Do you think soul's have shadow?

That would require a soul to be a physical object capable of blocking physical lightwaves, which of course is contrary to the common perceptions of what a soul is.

I think It doesn’t. When people see a ghost or spirit they don’t see a shadow.
Oh yeah and are you high?
The only time I hear questions like that is when my brother is high!

in real life I dont think so, Einstein said a soul is pure energy, energy dont cast shadows.

“Einstein said a soul is pure energy…” [citation needed].
He seems to not believe in a soul at all.

But to answer the question, I’m not sure that a non-physical entity would have a shadow, since a shadow is a lack of light because the light is hitting something physical. Of course, I don’t believe in them anyway, so I suppose I ought not have answered your question at all.

Perhaps in Heaven the traces of our earthly sins are seen as shadows.

yes I’m sure that’s it

Oh yes. A person’s soul always casts a shadow on those nearby. That is how we can sense a person when they are near even if we can’t see them. We all have An essence that is a distillation of all that we are. We can sense this essence of others in ways that are unclear. Perhaps we make subtle changes in the atmosphere of the space we enter that we can detect with our senses without quite becoming aware of what we are doing. That is what we call the shadow of a soul—for those who are inclined to use that metaphor.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies : That’s the mystery we all will have to experience after death. What do you think of water, gas, air? Do they have a shadow? You can see a shadow of water
if you put a candle or any light source behind the object. How can we experiment this with a soul ? So, it’s still in mystery book. :(

That would depend upon how one defines “soul”. My position is that a soul is not a physical entity. Thus it could not affect a change upon anything in the physical realm.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies : Ya! Agree with you. :)

I have used laser diodes and detectors to measure gas concentrations by their absorption of specific spectral lines of light. I have never never seen a drop that was not caused by the test gas – including the IR range for CO2.
I guess that means no souls passed through my beam.

It doesn’t mean that at all. It only means that you cannot detect them passing through.

@wundayatta I like your answer. I have never heard it quite put like that. Still, I would argue that we sense someone is in the room because their body creates the disturbance. Maybe it is a bend in space, or the heat of their body, but I don’t think it is their soul. But I like the idea. It fits in with how I like the idea that we come back, reincarnate after death, and the souls we love continue to stay near us. One life my husband might have been my brother, or my son. But, I don’t really believe it, I just like the idea.

I do not know if there is such a thing as a soul. There is no evidence discernible in the material world of such a thing’s existence. If, as @RealEyesRealizeRealLies suggests, they can’t interact in any way with the material world, what good would they do to a corporeal body?

If a soul blocked light, then it would be detectable by scientific methods. So no, if there are souls, they are either non corporeal altogether, existing only on a spiritual plane, a part of the great void, space-time, or quite transparent.

Perhaps the entire Universe is God, in which case we each have a part of God permeating every part of our existence. But this would not equate to a soul as a homunculus in our heads, which is what I gather most people envision when they claim to have a soul. They are equating their soul with the separate sense of “I“ness, or the little wo/man who watches the movie screen in their head. I am pretty sure based on evidence available that no such homunculus exists, and therefore they leave no shadows.

I’ve said it before, and for the sake of this thread I’ll say it again…

I do believe in Soul, but not nearly in the manner that is typically referenced in common vagueness. Soul is the Theological synonym of Mind, that being from Science. Two different words that mean the exact same thing. But neither Theology nor Science would have us realize this.

The same is true for Spirit and Thought. One term from Theology and the other from Science. But they are identical in concept.

It takes many Spirits to build a Soul. Just as it takes many Thoughts to build a Mind. These are identical concepts and neither one of them is emperically demonstrable. We cannot touch or hold a Soul any more than we can smell or taste a Mind. These agents may only be inferred to exist, but they are never provable, and never will be.

But can we deny that the Soul of a Nation exists? It is built upon the individual Spirits that affect it throughout history. The Soul of Baseball, and the Soul of Ferrari are built upon the numerous and varied Spirits that have affected those institutions. And although many physical people have come and gone, their Spirits remain to this day, coming together to create the Soul of, the Internet, McDonalds, the YMCA, the Legal System, or whatever human endeavor one might think of.

Likewise, the Mind of McDonalds, the Internet, or whatever, is guided by the Thoughts of those involved with it, be them past, present or future. In this manner, Spirit, Thought, Soul, and Mind are t-i-m-e-l-e-s-s, non-corporeal, immaterial, yet quite real nonetheless. A clever fellow might even make a plausible argument that these agents of immaterialism are the only real agents in existence, and our physical realm is the one of fleeting fancy, never really existing at all. Not now, not then, not ever.

Now here is Nowhere.

We have to first define what “spirit” really is. Spirit is really nothing more than information. This information is known as i-ther (intelligent ether). It comes down to the very reason why our universe formed to evolve and support life.

The structure of i-ther continually fed with energy had the self-organizing power of chaos. Evolution by this means continued for some 300 billion years until a conscious intelligence emerged. Only then could several parallel universes of matter be created as a set of virtual realities. This is claimed reasonable since the weirdness of quantum theory can be interpreted to mean that matter is not truely real. Atoms are programmed like the self-replicating viruses that plague computer users but have a replication cut off routine so that matter stops being produced at the required time.

Minds (spirits) are sectioned off fragments of i-ther and use these fabricated matter-systems as temporary habitats (our physical bodies and brain). Lifetimes in any one are deliberately limited and then the mind switches to one of the alternative habitats similarly prepared as virtual realities. So contrary to the established opinions held by the entire spectrum of the sciences, this theory has immortality as an inherent future.

The i-ther I’ve been mentioning are sub-quantum particles with annihilation filaments (at their cores) as composites of positive and negative energy that have a a zero net mass. This means that waves traveling along them will move at a speed indistinguishable from infinite speed. Therefore information generated at any place can be almost instantly available everywhere in the universe.

The entangled particles only need to be linked by information since, according to this theory, all matter is simply built this way. So non-locality and telepathy are intimately linked. They are different manifestations of the same thing. Telepathy could instantly transmit information from any point in the universe to any other. It means all the information about everything that is happening, everywhere in thw whole universe, is instantly available at every place. Every mind therefore needs to be protected from information overload by being surrounded by a very effective information filter-barrier programmed by the i-ther within it’s computer-like structure. The propagation of information is no longer limited to the speed of light, as in relativity.

I’ve mentioned all of this as so to define what I consider to be “spirit” which is really information devrived from the i-ther or in Spiritualist terms the “cosmic consciousness” rather than an individual entity. Everything is interconnected through this i-theric information and this is a theory which explains many phenomenom including ghosts, spirits, telepathy, near death experiences, out-of-body experiences among others. Now that we know what a soul really is the short answer to your question in our physical sense is no but in certain circumstances of entities that can occasionally materialize (since we are all made of the same matter in the same time/space but on a different wavelength frequency) yes a “soul” or really an interdimensional being can ommit a shadow in the correct circumstances (another topic altogether).

@Paradox I enjoy reading your comments and I’m very happy that you are here to express them. In very basic principle, I kind of think I agree with you… kind of. But our terminologies are so different, that I can’t really tell. On the surface, I have some issues with the way you present your thoughts. So in curiosity, not challenge, allow me to ask some pointed questions.

First, I understand that you are representing the hypothesis of Pearson’s Big Breed. Is this correct? And more specifically (since I have not read him) how much of your own thoughts are coming through here, possibly challenging Pearson’s? Do you agree with everything he says, or are you using his theory to support your own further suppositions? I’m interested in both.

Have you or Pearson contrasted your thoughts against Information Theory, Norbert Weiner, The Sphota Theory, or Biblical principles of The Word? These are a few of the notions I’ve pursued, and thus, I must digest your comments in light of the Knowledge Trap that I’m already in.

With that in mind, I must ask… in order to discover if we are of like thinking, or approaching a semantic confusion.
______________________________

“The structure of i-ther…”

The term “structure” denotes a physicality. Is the “i-ther” a physical agent? If not, then it cannot have any “structure” whatsoever.

Now forgive me for being such a hard linguist. If the “i-ther” is indeed non-physical, I can accept that, and I understand why one would use the word “structure” to describe it. Our physical language breaks down and fails miserably to describe immaterialism, for we must use material terms to accomplish this. Most of my issues with this subject deal with this semantic hurdle.

I assure you, I mean no challenge. My intentions are designed to help us all develop a clear way of speaking on this subject, denoting the immaterialism, but sans the materialistic terminologies. If we cannot do this, then our dissertations are doomed to being misunderstood. We so often take language for granted, assuming that we understand what each other are talking about. But when speaking of the immaterial realm, we must be extremely cautious with the words we use to describe it, lest we mistakenly tag it with materialist characteristics. Perhaps we even need new words to discuss this issue accurately.
________________________________

“The structure of i-ther continually fed with energy had the self-organizing power of chaos.”

If the I-ther is non-physical, then how is it “fed with energy”? How is it “fed” with any thing? I propose that a non physical agent is not “fed”, and requires no thing (nothing) from the physical realm whatsoever.

But more importantly, I challenge any notions of a “self-organizing power of chaos”. I’ve seen nothing to suggest this is possible or accurate. Yes, yes, I know that 99% of physicists would disagree with me. But I feel they are suffering from the same semantic materialistic hurdle that I described above.

It is a Paradox, to claim that chaos is self-organizing. A contradiction in terms to say the least. If chaos is self-organizing, then how can it be chaos? It’s a lazy use of language, and leads to confusion and bad science. We casually toss words like “order” and “self-organizing” about without really understanding the ramifications of those erroneous labels.

In this manner, we personify objects, thereby creating false Gods. We would do well to leave and label objects as objects, and not personify them. Organization requires an organizer. And the only organizer found in this scenario is the human observer, who upon careful observation, describes a phenomenon, thereby creating order and organizing that which has no order inherently unto itself.

We can’t even see our own minds working.
_________________________________________

“Evolution by this means continued for some 300 billion years until a conscious intelligence emerged”

Evolution requires a code. All codes come from the mind of an author. We have yet to discover a code beyond DNA. No code of the cosmos has ever been detected. SETI will confirm this in spades. Therefore we cannot rightfully claim that the cosmos Evolved.

Cause and Effect is not synonymous with Evolution, and they should not be conflated. There is a vast chasm between Cause and Effect and Thought and Affect. The smoking gun to determine the difference is the existence of Code. Without Code, there is only Cause and Effect (Cause/Reaction). With Code, we MUST infer Thought and Affect (Thought/Action). Then and only Then, may we claim the existence of Information (Thought In-to-Form).
___________________________________

“Atoms are programmed like the self-replicating viruses…”

That very well could be. Though I would require a code to make that claim. Where is the code that confirms this statement?
__________________________________

“quantum theory can be interpreted to mean that matter is not truely real”

Yes it can be interpreted that way.
__________________________________

”(Atoms)...have a replication cut off routine so that matter stops being produced at the required time.”

You understand this flies in the face of traditional physics. As I understand it, “matter” is never “produced”. It is only reformed as varying densities of energy. And again, a “replication cut off routine” requires a code to make that happen. Where is the code?
__________________________________

“Minds (spirits) are sectioned off fragments of i-ther and use these fabricated matter-systems as temporary habitats (our physical bodies and brain)”

Personally, I equate Mind with Soul. Spirit is synonymous with Thought. Thought and Spirit are metaphorical building blocks that construct Mind/Soul. Many Thought/Spirits build a Mind/Soul, thereby awareness of mathematics, charity, billiards, and photography metaphorically fill and expand a Mind/Soul.

But to manifest these immaterial agents into the material realm requires a physical medium. And you are correct to note the “temporary habitats” as “physical bodies and brain”. The “tion” in In-form-a-tion denotes that as a process. Therefor Information is the process of manifesting Thought/Spirit into physical Form. Physicality is the medium which expresses it. Language (Code) is the tool that we use to accomplish it. Code is the only tool that can manifest Thought in-to-form… physical form.
___________________________________

“Lifetimes in any one are deliberately limited…”

The deliberate cancellation of a program requires an auto-exec code to terminate the run sequence. I’ve often wondered, just before the Biblical account of the Flood, where God claims in Genesis 6:3, “Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with [a] man forever, for he is mortal [b] ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years.”… Did God alter our genetic code in order to accomplish this? We are rapidly learning to alter our genetic code, and extended lifespan seems to be a viable pursuit simply by “tweaking” our biochemistry. Juan Enriquez thinks so. So does Judith Campisi.

Keep in mind, before the flood, humans supposedly lived well past 400 to 900 years. Supposedly…
_____________________________________

“The i-ther I’ve been mentioning are sub-quantum particles…”

So is the I-ther a physical or non-physical agent? I don’t want to misread you. And more specifically, is the I-ther intelligent? Is it a sentient being, be it material or immaterial?

I have more questions, and comments, but this should suffice for now. Thanks!

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies You asked: First, I understand that you are representing the hypothesis of Pearson’s Big Breed. Is this correct? And more specifically (since I have not read him) how much of your own thoughts are coming through here, possibly challenging Pearson’s? Do you agree with everything he says, or are you using his theory to support your own further suppositions? A little of both. From reading two of his books on this matter I have a better understanding than most (according to his own theory) so in a direct sense I’m using my own words to directly quote this theory. So yes, my statements are more of Ron’s own interpretation rather than my own.

There are quite a few other dualist physicists who disagree with what I’ve mentioned however. Brian Josephson is just one example. The biggest arguments that other secular dualists have is with what was mentioned above: natural order emerging from chaos with energy and proper time frame being applied. The religionist dualist very obviously would have a problem with that but so do some secular dualists as well.

I don’t have any certain opinion I am sticking to at this point, I’m just trying to investigate with an open mind on this matter. I admit that I’ve had somewhat of a bias to support Pearson’s theory on this issue because he was one of the few that has actively tried to connect dualism with the orgin of the universe, conditions for life to exist and even life itself. His hypothesis about the obvious expansion of the universe (which violates the cosmic constant of the Big Bang) anticipates mathematically that the universe should expand at a faster rate.

I also have a hard time taking any religious texts with a grain of salt as well. As far as The Word mentioned in the Bible I have my doubts but I’m open enough to assume that maybe I’m wrong here as well. I never heard of the Information Theory, Norbert Weiner nor the Sphota Theory. My take on this matter and why I’m willing to agree with Pearson’s theory (at this point) is I have a hard time believing in an omnipotent God that decided to do nothing for eternity and all of a sudden snap his/her fingers and decide to create everything. I don’t believe in magic nor miracles myself and to me no such entity can exist. I will agree with you about order and code randomly emerging from chaos could be considered a miracle itself. But than again we arrive at that unknown.

I have answers to all of your questions (I think), I will try to explain what i-ther really is better. I’m running late but I will try to get back with answers when I get the time.

I appreciate the reply. I don’t believe in the type of God you describe either. But the concept of “all of eternity” as reason not to believe in some type of a G may be worthy of revisiting.

Typically, we think of eternity as being all of time. Well, the G being is supposed to exist outside of our materialist space/time, and therefor would not be subject to the same limitations as we. I suggest there are other dimensions where time is not so confining, and may not exist at all.

Time is a measure of velocity over distance. But an immaterial realm has no physicality, and thus no distance, no measure, no time. I suggest it is a realm of pure all knowing thought. So I’m curious if the I-ther is physical, or non-physical. If it is non-physical, then what else could it be, other than pure all knowing thought. All knowing means that knowledge is never learned. It does not require space/time to build up graduated knowledge. It does not become. It simply IS, and we have a very difficult time understanding and accepting that. That’s ok. My dog has difficulty understanding why I tie my shoe.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies You asked about what i-ther really is and it’s hard to explain. According to the Big Breed Theory i-ther is the only form of true reality that exists in the 7 different universes (yes it is assumed that there are 7 different universes that the mind can inhabit including our own universe).

During the time period the universe was in a zero energy state called the void this condition of existance was very unstable with positive and negative energy cancelling each other out into annihilation until finally a slight energy potential (let’s say positive since we are used to the direction of energy transfer being in the same direction as it’s movement) creation slightly favored annihilation. According to this theory i-ther is the smallest form of reality, even smaller than subatomic quantum particles. I-ther just is, the buck has to stop somewhere. Everything else is what we percieve through our senses. All matter is nothing more than wave-particle duality. Wave-particle duality was the virtual “reality” created by the only real form of matter which is the i-ther itself. There is alot more to this and I’m putting in very short paragraphs here to try and explain a really complicated grid-theory.

We are fascinated by the sheer size of this universe but to an intelligent i-ther (which makes up the entire universe and IS the entire universe itself) this megaspeed expansion has to be a nightmare since if the expansion stopped positive and negative energy would cancell each other out into oblivion.

According to this grid theory of i-ther the terms “spirit”, ghosts and souls are actually an insult since these entities are real people like ourselves but interdimensional beings whose matter systems interpenetrate ours but yet do not interfere with each other (at least at most times or no paranormal activity would occur). Again this is more complicated than what I’m mentioning here.

Interestingly, naturalists propose that life randomly evolved from non-living matter and consciousness evolved from life evolving. This Big Breed Theory proposes that i-ther (the only real existance in the universe) evolved to develope a mind or consciousness then this consciousness created the illusion of matter and life.

Physicalism = life created mind. Grid Theory (i-ther) = mind created life.

As far as life or consiousness evolving from chaos this is speculation. I would suggest maybe reading this book. This is a quality book by a scientist name John Gribben who shows how many different experiments have shown that natural order is inevitable when energy is consistently applied to a chaotic situation. However even Ron Pearson and other supporters of this i-ther grid theory even acknowledge they don’t know everything and it’s even possible for a higher intelligence that organised consciousness and life itself. I would have wrote more but i’m beat from a long week.