Mr Prime Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 Which branch of physics does this stone tape utilise apart from the one in a science fiction horror story? No idea. The principle has been discussed before and beyond the story. Unlike my usual debates the whole thing is a mystery to me and I could be completely wrong. The reports over the decades that chime with the theory leave me intrigued. I expect there are experts on SF who could offer an explanation. I'm not here to win an argument as this is not politics etc just to answer the OP question as weak as that may seem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 Isn't a simple delusion more likely than an entirely new type of physics discovered for a BBC play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcrust Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 SF atheists don't believe that though. They find the very idea of God rediculous, they dismiss the theists argument because the theist can produce no evidence to prove there actually is one. This has become the atheists favourate line of argument on SF. Surely, that line of argment must conflict with the reason they believe in ghosts? Well, from my point of view at least, someone who takes a fully evidence based approach to such things would be described as agnostic rather than atheistic. Atheism is a belief that cannot be confirmed, at present, by the evidence. To my knowledge there is no proof that God doesn't exist. EDIT: Interesting New Scientist article on this subject: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928055.600-religion-is-irrational-but-so-is-atheism.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted April 3, 2011 Author Share Posted April 3, 2011 No. Ghosts are merely a recording in time played back endlessly which explains why unconnected witnesses over many decades or centuries keep seeing the same scenes 'played' back.Why hasn't everyone seen a ghost then? Why aren't we besieged with recordings of the dead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 Isn't a simple delusion more likely than an entirely new type of physics discovered for a BBC play? So take 20 people over the space of 100 years who say they saw the same image and those 20 people have had no contact with each other. It's too much of a long shot to say they coincidentally all had the same delusion at the same place. That's simple logic, no autosuggestion, no desire to invent something just pure testimonies from unrelated witnesses. It's merely an idea yet there is something inexplicable about the above scenario. Don't get me wrong, science is everything to me but I see this as a scientific theory yet to be substantiated. It's also far more in the right direction than people saying their relatives visited them from beyond the grave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 Who says that they scientifically 'saw the same image'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 SF atheists don't believe that though. They find the very idea of God rediculous, they dismiss the theists argument because the theist can produce no evidence to prove there actually is one. This has become the atheists favourate line of argument on SF. Surely, that line of argment must conflict with the reason they believe in ghosts? Well why don't you find an atheist who beleves in ghosts and who also uses the arguments you mention and ask them? You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that because there are hypothetical atheists who believe ghosts, all atheists believe in ghosts, and therefore owe you an explaination as to this apparent inconsistency, simply because they are atheists, even though they probably do not believe in ghosts themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 Why hasn't everyone seen a ghost then? Why aren't we besieged with recordings of the dead? We could well be besieged with recordings but it doesn't mean everyone would be capable of sensing them. I don't necessarily believe there are a mass of recordings either. The theory expands to state that images are usually connected with moments of high energy or stress eg violence, war and sudden death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted April 3, 2011 Author Share Posted April 3, 2011 Well, from my point of view at least, someone who takes a fully evidence based approach to such things would be described as agnostic rather than atheistic. Atheism is a belief that cannot be confirmed, at present, by the evidence. To my knowledge there is no proof that God doesn't exist. EDIT: Interesting New Scientist article on this subject: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928055.600-religion-is-irrational-but-so-is-atheism.html I wonder whether professor Dawkins is aware of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 We could well be besieged with recordings but it doesn't mean everyone would be capable of sensing them. I don't necessarily believe there are a mass of recordings either. The theory expands to state that images are usually connected with moments of high energy or stress eg violence, war and sudden death. Ah, so to be able to see these new BBC physics recordings you need to have special sensory apparatus. Would this be available on a TV detector van or is something else needed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.