Rank: Veteran Joined: 7/3/2007 Posts: 1,634
|
tycho wrote:Wakanyugi wrote:tycho wrote:@masukuma and @Wakanyugi. Today I'm trying hard not to think hard. I woke up at 4 in the morning to pop some pills.
But given the question, it's been hard for me to resist the task.
First, what patterns can we discern from sickness, the shortest lifespans, and the longest ones?
Because they seem to be related.
And then what is time? My most recent definition is 'the measure of distance traveled by light'.
That would mean that immortality is a function of light. That is, sensitivity, transmission and reception of light.
When we search through ancient ideas we find sources that link longevity and breathing rates.
And breath and light are connected.
The housefly is the last stage of a certain organism's life. Interesting thoughts Tycho. [aside: I hope those pills you are taking are approved by a Doctor.] Immortality for me is not a function of the speed of light. This actually situates your conclusion on illusory quick sad (both light, speed, time and space are contentious postulates). It might be better to phrase mortality/immorality as a function of entropy - the degradation of the human vehicle, for instance, which is unidirectional. The day that direction is reversed, rather than just controlled, we shall have immortality. But as another Wazuan posed: Why would anyone want to live forever? Even gods don't 'live' forever. Don't forget light is a photon. And entropy has an opposite, that to my understanding, is mainly of the family of photons. Degradation is about capacity for work, which is basically about the information in a system. That is, degradation, or entropy, is about the transfer of light. Who, is the one wishing to live forever? Or rather, which is this self that wishes to live forever? I meant entropy/degradation in the manner in which all closed systems have a tendency to break down over time. And this process goes from complex to less complex and never the reverse. Seeing as our bodies are such closed systems, the process of again (breakdown) seems to be a given. Even if we make scientific advances, these will only postpone the incidence of terminal breakdown (death) not eliminate it. "The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." (Niels Bohr)
|