Dear Socrates

[Philosophy Now]

Having returned from the turn of the Fourth Century B.C. to the turn of the Twenty-First A.D., Socrates has eagerly signed on as a Philosophy Now columnist so that he may continue to carry out his divinely-inspired dialogic mission.

http://philosophynow.org/issues/39/Dear_Socrates

[HexHammer]

If outside of space and time, then what is stopping the spirit from entering into any period of time?

Nothing can exist outside of space and time, this is babble.

[Arising_uk]

Outdated nonsens, answerd in modern quantum science.

Care to say how?

[HexHammer]

Once a thing no longer exists, or becomes spirit, where does it go? If outside of space and time, then what is stopping the spirit from entering into any period of time?

Outdated nonsens, answerd in modern quantum science.

Care to say how?

Nothing can exist outside of space and time, that in itself is pure nonsense.

It either turns to energy, fine particles or whatever, but it doesn't stop to exist. That would violate basic Newtonian RT. The real question is if information is kept, or destroyed.

[Arising_uk]

... Nothing can exist outside of space and time, that in itself is pure nonsense.

Which is exactly what Neo-Socrates said and he used just logic.

It either turns to energy, fine particles or whatever, but it doesn't stop to exist. That would violate basic Newtonian RT. The real question is if information is kept, or destroyed.

What's "Newtonian RT"?
What's "energy"?
What's "whatever"?
Are you claiming information as a substance?

[HexHammer]

... Nothing can exist outside of space and time, that in itself is pure nonsense.

Which is exactly what Neo-Socrates said and he used just logic.

It either turns to energy, fine particles or whatever, but it doesn't stop to exist. That would violate basic Newtonian RT. The real question is if information is kept, or destroyed.

What's "Newtonian RT"?
What's "energy"?
What's "whatever"?
Are you claiming information as a substance?

- no?
- read some quantum science, not in the mood to explain it.

[Arising_uk]

...
- no?
- read some quantum science, not in the mood to explain it.

Doubt you could, as to understand such things is to be able to do the Maths.

Last thing I read about such stuff was that the problem with 'information' being 'destroyed' in QM is more to do with the Maths being used, so information is 'lost' when 'we' use complex numbers rather than the real numbers. Use real numbers and no loss but strange ontological and metaphysical entities have to be assumed, i.e. the u-bit.

You didn't answer these?

What's "Newtonian RT"?
What's "energy"?
What's "whatever"?