But was there anything special about the ancient one in this main universe we follow? Or could a universe that is identical except that the ancient one survived just as significant? Why would any particular one in an infinite number of universes that rarely interact matter that much?

In the "what if..." series they covered Infinity stones only working in their particular universe. And of course in Loki at the TVA they are all powerless there. They also brought back the ancient one in some type of "echo" form.

So far I think only in Deadpool 2 did they represent an afterlife in the MCU.

In what way? Assuming there are an infinite number of universes wouldn't there be just as many universes in which she/he survived as died?

So why would the rest of the multiverse care that this particular one died?

Thanks but I understand the geometry. I was just assuming ethereal lovers were imagining something real versus thought stuff only.

What is metaphysical? Just like virtual particles that can become real in our scientific sense? Is spiritual stuff outside of both physical and metaphysical stuff?

Thought experiments are one thing, but people who straight up claim that death or even astral projection can show us these higher dimensions is quite another?

I see. I know Americans aren't the most liberal in the sex department, but generally I don't know of anyone going to jail for anything unless it does involve nonconsent.

Anyone else in this forum take an active interest in NDEs?

Can I DM you? I would really like your references to NDEs and the Harvard study concerning hallucinations you mentioned.

When he describes materials like sodium, potassium, silicone, etc changing proportions without it being clear where the extra stuff is coming from.

My thought too, but is there anything wrong with the math?

Ok. Thanks.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sPGZSC8odIU

This seemed just about as thorough as they get.

How many people would you imagine have had NDEs? According to Dr. Bruce Greyson they pretty much all tell about their experience to everyone like a preacher and their behaviors in life are ever changed (sounds like for the better). The only exception he mentions are the scary NDEs which he says are few. I can't imagine being quiet about something so profound that seems so real.

Where have you found the NDEs testimonials? And what Harvard study concerning hallucinating?

Possibly, but I think people generally go with one or the opposite.

Is my question unreasonable? The spirit wouldn't leave the body unless it was in rough shape? I truly want to believe in conscious existence after physical death. But there seems to be a lot of space between those that believe NDEs are evidence of that, and what I perceive as the majority of those in this forum.

If 90% (likely more) of people that are clinically dead and will likely stay dead without medical intervention don't have NDEs, how can it not be considered that 10% are imagining an experience that is only imagined? If the body is uninhabitable to some type of "spirit body" why wouldn't OBEs be much more the standard?

If 100 people are clinically dead for a time and only 10% have the experience how doesn't that cast doubt onto the legitimacy of it representing consciousness outside of the body? Why can't it just as easily be imagined?

"some consciousness source"? What does this mean? Are you suggesting we don't have consciousness of our own? A loan of some kind?

I think biologist Dr. George Church thinks he can modify our code just enough not to change us, but to make us unfamiliar to pretty much all viruses. Hopefully any such thing helps us and doesn't doom us.

That's some Dr. Strange stuff. Lol.

Largely primates. Got ya. Few enough that we considered having apposable thumbs a milestone that isn't taken for granted.

My first thought was, is that Ringo Starr? Turns out it was. Lol.

Evolutionary pressures aside, is a more advanced hand imaginable?

You are stating language to necessarily be a more advanced form of consciousness and therefore a successor only?

First off, nobody can experience zero gravity. Secondly all we can do is count all the people who were clinically dead for a time being and if less than 20% of them have NDEs why can't that suggest imagination being involved to pacify the ego during a crisis whether or not they mentally realize it? Also of course memories can form as soon as a person starts to wake and they can easily mistaken the when of when the memories were actually created.

Maybe expand "language" to any intention? Don't we intend or want something before we interpret the associated emotions and then consider the words needed to express our intention. Couldn't intention itself be a kind of language and eventually we have to use a language that others can understand as well?

There was at least one person that believed the language part of the brain (I assume Broca's area) was the source of consciousness. Now I think it might be thought to be near the brain stem.

Wayfarer has covered this topic?

Glad you finally got an appropriate avatar. Lol.

Isn't M theory a good thing? It tries to combine all aspects of previous string theories into a single thing? Also what else can a theoretical physicist do except make predictions? They generally don't do the experiments?

So Michio assumes too much might be possible when there isn't enough to open that door, or he is fantasizing too much on impractical ideas that might not serve us anytime soon? What is his fault?

Perhaps if an object expanding in all directions at the speed of light being made of many atoms at what point is a bunch of atoms an object and when is it just atoms traveling in exactly one direction each?

Perhaps, but who would be there to see it. It's just interesting to think of something expanding into all space and into no space at the same time.

Well if you had a dead body in your yard the police would write a report, the medical examiner would write a report, maybe the funeral people would keep records. I assume religious writings are written by very few and are treated as truth largely just within the faith? I don't imagine most Buddhists would consider Jesus supernatural. Also Buddhism has been around maybe a few thousand years before the bible claims humans existed? Even between religions there is conflict on historical details that historians don't seem to disagree much with each other about.

That's what I figured. I wouldn't even use stupid human behavior as a reference. Lol. I assume if time was truly circular entropy couldn't be possible?

What do you mean? The past can't actually also be the future?

Can we assume the existence of past, present, and future? The past supposedly happened because we remember things being different and may have witnessed their change, and the future can be predicted based on past memories or records? The present in my view would have to be the elusive one because events are already passed by the time we perceive them so we don't really experience present tense, just the echos of it having happened?

So with those three statuses must time then be linear?

If I think about an apple or any unchanging object and gather all details of its attributes can't I then at the same time examine the thinking process as it is being used to consider the apple? Is there proof of the impossibility other than someone personally trying it?

Is it not possible that we can simply address only so many things at one time? I think when we read we can consider only 4 characters at a time for most people, and when we say something we know is false we have trouble treating it as anything else and often give a tell that it's a lie or otherwise something that conflicts us? Maybe the stream of thought goes through a very narrow opening? A bandwidth issue, not necessarily speed?

One person reference the pyramids as to why our future gives us the technology to create the pyramids? That is crazy. I mean we still apparently went back to slavery in that case.