Imo Einstein's E=mc2 proves an afterlife, any further reading on this idea/similar ideas?
- jeffdanielkLv 42 weeks ago
Could you please explain why you think the fact that matter can be changed to energy in a nuclear reaction has anything to do with an afterlife?
- Anonymous1 month ago
Everlasting = more Christ too ? Eternity = many Christians too ?
I just don't see how Einstein's theory about the relationship between energy & mass & speed of light proves an afterlife.
- WhoLv 71 month ago
how does it prove it?
- KillmousekyLv 71 month ago
Your opinion is cracked. The formula doesn't apply to anything other than the amount of energy produced by a thermonuclear explosion.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- EliseLv 41 month ago
Can someone explain what E=mc2 really means because google is not helpful for this.
- TomLv 71 month ago
You are implying that HIGHER ORDER theoretical Physics demonstrates things like Parallel Universes and even an Afterlife might be POSSIBLE to exist----I agree, but it does NOT PROVE an Afterlife exists, but It DOES suggest such things are POSSIBLE. But remember---"Being Possible" does NOT mean IT IS SO
Check out HUT (Holographic Universe Theory) Physics---which is rapidly gaining favor in Physics circles----HUT has even MORE implications concerning a possible afterlife---suggestion Consciousness itself is an important factor in our universe.__Lots of mind blowing evidence---Look up HUT Physics on You Tube.
- 1 month ago
Saying "I saw a ghost" is not proof you saw a ghost.
Saying "I saw a UFO" is not proof you saw an alien spaceship.
Saying "my aunt could see the future" is not proof your aunt is psychic.
Saying "E = mc2 proves an afterlife" is proof you haven't applied Critical Thinking.
- Gary KLv 71 month ago
- RWPossumLv 71 month ago
I never heard that one. There are people who maintain that quantum physics proves something about the soul. Frankly, I don't get it. I admit that quantum `research raises some interesting questions about the nature of reality and the mind, but if you want interesting scientific evidence, the near-death experience has been studied extensively since the 1970s, starting with collecting anecdotes and then large-scale study with statistical analysis.
The difference between science and pseudoscience is that science makes predictions. Van Lommel's 2001 article in The Lancet does that. "Significantly more patients who had an NDE, especially a deep experience, died within 30 days of CPR (p<0·0001)." In other words. if you know nothing about a person except whether or not the person had an NDE, you can make an educated guess about the person's survival during a 30-day interval, and the chance of this being a lucky guess is less than 1 in 10,000.
Does your E=mc2 idea make any predictions?
Van Lommel has written a book that reviews study of NDE.
- ?Lv 71 month ago
E=mc2 applies to matter and energy. It has nothing to do with the conservation of consciousness after death. There is no evidence that consciousness is any more than a phenomenon within the living brain.