crankypot.com

Lets talk about something real. Atoms. Everything in the world that’s ever been, was and will ever be, is made of atoms. Period. You, me and everything else around us is made up of different kind of atoms. I remember standing in the middle of the mall the other day and thinking to myself: “Wow, all of this stuff came out out of the earth and ground?”. Everything we see is just collection of tiny entities call atoms. However, current atoms in your body are not the same atoms that were present in you, oh lets say 10 years ago, or even 10 days ago. That’s right. You’re only a temporary collection of assorted atoms. In other words, different kinds of atoms have to come together at some point in time just to form YOU; then to disband and be replaced by other atoms (at different times of course). Some scientists hypothesize that by the age of 30 all of the atoms in our body have been replaced by new ones; and that’s not even the strange part. Think of this: Atoms don’t age. They don’t just die. Radioactive atoms do decay but non-radioactive atoms are permanently stable as far as we can tell. After we die, atoms that make up our body are recycled. Some of them end up in ground, some in air while some end up in other objects. That would mean you might be made of same atoms as Hitler, Plato or even Jesus Christ was made of. You also might be containing same atoms that may have been in Great Wall Of China, bottom of the ocean, moon, dinosaurs and even Turkish hashish from Anatolia’s mountains. As a matter of fact, it’s a statistical certainty that you’re made of same atoms which some famous people were made of; or at least those atoms were part of you at some point in your life.

Question is: if atoms in our body are constantly getting replaced, then how come we don’t feel that kind of change? How come we don’t sense when our old atoms get replaced by new ones? Answer is two part I think. First, change is so gradual and slow that we really have no senses to feel this type of change. There are approximately 7*10²⁷ in a human body. That’s 7,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms. That’s a whole lot of atoms. Second, atoms in our body have to follow certain rules and paths. Think of water that makes up rivers and streams. Water is constantly changing and cycling, but the river itself always stays the same. It’s always (more or less) of the same shape. So, it’s the interaction between atoms that’s important and not the atoms themselves.

We’re made of the same stuff as everything in our universe is made of. Stars, galaxies, rivers, mountains, and everything we can observe are all made of same stuff. It’s just order of the stuff that makes up different shapes, molecules, cells, tissue and everything else material. That would mean that when we observe (or consciously thinking) our universe, essentially we’re observing ourselves. Carl Sagan once said: “We are the way for The Cosmos to know itself.” Think of that next time you go to Wall-Mart and are surrounded by all of that stuff.

This was just too good not to be posted. it’s actually more sad than funny but I cannot help but laugh. I just feel sorry for his parents.
Before you read following article let me remind you of a quote.

Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion. ~ Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate in physics

Now read following article:

FLORENCE, S.C. (AP) A teen accused of plotting to blow up his high school told police that he wanted to die, go to heaven and kill Jesus, federal authorities said Tuesday. Read full story here…

Â

Some people crave winning a lottery, spending a night with Angelina Jolie, while some of them go as far as wanting to become a rock star even though they have musical ear of a water bucket. I on the other hand have very simple requests. Here’s a short (but not complete) list:

I crave:

• working wheels on the Wal-Mart shopping carts.
• more than one register opened at Wal-Mart stores.
• “Origins Of Species” in hotel drawers instead of holy book.
• waiters not to interrupt my conversation every time they ask everything ok?
• working remote control in hotel rooms.

And that’s all.

I am sure this is not a new joke, but it’s funny nonetheless.

A nine year old boy asks his mother, “Is God male or female?”
After thinking for a moment, his mother responds, “Well God is both male and female.”
This confuses the boy, so he asks, “Is God black or white?”
“Well,” she says, “God is both black and white.”
This really confuses the boy, so he asks, “Is God gay or straight?”
Feeling a bit out of her depth, but wanting to be consistent, the mother answers, “Honey, God is both gay and straight.”
At this the boy’s face lights up with understanding and he triumphantly asks… Read more »

This article will explore my own observation if capitalism really works or not. Famous saying is that capitalism brings prosperity and wealth to the people. Lets see if that’s really true. I’ve lived in Europe for 20 years and currently am living in U.S for 13 years. That gives me objective perspective on economic conditions from the layman’s point of view.
Here’s a startling fact: Currently most of the worlds countries are one or another form of capitalist economies; and most of the world is poor. That’s a fact. Those who resort to no welfare and social programs usually have greatest class divides and poorest standards of living. Some of those countries are: India, Indonesia, Thailand, Mexico, Russia, Brazil etc..

Let’s see simple example of capitalist economy in action.
In a capitalist economy, labor (working class) is working for the owner (capitalist class) to produce goods. Labor is selling their work abilities in return for wages. With those earned wages, labor goes out and consumes products of their own making, but at much higher price. For example: A person who labors in a production factory could make 200 products an hour, lets say of 1$ per product ; but I guarantee you that he is not getting paid $200 an hour. In an 8 hour shift he can make as much as 1600 products. That’s $1,600 worth of products while taking home (before tax and all deductions)maybe $100 a day, if he’s paid really well. So, he will earn his day pay in about half an hour. He also cannot just stop working once he reaches $100 a day in products; which is within half an hour. But it doesn’t end there. He will then go out and buy some of those products at much higher price. Owners are the only ones who truly benefit. Labor will just survive and have a big choice of products to consume. Not much more. If laborer complains or demands higher wages, he will be immediately replaced by another one waiting in line who will work longer hours for less pay. Capitalist class knows this, and they’re counting on it. That’s called exploiting working class, but I could be wrong.
Let’s look at the United States.
Let me first say that U.S is not a pure capitalist economy. U.S used to be pure capitalist economy 100 year or so ago, and guess what? U.S was considered a third world country at that time. Things have changed since then, but only on the surface, and only thanks to working people who fought for their rights. If capitalists had their way, U.S would still be a third world country.
U.S has now what’s called mixed economy. It’s based on profits but some of the things are regulated. In a true capitalist economy you would not have: Medicaid, Social Security, Labor Unions, workers rights, child labor laws, affirmative action, welfare and other socialized institutions. In capitalist economy everything is privatized and people work for wealthy few who own most of the industries. And I mean everything! Pure capitalism can be illustrated by simple picture like this:

Simple but it’s worth thousand words.

Even though U.S has mixed economy, the whole system is still based on making profits; lots of it. That’s one of the core attributes of capitalism. Every business of course strives for huge profits, but even institutions you would not expect are also in competition to make huge bucks. Media cares about ratings; big ratings bring big bucks from advertisers. Hospitals and the whole health care industry are also striving to make profit for their shareholders. Doctors are accepting large amounts of patients to maximize their bonuses and salaries. (They also accept vacation packages from the drug industries in return for testing few drugs on their patients). FED (Federal Reserve System which is privately owned) are lending money to business, while making huge profits of interest which businesses pay back. Even our government is trying to make profit. I dare you to find me an industry that works for good of the people, instead for profit.
In capitalist society, profit comes before people, education, health, environment and other life’s basic necessities. Oil companies will drill in the wild if it makes them profit. Lumber companies will cut down the whole forests if thats the only way for them to grow and make profit. In the US we indeed see all of this even though it’s not a true capitalist economy; it’s much more subtle but damaging to the people nonetheless.
If business grows to the size, where the only way to sustain itself and make profits is to start hitting work force on their backs, while passing costs to consumers (notice work force and consumers are the same people actually), while at the same time destroying competition at any cost, they will do it; we see them doing it every day.
Average American is then pushed into the corner. He has to compete with his fellow Americans for a better job and better pay, so that he can pay his mortgage, send his kids to school, buy health and life insurance, secure his retirement and basically just survive. Who has time for fun! He has no choice. He will often resort to stumping over his morals and ethics just to get one step ahead. Good people will resort to all kind of innovative ways to make money and survive. We see that in all kinds of scams around us.
He is also constantly bombarded by media and reminded by employer (capitalist class) that giving 110% at work and not complaining a lot is the best way to get ahead. Those who complain get fired really quick and get replaced by other ambitious laborers. Be competitive and have good work ethics and everything will work out they say. Add to that, constant avalanche of consumer products being shoved up his butt, and what you got here is a obedient consumer/worker robot. That’s a person who works as hard as he can, while consumes as much as he can while keeping his mouth shut. Not a bad deal for the capitalist class eh?
If working class is just working and not buying, then whole system breaks down. Opposite is also true. So capitalist class needs obedient worker whol will also consume lots of its products.
Capitalist class these days have yet another weapon to maximize their profits. Offshoring and globalization. Owners will abandon their already overworked and underpaid local labor in return for cheaper and even more overworked labor overseas. Any way you look at it, average American will get short end of the stick every day and twice on the Sunday; and the only thing he really wants is little piece of mind; or as it’s popularly called American Dream.
Every person in US strives for that piece of mind that will never come. It’s a never ending struggle between anxiety and labor, until the day he dies. He just doesn’t know it while he’s in his 30′s or 40′s.
Even if he’s on the right track of fullfiling that dream, something else along the way always comes, just to set him back or place him right back at the beginning. It’s like running in the sand. A true checkmate. Even if he accumulates material goods, anxiety will always be there.
Lets say he has million dollars saved by the time he retires; he’s feeling good and has all these travel plans; but what he doesn’t realize is that all it takes, for him (or a family member) to get really sick and all of that could be wiped out by medical treatments, and if he doesn’t get really sick he will turn in all that wealth to a retirement home. Next time you see him, he will be greeting you at wall mart or bagging your groceries.
Example: Friend of mine was in a car accident and he suffered spinal injury which left him almost paralyzed. He underwent couple of surgeries and he has to be under physical therapy constantly. Let me just say that medical insurance company stopped paying his bills after $300,000. Right now I think his medical bills are over six million dollars! Yes that’s US Dollars.

Point is that no matter what the average person does, he will always have that annoying background anxiety. Be that fear of loosing your job, mortgage, medical bills, kids college, health issues or just a feeling of not doing anything with your life, those anxieties will always be there. All of those anxieties are caused and are pure product of pressures of capitalist society and economy. Even if you have everything paid for; secure retirement and piece of mind is not guaranteed. Something always comes along to put you back in your place of being a laborer.

So conclusion of this article is that capitalism does work. It works gloriously, but only for capitalists. It works great for the wealthy. Those who tell you that capitalism and privatization really work are the biggest bullshitors world has ever spat out. Either that or they’ve been persuaded into believing in a dream that will never come. I really cannot believe that there are normal, healthy people in this world who believe that pure capitalism brings wealth and prosperity to the people.
Problem is that there’s not much average guy can do except to vote in elections only for his/hers interests and not against it. I lived overseas and currently am living in US, so I’ve experienced both sides, but I’m still baffled by people who vote against their own interests.
Reassuring fact is, when cup is full, when working class have had enough, capitalist class will hear the rumble of the people (as Nader used to put it). It happened before and will happen again. We don’t have 14 hour working days anymore. We have women voting rights, child labor laws, work discrimination laws, labor unions, welfare programs etc. Every one of those laws was accomplished by working class.
People fought for their rights before, and be assured, when pushed into a corner, they will fight again.

Consider answering following questions about time (Do not just read these questions, but think about them for a little bit). I call them mind-benders.

• Can every moment in time of the past exists somewhere?
• Does past actually exists somewhere? If it does, Is it than stored somewhere?
• How about the future or present? Can future and present exist somewhere?
• Can you define present? How long does the present lasts?
• If you think that present exists, then where is it? If you think that past exists, then where is it?

When you really think about it answer is so simple that even child could understand it, so we conclude following: no past, present and future can exists without violating at least dozens of physics and logical laws; which in turn would imply that time does not exists.
Passage of time is just an illusion we made up to cope and measure the change. No more and no less; Everything else in between is work of our imagination, science-fiction writers and physicist with too much time on their hands. That is essentially what this article will be about. Just a thought exercise to see if we can have a logical world with no time existing.

Let’s first start with the quote:

” A famous philosophical argument says that, if the future were real, then it would be fixed now, and we would not have the freedom to affect that future. Since we do have that freedom, the future can’t be real”

What this quote is essentially saying is that predetermined future cannot exists because we’re the ones that are making it as we go along. If that kind of future did exist somewhere, than we would not be able to affect it with our own actions. So no matter what I did, my future would always remain the same.

We all know stories and science fiction novels about traveling back  in time or further into the future. We also know about time travel paradoxes. Most famous being grandfather paradox. It goes like this:
If you went back in time and killed your grandfather, you would not exists since he would not be able to have children of his own. He would be dead and you would’ve never been born. But, if you weren’t born you would not be able to go back in time to kill your grandfather in the first place since you didn’t exist, but obviously you do exist and you did go back in time and you did kill your grandfather. This creates a logical paradox and big inconsistency in logical thinking. But we’ll come back to this later in the article.
There’s another paradox which physicist don’t talk about, but to me it seams like even stranger paradox than the grandfather one. I’m sure someone else though of this but I’ll just state it. It goes like this:
Today is 2008, and let’s suppose you went back to 2006 to meet yourself. Now there’s two of you. How would that be possible without violating Conservation of Energy Law, which states that matter cannot be created nor destroyed. It can only change forms. Obviously since there’s two of you occupying same space and time, one of you was created. Either that or you are leaving copies of yourself on every instance (frame) in time which would violate the law even further.

Another example: Imagine taking the whole earth back with you to only yesterday. You would now have two earths in the same orbit! You would have increase in mass and God knows how would that affect the space in our Solar System. You might try to counter this argument by saying that it would not be possible to take anything with you back in time; But with that logic you wouldn’t be able to take yourself back in time either, so time travel would still not be possible.

Let’s take that little further and say that from 2006 you wanted to jump to 2000 and look up yourself there too. Now there’s three copies of you. Two copies of you exist in the year 2000 and one that you left in 2006. Or would that 2006 copy of you just disappear? How would that actually work?
It gets even more complex and illogical if one wants to define instance. What’s one instance? What is NOW? Is it one second? One microsecond? Nanosecond? How about picosecond? You can pretty much go to infinite regression and make no progress of defining NOW.
It seems that we’re creating problems that don’t really exists, and and then trying to find a solution for it.

Einstein wrote extensively in his papers about time. The whole premise of General Theory Of Relativity revolves around time. However, Einstein did claim that traveling to past is not going to be possible. I happen to agree with that, but for different reasons. Einstein’s relativity claims time is directly correlated to mass, speed of light and energy (E=MC2) and that nothing could travel faster than light. Faster you go (higher your velocity), slower the time passes for you.
If you were to ever reach speed of light you would have to become one dimensional and would have no mass. Like photon particles. Time would then stop for you. You would not be affected by time. Just like light is not affected by time. It is one of the constants in universe. But you would never be able to catch up with the light anyway.
If you would to travel along side of light; It would not matter how fast you were going; from your perspective, light would still be going 186,000 miles per second. For example: If you were to travel close to the speed of light (185,000 miles per second lets say), light would still be going 186,000 miles per second respective to you. Not only you would never be able to catch up with it, but it would look as if you were just standing still and light is just zipping by you regardless of your speed.
Now, in order to go back in time you would have to travel faster than the speed of light and have negative mass. Einstein believed that is not possible.

Lets now see solution for all these inconsistencies and paradoxes. New speculative-theory which states that time does not exists solves this and many other problems. It states that time is just an arbitrary concept we made up and it’s only a measurement of change. Nothing more. Every kind of change for that matter. Just like a mile is measurement of distance. Mile doesn’t really physically exists. Same thing with time. Time as a physical or multidimensional entity doesn’t really exists. We use concept of time to measures changes in our body, motion, aging etc. Nothing more.
Without time there’s no grandfather paradox. Here’s how:
You would not be able to go back in time to kill your grandfather because your grandfather is here! There is no such a thing as “before”. Maybe your grandfather is not alive right now, but in whichever form, he is definitely here. Yes he was alive 20 years ago, but right now he is physically HERE, in a different form, made of different particles, but that doesn’t mean that there’s another copy of your grandfather existing back in 1950′s or 1968 or any year you happen to pick. What we are witnessing is the changes in your grandfather, from the fetus do the worm food.
The only proof of your grandfather existing in the past you have is memories of him. Having memories of your grandfather don’t mean he still exists in the past. If you for example look at a photograph of your grandfather to remind you of him; would that mean that your grandpa from the photograph still exists somewhere? And if he does exists somewhere in time; that would mean that every other instance of your life also exists somewhere in time. And we just showed that you really cannot define the instance.
Here’s another example with photograph: Lets say you pick up the photograph of yourself, and in that photograph you have a black eye. That black eye has healed so far. But does it mean that your black eye from the photograph still exists somewhere? I think we can see false logic here. Your black eye cannot exists because the eye you’re reading this text with now, and the black eye from the past are actually the same eye. The only difference is in change. Black eye has healed (dead cells got replaced by healthy ones etc…) and turned into normal healthy eye, but it’s the same eye that always occupied the same space, your head.
We’ve created paradoxes like “grandfather’s paradox” only because we assume that there are multiple copies of your grandfather you can go back to. I think it is more natural to assume that time as a physical entity does not really exists, and that the only way to go back in time is to UNDO the changes that affect you and your surroundings. That would mean to put everything (and I mean everything) back the way it was let’s say 20 minutes ago. You might as well say “going back in change” instead of “going back in time”.
I will give you analogy for this example but before I do that let’s define what it means “to age”. To age simply means cell death. Your cells are dying and getting weaker and weaker so you have sense of aging. That’s it. Time has nothing to do with it. Time as a physically (or logical) entity cannot make you age. Death of cells is the only thing that takes place. The only reason you feel weaker as you age is because of billions and billions of your cells are dying ever day but they don’t get replaced by the same amount. Remember this since you will need it for the next experiment.

Going 20 minutes back in “time” in a world with no “time” experiment

I have been thinking of an analogy to use here to accurately describe what happens in a world with no time so hopefully following analogy will explain it well. As you read following scenario please try to visualize events happening.

Imagine yourself siting in the middle of a small room on a wooden chair.
There’s nothing in the room but you, four walls, ceiling, floor and that wooden chair.
You absolutely are not doing anything but motionlessly stare at the wall.
It seems that nothing is happening and that time is standing still. But that is not true. Atoms in your body as well as atoms and molecules in walls around you and chair underneath you, are in constant motion and are changing constantly. Even the air around you is in constant motion.
After 20 minutes, wooden chair breaks and you fall and bruise your butt. The act of chair breaking is the only thing you’ve been aware of in those 20 minutes. If chair did not break you would not be able to tell the difference between minute 2 from minute 5 lets say, but since now you have a reference point (chair breaking), it seems like some time did pass and you would be able to pin point differences between minute 2 and 5. It would be easy because you would use breaking of a chair as a reference point. Keep with me here, we’re almost done.
Now ask yourself: What would it take for you to go back in time when chair was whole and your butt was bruisless? Can you guess by now? No, not a time machine or a worm hole.
To truly go back in time, all you would have to do is to revert changes back to way they were 20 minutes ago. And that includes everything: the chair, your body, floor, ceiling, air molecules and four walls around you.

• That would mean putting back and re-arranging every molecule back where it was.
• Every atom in that broken chair would have to be repaired and reassembled the way it was 20 minutes ago.
• That would also mean you would have to cure your cells from aging and revert them to state they were in 20 minutes ago. Cells don’t just disappear after they die. They turn into energy, so you would also need to convert some of the lost energy back into cells. That would also cure your bruise.
• You would have to rearrange your neurons in your brain to reflect original state which was 20 minutes ago, which would in turn erase your current memories.
• Every molecule and atom in the walls, ceiling, floor and air around you would have to be rearranged, converted and reverted back to the 20 minutes ago.

Once everything is done, you could say that you truly went back in time without time. Then there would be no difference between you (and the room) right now and you 20 minutes ago. None whatsoever. You went beck in time without time really existing. But that would only apply to you. Outside world would still be unaffected by your molecule rearrangements and would continue aging and changing, but you would be 20 minutes younger.
Of course in current practice all this is impossible and irreversible without using up godly amount of energy. Just imagine the feat of trying to revert changes just for the room example!
That is exactly why we have grandfather’s paradox. If your grandfather is dead right now, the only way to see him alive is not go back in 1950′s, but to revert changes that lead to his death. And that includes everything. Going back in time with a time machine would created logical paradox which doesn’t make any sense since it would require multiple copies of grandfathers to exists which violates not just logic but our fundamental laws of physics. We only have illusion that time exists because we use it to measure the actual change. It’s simple as that.

I realize that some of these examples are really simple and maybe point of view a true realist would have, but sometimes in order to see the truth, we need to oversimplify things to get past the clutter and fog.

This is the point where you ask: “What about relativity? If there’s no time, how come that we’ve observed that time does slows down for a person in motion?” Good question, but that’s illusion too. Person’s perception of time slows down because everything in his/hers body slows down as they go faster and faster. That includes: heart rate, brain neurons, cell division, cell death, protein forming and the whole enchilada. At this stage person’s perception of everything slows down. Relativity also treats time as one and the same entity as space. If there’s no space there would be no time; so “no time” theory would not affect relativity at all. Think about it. If there’s no space than it would be impossible for matter to exists. If there’s no matter and space, there would no occurrence of any changes taking place and time would still not exists.
The fact is that time still remains more of philosophical question than anything else.

I am going to try to explain basic differences between scientific theory, law, facts and hypothesis. There are lot of misconceptions about these so I thought I’d try to explain it as best I can.
I am no scientist but I do have friends (from both sides of Atlantic) that are so I pick their brains every once in a while. Also, I still remember this from the science class when I went to school and I did great deal of researching about the subject through out the years.
Amazingly, scientific theory is something all scientists agree on, with no exception regardless of geographical location. So this article will not be me speculating. These are coming from the actual scientists themselves.
We all heard following phrase: “Oh it’s just a theory and not a fact.”
Theory in every day life is indeed just a speculation, but in scientific world theory is something totally different as we will see from the following article.

It’s important for a somewhat educated person living in 21st century to know what scientific theory is and be able to name basic differences between Law and Theory. This is elementary knowledge but people forget these things quickly. That’s why “Are you smarter than a Fifth Grader” show works so well.

Lets take matters from the beginning and see how scientists form theories.

Chronological step by step:

1. Observational Facts – Are collection of data through observation methods. If I drop the ball from my hand it will fall to the ground. If I repeat this many times, I will get same results over and over. Ball will fall to the ground every time. This is an observational fact. Some more observational facts: Rivers running in certain direction, bees pollinating flowers, etc..
2. Law – Getting back to ball fall. if I get same results with other objects after repeated experiments, I can form some kind of law with probable certainty. This is Newton’s Law of Gravity. However, this law does not explains why did ball drop on the floor. It just describes the event. That’s it. There’s not much difference between law and observational facts. You could in a sense say that Scientific Law is just body of predictable observational facts. Nothing more.
3. Hypothesis – After the law is formed, scientist will try to explain it by observation and repeated experiments. Eventually they will form different hypothesis. Hypothesis are ideas that could be falsified, changed and modeled as the new evidence comes in. Does the ball falls because earth is bigger than the ball? Does the ball falls because there’s an invisible force that is attracting the ball towards the earth? Will the ball fall at the same speed in vacuum? Etc… Scientists will continue to hypothesize until there’s no new evidence to dispute their hypothesis. But they’re not done yet. Hypothesis has to pass scrutiny of grueling tests under different conditions and repeated experiments. All of those experiments has to conform to their proposed hypothesis every time. If they don’t, hypothesis is thrown away and the scientist moves on.
4. Scientific Theory comes the last. Only if hypothesis passes all of the above stages, it can be formed into Scientific Theory. Scientific Theory is crowning achievement in science. In science, there’s nothing higher than theory. It’s Creme De La Cream. You can describe Scientific Theory as following: Theory is a comprehensive explanation of natural world that is supported by factual observations, independently testable and repeated experiments. Theory is explanation. So theory contains facts and laws. Laws and facts are part of the theory.

But it doesn’t end there. Theory then has to be peer reviewed. It will be bombarded by skepticism from other scientists with their own hypothesis and theories from same field of studies.
Who do you think is the major debunker of scientific theory? It’s other scientists. They will try to debunk and disprove new theories and replace them with theories of their own all the time. It’s a constant battle.
Every scientist wants to get recognized and possibly get Nobel Prize, but you don’t get Noble Prize by just confirming already established theory. You want to debunk it and replace it with better theory or at least make a noticeable correction (like Einstein did with Newton’s) worth the Noble Prize.
Scientific theories are constantly evaluated, peer reviewed, bombarded and critically examined by other scientist. That’s how we get well established theories. Just imagine scientific theory that passed all that scrutiny and criticism for hundred years. It’s the closest thing to the truth and explanation of natural world as we know it. That’s why all well established theories are almost unshakable and last for long time. Theory of Evolution and Cell Theory are one of them. Plate tectonics, General Relativity, Atomic Theory are all examples of well established theories.

Theory Of Evolution (by Natural Selection) being the most criticized and attacked, withstood test of time for 150 years! That is more testing, evaluating, examining, collecting evidence than any other well established theory we have.
The fact that some us (who don’t practice science professionally 14 hours or so a day, every day!) just don’t believe part (or whole) of it has nothing to do with theory being true or not. As long as it’s accepted within scientific community (you know… people who dedicated their whole lives to theories like these) theory will remain true. Public should be educated of course, but if you as a non-scientist want and try to debunk or argue some theory and you think you have the knowledge, roll the dice, write the paper and see if your thesis withstands same scrutiny as the theory you’re trying to debunk.
I cannot just tell to the carpenter how to make a table. Especially If I have never picked up a wood saw in my life.

Scientific Theories are less certain than laws. That’s true, but that’s only because law is just bunch of observational facts. Nothing else. It’s meaningless without the theory. It doesn’t provide any explanation. Theory of Evolution for example can never be a fact since it’s comprised of many facts and biological laws. It’s like a deck of cards. Theory Of Evolution being the deck and cards being the facts. It would make no sense to call the whole deck “a card”.

As the new evidence comes in theory will get tweaked and improved. But that’s the beauty of it. It will get modeled into comprehensive set of explanations of our natural world.
Think about this. Even if you see, with your own eyes, something that contradicts well established theory, it would not mean much. Eyes can deceive and we all know that brain is the best 3D software there is. Schizophrenics for example see and hear voices that ARE real to THEM. That doesn’t make it real. Scientific method is the only and the best way we know how to explain actual reality since it requires independent testing under different conditions regardless if public agrees with it or not. It’s up to science and teachers to explain their theories so we can understand them well. I agree that is something scientists and teachers have not been doing a great job at, but that’s for the whole new article.

Life could indeed be beautiful and just a thought of dying could be enough to put you in a temporary state of depression. Most of us like to live. We love life and want more of it, but at the same time we’re all aware that one day we’re all going to die. Every human on this planet knows, that one day they will too cease to exist. Some people are terrified by this, but some just accept it and are fine with it, while on the other hand majority of us wants and needs to know if there’s life after.

Let’s first look at the facts and what we DO know about death:

1. Heart stops and cells get deprived from oxygen so cells start irreversible process of dying
2. Lungs cease to function and person stops breathing
3. If CPR is not administered within 6 minutes brain starts to die from lack of oxygen.
4. After 10 minutes brain damage is certain and irreversible
5. Muscles starts to stiffen and body begins to cool down
6. Skin and bone cells die latest and could survive up to 36 hours without oxygen
7. After 36 hours (and extensive tests) person is pronounced brain dead and there’s nothing that could be done for him/her anymore.
8. No one has ever came back after 72 hours of his/hers heart stopping.
9. Your body decompose and you eventually cease to exists
10. Your molecules and atoms become part of the soil and eventually end up in rivers, water air and perhaps some other person’s or animals body.

To describe the process medically we use fancy latin names like following:

• Pallor mortis, paleness which happens almost instantaneously (in the 15–120 minutes after the death)
• Algor mortis, the reduction in body temperature following death. This is generally a steady decline until matching ambient temperature
• Rigor mortis, the limbs of the corpse become stiff (Latin rigor) and difficult to move or manipulate
• Livor mortis, a settling of the blood in the lower (dependent) portion of the body
• Decomposition, the reduction into simpler forms of matter

Doctors use instruments like Electroencephalography (EEG) or intracranial EEG (icEEG) to determine that there’s no electrical activity in the brain before they pronounce person brain dead or dead. Once these devices stop detecting brain activity, that’s it. Person is dead, and the process is irreversible.

You might say that this applies only to the body itself and not the soul. Well, neither me or you nor anyone else knows what the soul is. Let alone if it exists, so like I said let’s stick with what we DO know.
As you know it, your body (matter) cannot just disappear (second law of thermodynamics prevents that), but it can turn into energy or some other form of matter. If you consider this kind of energy to be soul then so be it, but that’s not really living after death and it will not be point of this article. I am assuming that when majority of people are talking about life after death, they’re talking about consciousness living. In other words, they would be aware they’re alive.

Sometimes belief in life after death could be overwhelming that it would be hard to put it in words. I’m sure we all had following conversation with our parents, friends or just acquaintances. I will describe brief dialog between myself and my mom:

Mom: ” So you believe that after we die we just go into the ground, decompose and eventually disappear.”
Me: “I really don’t know but yes, based on what we do know today that is what happens.”
Mom: We don’t feel anything and nothing happens afterwards?
Me: “Yes”
Mom: “But that cannot be”
Me: “why not?”
Mom: ” Because it cannot”
Me: “Why do you think that cannot be?”
Mom: “There has to be something.”
Me: “What?”
Mom: “Something. There’s just has to be.”
Me: “But what?”
Mom: “I don’t know what, but I cannot just go into the ground and just seize to exist. Something has to happen. There has to be something more.”
And goes on and on…

Now, I consider my mom to be very rational person of above average intelligence and well read. She is not the only one who talks and thinks like that in conversation like these. We’re just terrified of loosing someone or leaving the loved ones behind. Sometime we want something so bad that it’s hard to put it in thoughts. Let alone words.

Now, consider following quote which comes from one of our greatest thinkers. Mark Twain:

“I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.” – Mark Twain

Can you remember time of the Napoleon or Roman empire? How about dinosaurs? Of course you cannot, because you did not exist back then. You also did not feel, taste, see or sense back then. You just weren’t here. You have no consciousness recollection on any of those events and you’re not bothered by it.
Mark Twain implies that you will experience same thing after you die. Nothing. For lots of people that is truly terrifying, but there’s something very comforting about what Mark is saying. To me this seems a lot more comforting then wandering around as a ghost, spirit or some kind of non-physical entity. Same thing goes for being stuck in some kind of purgatory or heaven and hell for eternity. Just think about it little further. Doing anything (no matter how beautiful and great) for eternity seems like a torture to me.
Let me give you personal example. I really love playing guitar. I can play guitar for hours, but after six or seven hours it becomes boring and then pure torture. Imagine doing it for eternity! Even something as good as sex will get boring and eventually become true torture. Literary. Think about it. Physically burning in hell will eventually will be equal to having sex. That’s something I never though will hear myself say.

Good number of scientists and theologians believe that we cannot fully answer question life after death without fully explaining the consciousness. So far good number of tests and experiments are conducted and most of them point to conscientiousness being tied directly to brain functions. For example: reason why you cannot remember when you were one year old is because your brain wasn’t fully developed. Basically you weren’t conscious back then. Another example would be that if I would to hit you in the head you would loose conscientiousness and would not remember anything at all while unconscious. Yet, another even more convincing example is that it is the known fact that brain damage could change person’s personality. All of these point to the brain.

Can consciousness survive death? If consciousness is indeed just a brain function then no, it cannot survive death, but If consciousness is more than brain function then where would this consciousness reside? Is consciousness nothing more then our neurons firing at the certain order? Consciousnesses could also just be a measure to describe brain activity. Just like a meter is measurement of distance. You cannot touch or feel meter. Truth is, we really don’t know but lot of smart people are working on it.

I will leave you with little excerpt of Jesse Bering:

“Consider the rather startling fact that you will never know you have died. You may feel yourself slipping away, but it isn’t as though there will be a “you” around who is capable of ascertaining that, once all is said and done, it has actually happened. Just to remind you, you need a working cerebral cortex to harbor propositional knowledge of any sort, including the fact that you’ve died—and once you’ve died your brain is about as phenomenally generative as a head of lettuce.”

What do I think?

We really have no examples of consciousness existing outside of the brain, so why anyone would want to suppose such a thing in a first place. I think fear of unknown plays a huge part in this. Also, not all of us are equipped to deal with harsh realities in same way. Some of us cope with the unknown in totally different ways. Let me name some of them: resurrection, reincarnation, incarnation, heaven and hell, ghosts, NDE (Near Death experiences), 72 virgins (I am being serious here), zombies and probably hundreds of other interesting and inventive ways of surviving death. It became pretty much cultural. Different cultures have their own way of dealing with loss, grief and fear of the unknown.
My personal opinion is that if we (regular schmo’s) worry too much about all possible things that might come after we die, we will miss out on all of the good things in the only life we do know. I just don’t think it’s a good idea to live your life trying to conform to something you have no way of knowing exists. Sometimes it’s ok to say “I just don’t know”, and get on with your current life. The only thing that is going to be left behind you that we DO know is your legacy and deeds you did in this life.

Here’s the excerpt from todays’ CNN article:

Just 31 percent of Americans approve of how President Bush is handling his job, according to a poll released Wednesday, the fifth anniversary of the start of the Iraq war.
A new poll out Wednesday finds that 67 percent of those surveyed disapprove of President Bush.

Full article here: Poll: Bush’s approval hits new low
There’s something terribly wrong here. If you don’t know what that is, I will tell you. It’s that number 31% that it’s bothering me. Article says ONLY 31% support president. ONLY?! Are you fucking kidding me? I would’ve guessed much, much lower. The real questions is not the other 67% who don’t support the president, but I am wondering who are those 31% of mongoloids that do. In any normal and healthy society this number could not reach 1% but statistical chance alone dictates that you will always have certain percentage of retards and chimp monks supporting this guy so 4% will probably be a closest number, but 31%. Come on. Who’re we kidding.

One of the most confusing arguments today is fine-tuning argument. How is it that the universe is so finely tuned to support life? Everything is at the right distance from everything or nothing would work. Psychical constants are so tight that any variation would bring chaos. Earth is exactly the right distance from the sun so it doesn’t get burned or cooled. If for example nuclear force was only few percent different, it would alter configuration of the stars which in turn would not be able to support the life as we know it. If expansion rate of the universe is larger: no galaxies would form if smaller: universe would collapse, even before stars formed.
There are hundreds of examples like this, and at the first look it does look amazing and impossible. That’s because it is impossible. Chances that the Universe fine tuned itself for our existence is highly improbable and it’s bordering on fantastical improbability.

But this fine-tuning argument is so flawed and answer to me seems so simple that I am really puzzled how some people (including some scientists) do not see it. Answer is following:

It’s all matter of perspective. People who are amazed by this fine-tuning argument are looking at it from the opposite point of view. They’re assuming that we were already existed here and ready to go and universe just showed up and fine tuned itself around our existence so it could sustain us. Or that the Universe popped into existence with us humans in mind. That would indeed be amazing. Universe did not fine-tune itself for us, but it was the other way around. It was the opposite way. Universe was already here and we’re the ones who evolved to fit within that form. Not only us, but stars, galaxies and everything else. If universe was any different, we would’ve just evolved into something different or not exist at all. Galaxies would look different or would not exist. And it’s simple as that. Really. Change you perspective and everything drastically changes.
Another analogy might be in order.
Professor of physics used the firing squad analogy:

A man is due to be executed by firing squad.
No man in the squad has ever missed before.
However on this occasion they all do.
The condemned man is interviewed afterwards and is asked how he feels about this amazing coincidence that everyone in the firing squad has missed.
He replies:

“Of course they missed or I wouldn’t be here talking to you!”