians (i am not speaking of OLAAGHS) but real iranians, throught their own oil and where is the 20 percent portion of that?

Now is your allah (addressing muslims) according to his book a SON OF A BITCHING BRIGAND OF PLUNDERING SPIRIT or is he al-rahmaan-ol-raheem...

Don't give up your day time job Keyvan jaan ;)

sneers hurt but reality bites.

If we only had the courage (balls) to read a couple of books....only if.

I again direct you to The Anfaal Chapter of Ghoraan. Read it, think about it and see what this cancer is all about.

One must wonder, 14 centuries and only a handful of middle easterns have really had the insight not to accept things blind folded.

regarding my day job:
I actually recently got a promotion and am pulling 10 hour days. I guess that is a blessing in disguise for some people because i don't have nowhere enough time to research more into this crap.

Read, understand and analyze and you arrive at exactly the same place I am.
Let me tell, none of you will turn into stone...none of you will burn in hell...nothing will happen.

and the pending question is:

How is ALLAH giving and merciful? someone explain this to me please with valid examples.

regarding my day job:
I actually recently got a promotion and am pulling 10 hour days. I guess that is a blessing in disguise for some people because i don't have nowhere enough time to research more into this crap.


Congrats on the promo and ditto to the second part. ;)


Read, understand and analyze and you arrive at exactly the same place I am.


Keyvan jaan, I can assure you that I have read, understood and analyzed extensively and I am nowhere near the same place you're at. :dunno:

From what I have read and understood thus far, no one will turn into stone - I agree on that. But as far as "hell" goes, the concept is not unique to Islam and has been echoed for millenia in every corner of the world from Norse mythology to the aboriginal spirit world, to the Egyptians and their underworld, and even described from a different perspective as the concept of universal Karma in Eastern phlosophy.

One thing that you and I may differ in is the fact that you read the Quran and dismiss it as the ultimate truth. I read the Quran and appreciate it as a perspective (of many) in the evolution of man and its understanding of the -universe - a snapshot in time if you will, of a certain group in a certain place at a certain time and not the ultimate truth by any means.

So my question to you is... if matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed (only converted to one another according to Einstein,s famous E=mc^2), and considering that the electrical impulses (i.e. energy patterns) that constitute your thoughs and memories are not converted to matter when you die, does your essence, soul, energy (whatever you want to call it from whichever philosohpical or scientific perspective you like) not continue to exist in the universe?

This is not a rhetorical question and I really do like to get your educated response on it based on what you have read, understood and analyzed. Even if you want to question the validity of Einstein's energy-mass question, I am willing to listen to it with an open mind, but you do obviously need to provide strng evidence to back-up your argument.

Keyvan jaan, I can assure you that I have read, understood and analyzed extensively and I am nowhere near the same place you're at. :dunno:

From what I have read and understood thus far, no one will turn into stone - I agree on that. But as far as "hell" goes, the concept is not unique to Islam and has been echoed for millenia in every corner of the world from Norse mythology to the aboriginal spirit world, to the Egyptians and their underworld, and even described from a different perspective as the concept of universal Karma in Eastern phlosophy.


I guess we are on different topics here. I am mentioning here that hundreds of millions of people base their whole life on these books WRITTEN BY OTHER HUMAN BEINGS AND NOT SENT FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION BY SUPREME BEINGS. Why would someone who has a mind, conscience and morals of his/her own base their own life principles on theories or as you so rightly put MYTHOLOGIES AND PHILOSOPHIES that have absolutely no morals attached to them and no logic; and most importantly are INHUMANE.

I am saying why and you are giving me a history of the evolution of organized religion.

One thing that you and I may differ in is the fact that you read the Quran and dismiss it as the ultimate truth. I read the Quran and appreciate it as a perspective (of many) in the evolution of man and its understanding of the -universe - a snapshot in time if you will, of a certain group in a certain place at a certain time and not the ultimate truth by any means.


These are important points that I need to clarify for myself.
Let me first ask you: " Do you see the writings in Ghoraan as the ultimate truth?"
if yes then what are your scientific and/or logical and/or moral justifications ?

if no, then do you read it as a historical book just to give you a perspective of some angles of nomadic life in the arabian peninsula 14 centuries ago? If this is the case then i have no issues at all because in my mind every book, however badly written, should at least be read once.

As per the process of evolution, i don't know i might be wrong, but i would think that evolution of a process or of a group is how they go forward with regards to time.

Any action/item/philosophy that makes this process static (the bible, Ghoran and the old testament) are definitely classified as tools for Devolution and not Evolution.

Evolution of spieces with the ice age, bronze age, etc
Evolution of Communications roads, Telegraphy, telecom., wireless
Evolution of society: papacy, spanish inquisition, renaissence, protestanism, present.

i don't see how Ghoraan or the bible can take any active part in the evolution of man, having said that, the actions that they INVOKE in people cause upheavals in society that might direct a group of people one way or the other.

if that is what you mean that Ghoraan indirectly has caused people of Iran to do things or to adapt ways that has helped Iranian society evolve (from a pre ghoran society) into a more progressive or civilized framework then YOU NEED TO DEFINITELY PROVIDE EXAMPLES.

with regards to snapshots, the arab invasion of iran and the introduction of semitic philosophies into the persian culture is a definite BLACK snapshot of our history that seems to have been stuck with us. What i guess people need to do is to look into it more and try to find justifications for Islamic way of life and Islmaic actions that they take everyday of their lives.


So my question to you is... if matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed (only converted to one another according to Einstein,s famous E=mc^2), and considering that the electrical impulses (i.e. energy patterns) that constitute your thoughs and memories are not converted to matter when you die, does your essence, soul, energy (whatever you want to call it from whichever philosohpical or scientific perspective you like) not continue to exist in the universe?

This is not a rhetorical question and I really do like to get your educated response on it based on what you have read, understood and analyzed. Even if you want to question the validity of Einstein's energy-mass question, I am willing to listen to it with an open mind, but you do obviously need to provide strng evidence to back-up your argument.

i wouldn't call myself educated in this subject i am just beginning to scratch the surface.

Your life is the summary of your actions. As per the electrical impulses that you are referring to (if we can summerize them as electrical energy in a small form), then under the same context energy changes forms as in how the stored chemical energy of petroleum products is converted into Mechanical and Electrical energy in a car through a process of combustion.

There are ABSOLUTELY NO SCIENTIFIC evidence for soul and essence of a person per se. However, my take on this is that what is your essence is your actions and what forms and constitutes your action (consciousness) is what you have been acquired since an early age. I don't know what a soul is because i cannot see soul and there are no devices or meters or detectors in the world that can DETECT OR IDENTIFY SOUL OR MEASURE IT.

To believe that soul exists or there is an essence blindly just because its been said through the millennia in my mind is absolutely unacceptable. The whole basis of HUMAN EVOLUTION into a society that has controlled, invented and shaped is NOT TO BELIEVE BLINDLY IN SOUL, ESSENCE, DESTINY AND THE WORLD BEYOND.

Now when you by a PC a user's manual comes with it. When you buy Aslam Ghoraan is your user's manual.

If you seriously go through this book and it makes sense to you as even a snapshot of mankind then i guess either we are reading different books..

Unless, UNLESS instead of reading the ghoraan that was written by a few arabs some centuries ago and was changed up to mid 20 century, you are reading A TAFSEER OF GHORAAN BY alaame this or haaj agha that in which case there are no points at which we can compare because to learn a book you need to READ IT and not to READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT IT.

if you d like we can start from the beginning and read maybe 5 or 6 chapters at a time and have a weekly discussion on how those sections are related to soul, essence or how they are snap shots of history.

i am up for that.

, but you do obviously need to provide strng evidence to back-up your argument.

so do you. LOL

just because in an average joe's language i say this book is a badly written science fiction book AT BEST and you need evidence....

if you or anyone else claims that ghoraan is a slice of history or explains the essence or proves that soul exists or it is sent by god you need to provide extremely solid evidence also, specially since if you look at the general picture people who have followed this and still do are in a certain state and others who don't are in a different state.

and you guys have obviously preferred to be in an environment that the non-followers of ghoraan have created and managed so ....

I guess we are on different topics here. I am mentioning here that hundreds of millions of people base their whole life on these books WRITTEN BY OTHER HUMAN BEINGS AND NOT SENT FROM ANOTHER DIMENSION BY SUPREME BEINGS. Why would someone who has a mind, conscience and morals of his/her own base their own life principles on theories or as you so rightly put MYTHOLOGIES AND PHILOSOPHIES that have absolutely no morals attached to them and no logic; and most importantly are INHUMANE.


I didn't think we were on different topics TBH with you. I do think we are talking about the same topic (i.e. God) from different ends. You are focusing on the details to dismiss the concept. I'm starting from the concept to dismiss the details. Does that make sense? If not, let me carry on by addressing the points you brought up...

Our entire civilization and existence on this planet, in this current form, is based on books, ideas and concepts written down by other human beings. Agreed? The Quran is no different and for the sake of our discussion let's treat it as such (i.e. not sent from another dimension by a supreme being). Fair enough? Drawing moral values from previous writings (or oral traditions in some instances) is therefore not an isolated case for Muslims and in fact a necessity for developing individual moral values along with those derrived from personal life experiences. Now, I'm assuming you are in agreement with this, because a universal moral value would contradict the essence of your argument and support a "supreme" being (and universal truth). Therefore, in YOUR world and MINE, each individual is allowed to develop their own moral values based on all the information that's available to them, correct? In that case, would it not be hypocritical of us to say that some have made the "wrong choice" by picking one set of moral values over another (i.e. there is an ultimate truth and these people have not sided with it)?


I am saying why and you are giving me a history of the evolution of organized religion.


LOL. Come on bro, if there was a two liner answer for all of this, I'm sure both of us would have come across it by now. ;)


These are important points that I need to clarify for myself.
Let me first ask you: " Do you see the writings in Ghoraan as the ultimate truth?"


Of course not. I already answered this. They (the writings in the Quran) are A perspective on the truth as there are many others. The culimination or sum of these perspectives, plus those not yet expressed or realized is the ultimate truth IMO.


if no, then do you read it as a historical book just to give you a perspective of some angles of nomadic life in the arabian peninsula 14 centuries ago? If this is the case then i have no issues at all because in my mind every book, however badly written, should at least be read once.


Not just that. I read it to understand and analyze the progression of thought in the Abrahamic school of thought and overlap certain elements of nomadic life in the Arabian penninsula with those strongly influenced by Greco-Roman philosphies 6 centuries earlier and the ancient Persian school of thought 12 centuries earlier (through Judaism) and also in the centuries that followed (through the many sects that branched off Islam in Iran).


As per the process of evolution, i don't know i might be wrong, but i would think that evolution of a process or of a group is how they go forward with regards to time.


Okay. Fair anough description.


Any action/item/philosophy that makes this process static (the bible, Ghoran and the old testament) are definitely classified as tools for Devolution and not Evolution.


What I don't understand is why you think any of these books make the "process" static? Do each of them not very specifically describe a dynamic process through which the earth came into existence, the animals came into existence and as part of that process, mankind was created? Did they not in fact describe a process that until the time of Darwin, centuries after they were written, was beyond our realm of understanding? Do they also not describe our eventual (and quite inevitable for that matter) fall as a specie? I don't know why you interpreted any of these books to decribe something static when the process they are describing is actually quite dynamic IMHO. Are you sure you are not more than anything interpreting the intepratations? (because if that's case I do understand exactly where you're coming from and agree that the interpretations have made these books, like many other ancient writings, seem quite static and obsolete)


Evolution of spieces with the ice age, bronze age, etc
Evolution of Communications roads, Telegraphy, telecom., wireless
Evolution of society: papacy, spanish inquisition, renaissence, protestanism, present.


Well, actually those who brought us telegraphy, telecom and wirelesss are exactly those who brought us the incorrect interpretations of the 2nd series of these books!!! ;) Not surprising, all of these "technologies" are anti-evolutionary (in a scientific sense) because they remove the need for our specie to "naturally adapt to our environment" (i.e a very key phrase in the definition of evolution).


i don't see how Ghoraan or the bible can take any active part in the evolution of man,


Of course they don't play any active part in the actual process of evolution. All they're trying to do is DESCRIBE the process (granted not in a modern sense, but don't forget the latest one is 13 centuries old!) If we just take that aspect of it as an example objectively and without getting lost in the dogma and misinterpretations, wouldn't you say that describing something that we came to understand centuries later, deserves some credit at least?


having said that, the actions that they INVOKE in people cause upheavals in society that might direct a group of people one way or the other.


Although I do agree with you on this, I don't think it's fair to blame the stupidity of mankind in following specific interpretations of books which explicitly say they should not be interpreted, on the book itslef. Although, I do understand your frustration on that and sometimes share similar sentiments, not just about the Quran, but the entire Abrahamic line of thinking.


if that is what you mean that Ghoraan indirectly has caused people of Iran to do things or to adapt ways that has helped Iranian society evolve (from a pre ghoran society) into a more progressive or civilized framework then YOU NEED TO DEFINITELY PROVIDE EXAMPLES.


I don't want to get off topic here, but as far as I'm concerned the Iranian society has not evolved one bit in the last 2500 years and if anything the overall result has been a huge negative, not a positive. I also don't think the Quran has helped the evolution of any society or mankind in general, in the slightest sense - unfortunately.


with regards to snapshots, the arab invasion of iran and the introduction of semitic philosophies into the persian culture is a definite BLACK snapshot of our history that seems to have been stuck with us. What i guess people need to do is to look into it more and try to find justifications for Islamic way of life and Islmaic actions that they take everyday of their lives.


This is a whole different topic, but I will only say that I have seen extremely progressive interpretations of the Quran, both by Iranians and non-Iranian muslims, which would agree with your point, just as much as I will.


I wouldn't call myself educated in this subject i am just beginning to scratch the surface.
Your life is the summary of your actions. As per the electrical impulses that you are referring to (if we can summerize them as electrical energy in a small form), then under the same context energy changes forms as in how the stored chemical energy of petroleum products is converted into Mechanical and Electrical energy in a car through a process of combustion.


Actually, you're getting matter and energy mixed up. Your body (matter) over time changes into other forms of matter which may or may not store "usable" energy. This has nothing to do with the electro-chemical imulses (energy) that exist in your body already. This energy is simply released when you die and will not be converted to matter (at least not through any mechanism currently known to us).


There are ABSOLUTELY NO SCIENTIFIC evidence for soul and essence of a person per se. However, my take on this is that what is your essence is your actions and what forms and constitutes your action (consciousness) is what you have been acquired since an early age. I don't know what a soul is because i cannot see soul and there are no devices or meters or detectors in the world that can DETECT OR IDENTIFY SOUL OR MEASURE IT.
To believe that soul exists or there is an essence blindly just because its been said through the millennia in my mind is absolutely unacceptable. The whole basis of HUMAN EVOLUTION into a society that has controlled, invented and shaped is NOT TO BELIEVE BLINDLY IN SOUL, ESSENCE, DESTINY AND THE WORLD BEYOND.


What more evidence do you need? You are here sitting and reading this, all this information is being processed through a series of electro-chemical impulses in your body, just like every other piece of information that has been processed and stored in your mind through the same mechanism. There is an energy element associated with your existence. I'm calling this your soul. If you don't want to call it soul and have a better word for it, then tell me what is it? Alternatively, if you know what soul is and it's not what I described, then, I'm also listening. ;)


If you seriously go through this book and it makes sense to you as even a snapshot of mankind then i guess either we are reading different books..
Unless, UNLESS instead of reading the ghoraan that was written by a few arabs some centuries ago and was changed up to mid 20 century, you are reading A TAFSEER OF GHORAAN BY alaame this or haaj agha that in which case there are no points at which we can compare because to learn a book you need to READ IT and not to READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT IT.


As per the Quran itself (or at least what I have read and understood of it, albeit limited), you read it and understand what you will. I will tell you one thing based on what I've seen and understood and that is Tafseer is an absolute no no. It says that it is written in a simple enough language for you to understand it and interpret it as you see fit. If that has brought you to a bad point, then it has obviously failed you and I understand your frustration. I have NEVER read it as words OF (i.e. from) God, but rather words of (i.e. speaking of) God and therfore, do not share the same passion or resulting frustration - thankfully too, cause I totally sympathize with your situation ;)

I didn't think we were on different topics TBH with you. I do think we are talking about the same topic (i.e. God) from different ends. You are focusing on the details to dismiss the concept.

well a large proportion of mankind, including a few millions in IR would disagree with you as not paralleling Ghoraan and other human schema with God or Vojdan or the creator. One is created by mankind (God) to give him a piece of mind the other (Ghoran, mamad, etc. ) to allow some make life miserable for others.


Our entire civilization and existence on this planet, in this current form, is based on books, ideas and concepts written down by other human beings. Agreed?
The Quran is no different and for the sake of our discussion let's treat it as such (i.e. not sent from another dimension by a supreme being).

well when humans begun to record events on stone (Egyptians and Mesopotamians), they were recording events such as what king did what or what natural disaster occured where.

The coming into print (record) of the old testament which became the father of the bible, both of whom gave birth to the prodigal son called ghoraan are not historical books.
Most of events (and I am not talking about segments of these books that lecture and tell you to donate your life to allah) are fake and conjured up cross-sections which serves the unified purpose of the person(people) who compiled them, WHICH IS GAIN FOR A FEW THOUSANDS AT THE EXPENSE OF MILLIONS.
So, No i don't agree with you i cannot treat Ghoraan as a book such as "The origin of species" by Charles Darwin or "Opticks" by Sir Isaac Newton


Drawing moral values from previous writings (or oral traditions in some instances) is therefore not an isolated case for Muslims and in fact a necessity for developing individual moral values along with those derrived from personal life experiences.

I am not disputing WHERE the moral values are drawn from, i am simply saying WHY...that is all, why would you or any other muslims draw their moral values from such sources and EXACTLY WHERE (WHICH CHAPTERS) each of these moral values are based on?
Now, I'm assuming you are in agreement with this, because a universal moral value would contradict the essence of your argument and support a "supreme" being (and universal truth). Therefore, in YOUR world and MINE, each individual is allowed to develop their own moral values based on all the information that's available to them, correct?

Spot on.
Now when these moral values or ways of looking at life percipitates into stepping over other people's rights then I start to question those moral values. (As Luther questioned Catholics and when they set out to destroy him, he destroyed them). Let us not forget i was, UNFORTUNATELY, born a muslim like the rest of you.
I guess the difference here is that some of us blindly accept and a very few would like to dabble into things and see what exactly is being accepted by them.


In that case, would it not be hypocritical of us to say that some have made the "wrong choice" by picking one set of moral values over another (i.e. there is an ultimate truth and these people have not sided with it)?


Choices are there to be made.
Again moral values are not picked. Our way of life is based on what we have learnt primarily in the framework of family and then in society based on personal experiences. How we decide to interpret and decide on what is right or wrong differs from one person to the next.

If i had not spent any years under IR then one might think well maybe my perspective is incomplete but let us not forget that i was raised in that country until 1984 which is five years after the islamic revolution. I was exposed to the exact environmental glitches and short comings as many others did and i made my own interpretations.


What I don't understand is why you think any of these books make the "process" static? Do each of them not very specifically describe a dynamic process through which the earth came into existence, the animals came into existence and as part of that process, mankind was created?

the phenomena you are referring to are stories they are not processes.
These writings also claim that if you go far enough you fall off the edge of the world and the whole universe rotates around our earth
millions of sons of egypt will die...the sea will part for moses to pass..and jesus made a demon leave a girl and go inside a pig ...

These are not specific descriptions any real events. There is a process here for sure. There is a purpose. The purpose is to make a naive, hungry, savage group of people tame under the same banner for purpose of pillage and murder. (and please don't tell me that initially the idea of religion was positive and during later stages people used it to gain personal goods because mamad came into power by raiding caravans which used to back and forth between Mecca and Syria/Lebanon. If these raids (robberies) were not successful there would be no Aslam.

other purposes served: (Examples)

-- Unify them under Torat for the jews to attack neighboring countries when in their traditional land of Kanaan where food and resources have become scarce.
-- Unify semitic savage nomads of the arabian peninsula to ravage east for persian gold and slaves.
-- Unify spanish papists to burn jews and the french papists to burn innocent people as witches so the church can take over their land and belonging therefore granting more power to the pope so it can solidify its religious dictatorship over more people.

Did they not in fact describe a process that until the time of Darwin, centuries after they were written, was beyond our realm of understanding?


No they did not. They were stories as i mentioned above. And they seemed like stories of real bad taste to millions of people THEN such as me NOW otherwise PERSIANS WOULD HAVE EMBRACED IT PEACEFULLY RATHER THAN FIGHTING IT FOR HALF A MILLENIUM.

These stories also seemed very strange and also in bad taste to europeans otherwise people would be wearing TALIBAN MASKS in Sweden and Toronto right now.

So here i absolutely disagree with you.

Do they also not describe our eventual (and quite inevitable for that matter) fall as a specie? I don't know why you interpreted any of these books to decribe something static when the process they are describing is actually quite dynamic IMHO.


I have read the Ghoraan in farsi twice (NO TAFSEER ghoraan itself i mean) and i don't remember any specific place where it gives a scientific explanation on the FALL OF THE SPECIES or any timeline for it. (I assume you are not referring to Gheyaamat, I hope you are not)....

Are you sure you are not more than anything interpreting the intepratations? (because if that's case I do understand exactly where you're coming from and agree that the interpretations have made these books, like many other ancient writings, seem quite static and obsolete)


All you need, all you need is to be able to read in Farsi. Once you read the book and bring under question the authenticity of statements and the wild claims you will be where i was a couple of decades ago.

If you read it and then try to make sense of events because your mind is biased to make sense of them you can see explanations of wireless node to node data transfer given by Balale habashi....


Well, actually those who brought us telegraphy, telecom and wirelesss are exactly those who brought us the incorrect interpretations of the 2nd series of these books!!! ;) Not surprising, all of these "technologies" are anti-evolutionary (in a scientific sense) because they remove the need for our specie to "naturally adapt to our environment" (i.e a very key phrase in the definition of evolution).


you are confusing Evolution (Darwinism concept of evolution) with the evolution of human society (or mind) as a collective.
There is no correlation whatsoever.
We evolve as our minds evolve and these changes apply directly to our personal day to day lives. This evolution of our mind is greatly owed to sciences ranging from natural, pure and applied, health all the way to philosophy and psychology. These are fields that i referred to as dynamic in aiding to set the history of mankind as opposed to static and corrupt philosophies defined in the so called books of god.

I give you a small example here:
"A great number of verses in Ghoraan tells us WHAT TO DO to get the virgins in heaven and WHAT NOT TO DO to avoid being punished by satan for eternity"

further on it mentions that: "Eitherway it is god that decides what actions you take and which part of after life you will be entered in (heaven or hell)"

now if this is not the essence of devolution and a static mind frame i don't know what is.



Of course they don't play any active part in the actual process of evolution. All they're trying to do is DESCRIBE the process (granted not in a modern sense, but don't forget the latest one is 13 centuries old!)


Again i am afraid i disagree with you, ABSOLUTELY.
I am resulting from the sentences i have quotted from you above that you are in the opinion that Ghoraan is giving a SUBJECTIVE, IMPARTIAL description (and please note that i am not disputing the correction of the actual description) and i am saying NO. Absolutely NOT.
Whatever this description might, It is exteremely OBJECTIVE. It is biased and in the context it is written it cannot help describe any processes not even the life of centuries ago.


If we just take that aspect of it as an example objectively and without getting lost in the dogma and misinterpretations, wouldn't you say that describing something that we came to understand centuries later, deserves some credit at least?


As i said, every book, however badly written or comical or redicilous, must be read at least once. (even though none of us can read all books in one lifetime)

But I give credit based on deserves and not Bias. And i am afraid i give more credit to the latest edition of over 60s news in my neighborhood over Ghoraan, bible, and torat combined.



Although I do agree with you on this, I don't think it's fair to blame the stupidity of mankind in following specific interpretations of books which explicitly say they should not be interpreted, on the book itslef.


Again i invite you to go to the BOOK ITSELF. I even give you first picks. Go ahead and pick whatever segments you want and we can have a read and discuss on weekly basis on what is the text in its own context with no interpretation.


Although, I do understand your frustration on that and sometimes share similar sentiments, not just about the Quran, but the entire Abrahamic line of thinking.

I used to get frustrated. Now i am thinking inward because i am beginning to think i am on a different level of thought as people who refer to organized religion as a pivot in their lives.

It is like debating with a stone wall. The words bounce off. and that is if you are lucky, most muslims tend to end the discussion with a sharp object or bullets entering the other persons body and therefore granting them their heavenly kingdom.

I, sincerely hope, that you take me up on the above and start to dicuss these evolutionary verses or we can set aside our selectiveness and start from the beginning and do maybe 10 pages a week and have a weekend discussion.

After all, We have TALKED AROUND THE SUBJECT. to get down to the nitty gritty we need to get to the subject itself, i.e. Ghoraan.



I don't want to get off topic here, but as far as I'm concerned the Iranian society has not evolved one bit in the last 2500 years and if anything the overall result has been a huge negative, not a positive. I also don't think the Quran has helped the evolution of any society or mankind in general, in the slightest sense - unfortunately.

that is a direct contradiction of what you have said previously but ok.



Actually, you're getting matter and energy mixed up. Your body (matter) over time changes into other forms of matter which may or may not store "usable" energy. This has nothing to do with the electro-chemical imulses (energy) that exist in your body already.

actually no there is no confusion here.
Matter is made up of molecules that are made up of atoms and when it decomposes some of it turns into energy and some is consumed by other matter.

This energy is simply released when you die and will not be converted to matter (at least not through any mechanism currently known to us).


and this is based on .... ???? i mean this comment is coming from what source, have you investigated this yourself ...
i guess i am bit confused here.



What more evidence do you need? You are here sitting and reading this, all this information is being processed through a series of electro-chemical impulses in your body, just like every other piece of information that has been processed and stored in your mind through the same mechanism.

Perception, Cognition, Memory and Thought.
The same way a monkey learns to ring a bell when its hungry. and i don't know any monkeys that are shiite or sunnis. but i do know many shits and sunnis that are monkeys. looooool (sorry couldn't resist that one)

The same way a dog starts to salivate when a bell is rung. (pavlov)
Our brains, however, are more evolved than other beings therefore we are able to bring some elements under our control.


Heart pumps the blood all through the body which brings oxygen to the organs. Food is broken down into ATPs that provide energy for the organs to work. This energy is used for perception, cognition, and processing of the information.

If you are dabbling into spirits and souls again, you need to provide evidence.

i.e. When some people told the average arab that mamad got onto his olaagh and went to the 7th floor of the sky (the story of Meh-Raaj) if one of them had bothered to ask i don't think i can believe this till i see it myself maybe we would not be in the world of shit that we are now... LOOOOOOOOOOL



There is an energy element associated with your existence. I'm calling this your soul. If you don't want to call it soul and have a better word for it, then tell me what is it? Alternatively, if you know what soul is and it's not what I described, then, I'm also listening. ;)


Again Bi-honar jaan i am not very good with OUTRIGHT CLAIMS such as yours above. Till you are able to provide direct evidence of such energy or soul or whatever it is invented to be i cannot accept it.

This is a dangerous road a mind can take because once you start to accept concepts blindly. you start to accept actions concepts blindly. Once that happens you start to accept actions blindly, you might start to act blindly.
well and i don't need to get into the details of what results into.

Vast majority of crimes committed by man against man is directly or indirectly related to religions and religious organizations.



As per the Quran itself (or at least what I have read and understood of it, albeit limited), you read it and understand what you will.


that will not do. That will not do.
There is simple reason for that.
we are not discussing Newton's law of motion since F=ma applies equally in toronto and in montreal.
But in order for me to be exposed to your opinion of it we need to disect it and share our thoughts on it unless if you are scared of any supernatural events taking place ???

Keyvaan jaan,

You're still dismissing the concept based on some nitty gritty details. I'm NOT disagreeing with you that some details are ridiculous and should be dimissed - never have, never will.

What I don't agree with is the approach to dismiss the entire concept (of a higher order) based on specific details in specific books and in the process calling half the world STUPID. You and I are not going to change the world, at least not over night and not like this. It looks like you've already hit the wall enough times and you are well aware of this - so am I. All I'm trying to do is encourage you to do more of this inward reflection that you've brought up a couple of times, obviously for a reason. Because it's much easier for us to focus on changing OUR approach than trying to CHANGE THE WHOLE WORLD. Are you with me on this?

I grew up in Iran until '86 as well and have seen what a destructive force religion can be. My 21 year old uncle was shot in the back of the neck by IR thugs in the early days of the revolution. My 22 year old cousin was excuted in jail. I have at least 3 aunts and 2 other cousins that served long jail sentence under the IR. There were only one or two people in NIRT between Ghotbi and my father, so you can imagine what we went through, not having escaped in the early days of the revolution - let's just say that we were one of very few Iranians that came to Canada as "political refugees" (not under Iranian Progrman with Mexican passports and all that crap, but actually seeking political assylum from a Canadian embassy abroad). So, honestly I'm one of the last people who needs a recap on how religion has and can go wrong. But so what? I can be an angry person and stress myslef out ranting and raving about how our family was wrong done by the IR and keep hitting that wall - but then what?

Look, you and I don't decide the rules of how the world works. The best we can do is understand them and learn how to wiggle our way through in small little steps, by going with the flow and rolling with the punches. We can't stop a mud-slide by standing in front of it. The best we can do is come up with ways to change its direction. And there's no way to accomplish that without building a SOLID STRUCTURE that can sustain a lot of force and abuse. Solid structures can not be built on shaky grounds or on the baacks of others. We'll be much better equipped to succeed IMHO (if you do have real long term goals of change in the world) to seek the help of the whole world than alienating half of it. We have to learn to choose our battles and going up against Islam in a contry the majority of whose population is Muslim is not a good battle plan, no matter how you look at it.

Again Bi-honar jaan i am not very good with OUTRIGHT CLAIMS such as yours above. Till you are able to provide direct evidence of such energy or soul or whatever it is invented to be i cannot accept it.

This is a dangerous road a mind can take because once you start to accept concepts blindly. you start to accept actions concepts blindly. Once that happens you start to accept actions blindly, you might start to act blindly.
well and i don't need to get into the details of what results into.

Vast majority of crimes committed by man against man is directly or indirectly related to religions and religious organizations.


Keyvan jaan,

The reason I didn't respond to your post in detail is that you are getting defencive and outright dismissing what is being shared with you, without even condiering its validity (that's of course my opinion - i.e. the way I'm seeing it). I feel like I'm hitting the same wall with you that you talk about hitting with religous people. I'm going to use the above as an example, but there were many more...

I am NOT making an outright claim that there's a soul. I'm merely bringing it to your attention that your nervous system receives, processes and stores information using ELECTRO-chemical impulses. This is a scientific fact (Google it, look it up on Wikipedia, etc.). I am then bringing it to your attention that an ELECTRONIC pulse of any kind is classified as ENERGY based on our current scientific understanding of the universe and matter energy classifications (again this is a scientific fact and you can Google it, look it up on Wikipedia, etc.). So, at any given time FOR AS LONG AS YOU ARE ALIVE, your body has a mass/matter and an energy component.

Since this ENERGY component controls your thoughts, actions and memories, and I know of no other word (clinically, scientifically, philosophically, etc.) to accurately describe it other than "soul", that's the name I'm assigning to it. I also asked you, if you know of a word or medical phrase that would more accurately describe this ENERGY component, please let me know. So, how is any of this an outright claim to the existence of soul and more specifically without providing evidence?!!! :meditate:

Keyvan jaan,

The reason I didn't respond to your post in detail is that you are getting defencive and outright dismissing what is being shared with you, without even condiering its validity (that's of course my opinion - i.e. the way I'm seeing it). I feel like I'm hitting the same wall with you that you talk about hitting with religous people. I'm going to use the above as an example, but there were many more...

I am NOT making an outright claim that there's a soul. I'm merely bringing it to your attention that your nervous system receives, processes and stores information using ELECTRO-chemical impulses. This is a scientific fact (Google it, look it up on Wikipedia, etc.). I am then bringing it to your attention that an ELECTRONIC pulse of any kind is classified as ENERGY based on our current scientific understanding of the universe and matter energy classifications (again this is a scientific fact and you can Google it, look it up on Wikipedia, etc.). So, at any given time FOR AS LONG AS YOU ARE ALIVE, your body has a mass/matter and an energy component.

Since this ENERGY component controls your thoughts, actions and memories, and I know of no other word (clinically, scientifically, philosophically, etc.) to accurately describe it other than "soul", that's the name I'm assigning to it. I also asked you, if you know of a word or medical phrase that would more accurately describe this ENERGY component, please let me know. So, how is any of this an outright claim to the existence of soul and more specifically without providing evidence?!!! :meditate:

Those are interesting claims.

What i would like to see is the links to those articles when you have time.

I don't know if you don't like what i am saying therefore you are saying i am getting dismissive.

Either way please go ahead and at your lesuire provide me with those articles. Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information for the simple reason that me and you can post articles there but i sure would appreciate any publications by authrities in the subject or at least referrals to books or names and i would follow the lead myself.

Most importantly, in any case, believing in the soul or whatever it is that you are relating to must fulfill a long chain of thought for us to go ahead and base our lives on rules that was conjured up by people completely different to us in every aspect of life and 14 centuries ago.

Keyvan jaan,

The reason I didn't respond to your post in detail is that you are getting defencive and outright dismissing what is being shared with you, without even condiering its validity (that's of course my opinion - i.e. the way I'm seeing it). I feel like I'm hitting the same wall with you that you talk about hitting with religous people. I'm going to use the above as an example, but there were many more...

I am NOT making an outright claim that there's a soul. I'm merely bringing it to your attention that your nervous system receives, processes and stores information using ELECTRO-chemical impulses. This is a scientific fact (Google it, look it up on Wikipedia, etc.). I am then bringing it to your attention that an ELECTRONIC pulse of any kind is classified as ENERGY based on our current scientific understanding of the universe and matter energy classifications (again this is a scientific fact and you can Google it, look it up on Wikipedia, etc.). So, at any given time FOR AS LONG AS YOU ARE ALIVE, your body has a mass/matter and an energy component.

Since this ENERGY component controls your thoughts, actions and memories, and I know of no other word (clinically, scientifically, philosophically, etc.) to accurately describe it other than "soul", that's the name I'm assigning to it. I also asked you, if you know of a word or medical phrase that would more accurately describe this ENERGY component, please let me know. So, how is any of this an outright claim to the existence of soul and more specifically without providing evidence?!!! :meditate:

Again these are claims that are interesting but need to be backed up by scientific proof.

I am sorry but i just cannot take your word for it.


Please refer me to the publication and once i am done performing a comprehensive study of whatever it is that you would provide as evidence i will probably know more so that i can have a discussion on the same level as you.

As far as Ghoraan goes i am still waiting for your time/chapter nominations so we can go ahead and have our discussions.

I have mentioned this three times and i think you are bypassing it....:spinface::spinface:

I don't know if you don't like what i am saying therefore you are saying i am getting dismissive.


Of course not bro. I'm just confused about what you're asking. All I'm doing is connecting the dots. What I don't understand is whether they're not creating the same shape for you as they are for me, or whether you think one of the dots shouldn't be there (both would obviously be valid concerns, but I just don't know which one is your concern).

If it's the dots themselves that you're questioning, this article explainig the electrochemical energy in our bodies is a good place to start (i.e. the first dot):

http://books.google.ca/books?id=zWayMs_7r2oC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=electrochemical+energy+in+the+body&source=bl&ots=xY0AHw0WHJ&sig=_YMP0liND_kP92TW20jtdfUX-po&hl=en&ei=YOMGSvyqDpPaMaqHqZcF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#PPA68,M1

You should have no doubt after reading this article that as I suggested, there is an electrochemical energy (a form of Energy) present in our bodies which is responsible for the processing and storage of all sensory input (i.e it provides the mechanism through which we process all our experiences, store them as memories and reprocess them as thoughts).

For your next question of how do we know that this energy is not converted into matter after we die, I refer you to a short article from NASA, answering that exact question (i.e. the second dot):

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970724a.html

But can this energy be destroyed when we die (i.e. the third dot)? The simple answer is no. According to the LAW of conservation of energy (which I assume will need no links), energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted to other forrms of energy or matter (which as we established above, does not pertain to this case).
Let me know if we are on the same page thus far. If not, let me know specifically which part of the above articles you disagree with, providing simlar proof/evidence/links. :chekerim:


As far as Ghoraan goes i am still waiting for your time/chapter nominations so we can go ahead and have our discussions.
I have mentioned this three times and i think you are bypassing it....:spinface::spinface:

Don't worry my good man, I haven't forgotten about that and we'll definitely come back to that - I'm not going anywhere. ;)
It's just that the discussion would be much easier and faster once we establish that we're both as open and willing to discuss new concepts (which I think we're doing pretty good on) and also learn how to get abstract ideas across to one another with the least amount of verbage (which would make everything go faster). This is all part of the SOLID STRUCTURE I was talking about earlier.

thanks for the links.
i ll get back to you in a few days.

Thanks a lot for putting in the time.

No worries at all bro. Thank you for being open-minded enough and taking the time to read and decide for yourself. That's a very admirable quality. :)

i have always been this way.

The best way to dismantle a philosophy is to know it inside out.

The issue that i had with ISP was that the forum was riddled with OLAAGHS and i had no way of sending them YONJEH over the net so i did my best to get on the TAVILEH level to be able to mentally connect to them but to no avail...

I hear ya bro. That's why we all said in the other thread, that we're dedicated to creating an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged more freely and with respect and friendship. Honestly, I did learn a lot at ISP in the last few years, but could have learnt sooooooooooo much more.

Bihonar jaan,
i looked at both links unfortunately, however slightly related to our discussion, they seem not really to address the question i asked you.

I am not satisfied by a few sentences and an anatomy book. I wanted direct evidence of a connection between the body and bodily functions to SPIRITS, ROOH or whatever its called.

this is not really applicable here.

Well, the articles clearly addressed your questions of how do we know there's an enrgy component associated with our existence and how we know this energy component continues to exist after we die because it's not converted to decaying matter. This has a close enough correlation for me to the word described in theology and philosophy as the "soul". You neither provided any evidence to refute these scientific facts, nor provided an alternate word better suited to describe this energy component and if I'm not mistaken, that was the tenet of our discussion.

As you can appreciate, this is like a situation where we come across a tree unknown to both of us, with Blue fruits that look like apples. I pick one and examine it. It smells like an apple, so I take a bite out of it and it sure tastes like an apple and has the internal structure and color of an apple. So, I say we should call this a Blue Apple. You refuse to smell and taste it and turn around and say, I can't call it a Blue Apple because you need "direct evidence" that it's an apple and it's blue. You also, don't have any other name to describe it and provide no evidence of any other blue fruit that fits the criteria. So, I choose to continue to call it a Blue Apple while you do not try to assign another name to it that we can both agree on, or acknowledge that such fruit even exists.

Unfortunately, that leaves us in a position where we can not close the gap between our opinions and perceptions of the world in any way, much like we would never reach an agreement on calling Twilight darkness.

Well, the articles clearly addressed your questions of how do we know there's an enrgy component associated with our existence and how we know this energy component continues to exist after we die because it's not converted to decaying matter. This has a close enough correlation for me to the word described in theology and philosophy as the "soul". You neither provided any evidence to refute these scientific facts, nor provided an alternate word better suited to describe this energy component and if I'm not mistaken, that was the tenet of our discussion.

As you can appreciate, this is like a situation where we come across a tree unknown to both of us, with Blue fruits that look like apples. I pick one and examine it. It smells like an apple, so I take a bite out of it and it sure tastes like an apple and has the internal structure and color of an apple. So, I say we should call this a Blue Apple. You refuse to smell and taste it and turn around and say, I can't call it a Blue Apple because you need "direct evidence" that it's an apple and it's blue. You also, don't have any other name to describe it and provide no evidence of any other blue fruit that fits the criteria. So, I choose to continue to call it a Blue Apple while you do not try to assign another name to it that we can both agree on, or acknowledge that such fruit even exists.

Unfortunately, that leaves us in a position where we can not close the gap between our opinions and perceptions of the world in any way, much like we would never reach an agreement on calling Twilight darkness.

Gentlemen,
Sorry to interject between your insightful and informative debate, but I couldn't resist.
Behrou jAn,
Borden of proof is on your shoulders, how can I prove something which I claim it does not exist? It is the same as I claim "I'm broke penniless" and you ask me to prove it. If I claim I'm a multimillionaire then I should present evidence.
Granted I haven't had time (yet) to go through the links you've provided but allow me to ask. According to what type of scientific evidence you're claiming such a phenomenon as soul exists?
1- Is it observable?
2- Is it repeatable?
3- Is it empirical and/or measurable?
And based on what fact you consider soul and energy as synonymous?

IMHO There is distinctive difference between the truth and the belief.

Rasoul jaan, even if I was here to prove something and the burden of proof was on me, it would make it very difficult to do so if you guys aren't even reading the info that's being provided. Agreed?

Having said that, I am simply providing a theory. As the Scientific method goes, any theory is a valid theory until it is either proven or disproved (i.e. the burden of proof is NOT on the person who came up with the theory rather on the person wanting to disprove it). If the theory is proven, it becomes a fact (i.e. if I was prociding it as a fact, the burden of proof would be on me). If either of you have a different understanding of the Scientifc method please let me know. Just to recap,

Scientific fact #1 > There is an energy compoent associated with our existence in the form of electro chemical impulses in our nervous system. This energy pattern is responsible for us receiving sensroy input, processing it and storing it as our experiences and our memories (facts provided).

Scientific Fact #2 > When we die, this energy componet is NEITHER converted to matter, nor destroyed according to mass-energy conservation (facts provided).

The Theory > Drawing on the two scientifc facts above, since the component of our existence - which by definition is tunique to each person and he essence of our life - is neither destroyed nor converted to matter upon death, it closely resembles the broad definition of soul in theology and philosophy and also resembles no other definition, word, phrase, etc. in any of our languages, it can represent nothing else other than what's described as the soul.

To disprove the theory, one must either disprove one of those scientific facts above, or the connection between them, or the association made in the theory with theology and philosophy, or present a new association which better resembles the phenomenon. Simply saying I didn't read it, I don't want to read it, I read it but I don't like it, etc., etc. is not going to cut it for me at least not in a thread where we want to talk about logic, science, the search for the truth, and a higher state of mind.

Rasoul jaan, even if I was here to prove something and the burden of proof was on me, it would make it very difficult to do so if you guys aren't even reading the info that's being provided. Agreed?

Having said that, I am simply providing a theory. As the Scientific method goes, any theory is a valid theory until it is either proven or disproved (i.e. the burden of proof is NOT on the person who came up with the theory rather on the person wanting to disprove it). If the theory is proven, it becomes a fact (i.e. if I was prociding it as a fact, the burden of proof would be on me). If either of you have a different understanding of the Scientifc method please let me know. Just to recap,

Scientific fact #1 > There is an energy compoent associated with our existence in the form of electro chemical impulses in our nervous system. This energy pattern is responsible for us receiving sensroy input, processing it and storing it as our experiences and our memories (facts provided).


yes with you so far. (i mean at least this part of your theory is worth reading about because at a primary level it makes sense)


Scientific Fact #2 > When we die, this energy componet is NEITHER converted to matter, nor destroyed according to mass-energy conservation (facts provided).

.

no. facts were provided but they are in no manner convincing at all.
please copy and paste the scientific proof of this here.

For, whose dead bodies have been examined for this and what is the actual scientific process to prove that the elecrto chemical energy is neither converted to matter NOR RELEASED AFTER DEATH IN FORM HEAT (endothermic and exothermic heat during the decomposition of Organic matter)

Once you have provided facts with statistical figures (just like any other scientific theory that becomes a THEOREM by proof) we can close this and go on to your spiritual book, namely, Ghoraan.

For, whose dead bodies have been examined for this and what is the actual scientific process to prove that the elecrto chemical energy is neither converted to matter NOR RELEASED AFTER DEATH IN FORM HEAT (endothermic and exothermic heat during the decomposition of Organic matter)

Once you have provided facts with statistical figures (just like any other scientific theory that becomes a THEOREM by proof) we can close this and go on to your spiritual book, namely, Ghoraan.

For the love of God bro, you're even unwilling to understand something as fundamental and reudamentary as the difference between Energy and Matter and the interaction between them. I'm talking about ENERGY and you keep talking about MATTER - as you did AGAIN in your statement above - and this is NOT the first time I'm bringing it to your attention.

I provided you with a link from NASA that says there is no simple mechanism through which ENERGY gets converted to MATTER. Now, if you're going to say I know nothing and the guys at NASA know nothing and we all have to change our understanding of the world based on what Keyvan thinks could possibly happen (for which there is absolutely no theory whatsoever, let alone one shred of evidence) then what do you want me to say to you?! :imstupid:

And NO, NO, NO! There's a huge difference between a theory and a theorem and NO a theory does not have to become a theorem, nor does it need to be proven to be a valid theory. Again, these are just basic terms and I'm not going to accept off-the-wall redefinitions of generally accepted terms to be able to have a discussion.

i would like to add two things if i may:

1. The scientific method is given too much attention in discussions such as this. People tend to forget that there is A LOT of accepted knowledge that cannot ever really be proven by the scientific method. Most of Mathematics falls into this catagory, where rational is the only way to prove/disprove it. There is also a lot in the field of physics that cannot be proven experimentally.

2. Scientific Fact #2 > When we die, this energy componet is NEITHER converted to matter, nor destroyed according to mass-energy conservation (facts provided).

this statement is true beacause mass and energy only interconvert at very very high speeds, and this doesn't apply to the body or its enviroment after it dies.

For the love of God bro, you're even unwilling to understand something as fundamental and reudamentary as the difference between Energy and Matter and the interaction between them. I'm talking about ENERGY and you keep talking about MATTER - as you did AGAIN in your statement above - and this is NOT the first time I'm bringing it to your attention.



http://www.deathonline.net/decomposition/index.htm

I absolutely understand the difference between energy and matter. And i have known about particle accelerators and their BASIC functionality probably since you were in kindergarten.

The article from NASA, if you can call it a particle, tells us about matter, anti matter and how much energy is required to put matter back together.

Now i am asking you what has this got to do with soul (that you claim exists or the ENERGY that you regard as a LIFE FORCE ???

very simple, waiting for reply.

i would like to add two things if i may:

1. The scientific method is given too much attention in discussions such as this. People tend to forget that there is A LOT of accepted knowledge that cannot ever really be proven by the scientific method. Most of Mathematics falls into this catagory, where rational is the only way to prove/disprove it. There is also a lot in the field of physics that cannot be proven experimentally.

2.

this statement is true beacause mass and energy only interconvert at very very high speeds, and this doesn't apply to the body or its enviroment after it dies.

I don't know how much simpler i can put this, the so called energies that he is referring to convert into another type of energy. This in simple terms can be compared to Mechanical energy in a turbine BEING CONVERTED into electrical energy.

I don't know how much simpler i can put this, the so called energies that he is referring to convert into another type of energy. This in simple terms can be compared to Mechanical energy in a turbine BEING CONVERTED into electrical energy.

you said earlier that it is converted to heat energy. now that you have made this claim, do you have evidence to support it?

So my question to you is... if matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed (only converted to one another according to Einstein,s famous E=mc^2), and considering that the electrical impulses (i.e. energy patterns) that constitute your thoughs and memories are not converted to matter when you die, does your essence, soul, energy (whatever you want to call it from whichever philosohpical or scientific perspective you like) not continue to exist in the universe?


to put is simply so all you guys can get what i am saying, WHEN YOU TURN OFF A COMPUTER THE REGISTERS CLEAR....ALL THE BINARY DATA HAVE BEEN ZEROED OUT till you turn the machine back on and by using a mouse or via a remote session invoke new actions on it.

Essence and soul are words you are inventing, ENERGY IS A SCIENTIFIC MEASURABLE QUANTITY. please don't group them together UNTIL YOU CAN MEASURE SOUL OR ESSENCE.

can you measure soul, in what solograms...WHAT IS THE UNIT OF ESSENCE, HOW DO YOU MEASURE IT ?

waiting for reply.

you said earlier that it is converted to heat energy. now that you have made this claim, do you have evidence to support it?

WHAT IS IT ?
i am not a hydro electric engineer but ANY MORON on the street knows that a hydro electric dam, uses the potential mechanical energy of water to generate electricity. if you don't believe me walk to your toilet put your finger under the tap and turn of the water and see if you feel pressure.

do you know what a DAM is ???
how do you turn on the tv in your house using electricity that you pay for every month or you read the GHORAAN and the light comes on...or maybe your ESSENCE helps you see in the dark...

do you know what a DAM is ???

if you don't read up on it.

my question was in regards to the human body, not hydrolics:

For, whose dead bodies have been examined for this and what is the actual scientific process to prove that the elecrto chemical energy is neither converted to matter NOR RELEASED AFTER DEATH IN FORM HEAT (endothermic and exothermic heat during the decomposition of Organic matter)

you said earlier that it is converted to heat energy. now that you have made this claim, do you have evidence to support it?

please don't turn this place into another extension of that other toilet forum.
please.

don't get all excited and start editing your posts. a simple appeal for clarification is usually more than sufficient

my question was in regards to the human body, not hydrolics:

ok.

you come from iran and iran is famous for what ? OIL.

what is oil ? dead matter stored under ground, what is the dead matter that becomes oil over millions of years ?

plants and animals. (by the way my major is computer engineering but i remember this from high school so its not a brainer or anything)

as i was saying plants and animals.
what are plants and animals made up of ?

Organic matter. (C, O, H, N ) -->Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen and nitrogen

what are humans made up of?
same stuff

what happens when humans are dead and their bodies are decomposed?
if they are above ground they are eaten by other creatures and HUMAN MEAT INSIDE THE OTHER CREATURE BECOMES ATPs (energy units) and SHIT.

if they are stored into ground they are eaten by worms and maggots and they become atps in maggots and maggot shit.

IF YOU OPEN A GRAVE AFTER TEN YEARS you only see bones ?
why?
matter has decomposed (what does it mean the matter is decomposed, it has turned into other matter)

what has happened to the ENERGY that runs the impulses in the brain? once the brain gives up, the enzymes that cause the neurons to carry those energy messages along the spine to the brain from every corner of human body halt being secreted and there are no more messages sent to the brain.

NOW GIVE ME SOME SCIENTIFIC MEASURE OF THE SOUL AND ESSENCE PLEASE.

here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain

don't get all excited and start editing your posts. a simple appeal for clarification is usually more than sufficient

it is you who is getting out of your league a little bit here.

which post did i edit here ? (or you are just guessing again)

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/05/darpa-heat-energy-brains-now-make-us-some/

Decomposition can be broken down into 5 steps:

1. Initial decay
2. Putrefaction
3. Black putrefaction
4. Butyric putrefaction
5. Dry decay

don't get all excited and start editing your posts. a simple appeal for clarification is usually more than sufficient

what happened cat got your tongue or you are playing PS3 ?

How do neurons work?
Chapter 1

How do neurons conduct electrical impulses?

Neurons conduct electrical impulses by using the Action Potential. This phenomenon is generated through the flow of positively charged ions across the neuronal membrane. I will try and explain.......

Neurons, like all cells, maintain different concentrations of certain ions across their cell membranes. Imagine the case of a boat with a small leak below the water line. In order to keep the boat afloat, the small amount of water entering through the leak has to be pumped out, which maintains a lower water level relative to the open sea. Neurons do the same thing, but they pump out positively charged sodium ions. In addition, they pump in positively charged potassium ions (potash to the gardeners out there!!) Thus there is a high concentration of sodium ions present outside the neuron, and a high concenttration of potassium ions inside. The neuronal membrane also contains specialised proteins called channels, which form pores in the membrane that are selectively permeable to particular ions. Thus sodium channels allow sodium ions through the membrane while potassium channels allow potassium ions through.

Get the picture? OK, so far so good. Now, under resting conditions, the potassium channel is more permeable to potassium ions than the sodium channel is to sodium ions. So there is a slow outward leak of potassium ions that is larger than the inward leak of sodium ions. This means that the membrane has a charge on the inside face that is negative relative to the outside, as more positively charged ions flow out of the neuron than flow in. The membrane is said to be polarised.

OK with that? Good! Now for the Action Potential.

Let's go back to the boat. Now, in the boat, there is a pressure for water to enter and if a big hole is punched in the side, the rate at which water flows into the boat in massively increased. Similarly, there is a pressure for the sodium ions to enter the neuron, but they are prevented from doing so by the membrane and the pumping mechanisms that remove any ions that manage to get in. However, if the sodium channels are opened, positively charged sodium ions flood into the neuron, and making the inside of the cell momentarily positively charged - the cell is said to be depolarized. This has the effect of opening the potassium channels, allowing potassium ions to leave the cell. Thus, there is first an influx of sodium ions (leading to massive deplorisation) followed by a rapid efflux of potassium ions from the neuron (leading to repolarisation). Excess ions are subsequently pumped in/out of the neuron.

This transient switch in membrane potential is the action potential. The cycle of depolarization and repolarization is extremely rapid, taking only about 2 milli-seconds (0.002 seconds) and thus allows neurons to fire action potentials in rapid bursts, a common feature in neuronal communication.

How does the action potential propagate along the axon?

The sodium channels in the neuronal membrane are opened in response to a small depolarisation of the membrane potential. So when an action potential depolarises the membrane, the leading edge activates other adjacent sodium channels. This leads to another spike of depolarisation the leading edge of which activates more adjacent sodium channels ... etc. Thus a wave of depolarisation spreads from the point of initiation.

If this were all there was to it, then the action potential would propagate in all directions along an axon. But action potentials move in one direction. This is achieved because the sodium channels have a refactory period following activation, during which they cannot open again. This ensures that the action potential is proagated in a specific direction along the axon.

The speed of propagation is related to the size of the axon.

The speed of action potential propagation is usually directly related to the size of the axon. Big axons result in fast transmission rates. For example, the squid has an axon nearly 1 mm in diameter that initiates a rapid escape reflex. Increasing the size of the axon retains more of the sodium ions that form the internal depolarisation wave inside the axon.

If we had to have axons the size of the squid giant axon in our brains, doorways would have to be substantially widened to accomodate our heads!!! We could only have a few muscles located at any great distance from our brains - so we'd all be extremely short with very large heads....not really feasible, is it? The answer is to insulate the axonal membrane to prevent the dissipation of the internal depolarisation in small axons - myelin.

So what does Myelin do?

Do you remember that I said that a substance called myelin allowed for rapid action potential propagation? So," how does it do it?" I hear you all ask. Well, myelin is the fatty membranes of cells called Oligodendroglia (in the CNS) and Schwann Cells (in the PNS) that wraps around the axon and acts as an insulator, preventing the dissipation of the depolarisation wave. The sodium and pottassium ion channels, pumps and all the other paraphenalia associated with action potential propagation are concentrated at sites between blocks of myelin called the Nodes of Ranvier. This myelin sheath allows the action potential to jump from one node to another, greatly increasing the rate of transmission.

Without the myelin sheath, we cannot function. This is demonstrated by the devastating effects of Multiple Sclerosis, a demyelinating disease that affects bundles of axons in the brain, spinal cord and optic nerve, leading to lack of co-ordination and muscle control as well as difficulties with speech and vision. For further information on this disease, visit the MS Society's web site.




Previous Next

Brain Death:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_death

Brain Activity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_activity

Necrosis: (DEATH OF A LIVING TISSUE)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necrosis

no i was giving you some background so you could build up the most important ones which are the ones that i have posted here.
Read them and highlight the parts that give you any evidence to the EXISTENCE OF SOUL OR ESSENCE.

ok.

you come from iran and iran is famous for what ? OIL.

what is oil ? dead matter stored under ground, what is the dead matter that becomes oil over millions of years ?

plants and animals. (by the way my major is computer engineering but i remember this from high school so its not a brainer or anything)

as i was saying plants and animals.
what are plants and animals made up of ?

Organic matter. (C, O, H, N ) -->Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen and nitrogen

what are humans made up of?
same stuff

what happens when humans are dead and their bodies are decomposed?
if they are above ground they are eaten by other creatures and HUMAN MEAT INSIDE THE OTHER CREATURE BECOMES ATPs (energy units) and SHIT.

if they are stored into ground they are eaten by worms and maggots and they become atps in maggots and maggot shit.

IF YOU OPEN A GRAVE AFTER TEN YEARS you only see bones ?
why?
matter has decomposed (what does it mean the matter is decomposed, it has turned into other matter)

what has happened to the ENERGY that runs the impulses in the brain? once the brain gives up, upon death, this energy will get converted in other forms of energy.

here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain
Keyvan jaan the first part of your post applies to biological decomposition (via bacteria, worms, prasites, etc) and shows that the enerygy stored in our bodies goes from being stored in us to stored in the things decomposing us.

Unfortunately, nothing you wrote suggest that the last part (bolded) is true.

It could very well be that once we die, that form of energy (for our impulses) LEAVES the body and becomes stored somewhere else where it is not converted to other forms of energy. It doesn't necessarily have to leave via another material being (and therefore doesn't necessarily have to change into another form of energy).
it is you who is getting out of your league a little bit here.

which post did i edit here ? (or you are just guessing again)
please look where i quoted you (post #31) and look right above.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/05/darpa-heat-energy-brains-now-make-us-some/
Good. Now let me know how his experiment goes.

are you reading these links yourself or are you just posting them because their titles suggest that they are related to this discussion?

What i find really strange here is that that neither you or BI-honar are providing any proof for something THAT DOES NOT EXIST (this is a more black box approach), and then you demand for me to provide counter-examples.

WHEN SOMETHING DOESN'T EXIST I DO NOT NEED TO PROVE IT DOESN'T EXIST BECAUSE IT DOESN'T.

its like you asking me prove that six-headed fish-beast of East Anglia has Sushi for lunch every monday....

when such a creature does not exist why would i waste time on mondays in sushi restaurants looking for it.

When you can give me a CLEAR DEFINITION OF THE SOUL OR ESSENCE AND ITS EXISTENCE then i ll be satisfied that you have put some serious effort in this rather than behaving like a child whose father refused to buy him candy.

http://www.deathonline.net/decomposition/index.htm


Here you go again bro. What does decomposition of the body (matter) have to do with electro-chemical Energy!? I could not find a single reference to electro-chemical energy in that whole web site (not that I was expecting to).


I absolutely understand the difference between energy and matter. And i have known about particle accelerators and their BASIC functionality probably since you were in kindergarten.


Jeez that's a long time! Are you sure you've been using your time efficiently? ;)


The article from NASA, if you can call it a particle, tells us about matter, anti matter and how much energy is required to put matter back together.


NO, NO, NO. The article from NASA answers the question of "Why is it impossible, at this point in time, to convert energy into matter?" The naswer for which is "this is partly because in a technical sense, you cannot just create matter out of energy: there are various 'conservation laws' of electric charges, the number of leptons (electron-like particles) etc., which means that you can only create matter / anti-matter pairs out of energy. Anti-matter, however, has the unfortunate tendency to combine with matter and turn itself back into energy." There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in there about putting matter together. Are you sure you read the same article?


Now i am asking you what has this got to do with soul (that you claim exists or the ENERGY that you regard as a LIFE FORCE ???


And the explanation has been provided, very clearly in this thread. It has been reexplained, reiterated and reemphasized, but you're still talking about MATTER, MATTER, and more MATTER, which has nothing to do with the explanation given. So, the problem is not with the explanation, but the fact that you refuse to accept that you don't know everything.

I don't know how much simpler i can put this, the so called energies that he is referring to convert into another type of energy. This in simple terms can be compared to Mechanical energy in a turbine BEING CONVERTED into electrical energy.

ENERGY. I'm talking about one form of energy - electro-chemical. If this is converted to some other form of energy (I'm glad you've finally stopped talking about matter), what form of energy is it converted to and through what known mechanism?! Don't just make a wide open counter-claim. If you have something to back it up, then provide at leeast the same amount of evidence that was provided with the claim - it's common sense bro.

to put is simply so all you guys can get what i am saying, WHEN YOU TURN OFF A COMPUTER THE REGISTERS CLEAR....ALL THE BINARY DATA HAVE BEEN ZEROED OUT till you turn the machine back on and by using a mouse or via a remote session invoke new actions on it.


What does this have to do with anything?! You think after you turn the computer off, the electical energy is destoryed or converted to another form of energy? Is that what you're trying to get at?


Essence and soul are words you are inventing, ENERGY IS A SCIENTIFIC MEASURABLE QUANTITY. please don't group them together UNTIL YOU CAN MEASURE SOUL OR ESSENCE.
can you measure soul, in what solograms...WHAT IS THE UNIT OF ESSENCE, HOW DO YOU MEASURE IT ?
waiting for reply.

NO, NO, NO. Soul is not a word we're inventing. It is a word which has broad definitions in theology and philosophy (for the Nth time). And NO, NO, NO, an entity does not have to be measurable (even though the electro-magnetic pattern of the brain is measureable), to become a scientific term or used in a theory (scientific or otherwise). Again, you're trying to redefine every generally accepted term, pharse and practice to fit it into your argument. BTW, I do like Soulogram as a unit to measure the soul when we are finally able to measure it in a few decades.

are you reading these links yourself or are you just posting them because their titles suggest that they are related to this discussion?

That's what I like to know too Ramin jaan. All I see is a link that says nothing about converision of energy, but interestingly enought it does describe EEG and MEG, while we have to provide links about measuring electro-magnetic pattern of the brain!!! :dunno:
And if somone could explain the connection between any of this and some six-headed fish, or why something doesn't exist simply because Keyvan says it doesn't exist and then it has to be proven otherwise, I would really appreciate it too! :chekerim:

i am still waiting on how you can scientifically prove soul and essence from an existential point of view not because you were told about them by others.

still waiting....

what institution or corporation specializes in measuring or selling souls...
(aside from church and mosques)
loooooooool

as motori said the burden of proof is on your shoulders not mine.

I know soul does not exist because i see no evidence of it other than in story books such as Qoraan.

You guys say it exists because all religions tell you it does. How do you intend to open the subject is by scientifically approaching it...

i am afraid this does not make sense. You are poorly attempting to prove the existence of NOTHING by relating it to EXPLANATION of something completely different.

I would have mentioned this from the first post by you bi-honar but i was waiting maybe for some enlightenment on you guys behalf which never came.

i like your tang of sarcasm and sneer.
i guess it is a legacy from your ISP days. it is fun but it does not help your cause in sharing opinions with others.

unless if you are working in a circus and it is your job to make people laugh which i dont think is the case here. In either case, i am sticking with this and i am waiting for you to connect electrical impulses to soul and "Essence"

I like to interject my own personal opinion rather than googling and providing facts from other sources.
Here is what I've learned.
Electro magnetic impulses of the brain or entire energy required for human physic is extracted (i.e converted) from the food we consume. Fact!! we don't eat the entire body fails to function.
I still can't see any fact for equation of energy in human body and the soul.
I guess our consciousness must come from the soul, right? If that is the case then lets say I have frontal lobe of my brain removed, why I no longer can show emotional reaction? and remember I will still remain alive in vegetation state with basic body functions. What happened to my soul?
Is soul "nothing" without the brain?

Good discussion, although one might look for the explanation of soul, spirit, religion, etc. elsewhere, through logic and not necessarily science.

On that note, there are phenomena’s that not only can not be fully explained with the known science , but also contradict our basic understanding of science, particularly quantum physics.

One hypothesis of string theory is that matter is converted into energy in quantum levels, and of course that contradicts what we believe to be a fundamental conservation laws (both energy and matter) today. Anyway, the point is there are many things that just can not be explained fully at the present, e.g., spirit.

Proving the existence or non-existence of "soul" isn't really possible atleast not with the information we have now, there are claims to be made both ways but still. And the fact that something can't be seen doesnt really mean that it doesnt exist either, so the whole if I dont experience/see it, it doesnt exist doesnt go and even if its existence gets proven there will still be people that might contradict it anyway, this discussion is good but in the end I don't think either side can profide hard evidence.

I personnaly think its just a choice of words and how someone defines the word soul. Same thing with God,Allah, Jaweh etc. I believe in higher powers meaning coincidences, luck, love, sadness, happines, gravity, time etc etc all these things are "God" in my opinion. Same thing with soul, depends on how you describe it. Same thing with the after life, but to be honest I don't really care, bc the now life is more important at the moment. I think there is no such thing as THE truth, but everyone has, and should be allowed to have, their own truth. Thats why its hard for me to think someone is wrong, I might think that but not always can it be proven otherwise and not always should one want to prove it. Thats why I also try not to judge other religions to hard, thinking your own truth is the only truth there is kinda arrogant IMO.

Let me be very frank with you Keyvan jaan...

i am still waiting on how you can scientifically prove soul and essence from an existential point of view


You're still struggling with simple and basic definitions, like what the word theory means. For the Nth time, a THEORY does not need to be proven to be a valid theory. It does however need to be disproved to be invalidated. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? :help:


not because you were told about them by others.


Na azeez, you're making ridiculous assumptions in your entire argument like electro-checmical energy can be converted into matter or that I was in kintergarteen when you were studying the intricasies of the universe or that I'm saying this because I was told by others. I have tried very politely to bring to your attention that you obvioulsy don't have the academic background to be discussing Physics and Thermodynamics with an Aersopace Engineer and the receipient of National Physics awards and an NSERC sholarship (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canda), but it's easier for you to keep saying people are stupid rather than doing the least bit of that inward thinking that you so casually use. :spinface:


what institution or corporation specializes in measuring or selling souls...
(aside from church and mosques)
loooooooool

Another absolutely irrelevant comment. What insitution or corporation specializes in measuring your intelligence? Perhaps by your line of thinking, we should assume that none exists?! :dunno:

as motori said the burden of proof is on your shoulders not mine.


As Rasoul said, he had not read the discussion or the links provided. And again, there is no burden of proof for a theory. If Rasoul has some other understanding of that, I'm sure he will let us know.


I know soul does not exist because i see no evidence of it other than in story books such as Qoraan.


If you want to consider yourself on the same level as single cell organisms, all the power to you. After the way you've acted in this discussion, I sure as hell wouldn't stand in your way! ;)


You guys say it exists because all religions tell you it does. How do you intend to open the subject is by scientifically approaching it...


This just goes to show that you read everything with the utmost prejudice and relate it to some preconceived notions in your head. NO ONE EVER SAID SUCH A THING IN THIS THREAD, that the soul exists because all religions tell us or you that it exists.


i am afraid this does not make sense. You are poorly attempting to prove the existence of NOTHING by relating it to EXPLANATION of something completely different.


LMAO. This is rich coming from a guy who insists there's a mechanism for converting electro-chemical energy into matter!


I would have mentioned this from the first post by you bi-honar but i was waiting maybe for some enlightenment on you guys behalf which never came.

Oh yes of course. What was I thinking? The guy who thinks the majority of the world is stupid and there is nothing higher in the universe than himself has been looking for "enlightenment" this whole time. How stupid of me.

i like your tang of sarcasm and sneer.
i guess it is a legacy from your ISP days. it is fun but it does not help your cause in sharing opinions with others.


It is actually from my ISP days. I don't normally associate with people who have a one track mind and dismiss everything before they even understanding it, but I came across quite a few people on ISP, like REZA and General-Parsaian who fall into this category, albeit on different ends of the same scale, and when someone keeps repeating the same question without acknowledging the answer, sarcasm works like I charm as I quickly came to learn.


unless if you are working in a circus and it is your job to make people laugh which i dont think is the case here. In either case, i am sticking with this and i am waiting for you to connect electrical impulses to soul and "Essence"

The connection's all there whether you see it or not. I guess you're either going to have to wait until a few Green Martian dudes land on earth and hook you of with a Soulogram so you can see for yourself, or maybe someone here would have better luck than me in explaining to you what theory, energy, conservation, and soul in philosophy mean. I give up.

:bye2:

I like to interject my own personal opinion rather than googling and providing facts from other sources.
Here is what I've learned.
Electro magnetic impulses of the brain or entire energy required for human physic is extracted (i.e converted) from the food we consume. Fact!! we don't eat the entire body fails to function.
I still can't see any fact for equation of energy in human body and the soul.
I guess our consciousness must come from the soul, right? If that is the case then lets say I have frontal lobe of my brain removed, why I no longer can show emotional reaction? and remember I will still remain alive in vegetation state with basic body functions. What happened to my soul?
Is soul "nothing" without the brain?

Rasoul jaan, I just wanted to interject and expand on your post a little more if that's okay, as related to our discussion here.

There's no argument that our bodies function by converting matter (food) into usable energy. This mechanism is quite simple and in fact present all over nature in various forms and was not the subject of the argument, at least not from my end. The question is whether a similar mechanism exists (i.e. without going into particle accelartors and creating anti-matter) for the electro-chemical energy that is the byproduct of this matter-energy conversion, to be converted back into matter when we die? If not, is there any other mechanism that you know of, allowing this form of energy to be converted into any other form of energy?

As for an equation defining, or a method mapping, the electro-magnetic patterns in our brains, we are still decades if not centuries away from accomplishing such a thing. Having said that, just because there is no formula or equation to accomplish this, it does not mean it simply does not exist - much like there was no fromula or equation for gravitation until the time of Newton, but gravity existed nontheless. And on that same note, it took over a century from the time Galileo measured the effects of gravity to the time Newton formulazied it. We do currently have methods such as MEG to measure the magnetic fields produced by the electro-chamical energy in the brain, which itself was impossible until a few decades ago because of the noise-signal ratio associated with these types of measurements. And the results from MEG are still quite limited, putting the 3 dimensional mapping of this energy pattern decades if not centuries away.

Now, I am theorizing (again requires no proof particulalry for an abstract theory) that this electro-magnetic pattern exhibits the same qualities as the "soul" described in philosophy or theology, namely it is a requirement of being alive, it is unique, it is responsible for our experiences and thoughts, and it is released when we die, but not destroyed. I know of no other term that desrcibes the same qualities so accurately and therefore choosing to equate the two concepts together.

As for removing the Frontal Lobe of the brain, as far as I know, that would cause death (i.e. the legal definition of death which is the same as brain death). Having said that being in a vegetative state can be caused by damage to the Frontal Lobe, but does not eliminate the electro-magnetic "signature" of the brain and since it is not defined as being "dead" it does not contradict this theory about the soul.

NOTE: This was a very very interesting point you brought up Rasoul jaan and frankly this is the quality of rebuttals and counter-arguments I expected to receive, testing the limits of this theory. Hats off to you my good sir. :chekerim:

What i find really strange here is that that neither you or BI-honar are providing any proof for something THAT DOES NOT EXIST (this is a more black box approach), and then you demand for me to provide counter-examples.

WHEN SOMETHING DOESN'T EXIST I DO NOT NEED TO PROVE IT DOESN'T EXIST BECAUSE IT DOESN'T.

its like you asking me prove that six-headed fish-beast of East Anglia has Sushi for lunch every monday....

when such a creature does not exist why would i waste time on mondays in sushi restaurants looking for it.

When you can give me a CLEAR DEFINITION OF THE SOUL OR ESSENCE AND ITS EXISTENCE then i ll be satisfied that you have put some serious effort in this rather than behaving like a child whose father refused to buy him candy.

Keyvan if you go back and read our conversation carefully, you will see that i never made any kind of claim about the existance of a soul. I just responded to your comment about the electrochemical energy of our brains being converted to heat energy when we die.

Believe it or not, at the moment, i'm actually quite neautral on the subject.

Bi-honar jaan, a question for you if you will:
So if the electrochemical energy in our brain is not converted to another forum of energy after we die, where is the energy stored after our body decomposes?

All we know at this point Ramin jaan is that it's "released" and not destroyed. Since we're at the very rudamentary stage of measuring its electro-magnetic structure, it is difficult to even theorize whether it posseses enough cohesion to stay intact let alone be stored.

Having said that, if I were to hypothecize on this aspect of the energy pattern alone (i.e. not related to the extent and reach of this particular theory), based on my observations of animals (including us) and an apparent connection to a "higher conciousness" (which can be deduced from dreaming and other phenomena which can not be explained by coincidence due to their statistical improbability), I would hesitate to dismiss their contiunued existence as subsets of a larger collective altogether - if that answers your question.

All we know at this point Ramin jaan is that it's "released" and not destroyed. Since we're at the very rudamentary stage of measuring its electro-magnetic structure, it is difficult to even theorize whether it posseses enough cohesion to stay intact let alone be stored.

Having said that, if I were to hypothecize on this aspect of the energy pattern alone (i.e. not related to the extent and reach of this particular theory), based on my observations of animals (including us) and an apparent connection to a "higher conciousness" (which can be deduced from dreaming and other phenomena which can not be explained by coincidence due to their statistical improbability), I would hesitate to dismiss their contiunued existence as subsets of a larger collective altogether - if that answers your question.

it does, kind of.

correct me if i'm wrong behrou jaan because my knowledge of physics is very rudimentary.

Isn't electromagnetic force(energy) dependent on a moving charge? (F = q v B sin@) where q = charge, v = velocity, B = magnetic field, @ = angle between v and B.


So once we die, what gets this charge to move (as keyvan posted earlier in the brain its the ion gradient in our cells that gets ions (charges) moving.

Once we die, and there is not ion gradient, that means that there are no longer moving charges ans that would mean that v=0. If v=0, then F also equals zero.

Am i overcomplicating this?

Let me be very frank with you Keyvan jaan...



You're still struggling with simple and basic definitions, like what the word theory means. For the Nth time, a THEORY does not need to be proven to be a valid theory. It does however need to be disproved to be invalidated. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? :help:



Na azeez, you're making ridiculous assumptions in your entire argument like electro-checmical energy can be converted into matter or that I was in kintergarteen when you were studying the intricasies of the universe or that I'm saying this because I was told by others. I have tried very politely to bring to your attention that you obvioulsy don't have the academic background to be discussing Physics and Thermodynamics with an Aersopace Engineer and the receipient of National Physics awards and an NSERC sholarship (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canda), but it's easier for you to keep saying people are stupid rather than doing the least bit of that inward thinking that you so casually use. :spinface:



Another absolutely irrelevant comment. What insitution or corporation specializes in measuring your intelligence? Perhaps by your line of thinking, we should assume that none exists?! :dunno:



As Rasoul said, he had not read the discussion or the links provided. And again, there is no burden of proof for a theory. If Rasoul has some other understanding of that, I'm sure he will let us know.



If you want to consider yourself on the same level as single cell organisms, all the power to you. After the way you've acted in this discussion, I sure as hell wouldn't stand in your way! ;)



This just goes to show that you read everything with the utmost prejudice and relate it to some preconceived notions in your head. NO ONE EVER SAID SUCH A THING IN THIS THREAD, that the soul exists because all religions tell us or you that it exists.



LMAO. This is rich coming from a guy who insists there's a mechanism for converting electro-chemical energy into matter!



Oh yes of course. What was I thinking? The guy who thinks the majority of the world is stupid and there is nothing higher in the universe than himself has been looking for "enlightenment" this whole time. How stupid of me.



It is actually from my ISP days. I don't normally associate with people who have a one track mind and dismiss everything before they even understanding it, but I came across quite a few people on ISP, like REZA and General-Parsaian who fall into this category, albeit on different ends of the same scale, and when someone keeps repeating the same question without acknowledging the answer, sarcasm works like I charm as I quickly came to learn.



The connection's all there whether you see it or not. I guess you're either going to have to wait until a few Green Martian dudes land on earth and hook you of with a Soulogram so you can see for yourself, or maybe someone here would have better luck than me in explaining to you what theory, energy, conservation, and soul in philosophy mean. I give up.

:bye2:

loooooooooool....

A typical iranian end of a discussion.

i tell you what you stick to your soul and essence and i live my life in REALITY.

I guess that way everyone is happy.

Unfortunately i have not learnt anything from this aside from your initial posts. It has been a waste of time mixed with typical irano-muslim sneering and dalghak baazi.

such a shame.

Let me be very frank with you Keyvan jaan...



he connection's all there whether you see it or not. I guess you're either going to have to wait until a few Green Martian dudes land on earth and hook you of with a Soulogram so you can see for yourself, or maybe someone here would have better luck than me in explaining to you what theory, energy, conservation, and soul in philosophy mean. I give up.

:bye2:

LOL ...
you give up....???

You have given up a long time ago if you believe in soul, essence, spirits and allah...

my friend, sadly, you have given up and sold out a looooooooong time before this so called discussion started.

First off Ramin jaan, let me just say how glad I am that you are disecting this theory and putting it under a magnifying glass. Any abstract theory like this needs to go through this type of process, scrutiny if you will, modified and remodified as necessary until all the elements and details are worked out. Like you, I have no claim to know everything or be an "expert" in any specific field of science - although I will not submit to being an idiot either. Of course we have the added problem that we're crossing into multiple disciplines here and unless we had experts in several fields, it would make it very difficult to come to a consensus even with a longer period of time.

Having said that, I will answer this with my limited knowledge in each field (as I've gotten pretty rusty with formulas over time) and we can work together to dig deeper and deeper into the fine details:

The formula you are referring to is the simplified non vector form of the Lorentz "force" if I'm not mistaken. That's the force exerted on a charged particle by a magnetic field (or a combination of electric and magentic fields with the non-simplified formula). I am not sure how you would apply this formula to individual action potentials, or what the significance of quantifying the "force" caused by depolarization, would be in this particular case. I did also search the web a bit and could not find specific references to the Lorentz force and action potentials, but I did find the following passage which may be helpful:

"It is worth noting that action potentials do not usually produce an observable field, mainly because the currents associated with action potentials flow in opposite directions and the magnetic fields cancel out."

Having said that, Lorentz/Maxwell equations are used in measuring the "bulk" magnetic acticity produced by the brain in Magnetoencephalography (or MEG that we talked about earlier). I use the word "bulk" because you apparently need 50,000 active neurons for the singal to become detectable. Applying this to your question, when we die, the electrons cease to move through the brain and since v=0 the magnetic activity of the brain or the Lorentz force also becomes zero.

Based on that, we know that the electromagentic energy in the brain is "released" (as suggested earlier). We also know that this energy can not be destroyed or converted to matter. So, what exactly happens to it and whether it is "transmitted" as some form of electromagnatic wave and stored (your earlier question), is something that we're going to have to dig into deeper.

What we do know is that our brain produces electromagnetic waves called Delta, Theta, Alpha, Beta and Gamma during different types of activities which can be measured using Electroencephalography (or EEG that we also talked about earlier). These waves range in frequency from around 4Hz-80Hz (i.e. the low end of Extremely Low Frequncy radio waves or ELF)!!! Just something to think about and perhaps a good area to look into a little deeper. And as a future doctor :), I'm sure you'll also find the Holonomic Brain Theory absolutely fascinating as well, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holonomic_brain_theory

I think I have read all the posts. While I don't have any counter argument for disproving you theory Behrou jan, I think it is very plausible that the electromagnetic energy converts to head and dissipates.

Pedram jaan, that would actually be the easiest form of energy to test for. As far as the electrochemical pulses go, this would require a sudden rise in temperature of the body at the moment of death. I have not heard of such a thing, but definitely open to investigating it, if you've heard of such a thing.

Now, since the beginning of this thread we have established there are actually two components produced by this electrochemical energy. One is the actual pulses in our neurons and the other one is Extremely Short Radio waves produced by our brain (i.e. we work much like a transmitter, where there is an electric current through the circuitry producing a radio wave). Again, I know of no mechanism through which radio waves are immediately transformed into heat.

Having said that, dicipation is not the same as destruction. Even if it may be counter-intuitive to assume that these pulses and/or radio waves are not destroyed, the law of conservation of mass-energy obvioulsy suggests that the elctromagnetic energy associated with our existence does not simply vanish or cease to exist. Even if by some remote mechanism all the nergy was converted to heat, this is just another form of electromagnetic energy!

Again, this has nothing to do with religion and is pure science. There may be elements in the Quran, the Bible or other ancient text which may tip me in the direction of reading them only as works of philosophy or mythology, but I'm not going to dismiss scientifc laws, just to make sense of my limited understanding of the world. I think a lot of people make this mistake and just because they don't like religion, they start dismissing the overlaps with scientific, historical and archeological evidence. This is a BIG mistake IMHO.

Pedram jaan, that would actually be the easiest form of energy to test for. As far as the electrochemical pulses go, this would require a sudden rise in temperature of the body at the moment of death. I have not heard of such a thing, but definitely open to investigating it, if you've heard of such a thing.

Now, since the beginning of this thread we have established there are actually two components produced by this electrochemical energy. One is the actual pulses in our neurons and the other one is Extremely Short Radio waves produced by our brain (i.e. we work much like a transmitter, where there is an electric current through the circuitry producing a radio wave). Again, I know of no mechanism through which radio waves are immediately transformed into heat.

Having said that, dicipation is not the same as destruction. Even if it may be counter-intuitive to assume that these pulses and/or radio waves are not destroyed, the law of conservation of mass-energy obvioulsy suggests that the elctromagnetic energy associated with our existence does not simply vanish or cease to exist. Even if by some remote mechanism all the nergy was converted to heat, this is just another form of electromagnetic energy!

Again, this has nothing to do with religion and is pure science. There may be elements in the Quran, the Bible or other ancient text which may tip me in the direction of reading them only as works of philosophy or mythology, but I'm not going to dismiss scientifc laws, just to make sense of my limited understanding of the world. I think a lot of people make this mistake and just because they don't like religion, they start dismissing the overlaps with scientific, historical and archeological evidence. This is a BIG mistake IMHO.
First of all, I must say that I don't have any preference in accepting or dismissing your theory based on my religious (or lack of) beliefs.
It is a good scientific discovery one way or another and would help us learn more about our bodies.
I am not sure if there has to be a sudden rise in temperature. First of all, how much of this electrochemical energy are we talking about? Obviously this would highly depend on the state of the person just before dying. Let's compare a person who is resting and in a deteriorated health condition that is dying slowly, the amount of electrochemical energy in such person must be much much less than a person who is playing chess or a highly stressful physical activity.
The second factor that comes to my mind is how fast the electrochemical energy converts to heat (if the conversion to heat is the case). It could very well be that the electrochemical activity continues for a while longer after death and the slow conversion to heat would mean that the rise in temperature would be hardly noticeable if at all.
If the person is doing a stressful physical activity the temperature of the body is already high and again it is not clear how fast the electrochemical energy converts to heat (again assuming that this is the case). So, it would be hard to measure it.
So, in my opinion unless we are using very precise measurements it is very hard to make a determination one way or another.

Pedram jaan, that would actually be the easiest form of energy to test for. As far as the electrochemical pulses go, this would require a sudden rise in temperature of the body at the moment of death. I have not heard of such a thing, but definitely open to investigating it, if you've heard of such a thing.

Now, since the beginning of this thread we have established there are actually two components produced by this electrochemical energy. One is the actual pulses in our neurons and the other one is Extremely Short Radio waves produced by our brain (i.e. we work much like a transmitter, where there is an electric current through the circuitry producing a radio wave). Again, I know of no mechanism through which radio waves are immediately transformed into heat.

Having said that, dicipation is not the same as destruction. Even if it may be counter-intuitive to assume that these pulses and/or radio waves are not destroyed, the law of conservation of mass-energy obvioulsy suggests that the elctromagnetic energy associated with our existence does not simply vanish or cease to exist. Even if by some remote mechanism all the nergy was converted to heat, this is just another form of electromagnetic energy!


I do. It is called Micro Wave Oven.

I do. It is called Micro Wave Oven.

Correct me if I'm wrong Rasoul jaan, but the shortest microwave wavelength frequncecy is about 3 million times higher than the frequencies we're talking about here. I'd hardly consider that a mechanism through which ELF radio waves can be "immediately" converted to heat.

First of all, I must say that I don't have any preference in accepting or dismissing your theory based on my religious (or lack of) beliefs.


Neither do I Pedram jaan and unlike what our good friend Keyvan thinks, and most of you know this already, I have no religous affiliation, not to metion I am very strongly against the concept of religion - that includes any religion.


It is a good scientific discovery one way or another and would help us learn more about our bodies.


That's all I'm trying to say Pedram jaan. I didn't just pull this thing out of a hat. There are certain things I've seen, felt and experienced for which science has no explanation. Obviously, scientific explanations have to be and will be extended to include these phenomena at some point. In the meanwhile, we don't have to sit here and wait for some one else in some other corner of the world to come up with a theory to explain these things to us. As Iranians, are we any less than the rest of the world to come up with new theories?!

So, in the absence of sicence, we must turn to all sources available to us, that includes philopsophy and sensory observations. We have already touched on the philosophical aspect of things (and religions in their purest form - i.e. books only - are just philosophical schools of thought to me). As far as sensory observations, there is something that differentiates me or Dobie (our dog) from grass. I don't need anyone to tell me that and I need no proof of it beyond what my senses can tell me. What I do need is to extend scientifc facts and theories to explain it, not prove it.


I am not sure if there has to be a sudden rise in temperature. First of all, how much of this electrochemical energy are we talking about? Obviously this would highly depend on the state of the person just before dying. Let's compare a person who is resting and in a deteriorated health condition that is dying slowly, the amount of electrochemical energy in such person must be much much less than a person who is playing chess or a highly stressful physical activity.


Agreed. We do need to come up with some method to quantify some parts of this theory. Having said that I think that the amount of heat that our bodies give off is so much larger than any heat that we would get from the conversion of electro-chemical and radio waves to heat (even if such mechanism was available), that quantifying it with today's knowledge and equipment would be extremely difficult if not impossible.


The second factor that comes to my mind is how fast the electrochemical energy converts to heat (if the conversion to heat is the case). It could very well be that the electrochemical activity continues for a while longer after death and the slow conversion to heat would mean that the rise in temperature would be hardly noticeable if at all.


Absolutely. I think this is more along the lines of what we can find out. As far as I know and found out, brain activity and the associated brain waves cease immediately when we die (i.e. this is the lagal definition of death or brain death). If you come across anything else that suggests otherwise, we definitely do need to take it into consideration somehow.

Again though, I don't know of any immediate mechanism to convert radio waves into heat, and as the wavelength of any wave increases (and frequency obviously decreases) it becomes more and more difficult to block or absorb this wave (i.e. less likely to convert it into heat). Here's a great article on this topic:

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy99/phy99245.htm


If the person is doing a stressful physical activity the temperature of the body is already high and again it is not clear how fast the electrochemical energy converts to heat (again assuming that this is the case). So, it would be hard to measure it.
So, in my opinion unless we are using very precise measurements it is very hard to make a determination one way or another.

Absolutely Pedram jaan, as I said earlier. Looks like we're on the same wavelength!!!!!! :couple: