The short answer to the question can science prove life after death is—YES. The problem is not about designing objective and replicable clinical tests or even inventing machines sensitive enough to register organized consciousness outside of matter. All that would be easy in comparison to something like the Hadron Collider built to discover how matter forms at a subatomic level. The collider is a subterranean machine 17 miles (27 km) in length running under the Swiss-French border. Its development is a joint effort of European nations (CERN) and its data are sent to some 160 universities throughout the world for analysis. Nor is the problem about cost. The price tag for the Hadron Collider is already well into billions of euros. Compare this high-level, international government and university sponsored coordination and mind-boggling expense for the Hadron Collider to the small-scale, uncoordinated investigation of life after death, an enterprise which is nearly always conducted privately, and without outside funding. As science routinely invents devices that can “see” the invisible, whether in astrophysics or nuclear physics, why can’t it develop the technology it takes to prove life after death?
The problem is attitude. A Gallup poll on immortality found that only 16% of leading scientists believed in life after death as opposed to anywhere from 67% to 82% of the general population, according to several polls combined. And only 4% of these scientists thought it might be possible for science to prove it. Apparently they have no trouble believing in Multiverses in which a nearly infinite number of parallel universes are imperceptible or String Theory with its 11 dimensions of reality, some of them also imperceptible, and the Hidden Worlds Theory, which again hypothesizes imperceptible universes. But an afterlife? That’s just too crazy. Although this poll dates back to 1982 and so far newer ones have not been taken, the scorn and ridicule targeted at scientists who might be brave enough to propose testing for an afterlife and the subsequent loss or demotion of their professional positions are costs too high to risk. Even so, funding to test a survival hypothesis would hardly be granted.
So far evidence for survival is coming from the softer sciences, psychiatry, psychology as well as medicine and biology, with specific, potentially revolutionary hints in neurobiology, quantum biology and genetics. Even in the softer sciences, however, a person chances considerable derision if not loss of professional reputation for pursuing research in this area. Ironically, the hard sciences are doing the most to dismantle the assumption that the material universe is the only real universe—a crucial point for any argument for a non-material dimension of the dead. Astrophysics claims that 95.4% of the entire universe is not made up of the kind of matter and energy we call “real.” Less than a third of the 95.4% is composed instead of a mysterious substance called dark matter and more than 2/3rds of it is equally strange dark energy. The universe we are accustomed to thinking of as real amounts to a mere 4.6% and is composed of the kind of matter and energy we know. But quantum mechanics describes the matter that makes up our world, our bodies, and the computer in front of you as barely physical at all. In fact, the ratio of the amount of matter in an atom to the total size of an atom is roughly that of a pea to a football field. The rest is energy in the form of forces and oscillations. If you took all the space out of the atoms making up the human body, the amount of solid matter left would be the size of a microscopic dot. Theoretically then, what separates us from discarnates is that dot.
Most of us believe that the hard sciences, such as physics and chemistry, conduct the most objective and most accurate tests in comparison to the softer sciences. But any particle physicist knows that there is no such thing as objectivity. We also assume that the hard sciences’ test results are more precisely measured and more consistent than those of other sciences. If you really look closely at how scientific proof is achieved, you may be astonished to find that solid proof is not so solid. Dean Radin, senior scientist for The Institute of Noetic Science, gives many examples in his book, The Conscious Universe. One study he looks at was conducted by Larry Hedge of the University of Chicago. Hedge’s analysis compared the empirical replication rate for particle physics—the hardest of the hard sciences—with the empirical success in replication for social sciences. Both particle physics and social sciences showed a statistical inconsistency of 45%, that is, when all studies were taken into account. For reasons of design flaws or flukes, particle physicists discarded tests whose results were incompatible with expected ones. Since we now know that soft-science experiments can be as successfully replicated as those in hard sciences, we can assume that there is a potential design for replicable clinical tests on the continuation of organized consciousness outside of matter. I also suspect that the electrical energy of the dead—an energy my own body registers so strongly—could be precisely measured, which would yield quantifiable results. The technology sensitive enough to do so already exists.
Much of what the hard sciences propose as real is more often extrapolation from a set of effects rather than fact. If this and that are observed to happen, why they happen is deduced. From these deductions, a workable hypothesis is formed and then tested. We don’t really know, for instance, if there was ever a Big Bang. There has been no direct observation of this proposed cosmic event. That’s why the Hadron Collider was built, to attempt reproduction of how matter was born. The assumptions of a Big Bang or even a black hole are derived from a set of discernible conditions that can best be explained—in the current state of our knowledge—by a bang or a hole.
The evidence for survival already available satisfies the scientific criteria required for testing. First, there is a phenomenon in which it can be definitely stated that something real has happened because of its effects. That phenomenon could be anything from a recorded voice with no known source, a picture of a deceased individual picked up on film or a visitation from the deceased witnessed by more than one person simultaneously. Second, a very finite number of hypothetical causes from these effects can be extrapolated. And third, the hypothesis that best and most elegantly explains all the observable effects of a given phenomenon is the existence of organized consciousness outside the realm of matter. The problem of replicating these effects under clinical conditions remains however. If the dead could be induced to participate, and they can be, we could test for other more quantifiable effects, especially in the electromagnetic range. Another obvious route would be the development of sensitive communication technology. The private sector that researches Instrumental Transcommunication, as it is called, has already made remarkable progress, sometimes with startling success. If only 1% of the money and expertise that went into the Hadron Collider were available (even better, 1% of the ten trillion spent on developing the atomic bomb), within a matter of a few years science could prove life after death.
128 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
emil van Moorsel
2013-04-04 @ 6:30 PM
I am a fairly religeous person and have known for a long time that a spirit world exist . I pray daily and normaly thank God for my existance. A short while age however i had a prayer sesion where i was realy complaining and asking why life should be so complicated and surely there must be an easier formula for life than i have experienced. I know people for ages have always looked for ways to live forever and never found the way.However as i had requested an easier formula the following came to me. Einstein and what was his most well known formula. Now not being a cientist i had to think a bit and came up with E=mc2. where i received the following. E stands for eternal life . M stands for matter used by God to create the spirit , matter has intelegence and knowledge and is what constitutes the spirit within me. The first C stands for Christ ,The second C stands for us when we accept Jesus Christ and become Christians. Hence Eternal life = matter(Christ ,Christians). God will give us eternal life He has placed a spirit entity within each of us He sent his only begotten son Christ and gives us the opportunity to be Christians. In short our destiny and eternal life depends entirely on us as God has provided the rest.
I wonder if Einstein knew that he gave us the formula for eternal life?
I just found this verry interesting.
Julia
2013-04-08 @ 6:57 AM
I’m curious how you interpret the 2, mc squared.
Monerrate Ramos
2013-04-08 @ 6:00 AM
In 1982, august, 5th. My father died. In the three months prior I had three dreams (nightmares), the first was his death. The other two were death related. I loved my father very much. He was a very good person. My point does not prove death, but to me it proved there is still an awful lot “we” don’t understand.
Julia
2013-04-08 @ 6:13 AM
If you had these precognitive dreams, your father also knew he was going to die. This is a case of sharing information on the inner planes. Did the dreams help you prepare?
David Thomas
2013-04-12 @ 7:07 PM
Hello julia, i actually found your site after having lost a dog i rescued a couple of days back and so i was looking for solace i suppose. Personally i have tried to keep an open mind to the question of life after death, although after certain experiences i do veer towards belief as opposed to the majority of scientists and their “logic”. To my mind science comes from the same roots as religion and magic and therefore also needs some kind of belief system and so we have to wait until a more substantial number of heretics appear to see any kind of progress on research. I’m a gardener not a scientist, yet as i understand it, if we clap our hands together our skin doesn’t actually touch as there is a barrier of electrons or something surrounding us so it seems to me that our bodies contain much more than just flesh, blood and bones . It could also be that i have misinterpreted everything and therefore sound like a complete ignoramus but i shall be brave and post as it is something that i would really like to clear up in my own mind
Julia
2013-04-13 @ 7:11 AM
You don’t at all sound like an “ignoramus,” David. I love what you say about science and religion both stemming from belief systems. There you are sooo right! And don’t forget, what we perceive as matter is hardly matter at all. If I took out all the space in the atoms of your body, the amount of matter left composing your entire body would be the size of a very tiny microscopic dot. Furthermore, there are many subatomic particles that pass through us constantly without any awareness on our part.
I hope you checked out my blog, “Is There an Animal Heaven.” Believe it or not, afterlife encounters with our pets are more common than those with deceased spouses. And our pets often greet us when we pass over. What I am trying to say here is that the mechanisms of animal consciousness are no different from those of the human animal. They go to the same nonlocal reality that we go to. I applaud your animal rescuing. They so need us.
Thanks for writing,
Julia
alex
2013-04-18 @ 3:52 AM
I have been fighting a illness forfifteen years flatly it has been getting worse I’m 26 and have been obsessed with trying to figure out what will happen to me or if I will even remember any part of my self and it terrifies me because I have been getting worse
Julia
2013-04-18 @ 1:27 PM
Alex, NO PART OF YOU EVER DIES. You will be not only fully conscious in the “afterlife” but your perceptual abilities will be enhanced a thousand fold. Please read The Last Frontier. It’s crazy for you to be suffering with this fear. Getting rid of it is why I wrote the book. If I can help you in any way, let me know. What is the illness?
Wishing you some inner peace, Julia
Claire
2013-04-21 @ 10:14 PM
Dear Julia,
Like some of your other commentors I came to your website as a young person with an illness. I come from a poor working family and I have been so frightened for so long. My father died sick and homeless and I can’t see any other future for myself. I can barely breathe sometimes. This fear of death has been with me for so long. This fear of a great void and yet I don’t have the ability to change it, I don’t have the energy to bath much less control my future, so I must watch as those I love turn to hopelessness. I feel so terribly alone. Have you ever been this scared? Somewhere deep in my heart I can feel that there is nothing. I don’t mean to be such a downer, but I’m truly frightened. What do you recommend for someone so lost?
Julia
2013-04-22 @ 8:39 AM
Yes I have been that frightened! There was a time when I was so broke and alone I was sleeping in parks. Your strong identification with your family is a big part of the problem, of course. It makes you feel helpless, condemned. About the fear of death…I believe you are really afraid of that powerful disassociation from the self, a byproduct of deep depression, that is experienced as non-existence. I know that feeling too. It is horrible. And it is about the total absence of love. But it is not about what happens after we die. I wish you would pick up a copy of my book, The Last Frontier. It will help restore your faith in a benign universe. Your psyche is so drained! You need replenishment, inspiration, care. For me and for most others, these states arise in early adulthood, before we begin to accept ourselves. They do go away. Still, I will write you personally at your email address so that we can correspond privately. We can also talk to each other on the phone. I need to know what your illness is before we can work out a plan for you. In the meantime, please feel hugged and hugged and hugged from me! Julia