Haven't read through the entire thread but I remember reading about a study about how high levels of electro magnetic waves can be attributed to many ghost sightings or experiences. Example living near high tension cables with poor shielding can lead to such effect.

Also there are also some cases that say a lot of ghostly experiences happen in areas with an abnormally high amount of other stuff(like sulfur). When these things were neutralised(or reduced) the cases reported less ghost sightings or feelings.

I only remember of cases which involve electromagnetic waves and sulfur in another case(in a basement of an old pub). Make what you will of this. I suspect many of these ghostly phenomena can be reproduced with a little suggestion.

What I find interesting is that now we have so called 'ghost hunters' that use electromagnetic readers and claim that abnormal spikes are caused by ghost while the scientist say the abnormal spikes are what cause the ghostly experiences. So what we have is a chicken or egg conundrum. You can never dissuade the believer.

---

Added on October 6, 2009, 6:36 pmBTW this is supposed to be a science thread so try to explain things with logic and rationalism. And I don't like how the thread is started with the supposition that ghosts exist.

This is where I would like to point out that many of these ghost experiences can be measured as they have high correlation to areas with those instances as I have explained above.

This post has been edited by frags: Oct 6 2009, 06:42 PM

Is it in the power of the moderators to edit the first post, so as to somewhat salvage this thread?

Because I feel most of us here have opinion, but what this thread lacks is just a direction.

I'd propose that we first discuss on the existence of ghosts

before that, let us define ghost... most of peoples definition of ghost is that there are being who passed away from human and remain in earth realm..

some might call them ghost, spirits, zombie, jin, orang minyak, guardian of things, demon etc etc.. every culture has their own name and looks and characteristics...

however, I used to have a friend who claimed that he has the ability so see ghost... from our conversation, they looked like shadow.. blurred... like human, some are good, some are bad...

the question here... how come some people are able to see them while other are not able to?

Few questions you've posed there my friend, I'd respond to the first one, so that we can have a direction

So therefore, ghosts are beings of which does not belong to the living world, which is neither living nor dead, but somewhere in between.
That they are incapable of physical contact/detection/communication/reproduction, but yet they have some form of qualities of which can define their existence.

Is this statement agreeable? Pardon me I'm expressing my opinion. I'm not exerting my beliefs unto any of you

i like lynn's idea.

Yes, I'm also wonder whether it's true or how is it possible for certain people are able to see ghost...
Any forumer have any explanation on this?

I do believe that ghost can be scientifically proven.
Bare in mind that in my understanding, ghost isn't the spirit of the dead.
Ghost = Jinns.
Made of fire.
With the correct technology, scientists can detect their presence..

before we say ghost is dead, I think till today, scientist still haven find the correct definition for ALIVE.....

1) Homeostasis: Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, electrolyte concentration or sweating to reduce temperature.

2) Organization: Being structurally composed of one or more cells, which are the basic units of life.

3)Metabolism: Transformation of energy by converting chemicals and energy into cellular components (anabolism) and decomposing organic matter (catabolism). Living things require energy to maintain internal organization (homeostasis) and to produce the other phenomena associated with life.

4)Growth: Maintenance of a higher rate of anabolism than catabolism. A growing organism increases in size in all of its parts, rather than simply accumulating matter.

5)Adaptation: The ability to change over a period of time in response to the environment. This ability is fundamental to the process of evolution and is determined by the organism's heredity as well as the composition of metabolized substances, and external factors present.

6)Response to stimuli: A response can take many forms, from the contraction of a unicellular organism to external chemicals, to complex reactions involving all the senses of multicellular organisms. A response is often expressed by motion, for example, the leaves of a plant turning toward the sun (phototropism) and by chemotaxis.

7)Reproduction: The ability to produce new individual organisms, either asexually from a single parent organism, or sexually from two parent organisms


this world mean what? this earth? this dimension? out time frame? universe? soalr systems??

I really hope you`d watch this vid

http://www.tom365.com/movie_2004/html/7152.html

it explain how our universe interact with other dimension and universe

---

Added on October 7, 2009, 8:51 amaccording to Islam....

i don think FIRE is the correct word.... but light...


This post has been edited by Awakened_Angel: Oct 7 2009, 08:51 AM

I'm sorry, but I don't really understand what you mean.
Are you saying the possibility of measuring ghosts, or at the very least, determining their existence without the use of technology but by some other means?

Ghost = Jinns is just one of the many beliefs of how we define ghosts.
I believe, as Awakened Angel, that this is mainly the belief of Islam.
The Western world believes that ghosts are transparent creatures of the dead.
The Chinese believe that ghosts come in many shapes and sizes, but you have to be gifted (or "unlucky") to be able to see them.

Interesting. What might your definition of ghost be then if not dead?
Your answer would lead to the clarification of you stating the fact of an unknown definition for alive, hopefully.

If I may ask, why light?


I know a person who -claims- to be able to see ghosts, and I got interested so I began asking a lot.
In the end, found out it was a farce. Ugh.

In all seriousness though, I really do want to see them, if they exist.
If they exist, they're around us, I bet? Wouldn't it be cool to be able to interact with them?

________________

Like I said before, instead of finding ways of measuring as of yet, we have to know how to initiate their presence.

Another thing to think about is that ghosts have existed for hundreds of years. I find it really strange that no one bothered to clarify and prove their existence.

Also, why are we living creatures doing all the bother? If they can see us, I'm sure at least one of the thousands would somehow or rather make an appearance. And if an agreement is made somehow, it can go public and the world gains another important knowledge.

Think about it.

This post has been edited by slasherbaven: Oct 7 2009, 12:09 PM

Nice. We need definitions like this

However, these definitions only define (as you've said, to a certain extend) Living Beings.
A subject that do not fulfill all of these definitions may not be alive, but not necessarily be a ghost neither.
For example, if the subject is dead, it'll not fulfill any of the above. But yet is it a ghost? I'd say no, because it's just another dead thing.

you read on stephen hawking ang you`ll LUAO as he link ship and other object that fulfill the 7 criteria

Very nice indeed.

Wiki has plenty of definition on ghost/spirit, so not gonna repeat here.

Need to establish some form of understanding.

1) If a word has been defined in anyway (sciences, culture, wiki), it means an "object" has been labeled with certain characteristic for communication purposes. The key point here is it doesn't necessary means that such object exists.

E.g. A flying cup, a dragon ..or.. spirit

2) Belief in the existence of something doesn't automatically means it is true.

E.g. A believer in the flat earth theory does not know whether the earth is flat, however he believes it is.

Hope this will throw in more meaningful discussion.

Cheers.

When u tend to term it scientifically measurable you are already tryin to do the impossible.
What type of units your gonna categorize it under in first place? ^.^
My first statement wasnt off topic but juz to remind u that u are hitting on something impossible.

that`a the problem of modern science now.... what ever does not exist now is IMPOSSIBLE..

did NEWTON knew what unit he is going to use before he discover gravity??

did Watt knew that he will discover power??

did Joule knew he was going to discover work??

many past scientist took the chance and venture into impossible...

NOW is the age of add on... never again on discovery... in media people always boast on discovery.. invention... those are not inventions...

adding on features on HP is not invention... but add on...

When that apple fell on Issac Newton, he believed that something must have caused the apple to fall down, instead of flying up, so he acted according to what he believed and many years later he introduced the law of gravity to the world.

Just because one assumes something does not necessarily make that assumption false.

No issue with that

Back to the topic again, my apology as it is going to be quite long.

Many of us familiar with the quote by philosopher Descartes "I think, therefore I am" where consciousness is the awareness and the executive control system of oneself.

He emphasis the dualism concept where there are two kind of substances, first the matter, concrete stuff (body, organ, brain), second the mind or soul (the non physical stuff).

This concept often dubbed as 'the ghost in the machine', in our context, it is easier to refer it to "the soul in the body".

He has this idea that soul attaches itself to brains and control them. This concept theoretically means that when the body dies, the disembodied soul can float away to somewhere else.

This idea remains as a hypothesis in the realm of sciences as it introduced questions/challenges rather then solving the misery of existence itself.

Q1
Human activity/behavior can not be explained in the matter of concrete stuff (organ, brain activities). We need to push it back one level up to explain "the driver" i.e. the soul, how it works, what laws it obeys, so on and so forth.

Q2
Where the soul comes from? Who supplies it?

Here comes the religions and cultures explanation.

Q3
How the soul glues itself to the body? Does it attaches itself to all of the brain atoms, or some small parts of it or just one part?

Q4
What is the size of the soul? And what shape?

Example, it a boy dies at the age of 10, does the soul also at the age of 10, same size, same age? What if he dies naturally at 80, the soul becomes an old man?

Q5
At what state the soul is injected (let assume) in a baby? Immediately, one week, 9 months, somewhere in the middle?

Medical research discovered that, when the important organs developed, babies start to have consciousness.

Q6
When somebody lost an arm, does the soul lost an arm too?

Q7
For an old man with memory problem, be it short term or long term. When he dies, does his soul also experience memory problem?

If this is true, the soul would not be able to remember what religion he believed in, if he has one.

Q8
Observation from animals suggest that they have consciousness too.

Example, in the jungle, a group of wolfs will form a wolfs pack attack to a target deer. They are aware of their own existence, the other wolfs existence and the deer existence. They statregies and plan the attack in an army way, left, right, centre which will usually yields a better success rate.

Does wolfs have soul too?

Since we are not able to find the answers to this as yet, one of the scientist sum it up in the following paragraph:

You know, it’s a very curious thing about the self, that it is a paradoxical mixture of something which is unchanged with time and something that changes with time. If you ask, ‘Are you the same person you were at the age of ten?’ well, in one sense you are; there’s a continuity of memory, certain personality traits remain unchanged, and so on. On the other hand, you are clearly not exactly the same person. Not only has your body changed but your mind has changed as well. So there is something that we like to call the ‘self’ which is preserved intact through time, and yet something in there is changing, too. So I don’t think we are ever going to understand what we mean by the self without understanding the psychology of temporality and the puzzle of the sensation of the flux of time.

Ah alright, I understand your direction now. One disease, two ways of curing.
It's true, technology isn't the answer for everything, but there has to be an explanation, an answer somewhere. Even so, why has there not been an answer to as to the existence of ghosts? You might repeat there hasn't been any methods found, but it has already been hundreds of years. Ghosts can be a wonderful discovery, yet the discovery is never taken seriously. Why.

Yes I understand, but.. alright, if you're questioning if ghosts are not dead creatures, what else could they be?
People living in the same space as us but in alternate dimension?

Are you calling Allah a ghost?

Because the existence of cosmological object is the production of a string of scientifically logic assumptions. At least, I think so.

Ghosts, though, the idea of ghosts is very vague.
What are ghosts? They are the spirits of the dead. Why can some see them and some can't? It's possible the some who sees them lie. What are the attributes of ghosts? They are only available in certain place and/or with certain conditions. How do we go to the places, or achieve the conditions? We do so and so.
Like I said before, I've tried three popular "so and so" methods to see ghosts, but alas, to no avail.

An end is always a new beginning.


=EDIT=
nice.rider, I love your posts.

This post has been edited by slasherbaven: Oct 7 2009, 09:59 PM

o no >.< The topic travels from Earth to Sedna.

Sorry, but I've always felt answering a question with another question isn't the best way to justify oneself.
Let us view the fallacy of your viewpoint, and hence compare here:

1. Newton realises there's cause for things to fall. (So far, realisations of ghost only occurs to a minority group of people)
2. He then conducts experiment as to why things fall. (There've been experiments trying to detect ghosts as well)
3. Results of his experimentation concluded there exists a gravitational force. (Still no results from here).

The main difference here is item no.1, the realisation of the subject. Things fall, it's imminent/obvious/real.
Ghosts, on the other hand, is not.
Thus there're still difficulty in trying to gauge something which might/might not exist. Which is why I propose that we'd firstly discuss whether or not ghost exists.

Your string of questions are heavily based on the idea of souls.
Assuming if it is the brain/grey matter that ultimately controls the body, the idea of souls will fall.

That being said however, your idea/opinion here is not necessarily wrong. I accept it if you strongly about it, as it is failure on my part to prove my standpoint here (i.e. brain activity) as I do not know much about it. An opinion is all I have