The Science of Ghosts

[George-ananda]

Can you define what you mean by "materialization"? What kind of "material" is involved here? If there is a "material" involved here it might be possible to propose some kind of testable hypothesis.

Perhaps 'manifestation' would be a better word than 'materialization'. I don't claim to understand the whole process but it requires the use and manipulation of the energy from the local environment. Here is an explanation from someone who seems to know their stuff...


MANIFESTATIONS
Depending upon the strength and amount of energy a spirit has gathered as well as how active the spirit is, a spirit can manifest itself into different types of apparitions. The first thing is to learn how a spirit can absorb energy in order to manifest itself. Spirits try to manifest themselves for many reasons, i.e. they don’t realize they are dead and are trying to communicate with the living for help. These are all forms of constructive energy:

There are several ways a spirit can absorb energy to manifest itself, the first way is to absorb the heat in a particular area. Heat is nothing more than the resonation of molecules, the faster the molecules move; the hotter the area is. Well, when the spirit absorbs this kinetic energy, the end result is the area being colder than the ambient temperature; hence, a cold spot is formed! Cold spots are an easy way to detect paranormal activity! Cold spots can be measured with an infrared thermometer, seen with a thermal imaging camera, and felt with bare skin. They typically last a second or two and can be measured as a drastic temperature change.

An other way that spirits can absorb energy is by feeding upon ionized air molecules. Typically this happens during a thunder storm when the frequent lightning strikes cause air molecules to ionize. Spirits then feed off this energy and manifest themselves a lot more frequently than during calm weather. I know this is true because I have gone ghost hunting during a thunderstorm and have gotten far more activity on my EMF meter. I would like to stress that the lightning does NOT cause my EMF meter (cell sensor) to spike, and I get quick spikes in between lightning strikes which I presume to be supernatural. My Trifield meter, on the other hand, is sensitive to this and WILL detect the lightning, but this is because it is a natural electromagnetic field detector. It is important to make sure that an EMF meter doesn’t detect lightning if you are trying to detect spirits. Mainly natural EM meters will detect lightning, static electricity, etc.

Natural EM fields can be generated due to the earth’s magnetic field. These geomagnetic fields also can be used by spirits to help them manifest themselves.

The next, creepiest, way that a spirit can absorb energy is by absorbing it out of the living! They can’t kill you or anything of the sort but you may feel physically exhausted. This happened to me a couple of times where, for no apparent reason, I just felt physically exhausted. In other words, I had felt like I had just run a mile! The reason is simple, we as living beings have energy that we can simply replenish by eating food; thus, they partake in this and leave us with a feeling of exhaustion.

Finally, spirits love to suck the energy out of the batteries in electronic devices. This phenomenon can easily be noticed when you know that your batteries are full and then they suddenly become depleted. However, you must realize that cold weather kills alkaline batteries and old batteries tend to lose their capacity of holding a charge. With this in mind, you can be able to detect this annoying phenomenon when your electronic device suddenly fails because the battery has no charge.

 

[fantome profane]

Perhaps 'manifestation' would be a better word than 'materialization'. I don't claim to understand the whole process but it requires the use and manipulation of the energy from the local environment. Here is an explanation from someone who seems to know their stuff...


MANIFESTATIONS
Depending upon the strength and amount of energy a spirit has gathered as well as how active the spirit is, a spirit can manifest itself into different types of apparitions. The first thing is to learn how a spirit can absorb energy in order to manifest itself. Spirits try to manifest themselves for many reasons, i.e. they don’t realize they are dead and are trying to communicate with the living for help. These are all forms of constructive energy:

There are several ways a spirit can absorb energy to manifest itself, the first way is to absorb the heat in a particular area. Heat is nothing more than the resonation of molecules, the faster the molecules move; the hotter the area is. Well, when the spirit absorbs this kinetic energy, the end result is the area being colder than the ambient temperature; hence, a cold spot is formed! Cold spots are an easy way to detect paranormal activity! Cold spots can be measured with an infrared thermometer, seen with a thermal imaging camera, and felt with bare skin. They typically last a second or two and can be measured as a drastic temperature change.

An other way that spirits can absorb energy is by feeding upon ionized air molecules. Typically this happens during a thunder storm when the frequent lightning strikes cause air molecules to ionize. Spirits then feed off this energy and manifest themselves a lot more frequently than during calm weather. I know this is true because I have gone ghost hunting during a thunderstorm and have gotten far more activity on my EMF meter. I would like to stress that the lightning does NOT cause my EMF meter (cell sensor) to spike, and I get quick spikes in between lightning strikes which I presume to be supernatural. My Trifield meter, on the other hand, is sensitive to this and WILL detect the lightning, but this is because it is a natural electromagnetic field detector. It is important to make sure that an EMF meter doesn’t detect lightning if you are trying to detect spirits. Mainly natural EM meters will detect lightning, static electricity, etc.

Natural EM fields can be generated due to the earth’s magnetic field. These geomagnetic fields also can be used by spirits to help them manifest themselves.

The next, creepiest, way that a spirit can absorb energy is by absorbing it out of the living! They can’t kill you or anything of the sort but you may feel physically exhausted. This happened to me a couple of times where, for no apparent reason, I just felt physically exhausted. In other words, I had felt like I had just run a mile! The reason is simple, we as living beings have energy that we can simply replenish by eating food; thus, they partake in this and leave us with a feeling of exhaustion.

Finally, spirits love to suck the energy out of the batteries in electronic devices. This phenomenon can easily be noticed when you know that your batteries are full and then they suddenly become depleted. However, you must realize that cold weather kills alkaline batteries and old batteries tend to lose their capacity of holding a charge. With this in mind, you can be able to detect this annoying phenomenon when your electronic device suddenly fails because the battery has no charge.

The second one here is very interesting. Are you aware that there is actual evidence that elector-magnetic fields can cause hallucinations?

 

[George-ananda]

Why is that the most reasonable theory?

Because the anecdotal evidence and the theories dovetail nicely. And because I have heard no more reasonable explanation (including the materialist ones).

People who see weird stuff like to claim they are sensitive to the supernatural, and they like to think they are. Schitzophrenic people do it. People who have a knack for intuitively assessing people psychologically -- by asking them questions and slowly extract information from them -- like to think they are psychic mediums.

Consider that no one likes to think of the idea that they're hallucinating, even when we know they are. Also consider that people claim all types of things apart from ghosts. Things such as alien abductions or psychokinesis.

Are you then claiming that all cases are phenomena within the realm of the known (hallucinations, hoaxes, misinterpretation of normal phenomena, etc.)? I do not personally think that position can explain the full range of phenomena I have heard given the quantity, quality and consistency of the evidence. We would just have to disagree.

 

[George-ananda]

The second one here is very interesting. Are you aware that there is actual evidence that elector-magnetic fields can cause hallucinations?

I may have heard that before but that doesn't mean an active spirit can't draw energy from that source too. And I agree that hallucination may be the ultimate explanation for some sightings (but it doesn't stand up as plausible explanations for those with multiple witnesses or with obvious physical activity, where no unusual electro-magnetic sources exist, etc).

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Because the anecdotal evidence and the theories dovetail nicely. And because I have heard no more reasonable explanation (including the materialist ones).

Could you, like.... elaborate on that? Just saying it dovetails nicely and that nothing else is more "reasonable", doesn't really tell me anything.

I'm asking you why you think it's more reasonable. Responding with "because I heard nothing else that's reasonable" isn't an answer. That's just repeating what you said that lead me to asking the question in the first place.

Are you then claiming that all cases are phenomena within the realm of the known (hallucinations, hoaxes, misinterpretation of normal phenomena, etc.)?

No, I'm claiming that even if those things fail to account for a particular case, saying it's ghosts isn't the next reasonable thing. "omgz, ghosts!" shouldn't replace "I don't know what I saw".

 

[psychoslice]

I can't personally believe in ghost, for what can they be ?. We as the mind body organism are nothing more than conditioning and programming, what then would go on to be a ghost, like once the body is dead that's it, all that we were as a so called human is gone, there is nothing that could possibly carry on, no I cannot believe in such thins as ghost.

 

[George-ananda]

Could you, like.... elaborate on that? Just saying it dovetails nicely and that nothing else is more "reasonable", doesn't really tell me anything.

I'm asking you why you think it's more reasonable. Responding with "because I heard nothing else that's reasonable" isn't an answer. That's just repeating what you said that lead me to asking the question in the first place.



No, I'm claiming that even if those things fail to account for a particular case, saying it's ghosts isn't the next reasonable thing. "omgz, ghosts!" shouldn't replace "I don't know what I saw".

Well I study the full gamete of paranormal phenomena (ghosts are just one thing) and Vedic/eastern spirituality. The Vedic tradition describes the levels of reality beyond the physical that is quite complex and dovetails well with the experiences found in the beyond the normal experiences of people. The fields of the paranormal and eastern/Vedic spirituality are vast and take time to understand and appreciate. I don't know what I can do in a short reply post. Some things take time and effort to understand. I can only respond to more specific questions.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Well I study the full gamete of paranormal phenomena (ghosts are just one thing) and Vedic/eastern spirituality. The Vedic tradition describes the levels of reality beyond the physical that is quite complex and dovetails well with the experiences found in the beyond the normal experiences of people. The fields of the paranormal and eastern/Vedic spirituality are vast and take time to understand and appreciate. I don't know what I can do in a short reply post. Some things take time and effort to understand. I can only respond to more specific questions.

Be less vague please. If you see a chair float in the air by it self, and a shadow figure float by a moment later, how do you confirm it's a dead person? As oppose to any other radical claim? (such as an alien or a time traveler)?

Never mind hallucinations or mistaken assessment. We're gonna pretend those options are ruled out for the sake of discussion. With that said, how do you confirm a strange occurrence is a disembodied dead person? As oppose to literally anything else?

I don't know what I can do in a short reply post

Be less vague. Your replies don't have to be excessively long, but you can be less vague.

There's plenty of people out there that have their own explanations that are unfounded. They'll respond to my question with the same vagueness you did, but of a different explanations.

Example: "Well I study the full gamete of abduction cases and scientology. It describes the various types of aliens that are beyond this dimension that is quite complex and dovetails well with the experiences found beyond the normal experiences of people. The fields of ufology and abductions are vast and take time to understand and appreciate. I don't know what I can do in a short reply post. Some things take time and effort to understand. I can only respond to more specific questions."

Get it? What makes your explanation any more valid than that example? You need to give me something with actual substance. No more vagueness or a random string of words.

 

[Papoon]

Consider that no one likes to think of the idea that they're hallucinating, even when we know they are.

Actually, I've had some wonderful times when I knew I was hallucinating.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Actually, I've had some wonderful times when I knew I was hallucinating.

Haven't we all....

The difference is, you were probably expecting, or even planning for the hallucinations to happen before they did.

 

[Papoon]

Haven't we all....

The difference is, you were probably expecting, or even planning for the hallucinations to happen before they did.

Not always, though I have become somewhat skilled in complex visualisation, whether still or full motion HD,. Which was a development of a skill learned from particular meditation practices.

So I am well aware of the capacity of the brain to generate all sorts of experiences.

I am not taking a position in this thread BTW. I'm kind of agnostic re the nature of what are collectively called supernatural or paranormal experiences.

 

[George-ananda]

Be less vague please. If you see a chair float in the air by it self, and a shadow figure float by a moment later, how do you confirm it's a dead person? As oppose to any other radical claim? (such as an alien or a time traveler)?
.
o
Never mind hallucinations or mistaken assessment. We're gonna pretend those options are ruled out for the sake of discussion. With that said, how do you confirm a strange occurrence is a disembodied dead person? As oppose to literally anything else?

Where did I say any such thing can be 'confirmed'? Any logically possible explanation is possible but that doesn't mean some explanations become more reasonable than others when all evidence, arguments and theories are considered. Guessing your next question will be "How do I judge reasonableness of theories?', this is where deeper and longer consideration is required that considers all evidence and argumentation from all sides and in the end, yes, we form our personal opinion of what is the strongest view. I have seen enough to make me go beyond 'I don't know' to state what I believe is happening short of claiming proof/confirmation.

Be less vague. Your replies don't have to be excessively long, but you can be less vague.

There's plenty of people out there that have their own explanations that are unfounded. They'll respond to my question with the same vagueness you did, but of a different explanations.

Example: "Well I study the full gamete of abduction cases and scientology. It describes the various types of aliens that are beyond this dimension that is quite complex and dovetails well with the experiences found beyond the normal experiences of people. The fields of ufology and abductions are vast and take time to understand and appreciate. I don't know what I can do in a short reply post. Some things take time and effort to understand. I can only respond to more specific questions.

Get it? What makes your explanation any more valid than that example? You need to give me something with actual substance. No more vagueness or a random string of words.

It comes down to the quality and comprehensiveness of our study and analysis, so you should just not take my or someone else's word for something on any controversial subject. If you are interested then you need to spend your own time studying and listening to all sides. In this thread I am voicing what I believe after my considerable study. All the evidence and argumentation from all sides? - where do we want to start?

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Where did I say any such thing can be 'confirmed'? Any logically possible explanation is possible but that doesn't mean some explanations become more reasonable than others when all evidence, arguments and theories are considered.

You keep talking about evidence when you haven't presented any.

Guessing your next question will be "How do I judge reasonableness of theories?', this is where deeper and longer consideration is required that considers all evidence and argumentation from all sides and in the end, yes, we form our personal opinion of what is the strongest view. I have seen enough to make me go beyond 'I don't know' to state what I believe is happening short of claiming proof/confirmation.

It sounds more you believe your so called "theories" only because it's the only one you've taken the time to look into. More-so than both the well understood explanations (such as hallucinations), as well as the other equally unsubstantiated and radical claims (aliens, psychokinesis,etc...)

where do we want to start?

You can start by presenting some evidence.

 

[George-ananda]

You keep talking about evidence when you haven't presented any.

All anecdotal paranormal claims are evidence to be considered (not blindly accepted or rejected).

It sounds more you believe your so called "theories" only because it's the only one you've taken the time to look into. More-so than both the well understood explanations (such as hallucinations), as well as the other equally unsubstantiated and radical claims (aliens, psychokinesis,etc...)

Not true in my case. I have made considerable effort to become well-acquainted with all the skeptical arguments as this subject interests me.

You can start by presenting some evidence.

Just on ghosts alone there are millions of pages written presenting evidence to consider. I previously started a thread in the paranormal section on Japanese Tsunami victims check it out). That is just one millionth of what can be presented.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

All anecdotal paranormal claims are evidence to be considered (not blindly accepted or rejected).

That runs into a problem when most people's anecdotal claims are due to having the same mentality I've described. i.e. they don't know how to say "I don't know" and automatically... automatically associate strange occurrences (stuff move by it self, shadowy figures) as the work of dead people.

People automatically associate spooky occurrences with dead people. Something moving by it self is automatically associated with ghosts. That's automatic in people's minds even when they really don't know. So most people who experience bizarre and spooky occurrences are gonna automatically tell you it's a ghost. Therefore most people's interpretations on these occurrences can't be trusted. Their description of what happened can be trusted to be sincere. But their interpretation can't be trusted.

So why do it? Even knowing that, why choose to trust people's interpretations when knowing full and well that ghost is an automatic association?

Not true in my case. I have made considerable effort to become well-acquainted with all the skeptical arguments as this subject interests me.

You automatically believe someone's bizarre experience is an alien abduction if they simply interpret it to be one?

Just on ghosts alone there are millions of pages written presenting evidence to consider. I previously started a thread in the paranormal section on Japanese Tsunami victims check it out). That is just one millionth of what can be presented.

I asked you for evidence. Telling me there are pages written that have evidence, isn't giving me evidence. You're basically repeating that there is evidence but not showing it.

I'll help you here. What needs to be presented is a connection. Something that connects strange occurrences to disembodied dead people. An actual connection. Because right now, that's just a conditioned association, not a true connection.

 

[George-ananda]

That runs into a problem when most people's anecdotal claims do so with the same mentality I've described. i.e. they don't know how to say "I don't know" and automatically... automatically associate strange occurrences (stuff move by it self, shadowy figures) as the work of dead people.

People automatically associate spooky occurrences with dead people. Something moving by it self is automatically associated with ghosts. That's automatic in people's minds even when they really don't know. So most people who experience bizarre and spooky occurrences are gonna automatically tell you it's a ghost. Therefore most people's interpretations on these occurrences can't be trusted. Their description of what happened can be trusted to be sincere. But their interpretation can't be.

So why do it? Even knowing that, why choose to trust people's interpretations when knowing full and well that ghost is an automatic association?

Where did I ever say I 'trust' others interpretations? I believe I said I 'consider' (neither blindly accept not blindly dismiss). In a consideration, people's prejudices and worldviews need to be considered.

You automatically believe someone's bizarre experience is an alien abduction if they simply interpret it to be one?

No I don't as people are fallible. Their interpretation can not make it reality.

I asked you for evidence. Telling me there are pages written that have evidence, isn't giving me evidence. You're basically repeating that there is evidence but not showing it.

Are you sure you understand what constitutes 'evidence'? You are confusing 'evidence' with 'irrefutable evidence'. In a criminal case we rarely have 'irrefutable evidence' but a preponderance of consistent evidence that may involve a variety of different kinds of evidence.

I'll help you here. What needs to be presented is a connection. Something that connects strange occurrences to disembodied dead people. An actual connection. Because right now, that's just a conditioned association, not a true connection.

(not all apparitions are disembodied dead people). After consideration I have come to accept that those that claim perception beyond the physical and the spiritual masters of the Vedic tradition are beyond the 'I don't know level' like you and I would be if left on our own. They present an understanding of the above the physical worlds that is consistent with the evidence.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

Where did I ever say I 'trust' others interpretations? I believe I said I 'consider' (neither blindly accept not blindly dismiss). In a consideration, people's prejudices and worldviews need to be considered.

Knowing full and well the tendencies of people's associative train of thought, it doesn't count as evidence for the paranormal. Their interpretations don't need consideration. A solid connection needs to first be made with dead people.

No I don't as people are fallible. Their interpretation can not make it reality.

That should go for people's alleged ghost experiences too, meaning we're back to "I don't know".

Are you sure you understand what constitutes 'evidence'? You are confusing 'evidence' with 'irrefutable evidence'.

I don't consider people's fallible associations as evidence, irrefutable or otherwise.

In a criminal case we rarely have 'irrefutable evidence' but a preponderance of consistent evidence that may involve a variety of different kinds of evidence.

And then there are things that simply aren't evidence at all, but people like to say it is.

After consideration I have come to accept that those that claim perception beyond the physical and the spiritual masters of the Vedic tradition are beyond the 'I don't know level' like you and I would be if left on our own.

Why? These alleged spiritual masters, if they have any merit, would be the ones who have the connection I'm looking for. They would also have a degree of predictive power.

They present an understanding of the above the physical worlds that is consistent with the evidence.

How do they present this understanding? And what evidence is it consistent with? More importantly, how do they make the connection of some given set of spooky occurrences with disembodied dead people?

 

[George-ananda]

Knowing full and well the tendencies of people's associative train of thought, it doesn't count as evidence for the paranormal. Their interpretations don't need consideration. A solid connection needs to first be made with dead people.



That should go for people's alleged ghost experiences too, meaning we're back to "I don't know".



I don't consider people's fallible associations as evidence, irrefutable or otherwise.



And then there are things that simply aren't evidence at all, but people like to say it is.



Why? These alleged spiritual masters, if they have any merit, would be the ones who have the connection I'm looking for. They would also have a degree of predictive power.



How do they present this understanding? And what evidence is it consistent with? More importantly, how do they make the connection of some given set of spooky occurrences with disembodied dead people?

What can possibly determine what an apparition is? Now, there is much in chemistry I accept from chemistry masters that I would never have determined on my own, It is the same for me with spiritual masters except that they can't show us with physical experiments at this time so whatever they say can not be shown with the same scientific certainty as chemistry. Do spiritual masters truly know things beyond the physical? I am absolutely convinced from my study of the lives and teachings of many of them.

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

What can possibly determine what an apparition is?

You tell me.

What I could tell you is what type of evidence would actually confirm the existence of ghosts.

Someone would need a way to reliably and consistently observe some sort of essence that leaves the body upon death, and they would need to be able to track this essence reliably. They would also need to determine that this essences carries traces of consciousness from it's former living self, perhaps inferred based on the behavior of this essence. Maybe then we can confirm the existence of the soul by it's text book definition.

Even then, you still haven't made the connection with this and various alleged haunting. It would also have to be shown that this essence that we're able to reliably observe is capable of moving objects, assume a visible human form, and do all the other stuff that ghosts are claimed capable of. Now considering how many people and animals die every day and have died in the past, there should be countless ghosts running around the world, if ghosts are actually a thing.

This discrepancy would also need to be solved. Why we're able to observe this disembodied essence reliably, yet, we don't observe billions of these running around haunting stuff.

It is the same for me with spiritual masters except that they can't show us with physical experiments at this time so whatever they say can not be shown with the same scientific certainty as chemistry.

Then why do you believe them with certainty?

Do spiritual masters truly know things beyond the physical? I am absolutely convinced from my study of the lives and teachings of many of them.

So basically you're admitting you believe them without sufficient information to go by.

 

[George-ananda]

You tell me.

What I could tell you is what type of evidence would actually confirm the existence of ghosts.

Someone would need a way to reliably and consistently observe some sort of essence that leaves the body upon death, and they would need to be able to track this essence reliably. They would also need to determine that this essences carries traces of consciousness from it's former living self, perhaps inferred based on the behavior of this essence. Maybe then we can confirm the existence of the soul by it's text book definition.

Even then, you still haven't made the connection with this and various alleged haunting. It would also have to be shown that this essence that we're able to reliably observe is capable of moving objects, assume a visible human form, and do all the other stuff that ghosts are claimed capable of. Now considering how many people and animals die every day and have died in the past, there should be countless ghosts running around the world, if ghosts are actually a thing.

This discrepancy would also need to be solved. Why we're able to observe this disembodied essence reliably, yet, we don't observe billions of these running around haunting stuff.

It sounds like you are laying out what it would take to prove or almost prove ghosts. That would be great but we are not there yet. I am only saying when all the evidence and argumentation is considered I believe in ghosts beyond reasonable doubt. For example I believe OJ committed the murder based on all the evidence and argumentation. But there is no proof or near proof of the type you are looking for above. So I strongly believe OJ was guilty of murder and that ghosts exist. That is all I am saying.

Then why do you believe them with certainty?

All I can say is I believe in ghosts and OJ's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

So basically you're admitting you believe them without sufficient information to go by.

If your idea of sufficient evidence is proof or near proof then I agree. Do I have sufficient evidence to believe in ghosts and OJ's guilt beyond reasonable doubt? I believe I do.