The Nature of a Ghost Hunt

Zillah

I've been thinking lately. Too much. As usual.

And something has occured to me. The phenomenon of ghosts is incredibly hard to research. Even if you take it at complete face value that a ghost is the intelligent mind of a dead human being who continues to exist, its near impossible to prove.


For one, theres the very natue of a ghost. Lets say for now that a ghost is some or all of a dead person's personality that has survived death. Whether they exist as some form of energy, or in some form science has yet to indentify, we don't know. But either way, they don't have a physical body, thats inescapable. Which leads to an unusual situation. You've got a person, or something a bit like a person, who dosn't have a body, and so must find other ways at their disposal to interact with the world. And if they exist in a way science doesn't understand, then they communicate in a way science doesn't understand. Which has obvious problems.

But I think the biggest problem is if there really are dead people that still think, they're unlikely to think like living people. They don't have a brain. They have whatever it is they have, but its not a brain. This could be why ghosts seem to behave in such a strange way. Why they're inconsistent, and often confused. They couldn't see time and space the way we do. Hence, a ghost hunter could ask for a knock, and get one. But a scientist will want a knock twenty times, on demand to prove that there is something intelligent behind it, but it may not be intelligent as we understand it. But it still thinks its a person.

So you get something that wants to be treated like a person, but doesn't act like a person, and is beyond the understanding of modern science.

Very troublesome. It may be that ghosts are beyond our capacity to prove until we develop technology and methodology that deal in whatever the nature of a ghost is.

solas

I think of ghosts like photographs or a video clip, an image or carbon copy of something or somebody taken at a specific time and contains all the details captured in that moment. A little more than that, it preserves the energy of who that person was, hence the sensations or strong emotions associated with hauntings. As for interaction, we can be affected or influenced by many kinds of energy distortions, why not ghostly energy patterns.

That said, I think there's lot of different kinds of frequency's out there and not just the video clip/photograph type of spirit.

Zillah

But what you're describing as energy isn't really energy. Emotions aren't a form of energy, thats chemicals and electricty in our brains. If we're getting into mana or quintessence or whatever, thats fine, but its not "energy" as we know it.

Oryx

Non scientific opinion is all I can give. Dunno about ghosts, all I can refer to is spirit communication. Whatever way their non brain works, they seem to attempt to communicate in a way the recipient can understand, using images sounds etc relevant to them. To you would information provided this way consitute proof? Say if it was something verifiable?

Tho I have a sneaky feeling those on the other side want us mortals to live in a world of faith rather than knowledge for another while yet.:)

solas

zillah wrote:

Emotions aren't a form of energy, thats chemicals and electricty in our brains.

you feeling silly today? Aren't these chemicals and electricity a form of energy.

sure emotions are energy, maybe those emotions are the result of a chemical reaction but they are energy nonetheless. Once that energy has been "created" it acts or reacts with its environment.

zillah wrote:

If we're getting into mana or quintessence or whatever, thats fine, but its not "energy" as we know it.

conveniently, either are ghosts.

stevenmu

Good post Zillah, that really is a problem. Because we don't really have a scientific basis for what constitutes a ghost, we're really confined to looking for side-effects of ghosts opposed to the ghosts themselves. I see things like cold spots in particular, but also shadows or orbs on photos, EMF readings, EVP etc as being more indicative of the presence of a ghost or energy than direct evidence of a ghost itself. This unfortunatly means that we have to also rely on subjective evidence a lot, which is really only any good if you experience it yourself.

Also as solas points out some/many/all (depending on your point of view) 'ghosts' are thought to not be intelligent spirits, but more of an imprint or recording of energies in a place of a particular time. I know one of the times in the dungeon in Charleville last weekend I felt that we were witnessing a recording of an event, not actually in the pressence of spirits, altough I don't really have any strong reason for that.

The idea of what type of intelligence ghosts would have is extremely interesting, but very hard to actually think about. So much of how we think is based on our physical bodies, our brain structure and chemistry and instincts and so much of how we percieve things is based on our physical senses that I can't even begin to conceive what it must be like. This is where a lot of the major religions fall apart for me, describing God and the afterlife in terms that only make sense if you have a physical human-form body. I once thought about blindfolding myself for a week to see what it would be like to be blind, but I think that would only be a miniscule change in perception compared to what a spirit would percieve.

Zillah

sure emotions are energy, maybe those emotions are the result of a chemical reaction but they are energy nonetheless.

Its kind of complicated. Your brain is essentially a big blob of electrical goo. Its an incredibly complex and fantastic blob of electic goo however. Each time you feel an emotion, thats electricity whirring around in your brain and chemicals moving around your body. But then those chemicals get turned into other chemicals and that energy gets turned into other energy. Its only an emotion within the context of the whole system of the brain.

In the same way you can say a government is formed from politicians, its still not accurate to call a government a type of polictician.

EDIT:

KatieK wrote:

Dunno about ghosts, all I can refer to is spirit communication. Whatever way their non brain works, they seem to attempt to communicate in a way the recipient can understand, using images sounds etc relevant to them. To you would information provided this way consitute proof? Say if it was something verifiable?

Oh yeah, definately. A scientist would require extremely good accuracy, and consistency, but its not out of the question at all.

solas

zilah wrote:

Its only an emotion within the context of the whole system of the brain.

until it becomes external and others become the recipient of that energy and so starts another chain reaction. Take for example someone who is angry and shouting at people. It's no longer just a chemical reaction within the context of their brain, it a very real and powerful (and often dangerous) means of communication.

on the topic at hand aren't you discussing the nature of ghosts, something which for all intents and purposes you yourself have described as "and is beyond the understanding of modern science."

Oryx

Zillah wrote:

Oh yeah, definately. A scientist would require extremely good accuracy, and consistency, but its not out of the question at all.

That tends to be a problem, and some would say cop out, because in my experience 'they' dont perform on cue.

solas

like I can feel your emotions right now.

Zillah

solas wrote:

on the topic at hand aren't you discussing the nature of ghosts, something which for all intents and purposes you yourself have described as "and is beyond the understanding of modern science."

Exactly, if ghosts are simply "energy" then they should be as mesurable as any other kind of energy, which they aren't.

until it becomes external and others become the recipient of that energy and so starts another chain reaction. Take for example someone who is angry and shouting at people. It's no longer just a chemical reaction within the context of their brain, it a very real and powerful (and often dangerous) means of communication.

When you start shouting, thats energy from your muscles making the air vibrate, it has nothing to do with the energy in your brain. And then the energy from the vibrating air hits their ears and ends there. Again, the emotion only exists inside the context of your brain, as far as science is concerned. And energy is a science word.

KatieK wrote:

That tends to be a problem, and some would say cop out, because in my experience 'they' dont perform on cue.

Lets say the experiment was along the lines of Qs and As. With an experiment I'd design, you wouldn't have to answer every question, but when you did provide an answer, it needs to be right. If we only counted the right answers then it wouldn't be a very good experiment.

Oryx

So when someone is shouting at you and you feel it like a punch to the solar plexus, is that your energy or chemicals, or emotion or what? Cos ghosts affect us on the same level.

solas

Exactly, if ghosts are simply "energy" then they should be as mesurable as any other kind of energy, which they aren't.

what about emf readings and infa red and stilled photography?

When you start shouting, thats energy from your muscles making the air vibrate, it has nothing to do with the energy in your brain. And then the energy from the vibrating air hits their ears and ends there. Again, the emotion only exists inside the context of your brain, as far as science is concerned. And energy is a science word.

if you say so zillah. I'm very empathic so I can feel how your feeling, maybe I'm just perceiving the reactions within your brain. Wonder how that works.

Zillah

KatieK wrote:

So when someone is shouting at you and you feel it like a punch to the solar plexus, is that your energy or chemicals, or emotion or what? Cos ghosts affect us on the same level.

Although im not too sure what you're talking about, its likely that any physical reaction you feel after being shouted at is a result of your own brain's reaction to it. Rather than something they've done to you.

solas wrote:

what about emf readings and infa red and stilled photography?

Im not sure, thats kind of the topic Im bringing up here. Obviously ghosts interact with the world as we know it on some level, otherwise we'd never notice anything.

if you say so zillah. I'm very empathic so I can feel how your feeling, maybe I'm just perceiving the reactions within your brain. Wonder how that works.

What am I feeling exactly?

solas

zillah wrote:

What am I feeling exactly?

much prefer if you expressed that.

Zillah

Em, the only reason my emotional state is relevant is because you've said you can sense it. Im quite curious to see if you're correct. Why would you bring it up at all if you don't want to discuss it?

solas

zillah wrote:

Im quite curious to see if you're correct.

of course you are. If I said how you feel (toward me) you would deny it or rationalise it as chemical reactions in my brain.

Why would you bring it up at all if you don't want to discuss it?

because its about as possible to prove as "ghosts", which are really nothing more than the same.

Zillah

solas wrote:

of course you are. If I said how you feel (toward me) you would deny it or rationalise it as chemical reactions in my brain.

Solas what are you talking about? If you think I have something against you for some reason, I don't.

because its about as possible to prove as "ghosts", which are really nothing more than the same.

Not really. If you can sense my emotions then you could say that im feeling "happy" or "sad" or "confused" or whatever. And it'd either be right or wrong. If you don't want to discuss your empathic abilities then don't bring it up, especially in relation to me. I don't mean that as a challenge or anything, it just makes sense.

solas

zillah wrote:

Solas what are you talking about? If you think I have something against you for some reason, I don't.

untrue.

If you don't want to discuss your empathic abilities then don't bring it up, especially in relation to me.

this isn't about my empathic abilities, the discussion as you have stated earlier is in relation to the very nature of ghosts and spirits, If I can sense your spirit, wouldn't it suggest that the sum of all these chemical reactions is an energy undefined by science?

Zillah

Solas, do you seriously expect me to continue to discuss things with you while you insist on claiming I have something against you?

For the record, I was in a remarkably good mood while I was posting, as I was also on MSN arranging dinner with a friend I havn't seen in a long time.

solas

said you would deny it.
It's not so much a case of belief anyway, you've made your feelings known on plenty of occasions in the past. I just sensed your annoyance and irritation in response to my first post in the thread, and in an effort to regain your sense of authority you seek out approval from other posters. (the I'm popular mentality)

Zillah

stevenmu wrote:

Good post Zillah, that really is a problem. Because we don't really have a scientific basis for what constitutes a ghost, we're really confined to looking for side-effects of ghosts opposed to the ghosts themselves.

Its an interesting point that we have to look for the symtoms rather than the source. Without a vast quantity of analysis and consistent evidence science can't accept the phenomenon, so I expect this may be a bit of a stand off until 2024 when the ecto-scanner is invented

Also as solas points out some/many/all (depending on your point of view) 'ghosts' are thought to not be intelligent spirits, but more of an imprint or recording of energies in a place of a particular time. I know one of the times in the dungeon in Charleville last weekend I felt that we were witnessing a recording of an event, not actually in the pressence of spirits, altough I don't really have any strong reason for that.

If that was the case then it makes the phenomenon all that much harder to prove. Hell, we might be dealing with stuff on the quantum scale here.

The idea of what type of intelligence ghosts would have is extremely interesting, but very hard to actually think about. So much of how we think is based on our physical bodies, our brain structure and chemistry and instincts and so much of how we percieve things is based on our physical senses that I can't even begin to conceive what it must be like.

But even with that in mind (hehe), its likely that if these echoes or whatever are capable of thought or self awareness of any kind, it would be fundamentally based on the person it came from, so like I said earlier, we have the conundrum of an entity that wants to be treated like a person, but doesn't act like one.

Oryx

I dont know about any issues between you two, but this in this place its very easy be misunderstood. The only emotion I sense from Zillah is a mild exasperation at times. But otherwise your a closed book and thats how you like it

Zillah

KatieK wrote:

But otherwise your a closed book and thats how you like it

Now that I find to be an interesting thing to say...

solas

see?

Zillah

Are you drunk? Solas, aside from the obvious, nothing I've said has had anything to do with you. Frankly your interupting, just stop.

I genuinely found that to be quite an interesting thing for Katie to say. Whether she's just picked it up over the last while on boards or whether a spirit guide told, I don't know, but she's spot on.

Oryx

I interested Zillah! Hooray... /goes off to throw party;)

BTW, I dont do guides. Not red indian or otherwise. Just a sense, which Ive been trying to convince you of for 18 months...:-)

solas

nope, not drunk, I'm fairly teetotal with the exception of parties and christmas.

Frankly your interupting, just stop.

thanks for expressing.

Zillah

KatieK wrote:

I interested Zillah! Hooray... /goes off to throw party;)
BTW, I dont do guides. Not red indian or otherwise. Just a sense, which Ive been trying to convince you of for 18 months...:-)

Hey hey, I said it was interesting, im not quite convinced you have psychic powers just yet

Oryx

Zillah wrote:

Hey hey, I said it was interesting, im not quite convinced you have psychic powers just yet

I know, Id want to tell you the colour of your underwear to convince you. But I like the 'yet'

GuanYin

Zillah wrote:

Its kind of complicated. Your brain is essentially a big blob of electrical goo. Its an incredibly complex and fantastic blob of electic goo however. Each time you feel an emotion, thats electricity whirring around in your brain and chemicals moving around your body. But then those chemicals get turned into other chemicals and that energy gets turned into other energy. Its only an emotion within the context of the whole system of the brain.

I'll refer you to the first law of thermodynamics, that states, in summation, Energy cannot be created or destroyed, just changed.

Now, yes you are right, emotions are down to basic chemical interactions, however these interactions are down at their basest level to atom transfer and as a result energy transfer (and I'm talking at the physics level) to the point where the human brain creates a continuously oscillating EMF probably varying in the range of 5-100 Hz - I believe this is what solas may be referring to.

To put it in the context of an esteem colleague, all biology is just chemistry, all chemistry is just physics (and all physics is just math).

If you had sophisticated enough machinery, far faster than the current MRI and with a higher resolution that the alternative SQUIDS technology - that is something that could measure both the time and the spatial variation, you could probably start talking about emotions in quantitative energy terms

GuanYin

Oh god, I've had a really stressful day and I'm not arsed editing this thread to thunderdrome.

Suffice to say that I'd prefer if we left the fighting/flirting between the 3 of you (I'm not convinced who is doing what with who mind you) out of an interesting thread.

So, lets keep this on,
1. Ghost hunts
2. The nature of ghosts
3. Closely related tangents.

and avoid topics of

1. Who likes who
2. Who doesn't like who
3. Who feels what
4. Who feels who
5. Our underwear colour.

Now, back on topic.

This has been a public service announcement by your friendly neighbourhood paranormal moderator.

Zillah

psi wrote:

I'll refer you to the first law of thermodynamics, that states, in summation, Energy cannot be created or destroyed, just changed.

Now, yes you are right, emotions are down to basic chemical interactions, however these interactions are down at their basest level to atom transfer and as a result energy transfer (and I'm talking at the physics level) to the point where the human brain creates a continuously oscillating EMF probably varying in the range of 5-100 Hz - I believe this is what solas may be referring to.

To put it in the context of an esteem colleague, all biology is just chemistry, all chemistry is just physics (and all physics is just math).

If you had sophisticated enough machinery, far faster than the current MRI and with a higher resolution that the alternative SQUIDS technology - that is something that could measure both the time and the spatial variation, you could probably start talking about emotions in quantitative energy terms

Ha! I understood that.

First of all, I didn't say the energy is destroyed. In fact, I specifically stated that it gets changed into another form. (When I said the sound wave ends there, I meant for all intents and purposes)

As for the brain's EMF, it does indeed change according to the brain's functions, and therefore if you feel a particular emotion, your brain's EMF will change accordingly. However, the crucial point remains that what we're talking about is still just an electro magnetic field in which the emotional state is reflected, the emotion itself is not a form of energy.

EDIT:

5. Our underwear colour.

I believe that falls under the "closely related tangents" section.

GuanYin

Zillah wrote:

, the crucial point remains that what we're talking about is still just an electro magnetic field in which the emotional state is reflected, the emotion itself is not a form of energy.

With perhaps, a very very specific wavelength?

Or, perhaps even a sequence of specific wavelengths?

Zillah

Oh im not saying that you couldn't feasibly develop an empathic sense (whether technologically or biologically) with which to sense emotional states through the brain's EMF, Im just pointing out that the use of "energy" in a vague mystical manner to represent emotions and spirits is innaccurate.

I believe that I previously stated that reading the brain's EMF is probably the most likely basis for any sort of psychic powers if they exist.

Sure, emotions can be represented by energy, but that doesn't mean they are energy. I could also represent the wavelength on a piece of paper with a pencil, but that doesn't mean emotions are graphite.

GuanYin

Zillah wrote:

Im just pointing out that the use of "energy" in a vague mystical manner to represent emotions and spirits is innaccurate.

Well its not a science forum and not everyone is scientifically trained so I think its the "gist" rather than accuracy you should be looking at. But if you feel someone is oversimplifying, feel free to expand maybe, rather than argue? (that's not meant as a criticism).

I believe that I previously stated that reading the brain's EMF is probably the most likely basis for any sort of psychic powers if they exist.

Agreed.

Sure, emotions can be represented by energy, but that doesn't mean they are energy. I could also represent the wavelength on a piece of paper with a pencil, but that doesn't mean emotions are graphite.

No, I think you're missing the point. The words emotion is just a term given to a group of personic terminologies for what are basically complex chemical interactions.

So an emotion, such as anger (included in the aforementioned shouting) is a chemical reaction. This chemical reactions is basically the formation and degredation of chemical bonds which is, at a physical level a simple energy transfer process.

So at its base level an emotion is just energy transfer.

Oryx

Zillah wrote:

Oh im not saying that you couldn't feasibly develop an empathic sense (whether technologically or biologically) with which to sense emotional states through the brain's EMF, Im just pointing out that the use of "energy" in a vague mystical manner to represent emotions and spirits is innaccurate.

Psychics dont use the word in a scientific sense. I think they use it for want of a better word.
Straining the brain cells to follow here, but ye seem to be saying emotions cannot be quantified, even though we know they exist. So could the same not hold true for ghosts and psychic ability? If you cannot pin them down with guages and meters, how else do you satisfy yourself they are there or not? (which I know is where this discussion started)

GuanYin

KatieK wrote:

Zillah wrote:

Oh im not saying that you couldn't feasibly develop an empathic sense (whether technologically or biologically) with which to sense emotional states through the brain's EMF, Im just pointing out that the use of "energy" in a vague mystical manner to represent emotions and spirits is innaccurate.

Psychics dont use the word in a scientific sense. I think they use it for want of a better word.
Straining the brain cells to follow here, but ye seem to be saying emotions cannot be quantified, even though we know they exist. So could the same not hold true for ghosts and psychic ability? If you cannot pin them down with guages and meters, how else do you satisfy yourself they are there or not? (which I know is where this discussion started)

Nope, emotions can be quantified to a degree. The technology just isn't very good (yet). They know what to look for, they just can't get computers to both react as fast as the brain AND narrow down the precise frequency changes.

Actually, I wonder if anyone has actually ever looked for ghosts in this way.

I think one of the first questions a scientist should ask when considering a question (such as "do ghosts exist?") is : "Has anyone actually looked?".

To my mind, most of the experiments (which tend to "debunk" psychic phenomenon and ghosts) have been crude, shoddy and low tech.

We tend to forget that many scientific areas are overlooked due to funding. For instance, years ago, the brain was completely unmapped and the current technology for looking at EMF and the like would have been sci fi.

If the same money and effort and technology was focused on looking at ESP, would they find anything?

Oryx

psi wrote:

If the same money and effort and technology was focused on looking at ESP, would they find anything?

From my point of view, I certainly think so. I look forward to the day theres the equivalent of mensa for esp.:) I think theres too much genuine information out there for it all to be bunk. And it would explain a lot of the goings on in my head

stormkeeper

Regarding energy, I recall someone saying on the investigation that "energy cannot be created or destroyed; merely transferred." Granted, that may not be the exact phrase, but you get the gist of it...

Zillah

KatieK wrote:

I look forward to the day theres the equivalent of mensa for esp.

Would you like to joing the PsyTeam? You must have a Pychic score of at least 140!

stevenmu

Zillah wrote:

But even with that in mind (hehe), its likely that if these echoes or whatever are capable of thought or self awareness of any kind, it would be fundamentally based on the person it came from, so like I said earlier, we have the conundrum of an entity that wants to be treated like a person, but doesn't act like one.

This reminds me that while ghosts, the intelligent variety at least, generally tend to either not know or not accept that they have crossed over, there are spirits which are fully aware of what they are and have no inclinations towards being treated like a person, in fact they would see us similar to the way we would see a baby (or so I've been told).


I'm a bit lost by all this talk of energy, but I think quite often when people talk about something like emotion being an energy, the scientific meaning would be either a pattern in energy or the changing of one form of energy to another. I'm going to neatly tie this back in with the original topic in two ways.

One is that with the theory of (some) ghosts being recordings or imprints, implies that the patterns strong emotions can become embedded in the energy of other objects. I see this as being analgous to the way in homepathic medicine, the water molecules being treated take on the patterns of the source medicine, and therefore have the same effect on the body as the source medicine would have.

Two is that ghosts (the intelligent kind this time), must consist of some form of energy, assuming we can safely rule out matter and ether (don't know how to type that funny A) for now. It's not a huge leap to assume it's some form of energy we're not familiar with yet, or else it'd be easily detectable. But there are observable energy conversion effects. One being the fact that ghostly presences are often associated with temperature drops, the general explanation for this being that ghosts need to take energy from their surroundings to manifest. Another being that EMF fluctuations are often noticed in the presence of ghosts. Assuming that the ghost doesn't actually consist of electromagnetic energy itself, this indicates that for some reason ghostly energy tends to convert to electromagnetic energy, possibly similarly to how kinetic energy tends to convert to heat, or heat tends to convert to light.

The consequence of these two points combined is that if a ghost (a person who has passed on) consists of energy, then that energy must exist in the person before death, which is also clear if you accept the first point that the patterns of emotions and/or thoughts can be embedded in places or objects. If we take into account the stuff earlier about what the intelligence of a ghost would be like and we imagine our own consciousness and strip away all the stuff to do with processing the physical world and what our sense percieve in it, then theres not much left but emotion and feeling (altough they wuld naturally be quite different when not impaired by the chemical processes of our brain). So in this way I suppose emotion could be said to be an energy all of it's own.


(that actually all made sense in my head before I tried to type it out, hopefully someone can translate it)

Oryx

That made sense to me. And you managed to actually get it down, which I couldnt Im no scientist and any attempt to keep up with the technical aspects discussed here makes my head hurt Far as im aware, people trying to get in touch with their higher self or a spirit world, work at clearing the mind of physical stuff, realising the non-importance of reality as we see it, and living, thinking for right now. In other words, trying to think like a non corporeal being... theres also talk with ghostly communication of 'raising your energy' to their higher frequency. I know this may sound like mumbo jumbo, but this is how non science people who do this kind of thing all the time refer to it, and I am interested in what science has to say about this.

Zillah

Psi wrote:

So an emotion, such as anger (included in the aforementioned shouting) is a chemical reaction. This chemical reactions is basically the formation and degredation of chemical bonds which is, at a physical level a simple energy transfer process.

So at its base level an emotion is just energy transfer.

Well, at a base level everything is just energy transfer. And I don't think thats the sense that people mean when they discuss the "energy" of an emotion. Its not like the electrons exchanged between that hydrogen and that oxygen carry any sort of link with the other tens of billions of electrons flying around in a single speck of a chemically reactive substance.

psi wrote:

Well its not a science forum and not everyone is scientifically trained so I think its the "gist" rather than accuracy you should be looking at. But if you feel someone is oversimplifying, feel free to expand maybe, rather than argue? (that's not meant as a criticism).

My outlook is always going to be from the point of view of trying to codify, collect and prove the paranormal. So we need to be careful in our terminology. Refering to emotion as "energy" does us a diservice, as its not energy in the sense that useage implies. If believers want to think of emotion as a tangible element in the world thats fine, but I think they should use other words, like ether, or mana or something of their own choosing, as long as its not highjacking a very important scientific word.

Zillah

stevenmu wrote:

This reminds me that while ghosts, the intelligent variety at least, generally tend to either not know or not accept that they have crossed over, there are spirits which are fully aware of what they are and have no inclinations towards being treated like a person, in fact they would see us similar to the way we would see a baby (or so I've been told).


I'm a bit lost by all this talk of energy, but I think quite often when people talk about something like emotion being an energy, the scientific meaning would be either a pattern in energy or the changing of one form of energy to another. I'm going to neatly tie this back in with the original topic in two ways.

One is that with the theory of (some) ghosts being recordings or imprints, implies that the patterns strong emotions can become embedded in the energy of other objects. I see this as being analgous to the way in homepathic medicine, the water molecules being treated take on the patterns of the source medicine, and therefore have the same effect on the body as the source medicine would have.

Two is that ghosts (the intelligent kind this time), must consist of some form of energy, assuming we can safely rule out matter and ether (don't know how to type that funny A) for now. It's not a huge leap to assume it's some form of energy we're not familiar with yet, or else it'd be easily detectable. But there are observable energy conversion effects. One being the fact that ghostly presences are often associated with temperature drops, the general explanation for this being that ghosts need to take energy from their surroundings to manifest. Another being that EMF fluctuations are often noticed in the presence of ghosts. Assuming that the ghost doesn't actually consist of electromagnetic energy itself, this indicates that for some reason ghostly energy tends to convert to electromagnetic energy, possibly similarly to how kinetic energy tends to convert to heat, or heat tends to convert to light.

The consequence of these two points combined is that if a ghost (a person who has passed on) consists of energy, then that energy must exist in the person before death, which is also clear if you accept the first point that the patterns of emotions and/or thoughts can be embedded in places or objects. If we take into account the stuff earlier about what the intelligence of a ghost would be like and we imagine our own consciousness and strip away all the stuff to do with processing the physical world and what our sense percieve in it, then theres not much left but emotion and feeling (altough they wuld naturally be quite different when not impaired by the chemical processes of our brain). So in this way I suppose emotion could be said to be an energy all of it's own.

Its certainly an interesting way of looking at it. But as it is we're basing theories on other theories and assumptions, and unless we can in some way be sure that A) Ghosts exist, They exist as energy and C) They only have will and emotion, then there's no basis for seeing emotion as anything other than a chemical reaction.

An emotion is essentially a chemical reaction within the electro-chemical goo of the brain. The brain's EMF occilates at frequencies analagous to the brainwaves, and thereby externalyses (sp?) the emotion in a manner of speaking. So, if that frequency can some how be recorded into surrounding materials, it is not innacurate to refer to the emotion as having been recorded in the area. However, even if you accept that at face value, theres still no basis for calling the emotion itself "energy".

stevenmu

I suppose we shouldn't get too hung up on the emotion=energy terminology aspect, but it is kind of mirroring the topic nicely.

Another angle to come at it from, is that we are all surrounded by an energy field, commonly known as an aura, which roughly equates to our spirit. This aura has different layers corresponding to the different components of our spirit. Different people have different idea of what they are but off the top of my head they are, from the inside out, the etheric (which acts kind of like the interface between physical and spiritual), the mental (where our conciousness resides, the emotional (self explanatory really), the astral and the spiritual (don't fully understand the last too yet myself, at least not well enough to try and explain them). I think there's another one to do with memories aswell, but that may be part of the mental, and depending on who you talk there there's many other minor ones. Anyway each part of your aura can get weaker or stronger (more or less energised) and can take on different patterns, depending on all kinds of different criteria. So in this sense emotions, which stem from the emotional layer and depend on it's energy levels and patterns, are an 'energy'.

I realise that's a mountain of assumptions based on top of each other for people who haven't experienced it, but to come up with a scientific understanding of it (or disproval of it), it helps to know what the non-scientific theory behind it is.

Also, I don't know a lot about the biology side, but as far as I'm aware the links between brain chemistry and emotion are still poorly understood ? For e.g. I read somewhere recently that a hormone thought to trigger stress (cortizone ?) is actually a by-product of stress, altough I don't know if stress counts fully as an emotion. Anyway, I think there's some doubt about whether the emotion causes the chemical process or the chemical process causes the emotion. I think there's also some suggestion that feelings triggered artificially by chemicals are quite different to those which occur naturally, such as the feeling of love experienced by ecstacy users ?

Zillah

stevenmu wrote:

I suppose we shouldn't get too hung up on the emotion=energy terminology aspect, but it is kind of mirroring the topic nicely.

Agreed.

Another angle to come at it from, is that we are all surrounded by an energy field, commonly known as an aura, which roughly equates to our spirit. This aura has different layers corresponding to the different components of our spirit. Different people have different idea of what they are but off the top of my head they are, from the inside out, the etheric (which acts kind of like the interface between physical and spiritual), the mental (where our conciousness resides, the emotional (self explanatory really), the astral and the spiritual (don't fully understand the last too yet myself, at least not well enough to try and explain them). I think there's another one to do with memories aswell, but that may be part of the mental, and depending on who you talk there there's many other minor ones. Anyway each part of your aura can get weaker or stronger (more or less energised) and can take on different patterns, depending on all kinds of different criteria. So in this sense emotions, which stem from the emotional layer and depend on it's energy levels and patterns, are an 'energy'.

This kind of thing I find amazing. Its so specific. Where does all this come from? Who first decided these things, and what are they based on? This isn't some abstract philosophy, this is quite specific and detailed.

EDIT: I don't mean that dismissively, Im genuinely curius as to where such details come from.

Also, I don't know a lot about the biology side, but as far as I'm aware the links between brain chemistry and emotion are still poorly understood ? For e.g. I read somewhere recently that a hormone thought to trigger stress (cortizone ?) is actually a by-product of stress, altough I don't know if stress counts fully as an emotion. Anyway, I think there's some doubt about whether the emotion causes the chemical process or the chemical process causes the emotion. I think there's also some suggestion that feelings triggered artificially by chemicals are quite different to those which occur naturally, such as the feeling of love experienced by ecstacy users ?

The brain is indeed one of the least understood things in biology. Its astoundingly complex.

New_Departure06

Jane Goldman Investigates on LivingTV (saw it last night first time) is good for this sort of thing. They had this device called an illuminator, where they took photos of people and then other faces - supposedly those of spirits - appear on the photos. Was a little creepy. Some people on the show supposedly said they recognised relatives like fathers etc. The were also in a supposedly haunted theatre where they left a recording device on a seat where the ghost of an 18th century theatregoer is supposed to hang around. When they played it and increased the pitch they heard a voice apparently saying, creepily, "It's your time". :eek: