Ghosts - your theories

[Twincam16]

Just moved this lot from the Gay Pride thread as it was way off topic, but fascinating.

If you believe in ghosts, where do you think they come from and how are they seen.

The 'debate' so far:

Twincam16 16:02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iria said:
now that hologram theory is a bit weird!




Well I thought it was a bit odd but he's got a point. Nearly all reported ghost sightings (including one that I saw), don't appear to interact with the outside environment, but appear to be a 'recording' of a person in a scene from the past.

Now, a hologram is made by shining a light source through a carefully etched series of glass prisms. We know that light shining through water droplets also has a prismic effect.

Now I don't know much about temporal physics, but could it be possible that there are atmospheric elements of time that occur on a loop, and the right combination of this atmosphere and a light source would create a ghostlike image.

It might also explain why some ghosts only appear when a camera flash goes off, and why they appear half-formed, like holding a negative up to the light.

Everything on the planet (and off it) will one day be explicable through science, but all it takes is a bold and determined scientist to stop discounting the 'impossible' and look into things that haven't been considered before.


Iria 16:15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I always wondered how holograms were made... I have never seen a ghost and am radically a sceptic on this matter so any scientific explanation is always more welcome than the life after death malarky, much as we wish our essences to remain. Talking of which, this is a bit of a tread hicjack... unless we find a link with the pride season main subject!


Twincam16 16:18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iria said:I always wondered how holograms were made... I have never seen a ghost and am radically a sceptic on this matter so any scientific explanation is always more welcome than the life after death malarky, much as we wish our essences to remain. Talking of which, this is a bit of a tread hicjack... unless we find a link with the pride season main subject!



Err, some of the people at the Pride might be ghosts?

I dunno - needs it's own thread - they come up once in a while. Might transplant this bit somewhere else if anyone else posts.


Iria 16:24
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
there was a tread on ghosts a while ago, a tread on "theories with a point" might be interesting

[Iria]

Do you think that there are cultures where ghosts do not exist? maybe cultures without a belief in re-incarnation or life after death... cultures without a religion... Hold on, is there any culture without a religion and hence without ghosts?

[pesty]

there may well be.

IMO there is no such thing.

ps I don't believein god either.

[wizzpig]

Oh most excellent, a juicy scientific, theological & philosophical debate about ghosts.

Is it just ghosts or the paranormal in general??

[rich1231]

Iria, the reason there are no cultures as you question is because progress tends to be forwards.

Simple societies with a very limited understanding of the world around them make things up to make them feel better. Things that they are too stupid to explain are bunched into the supernatural/religion folder and can wait til later.

No Ghosts, when you die thats it finito!

[Mrs Fish]

rich1231 said:

No Ghosts, when you die thats it finito!

I used to agree with you, but not anymore

[wizzpig]

rich1231 said:

Iria, the reason there are no cultures as you question is because progress tends to be forwards. Simple societies with a very limited understanding of the world around them make things up to make them feel better. Things that they are too stupid to explain are bunched into the supernatural/religion folder and can wait til later. No Ghosts, when you die thats it finito!

Evidence? Proof?

Or just idle speculation?

[Twincam16]

Mrs Fish said:

rich1231 said: No Ghosts, when you die thats it finito! I used to agree with you, but not anymore

Well perhaps yes, you do die, but there are natural elements that science has yet to explain that have the ability to record you at times in your life.

We can't rule out anything as untrue because science can't explain it yet. We used to think the weather came from God until we explained it scientifically. Now, because we live in an increasingly secular world, we term that realm of mysticism 'the paranormal'. The significant stuff, like weather and the sun and so on, has been explained, now it's up to science to tackle 'the paranormal'.

Science first emerged in order to prove the existence of God, and as such proved otehrwise. Perhaps science needs to turn to the paranormal.

I think that time, like Stephen Hawking suggests, is in some dimensions a tangible thing, and a ghost is simply a 'ripple' through this medium, possibly manifested through a form of naturally occurring hologram as I stated before.

So much of temporal physics is theoretical - it's about time we applied it to some of the remaining mysteries of the earth before all the scientists become sceptics.

[gh0st]

Hard to say

If they are spirits of the dead then how come we havent got billions and billions of ghosts looking for space to haunt / asking for benefits / demanding "rights for the dead" etc.

Recording theory is possible, there are many biochemical processes that we do not quite yet understand so its totally plausable that a 3 dimensional image could be created from reactions etc.

Failing that, I know I exist so there

[Iria]

Are we the way forward? Our minds are still embedded into the ritual side of life and I believe that in a way, the wish for something of the dear ones to remain is too strong to disappear.

Just throwing questions around(instead of writing my paper)

[rich1231]

wizzpig said:

rich1231 said: Iria, the reason there are no cultures as you question is because progress tends to be forwards. Simple societies with a very limited understanding of the world around them make things up to make them feel better. Things that they are too stupid to explain are bunched into the supernatural/religion folder and can wait til later. No Ghosts, when you die thats it finito! Evidence? Proof? Or just idle speculation?

Erm, surely it is the counter argument that should be providing proof?


Ok Ive seen enough death to know that there is nothing remotely comforting or presences felt after the moment. All of the ghostly goings on i have had explained to me can be explained as wishfull thinking.

Watch Most haunted and look at the weakness of those in the audiences that say they see or feel something.


Or watch Derren Brown's Messiah program.

[granville]

Must say, not seen a spectral entity in ages.

Probably emigrated to Oz.


Sensible policies for happier afterlife.

[wizzpig]

rich1231 said:

Erm, surely it is the counter argument that should be providing proof?

It works both ways though.

To say categorically that ghosts and ghost like phenomena do not exist and when you die that's it, is, at this stage in our evolutionary terms, akin to expert knowledge that the earth is in fact flat, balancing on four columns and resting on the back of a giant turtle as it paddles through space. That, as we now know, is a right load of bollards. But it used to be a fact. And that is a fact!

I certainly have no evidence to suggest that ghosts are alive and well and living in your aunt Bessie’s attic. But then I don’t have any to the contrary. To assume that we, as a species, know everything there is to know is a little arrogant. Indeed, the more we learn, the more we realise how little we really know!

What I am suggesting is an open mind to possibility. If proof, and I mean categorical proof, can be found either way to support or dispute any theories then lets have it.

I’m interested either way.

[rich1231]

wizzpig said:

rich1231 said: Erm, surely it is the counter argument that should be providing proof? It works both ways though. To say categorically that ghosts and ghost like phenomena do not exist and when you die that's it, is, at this stage in our evolutionary terms, akin to expert knowledge that the earth is in fact flat, balancing on four columns and resting on the back of a giant turtle as it paddles through space. That, as we now know, is a right load of bollards. But it used to be a fact. And that is a fact! I certainly have no evidence to suggest that ghosts are alive and well and living in your aunt Bessie’s attic. But then I don’t have any to the contrary. To assume that we, as a species, know everything there is to know is a little arrogant. Indeed, the more we learn, the more we realise how little we really know! What I am suggesting is an open mind to possibility. If proof, and I mean categorical proof, can be found either way to support or dispute any theories then lets have it. I’m interested either way.

Ok sorry, my opinion is based upon seeing so many saddos say they believe and describe things they have seen on TV. Not scientific at all, and without trying to cause offense they usually are believed in my the weak minded or those who have suffered loss and use it as acoping mechanism.

[Iria]

are we taking ghosts only as the "soul projections" of the dead ones? What is a ghost?

[wizzpig]

rich1231 said:

Ok sorry, my opinion is based upon seeing so many saddos say they believe and describe things they have seen on TV. Not scientific at all, and without trying to cause offense they usually are believed in my the weak minded or those who have suffered loss and use it as acoping mechanism.

I agree and think that many peoples opinions are purely subjective. Scientific evidence on both sides of the argument should be studied before opinions and beliefs are formed.

Your last comment is a good 'un. Leads us nicely onto TV evangelists.

Anyone!?

[spandexx]

wizzpig said:

It works both ways though. To say categorically that ghosts and ghost like phenomena do not exist and when you die that's it, is, at this stage in our evolutionary terms, akin to expert knowledge that the earth is in fact flat, balancing on four columns and resting on the back of a giant turtle as it paddles through space. That, as we now know, is a right load of bollards. But it used to be a fact. And that is a fact!

Firstly it was Terry Pratchett with the Discworld on a turtles back, not Earth and, as far as I know, the Discworld novels are fiction.
Yes, we (the human race) did used to think the Earth was flat but that was when we did not have much evidence to work from. If you did not have the benefit of satellite images, modern scientific thinking and no ability to transport yourself further than your average mule could carry you then you too would think the world was flat.
This same logic can be applied to ghosts. Without better evidence, understanding and knowledge we can easily jump to the conclusion that the odd thing we had just experienced was a ghost – especially if ghosts were a commonly heard of and talked about thing in your society.
If a psychologist, scientist or person with a educated and sceptical mind – ( i.e. an expert in this field) – were to experience the same thing then I suspect their conclusions would be very different and more plausible.
Ghosts are a ‘convenient’ label people give to odd feelings and wired happenings that they cannot explain. The reason they cannot explain it is the ignorance of the average person and the reason why science does not have much time for ‘ghost’ investigations is because there has been solid, testable and accepted explanations for the ‘supernatural’ for quite a while.

wizzpig said:

I certainly have no evidence to suggest that ghosts are alive and well and living in your aunt Bessie’s attic. But then I don’t have any to the contrary. To assume that we, as a species, know everything there is to know is a little arrogant. Indeed, the more we learn, the more we realise how little we really know!

Crucially no one else has any evidence of ghosts either. But we do have plenty of more believable, testable and repeatable explanations to the contrary. Never assume that what you do not know is not known by all. Science is bigger then you may first understand. Science is not arrogant as the pure basis of science is to alter what it thinks based on new understanding and testing. Science does not pretend to know everything and thrives off discovery. Being ignorant to science is arrogant, not science itself.

wizzpig said:

What I am suggesting is an open mind to possibility. If proof, and I mean categorical proof, can be found either way to support or dispute any theories then lets have it.

An open mind is the scientific mind; a closed mind is one that doggedly peddles the supernatural as real even against overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The ability to admit that something that has been accepted as ‘fact’ but based purely on the sheer numbers of believers, not evidence, is in fact an old wives tale and spurious shows real strength of mind.

wizzpig said:

I’m interested either way.

Me too.

[alexkp]

I certainly don't think ghosts are sentient spirits from the "other side".

However, there is a very interesting recent theory that seems to hold some weight and is worthy of further study.

Simply put it is this: Ghosts are images trapped in time, and replayed like a video under certain circumstances. The medium that records these events is running water.

Apparently there is some tentative evidence that most ghostly apparitions occur near running surface or buried watercourses, and as such a weak electromagnetic field is generated in the area - it is this that hold the image.

I make no comment as to whether this theory has any validity or not, and I am generally extremely skeptical, but it is at least a pseudo scientific attmempt to explain a puzzling phenomena.

[tim.tonal]

Beings that exist in 4 or more physical dimensions that include our 3 could have the ability to enter and leave the 3 spatial dimensions that we occupy at will and would appear to us to appear and disappear and be able to apparently change form to the casual 3-d observer.

[Twincam16]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

That would certainly tally with, perhaps, microscopic water droplets forming around presences and appearing in 'holographic' form. Would also suggest why people report feeling 'cold' if these things 'walk' through them.