Sunday, December 30, 2018

Time and Space


Time, Space, Inter dimensional travel, Linearity, Cycles, Curves and Paradoxes. All of these are great concepts to get in and study for yourself, but I will be writing a few hypothesis of my own about each of these topics. Firstly, we cannot consider ourselves alive without the notions of time and space. We see time as a linear concept that follows us from point A in space to point B in space. This could be considered a lifetime. The world we live in is joined by many such timelines. All these timelines sometimes interact with one another, every single interaction causes an alternate dimension or an alternate time and space. We should define what an interaction is. An interaction happens when one object performs an action that has effects on other objects(including himself), but this is not enough. Although not an interaction, an observation can also have an effect(see the wavicles in the double slit experiment posted in a previous article https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ). When talking about effect, we need to talk about cause and effect or causality as it is called. There can be no
effect without a cause. As I have previously analyzed inaction can also be stored as data of interaction however confusing that is. So for every interaction in your time-line with other objects or even with yourself multiple alternate dimensions appear. 
The question is: Do these alternate dimensions already exist predetermined just with the respective opposite interaction or do they come into existence only once the interaction has been undertaken? 
I personally think they exist only once an action has been undertaken. 
Of course this is just the end of the straw, the timeline itself started with the Big Bang/Start of the Simulation/God/Evil Demon/and so on, or it did not, what does this mean? 
It means that from the center of the universe, from before existence itself, there was an action that caused the beginning of everything. This in alternate dimension lead to nothing happening. Furthermore, each law of physics has effect, can we imagine alternate dimensions where one of the law of physics does not have effect? 
Hardly as all the laws came into place with creation of the universe, but it might not be the case. What this means, is that we might have multiple alternatives for the beginning/for the end/for the prime universe/or for universes. Personally what I think this means, is that the longest chain of interactions, may it be alternate from the original reality or not, is the "perfect" chain of actions. Other links might end abruptly or might differ on several different levels. Here one can imagine an alternate dimension where dinosaurs did not disappear. But an alternate dimension is linked to an original dimension, meanwhile an alternate universe should be linked to an original universe and an alternate galaxy linked to an original galaxy. In our dimension we became the dominant species, but who is to say that there isn't an alternative time and space in which each species becomes dominant through evolution. I like talking about spatial configuration when talking about alternate dimensions, imagine a line(the original) with the choice of multiple actions, these will be the closest links to the original by the amount of different choices one could perform. Let's say we had 3 choices at one moment, after choosing one, 7(we have 3 choices each once,2 choices without 1 trice, and the accumulative choice of all and none) links are created near the original, this link then becomes the original for other choices that will be taken in the future. You might think things are complicated now, wait until we add external factors. External factors have effect on the timeline itself, and if we are to trust in free will, there is an infinite number of possibilities through which all dimensions are linked to the original dimension. An interesting topic here would be the Mandela effect which could perhaps explain deviations in space and time that occur in reality https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN_qT6V5CIg. The choice of not interacting as well as the choice of interacting can have multitudes of possibilities linked to them. 
Want to complicate things even more?
Let's take Faith into account, by choosing to have faith when given the choice to either have it or not have it, you create not only one alternate dimension. The question is:
Does Faith have an effect? 
I believe it does, therefore the following happens. You choose to have faith in God alternatively you do not, both of these original/links then split one more time depending if faith has the effect to create or not. I must admit, it would be easier to only choose at the end in what you had faith in order to not cause links that create effects respectively links at the end of the timeline of a person. Imagine 2 billion people that have faith in God, what is the chance that all of them are wrong? It's miniscule. The same however goes for all other belief systems. The alternate to an atheist is a believer, but funnily enough, he stands the same odds of meeting God as believers as there are about 2 billion atheists and agnostics. Spatially with each movement or action the chain and the link become smaller and smaller to make place for new possibilities. We should also talk a little about Paradoxes, most importantly space and time paradoxes. 
What would you do if you were to meet yourself? 
Personally I would of course ask how he managed it. When a paradox happens a connection is formed between original chains of action, one goes through the old one, this of course changes
the outcome of the chain drastically. The chain would then have 3 original chains interconnected at one point of space and time. The chain with yourself at your youngest age between the chains, the chain of old with yourself that performs the paradox and then the chain of different outcome as you would change the chain once you interact with yourself. The more you interact with each other the more small links are added to the 3rd chain. The transfer of knowledge from the future could be abused. Just imagine how easy it would become to win the lottery. The question here is: 
Did you manage to change your own timeline or did you create an alternative timeline in which you interact with yourself? 
Personally I have yet to figure out yet which of the 2 is the correct answer as both might be true. 
How could this be achieved? 
Exotic matter is a favorite for a space wormhole, while traveling in space at high speeds would manage a time travel compared to the original planet you came from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuD34tEpRFw. The moment one reality develops inter dimensional travel it is very likely for many others to do so as well, you could explore different alternatives however the most probable outcome would be that the differences would be too small to be interesting. You would be better of inventing teleportation first unlike in “Rick and Morty”, unless of course you would also create a type
of code in the machine to help you differentiate between options, otherwise good luck going from one universe to another when the only small change was you forgot to buy bread. Basically, the first ones to discover inter dimensional travel would only have the advantage of making spatial paradoxes with each other, which does not account for much unless you maybe want to make an army of yourself and of course be remembered in the history of an finite infinite number of closely related chains as the one who invented inter dimensional travel. You could of course try to make massive changes in your lifestyle once you invent the device but that would be obsolete when you could have an army of yourself all working on different tasks, and let's face it, if you manage to invent inter dimensional travel everything else should only get easier from there unless of course you become lazy. You could also impact economy directly as it would be very probable you would have the same amount of bank currency across multiple realities. Probably the best way to earn money will be by fooling other people to join an alternate universe, although that will surely have consequences unless you would send them always to a new dimension, however there is a big possibility that people would not understand the limitations and then would be mad at you from another dimension. Sadly it's just too probable that there will only be small differences in dimensions so I'll leave this to somebody that grasps the semantics of inter dimensional travels better than I do. Time travel movie recommendation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4FTJN7jqiU

Sunday, December 23, 2018

Nothing and Nonexistence


Let's talk nothing and nonexistence. This is all theoretical but theories provoke the mind and perhaps you yourself after reading this will come up with your own hypothesis.
There is a permanent cycle in nature between life and death, one cannot exist without the other or all meaning would be lost. I claim that this cycle also occurs between something and nothing. There cannot be something without nothing nor the other way around.
The question remains what was before nothing and something?
Personally this is my greatest question and the question I would ask the universe itself if I had the opportunity. There are multiple types of nothing, one could call nothing void, dark matter or dark energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy, but that would still be something. What this means is that in our known universe there is more nothing than something, and against all odds life and death have found a way to exist and to create something we call life.
What would mean the death of the universe?
Perhaps a new beginning. We are not certain what death brings, it could bring nothing, or it could bring nonexistence.
What is your earliest memory?
For me it's a bicycle accident. So we miss our early years of youth in a blur while our minds develop, but we also miss the most important of life itself, the existence in the womb and the state before that, the state of nonexistence. It is said that a soul is born in the womb. I think it's important to understand the state of something and nothing for an individual, it can learn us more about the same state for the universe. So far we know that nothing and something although opposites can coexist, let's take it one step further, I believe that a universe is made out of at least two universes interconnected to one another, this could also be a chain of universes. But I'll be talking about the beginning, my hypothesis is that one universe is made of nothing and the other of something with nothing(more like nothing-something as long as it has some kind of form) entangled in it.
So the question here would be: What was before nothing?
If we talk about a chain of nothing and something it would be easy to talk about a Big Bang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang and a Big Crunch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch that made from something nothing and then from nothing something. Here could also be included the existence of white holes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole or the explosion of black holes. After absorbing enough matter a black hole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole inevitably spews all the information out in an explosion of energy, information here meaning whole galaxies that it has devoured while continuously expanding. When 2 black holes collide they become a binary black whole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_black_hole. This event could repeat itself multiple times until there is only one giant black hole in the entirety of the universe. This then could produce the Big Bang at some point.
But would entering such a black whole(inevitable event) take you into nonexistence or would it be just a wormhole that leads you eventually to another universe?
If the second theory would happen it would ruin the cyclical nature of something and nothing unless we talk about a wormhole to a parallel universe. It's a bit hard to toy around with space and time ripples at least, for now.
But let's get back to the question at hand: What was before nothing?
I gave you 2 scientifically theories, let's also talk about a theological theory, god created something out of nothing. There is not much to say about this theory, but it's interesting if we are to go back to the genesis as we know it, first there was light, this could mean the Big Bang or a white hole. Of course this theory dissatisfies both scientists and theologians alike, but if we are to trust in an all-powerful being this would not be that far out of reach. This would also confirm for me why the speed of light is one of the fastest speeds. Although the speed of observable pair particles is almost instant.
When observing one of the particles the other particle almost instant sets itself in the counter position of the first observed particle out of the pair. Quantum entanglement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhG_QZl8WVY
Another theory which has been gaining traction in the past years is the simulation theory. Just plug that supercomputer or quantum computer to a source of energy and start simulating after
a known pattern of existence(most likely their own). This would result in a replica of reality and the laws that govern it. Of course a brain might be also connected to the simulation(brain in a vat theory) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_in_a_vat, or as many brains as you'd want, these would power up the humans included in the replica and would give consciousness to them. But this is a rather grim theory. However it can be even worse, the evil demon theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_demon says the reality itself has been distorted for each and every one of us and this is just an illusion performed by the evil demon. Lastly, we also have the dream theory, made popular in modern times by movies like "Inception". Movie recommendation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoHD9XEInc0 So there are many theories out there for what was before nothing. Personally, I prefer thinking that we are in a reality but the odds of that being the truth make it rather problematic, especially when we already have simulation of our known
universe from its beginning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolshoi_Cosmological_Simulation. Of course these simulation do not have the power yet to zoom into galaxies but it’s just a matter of time and technological progress. Now, more importantly with all these theories stacked up one on top of the other, we have to think, which of these theories would prefer the existence of life?
Is the universe indifferent to us humans or was it predetermined for us to exist and try as much as we can to enjoy life?
Furthermore if the universe is indifferent and we were just a side effect of beings toying with the creation of the universe how can we claim that there is any purpose to life. An old thing I wrote, that sometimes gives me hope when thinking about the meaningless of the universe is "die for something you believe in".
Belief is personal and it has no limits, if I see myself as a creator of some sorts and I am satisfied with the responsibility and pride it would offer my life why would I not believe in it?
Here I have only talked about Genesis of creation of the universe, but what if this story we all follow called life is actually a Genesis with the purpose of the destruction of the universe?
Perhaps a very advanced civilization troubles itself at night with how their own lives will end and created an elaborate simulation to observe the causes of a possible extinction of the universe. Furthermore, no matter the sense in which we go, from something to nothing or from nothing to something, I believe that as long as any of these theories are true it will continue repeating itself. Lastly, I would like to end on a high note. If we truly live in a simulation, our goal would be to start the acts of conservation of energy and information. If the simulation will be ever closed, my theory is that we will continue living for perhaps what would be centuries or even more due to the fact that a high speed processor could simulate perhaps millions of years in just seconds for the entity it simulates it for. This gives us the chance to live our lives to their end without having to worry about being shut down. What this could also mean, is that when the time comes for us to be closed, we might have the resources necessary to power up our own universe if we reach a tier 2 civilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale by then. This would mean to harness the power of the sun to its full potential.
Would that energy be enough to keep the computer running from the inside to the outside or would we be forever doomed?
I cannot say, but I have the hope that there is a happy ending reserved for all of us.

Sunday, December 16, 2018

Cult of War


"Every act of creation if first an act of destruction", Pablo Picasso; "Without destruction there is no creation ... there is no change", Oda Nobunaga.
Do these quotes justify conflict, war, death? 
In their defense destruction does not always bring loss of human life with it, but if it were it's hard to agree with them. Humankind is driven by war, there have been less than 200 years without war globally in our recorded history. It is true that war has brought many innovations that we use today and has quite massively advanced technology. War even in culture/religion and myths has more deities than love and peace combined. Here are the lists that I have compared: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_deities, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Peace_deities and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_love_and_lust_deities
What does this say about ourselves? 
We claim to fight for peace but how can you maintain peace after bringing destruction and enforcing a military rule over others. Furthermore, you force them to believe in your gods. In other words, the right to rule throughout history has been given to the strongest military power. There is a cult of praise forged around soldiers. This can be seen best in America. But this is not new, we can see this kind of cult in history at the Aztecs and in the Roman empire only to name a few. Not only do we praise gods of war, but stories are told about great wars in religion as well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Heaven. The biggest problem in reality is that once this road to war is being undertaken it's hard to go back. Demilitarization can be an option, but you'd have to trust other countries to do so as well. The spent resources must be retrieved somehow, and this can only be done by enforcing conflict and war. Prevention of war has become preparation for war. It's a rather grim picture for humanity, and I wouldn't be surprised if a war driven nation would manage to also invent an AGI(Artificial General Intelligence) to completely nullify the defenses of another country. I think it will resemble the creation of the first computers and the internet for military purposes. This however might be ingrained in our DNA, as we evolved we became better hunters and maximized our chances at surviving in unforgiving nature. The better the hunters the more meat would be brought the higher the chance of survival for the whole tribe. Furthermore 5 out of 6 ancestor races have died, perhaps these were not as prepared for a human to human encounter or perhaps they went extinct for other reasons, this is sadly unknown, and one can only speculate. We also got lucky that the extinction of the dinosaurs happened, leaving space for evolution for a social mammal, the ape. This and the earliest forms of communities helped us alongside making tools for war against other mammals. Step by step we evolved into homo sapiens and instead of recognizing and appreciating each human with no discrimination we started driving cultures extinct. It is unknown to me if war is justified through religion or if the religion we choose to believe in, preach war. "Holy war" is preached by multiple religions, the conflict derives from misinterpretation of ancient texts. 
Who is to say that "the one True God" doesn't have multiple names depending on culture? 
In a previous post i have discussed about my belief in an All-Father("The deity variously called “Yahweh” or “Lord” or Allah” is thought to be one and the same God.") http://www.ipripak.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/bkreviewsw2005.pdf but I haven't properly explained my view on his existence, form or substance. The reason why we should not portray him is because we cannot even conceive such a powerful being. Our image of God is distorted by our own image. We make him a fatherly figure, as if God would have a gender or a skin color or a long beard. 
Who is to say that all these elements are true? 
One counterargument to this is "She is black", this view of God or "Kali" is portrayed in the Hindu mythology. Alan Watts talks more about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLg4AV60uWY&t=535s. Let's also talk about ethics. 
Is genocide not condemned by religion? Doesn't religion teach us to love the closest to us? 
We seem to forget the simplest teachings, the ancient texts talk about believing in God, but this mustn't be done necessarily through worship or by destroying temples and symbols of other cultures. By doing these atrocities or by performing genocide do you not only entice the other culture to hate and separate itself and even rebel against your own gods? What if the only difference is the name? The ancient texts taught us how to live a good life and how to be better versions of ourselves, even though some laws of God should be revisited we probably will not believe in contemporaneous prophets unless they can perform miracles. We are imperfect, we are not pure, personally, I think this is the fault of society and evolution. I think a big problem nowadays is that some nonbelievers act more responsibly and more considerate towards other humans than believers. They hate and discriminate less and are more charitable towards the poor no matter the religion. Without believing they will be rewarded in the afterlife, so wouldn't these individuals be more fit to ascend to Heaven/Nirvana/Eden and so on? Meanwhile the sects and religions keep for themselves and teach of punishment for the nonbelievers. They only help believers even if the help they could give to poorer nations could help restore a small balance to the world. It is hard to say if religion made the world a better or a worse place, mainly because it has been there since the beginning of recorded history. After all religion is part of our culture and just another thing that makes us distinguish ourselves from others. Leaving some of my cynic aside, religion gives purpose to life and I truly believe that purpose, no matter the purpose, is good. Under this assumption religion itself must be good, but we must differentiate between preachers of religion, especially those who only use small parts of the ancient texts to gain control over the masses and religion. Faith itself can't be bad, but as it happens with every important thing, humans cannot grasp all the information in an objective way or don't want to. 
What does it mean to be a religious person? 
Perhaps it means just to live a good life and be a better version of yourself, perhaps it means to read the ancient texts or perhaps it means to preach and convey others to your religion (although unlikely in my view as this is the exact thing that made problems throughout history and created conflict and war). Leaving more cynic aside, maybe we are not driven at war by religion, but it is one of the reasons that justifies war. A fully objective view would be to see war and conflict just as small parts of economic and political conflicts. The catch is in the interest of the elites. the less than 1% that run the world. Religion, holy wars and defense of your own religion are all part of an intertwined web of persuasion that are used to manipulate the 99%, or more likely the fit to fight that also believe in the preachers of religion. Lastly, do not believe the truths of others, seek the truth for yourself, do not seek justification of actions that contradict your morality from others, decide for yourself if something is right or not. Only when having full control of your life and accepting the possible
consequences of your own actions will you truly be free. And a free person is free to be judged by others, but no judgement should take his freedom away. 
Who is more justified in his actions the conqueror or the conquered? There are so many factors to consider but most important of them all, how is the individual affected? 
Mankind might not be so bad after all, but when we see our closest friends or family members die for no reason other than the will of others how can we stand aside and not do anything. Vengeance is enough of a driving factor to rebel against anything. ““Eye for an eye” makes the whole world blind”. At the same time many soldiers return home never wanting to return to the battlefield, soldiers, veterans that suffer tremendous psychological damage, many times irreversible after having lost their fellow men during wartime or after seeing the atrocities of war. We are evolving, for the past years we have been getting closer and closer to a nuclear war, but mankind will stand tall, and hopefully with a bit of help and luck we will manage to maintain peace and stop war. As a last note, if the money invested in prevention of war would be used for advancing society, we would have a better living much faster, but this, after all, is just, wishful thinking. Movie recommendation for this topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej83QvHuiNI

Sunday, December 9, 2018

Questions of philosophy to life


I wanted a thought provoking question, so I decided to look for one on this wonderful tool we call the internet, "questions of philosophy to life" was what I searched for, here is what I got: https://conversationstartersworld.com/philosophical-questions/
It's true that I personally prefer thinking of life after death, as I feel it's limitless. But let's first talk about life in our current era, big advances have been made in the last few years. Narrow AI, cryptocurrency, reusable rocket parts for space travel to Mars, Quantum computing, multiple ways to cure disease as well as methods to enhance and stretch the lifespan of people, just to name a few of the things humanity has been working on. My belief is that by the time I die of natural causes, I will have a choice, to either die or to upload my consciousness into a machine or perhaps an AI. Hereby lies a question that I wanted to think about: Is immortality of the soul more important than immortality of the consciousness? 
Sadly, we still do not know what makes us human, but we enjoy differentiating ourselves from animals by using words as reason, logic and consciousness, but we are after all not very different from one another, meanwhile when talking about machines more specifically about AGI Artificial General Intelligence we separate ourselves by using concepts as soul and life. 
What is truly alive would the next question be? Are you as alive as I am? Is the code/genomes/bacteria or mapping of the synapses(perhaps consciousness) what differentiates my alive from your alive? 
The first question however that I found, although not necessarily relevant with my own questions was: What harsh truths do you prefer to ignore? 
Immediately I had an idea. The question reminded me, like any good questions of other questions. Is ignorance bliss? Would you take the red pill or the blue pill from Morpheus? 
I am talking of course about the Matrix trilogy which I recently watched. 
Morpheus himself in the Greek mythology stands for the God of Dreams. We choose to ignore that statistically speaking the odds of our world being a simulation become more and more likely as technology advances. We already have a simulation of our universe. 
Would it be that weird to find the resources to simulate humans? What would be the next step? 
We should not forget that ethics should be involved when creating or simulating life. Shouldn't you feel as responsible for the children starving in Africa in the simulation as well as in our
world. Movie recommendation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtYdZkPmFoU
Would you attempt to eliminate all crimes? Would it be better to simulate a non-reality to first test the reaction of humans under pressure or under change?
Back to the question itself as the simulation theory remains for now just a theory. Firstly, there are universal truths and personal truths. It's hard to deny a universal truth, for example "the earth is round" but it is equally as hard to deny personal truths like existence of God. But if you were to ask me, the only truth that I ignore is that life is devoid of meaning. We came into existence just to evolve and procreate. There is no meaning in one action especially when thinking about parallel universes
where the action itself has exact opposite outcome, and an individual although able to impact multiple lives is still just an individual, and as much as I like thinking that every life matters the world seems to wake us up by showing us that every legacy is finite. Sadly, this subject got dark fast. What do we do while ignoring this harsh truth? 
We embrace Hedonism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonism, we take pleasure in the physical world and in its goods. We try to maximize happiness, process that in turn doesn't help the advancement of society but is our primary goal even while not realizing it. Furthermore, it's impossible to reach a maximum of happiness, there is no way of knowing when you reach your personal limit. 
What happens then? 
The pursuit continues, and the reward seems ever so distant, we try harder to bend the world around us through sheer effort which many times feels like it wasn't worth the reward. We are stuck in a cycle, every one of us who can't find their balance in life. Another goal of life is earning or having more than the people in your social circle. This is the driving factor of competition but also a trap of society.
Another philosophical question debated since ancient times is whether humans have free will. There are a few scenarios that we can follow here. 
If the universe is cyclical does everything happen the same way every time? 
It always starts with a Big Bang and ends with a Big Crunch for example. Another scenario is that God made everything in conformity with his divine plan. Here we can add that God is all knowing, so He should know already everything that will happen therefore eliminating free will. Of course, here should be noted that we have the free will to believe in his existence or not, although that could be predetermined as well. Another thing to consider is how fast the brain sends impulses. The brain itself is faster than thought itself, we become conscious of things without dwelling too much on the subjects, it's almost like the brain would have an answer or the synapses configured for every task we choose to make in life. Of course, some training is required, as nobody can learn everything, but the
majority of your every day to day interactions are considered by the brain and automated. Lastly, if this were to be a simulation, the simulation itself would have meaning, not the individual, we could be mere puppets in a greater plan but then even our small interactions between one another wouldn't those be simulated in advance.
How could a simulation do that? 
With Big Data, there is no need for imagination here, although that could be one of the few things that would not be predetermined. This Big Data could include all information about whom you talked with, books you downloaded, purchase history and everything that could be stored as information. Lastly, one thing that made me doubt the possibility that we have free will is the wavicle experiment. When observed an electron or other particles are shot one at a time through a double slit depending if the experiment is observed or not the wavicles can act either as particles or waves, this is not dependent on time as when observing the trajectory in reverse the outcome is the same. So, depending on the existence of an observer the particles act either as particles or as waves. This means that the wavicles interact with one another in a predetermined fashion when an observer is placed or not to follow the experiment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ
What does this mean?
If there is no observer for our actions or no recordings we might have free will, while not having in the opposite scenario. This reminds me of a saying: 
“If a tree falls in the woods does it make a sound?". 
In other words anything that is not observed does it really exist? 
While on the same topic, another interesting question is: 
"What should be the goal of humanity?" 
Ensure the survival of species based on what we have concluded previously. However, let's also look at the half full part of the glass. I would say Creation. We are here to create circumstances,
children, art or even AGI another purpose could be Discovery, we are here to discover the laws of physics that surround us, to find out what dark matter is but also discover happiness and fulfilment. Exploration could be another goal of humanity, to reach out to other planets, maybe aliens but to also explore our inner selves through meditation.
Who am I to limit our goal as humankind? 
I can just hint at some of the goals, perhaps too little, in the end I guess all we seek under different forms are pleasures and knowledge. Lastly along all other things and along my earlier cynic that we are born just to procreate, this also is part of something bigger, leaving a legacy.
Now most people leave a legacy through their kids, some manage to have less lasting legacies or more lasting legacies, let's look at the writings of Greek philosopher’s or the military journal of Julius Caesar or art. The most lasting legacies are the ones documented or written down in history, but it's easier in our day to leave a legacy, everything can be stored digitally. Remember the dead. We managed to reach a level where our kids will have pictures online with their grandparents.
"How long will you be remembered for after you die?"

Sunday, December 2, 2018

Afterlife Part 2/2

Let us start by talking about abstract concepts, or the way I like calling them free concepts. 
Were they the ones that have gifted us to keep creating more and more?
Thinking is one of many gifts that has been given to us. It’s hard to imagine a world where thinking would not exist, although I think it could be somewhat hilarious. A world with people always telling what their inner thoughts should be. It would certainly lead to less hypocrisy. It would also become annoying fast if thought were to be taken away after having it.
Personally, I think a well-made genesis or beginning of our 3-dimensional world would start only after thinking the consequences and the plan well. It would be rather bothersome if our world were to just exist because of physical causes and not a well thought through “greater plan”.
Another free concept would be Death, why fear death, death comes after all of us, the only death that should affect you, is not your own, but the death of your beloved ones. Death has been here from the beginning, even stars die.
The dead took a journey faster than us from this world to the next one. Personally, I will find happiness in death, because I can only imagine death as guide to your afterlife. In a sort of way death should be all knowing if imagined as an entity rather than just an occurrence at the end of one’s life.
But is there a bigger force than death and life? 
Personally, for me it’s hard to imagine any stronger entities besides the one residing over death and life. 
Don't we all come from the same source, or are we not all going towards the same direction? 
If we all go towards the same direction my hope is that we go towards a journey and an end filled with love. Love is a driving force of the universe. How much love must the universe have, in order to permanently give us motivation to go forward. Hope/Believe/Faith are all part of the same bigger idea. It's hard to take them apart. If you truly believe in something you have faith, but one can still believe in afterlife, no matter what form it brings.
A journey for everyone during after lifetimes, my hope while writing this is, that it is not a solitary road that we have to take, but one with loved ones. You can love different things in different manners. But I am not one to teach about love, because I have never managed to share my love for the physical world or reality as it’s called. Perhaps that is why I personally dislike life and await death without fear. Partly, because I have thought very well of how my afterlife should look like and can only wait for the brain and soul to take me on my own journey. 
I can say I was one of the lucky few to have found and lost his soulmate, but for the ones that haven't found it yet, do not despair, time is relative, and it is hard to find it when we have limited time in this world. But there should be no limit out of time in the afterlife to find your soulmate.
Is what we write fiction, or do we create reality? Do our thoughts replicate this? Are we each guided by a different entity? 
The driving force of the universe for the current times are humans. If only we would love each other more and would help each other where needed to achieve our own ascension to heaven.
After letting you contemplate all the different forms of creation I will also mention some of my own, because as there is Science and Imagination there is Pseudo-Science. As there is Physics, Metaphysics there are also Quantum Physics. Each and everybody of us has his own way of getting inspired. I hope that these passages will offer you a bit more inspiration to take your time when you get old to think about the afterlife, I would not recommend setting your mind on a journey of self-discovery prior to getting old as it is time consuming and we are not always right when we are
young as we still accumulate experience. When the time comes you should provoke your thought to come up with your own genesis, maybe write something yourself and come in a few years back and rewrite some more. There are no limits to what we can create, but if I should warn you about anything, is that some creations are as frail as a snowflake and should be treated carefully.
Let us take the time to also talk about a worst-case scenario. What do most of us expect to happen after we die? 
For me and for others it wouldn't be surprising if a light were to appear right in front of our spiritual body. All we would have to do is follow the light and experience a potential eternity of happiness or sadly, a trap. There exists a myth that by going in the light you prepare your soul to be recycled, drained of its energy and be given a new body. This would not be a problem if you wanted to live again, me personally I would hate it. The myth goes, that there are multiple levels of knowledge contained in the light, with each level you climb you must forget something regarding your previous life. At the very end, at the last level you would not remember of your past self and you would be ready to start a new genesis. We truly are the main protagonists of our own stories.
If we started talking about the Many Worlds Theory in conjunction with faith, we should also talk about the many different sources of inspiration that we find in our world. So many beautiful stories are created by humans in works of art. Would it surprise you that each one of these works of art may be true in their own universes? As part of an interconnected multiverse. Some examples of things that might be real: Movies, books, cartoons and other, all you had to do is imagine that that will be the world you reach after death. I said imagine, but faith must be intertwined, furthermore, the more elements the better, things to consider when using imagination in such a way is that you
depart your reality and are able to experience a new one with different rules of physics and ruled by different entities.
Furthermore, there are beings with capacities to travel across universes and realities, one of the most notable ones would be Deadpool the comic book version, it is important to note that we ourselves have multiple variations which sadly do not interact one with the other.
If of course you would want to meet the people you love in your creation or just join in somebody
else's creation you should talk with them. This of course will be a test to your faith. In the end everything is interconnected, and information is never lost. At least for our universe.
Let's take another moment to talk about religion, one of my first thoughts was, how to bring religions together when people fight over this topic so much. I have yet to come up with a solution for this, but I personally believe in an All-Father (As God has many names in different cultures and religions so does he have for me as well), a supreme being, considered as a Prime Mover by myself after learning the theory from Aristotle, here is more information about what the prime mover is, a first cause of the universe itself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmoved_mover. Only a being as powerful as everybody he commands could truly understand the necessity of having such a role full of responsibility.