Time in reverse theory

[Technosoul]

In science fiction books we are intertained by people who build a time machine and visit some location in the past.

The idea is somewhat based on the theory of four dimensional reality. When a star implodes into it's own center of gravity it seems to vanish into a wormhole ( aka - Black Hole). One theory suggests that the black wormhole opens up into another dimension of time and space. So you would be making a journey back in time or forward in time if you are an star that is in the process of being terminated from this universe.

One might imagine that the star is having a "born agian" experience. Having fallen into it's depression zone of the dark soul and then emerging again from that dark soul into some other heavenly environment. But such is not scientific because it sounds too religious. Metaphysical.

None the less the wormhole theory is popular among some visionary scientists who believe that they are on the cutting edge as great thinkers.

I think that a machanical time machine is outside of any reasonable expectation for wanna-be inventors. But I got another idea that might link the belief in wormholes with ideas discovered in the field of paranormal science.

The near death experience simulates the theory of wormhole in space and time. (or at least in space).

Reported as evidence we know that many people journey through a back wormhole tunnel and emerge on the other side which is another illuminated environment when they die (and are quickly restored to life by medical procedures - so they can recall the memory of what happens when you die.)

It could be that when our life is terminated our consciousness implodes like a star into a dimensional black hole to emerge again at some other point in time? That is the question based on what people reported who died for short time but did not remain there because of CPR - etc.

So can consciousness implode into it's own center of gravity like a supernova star? And then emerge through a wormhole into another dimension of time and space - or even what religion might call "heaven".

Perhaps a center universe where one could journey out from the hub via the spokes into any time frame that has ever existed or that could exsist in the future, To reason this out we must determine if time is like the flat earth or if it is circular or global in it's design - with a center hub of relative stillness. Point zero.

Where does our consciousness vanish into when we die along with our "enlightenment" in awareness? According to Hawking - information cannot vanish and our memory is stored information which is part of our conscious matrix.

For testing purposes science would need to invent the equipment that is able to kill someone and then bring them back before it is too late (to remain in this dimension). That would be like inventing a time machine and people could have near death experiences in a controlled and safe situation. (once the near death machine has all the bugs worked out of it's operational system). However they cannot invent that machine because of legal laws based on the morality that "thou shalt not kill". So we would need to rewrite the laws saying that it is okay to kill someone for scientific experiments to find out facts about wormholes.

This is a great idea and a neat combination of two theories that would also merge science and metaphyics into one happy group - "let's work together" envirnonment of study.

Whatcha think about my idea?

Here is a webpage you can use to debunk or advocate my theory.

BBC - Science & Nature - Space - Time Travel

[JohnMK]

The near-death experience is probably just our mind doing some really interesting things in its last throes of quasi-life, and probably not worm holy things.

[The Architect]

So can consciousness implode into it's own center of gravity like a supernova star? And then emerge through a wormhole into another dimension of time and space - or even what religion might call "heaven". Perhaps a center universe where one could journey out from the hub via the spokes into any time frame that has ever existed or that could exsist in the future, To reason this out we must determine if time is like the flat earth or if it is circular or global in it's design - with a center hub of relative stillness. Point zero.

It is very interesting to think about, death and what happens next. I doubt we will ever know until the day we die.
Just imagine your mind and soul is just an energy cloud floating in a "heaven" of all the others who died since the beggining of man and earth.

[JohnMK]

I doubt we'll ever know at all, if my materialistic view of nature is correct. The probability is that you simply won't know either at the moment of death and certainly you won't know after you're dead, because it would be impossible for a dead mind to know anything. Death is not sleep or meditation, it is the abolition of existence for you, cognitive and otherwise.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: JohnMK I doubt we'll ever know at all, if my materialistic view of nature is correct. The probability is that you simply won't know either at the moment of death and certainly you won't know after you're dead, because it would be impossible for a dead mind to know anything. Death is not sleep or meditation, it is the abolition of existence for you, cognitive and otherwise.

Before I can accept your opinon I need to know a couple of things.

1 Do you agree with the scientific theory about wormholes as discribed on the link page provided in my O.P?

2 Have you read any data about what is called the "near death experience"?
During a near death experience the the person is dead for a short time according to normal medical testing for those facts. No pulse or breathing taking place. Although flesh and bone and even brain tissue can remain useable for a short time after the persons dies (no heartbeat or breathing or pulse). That is why organ transplants are possible. But if the medial attendant acts fast enough they can get the heart to beat again and the lungs to operate again - in time where the heart and lungs can still operate in a "useable body of parts". In less you have another meaning for death other then the one commonly used by hospital staff the near death experience is in fact a death experience. And people who experience such a event awaken from unconsious state of being dead and report that they moved through a tunnel of darkness towards the light at the end of that tunnel and emerged in another place. Which is the same theory reported by science about a star that is terminated and falls into a wormhole of gravity within it's self. That is to say - same story line but one about humans and one about stars when they "die".

A large number of people have reported to have that same sort of vision when they recover at a hospital after being dead but restored to life before they reached the point of no return.

I did not say anything at all about meditation or dream states, and I know of no reports that people dream about such a happening or that anyone ever visioned such a happening while meditating. No collected evidence that dreamers or mediators had such a vision to support you claim. But a large number of reports from people who experienced a state of temporary death have been collected which report such a wormhole like experience.

see link pages ...

Near-Death Experiences and the Afterlife

Near-death experience - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What I have attempted to suggest is that we could apply the theory about wormholes (see first link in O.P.) to the theory about near death experiences as discovered through paranormal science. I am not interested (by the way) in advoating any of the religious opinons some of the NDE pages might employ.

Not asking for faithful believers here. But examine the known evidence on the NDE and see if the theory about wormholes as a scientific theory would not also apply to humans as it would to a star that is terminating. Of course you cannot know if you were never dead but others were dead and do claim to know what they saw during that experience.

However if you hold fast to a that materialistic viewpoint then I would agree that his theory would not fit (perhaps) into that frame.

[Hostile55]

And people who experience such a event awaken from unconsious state of being dead and report that they moved through a tunnel of darkness towards the light at the end of that tunnel and emerged in another place.

Have you ever heard of dissociative drugs? After taking ketamine people say that they felt as though they were looking down a tunnel then out through their eyes. Many other strange things happen when your brain starts to switch off (which is essencially what happens when you take K) and time perception is altered too. A near death experience could be explained in simillar terms. Does a dream take as long for our brains to process as the events in the dream take to happen? Or can it all take place in a matter of a few seconds? Can a NDE take place while the person is losing and resuming conciousness, rather than the interlude between?

As JohnMK puts it;

The near-death experience is probably just our mind doing some really interesting things in its last throes of quasi-life, and probably not worm holy things.

Also I think the connection you made between the 'death' of a star and the actuall death of a human being is desultory. Empirical at best.

[Fonceai]

I'm with Hostile

This is in Science and Technology, but it doesn't belong here.

This is more Philosophy and Religion, but with a weak attempt at linking it to Sci & Tech.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Fonceai I'm with Hostile This is in Science and Technology, but it doesn't belong here. This is more Philosophy and Religion, but with a weak attempt at linking it to Sci & Tech.

There is a branch called paranormal science that is in fact investigating the events of NDE in a scientific manner. Religion is doing nothing concerning such reports other then capitalizing on those reports for their own purposes.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Hostile55 Have you ever heard of dissociative drugs? After taking ketamine people say that they felt as though they were looking down a tunnel then out through their eyes. Many other strange things happen when your brain starts to switch off (which is essencially what happens when you take K) and time perception is altered too. A near death experience could be explained in simillar terms. Does a dream take as long for our brains to process as the events in the dream take to happen? Or can it all take place in a matter of a few seconds? Can a NDE take place while the person is losing and resuming conciousness, rather than the interlude between? As JohnMK puts it; Also I think the connection you made between the 'death' of a star and the actuall death of a human being is desultory. Empirical at best.

I was pointing out how simular the theory about wormholes with the reports from people involved in the so-called NDE is. I would agree that the brian perhaps creates a chemical simular to K that can cause those visions and that they no doubt happen at a moment near death then during the time the person is clinically dead.

One scientist reported that he could simulate certain parts of the brian electronically to produce such illumination as one might experience at a moment near death. It is none the less interesting that so many people have that very same "vision" or "dream" when the brain is shutting down (as you called it).

Terrence McKenna called such visions "hyperspace" and he was an expert on mind alternating drugs. Hmm? Perhaps space can get hyper and imagine wormholes? Well, that would not be a very logical "connection" between these simular events. My question being - why are they simular?

One fellow, perhaps it was scientist Rupert Sheldrake, suggested that the tunnel vision is a kind of "flashback" memory of when we were born and passed through a tunnel into the bright lights of a hospital room where we were greeted by loving parents and that guy in a white robe (doctor) - who might have been mistaken by some to be Jesus. (although currently they switched from white robes to greenish ones). That suggestion seems somewhat logical, I guess.

Wormhole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

John Archibald Wheeler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now about NDE science we have....

Simon Berkovich

Theory

Now here is a must read - a artical that claims that NDE is wormholes connecting hyperspace - eh? Reported as Science !

Just found this doing net search....

IndiaDaily - Near Death Effects (NDE) confirmed as worm hole transportation of space and time faster than light

For intertainment here is a metaphysical webpage on this topic which is presented in a scientific manner...

The Supernatural World :: Are Wormholes Tunnels For Time Travel?

So I am not speaking about religion here as you can see this is what Science people do when they have Sunday off from work.

[gallo]

Quote by: Technosoul I was pointing out how simular the theory about wormholes with the reports from people involved in the so-called NDE is.

But they are similar only in your mind.

Quote by: Technosoul I would agree that the brian perhaps creates a chemical simular to K that can cause those visions and that they no doubt happen at a moment near death then during the time the person is clinically dead.

What does Brian have to do with it and why is he creating chemicals similar to K. Why would Brian want to cause visions in someone else? Did Brian tell you he does this?

Quote by: Technosoul One scientist reported that he could simulate certain parts of the brian electronically to produce such illumination as one might experience at a moment near death. It is none the less interesting that so many people have that very same "vision" or "dream" when the brain is shutting down (as you called it).

And test pilots under extreme G-forces have reported the experience as the blood drains from their brain. Why did Brian let some scientist stimulate parts of him with light?

Quote by: Technosoul Terrence McKenna called such visions "hyperspace" and he was an expert on mind alternating drugs. Hmm?

Wow! So what? Did he know Brian and use his chemicals? What does it mean to "alternate" a mind? What do visions have to do with black holes?

Quote by: Technosoul Perhaps space can get hyper and imagine wormholes? Well, that would not be a very logical "connection" between these simular events. My question being - why are they simular?

It wouldn't be a logical connection between anything. I suspect that even if I knew what "simular" meant I wouldn't change my mind.

Quote by: Technosoul One fellow, perhaps it was scientist Rupert Sheldrake, suggested that the tunnel vision is a kind of "flashback" memory of when we were born and passed through a tunnel into the bright lights of a hospital room where we were greeted by loving parents and that guy in a white robe (doctor) - who might have been mistaken by some to be Jesus. (although currently they switched from white robes to greenish ones). That suggestion seems somewhat logical, I guess.

But fantasies seem logical to you even though they have nothing to do with logic.

Quote by: Technosoul Now here is a must read - a artical that claims that NDE is wormholes connecting hyperspace - eh? Reported as Science ! Just found this doing net search.... IndiaDaily - Near Death Effects (NDE) confirmed as worm hole transportation of space and time faster than light

You don't think that maybe they are yanking your chain? Funny that the article doesn't say what scientists and where it was reported. It doesn't even say what that babble is supposed to mean. Sure yanked you right in though.

Quote by: Technosoul For intertainment here is a metaphysical webpage on this topic which is presented in a scientific manner...

Which means that it is pseudoscience. It's not real. By the way, what's "intertainment"?

Quote by: Technosoul So I am not speaking about religion here as you can see this is what Science people do when they have Sunday off from work.

No? Well you are certainly speaking nonsense. It has nothing to do with science.

[Technosoul]

Woopie... you found another typo error and spent a lot of time making fun of it. But as always had nothing worthwhile to counter the idea with.

You noted a complaint about one link from a news article. Which I listed only to demonstrate that this idea was at least thought of by others. I do not use links to prove anything.

Correction: You found two typo errors. big deal.

You said that G-forces can drain the brain and cause the NDE (vision). But you did not say where you found that report nor which scientist reported it (and as evidence of what?). Are you yanking my chain with your pseudoscience? You did not even provide us with the physics involved for your G-force theory - again - yanking our chain with pseudoscience.. eh?

Debating you is like trying to win the Iraq war.

A NDE is a biological happening and not a fantasy.

They use the word "near" because it happens at moment near death which has nothing to do with might happen during the time you are dead. Note: - Near Death Experience. Near and not during death.

Death can be simulated in different ways to fool the brain to cause a NDE.

G forces might be one way to simulate the dieing process. Also one can do it with drugs, meditation (trance), by fasting, via emotional overdose such as when in the heat of battle during a war. Or because of an accident and from suffering extreme pain and/or fear. Even if you did not die in a clinical sense such factors can trigger a NDE or some other kind of revelation or vision.

I do not know if Wheeler was stoned when he got his idea about wormholes or his idea that space looks like an apple. Or if that was the reason that he then formulated the physics to back up his modern day myth. .

None-the-less, you have failed to grasp the relative concepts involved in my topic here nor the purpose of comparing the scientific myth with a biological novelty.

Why would Brian do that? Do your own reserch here

Brian Wilson | The A.V. Club


This is nonsense ... if that is what turns you on.

Astro*Zoom » The Twelve Signs of the NDE Zodiac

This is not nonsense ...

fUSION Anomaly. Rupert Sheldrake

[Hostile55]

What does Brian have to do with it and why is he creating chemicals similar to K. Why would Brian want to cause visions in someone else? Did Brian tell you he does this?

C'mon man. No one is impressed by this. You know he meant brain.

Technosoul. My point was that K shuts the brain off in a sense. I didn't mean that the brain creates a chemical similar to K, just that the brain switching off, so to speak, when one dies is the same principal as the effects of K. You dig?

[gallo]

Quote by: Technosoul Woopie... you found another typo error and spent a lot of time making fun of it.

But, you're fun to make fun of. They aren't typos for the most part. You can't spell and your grammar, word choice, and phrasing are terrible.

Quote by: Technosoul But as always had nothing worthwhile to counter the idea with.

Yes I did. Didn't you read it?

Quote by: Technosoul You noted a complaint about one link from a news article. Which I listed only to demonstrate that this idea was at least thought of by others. I do not use links to prove anything.

That's good since you link only proved how gullible you are.

Quote by: Technosoul Correction: You found two typo errors. big deal.

Indeed. You couldn't get a passing grade on a 10th grade paper.

Quote by: Technosoul You said that G-forces can drain the brain and cause the NDE (vision). But you did not say where you found that report nor which scientist reported it (and as evidence of what?). Are you yanking my chain with your pseudoscience? You did not even provide us with the physics involved for your G-force theory - again - yanking our chain with pseudoscience.. eh?

So you didn't understand what I was saying. Too bad. I'll try to explain. You gave a link and claimed that it was "scientists reporting" on something. Turns out, there was no science to it. We don't know who the scientists were, where they published, or even what they were reporting.

Quote by: Technosoul Debating you is like trying to win the Iraq war.

You aren't debating. You are asserting fantasy as truth.

Quote by: Technosoul A NDE is a biological happening and not a fantasy.

I didn't say it was. Are you misrepresenting what I said on purpose?

Quote by: Technosoul [snip of irrelevant self justification]

So what? What does any of that have to do with your fantasy about a connection between NDE and worm holes. You are aware, aren't you, that worm holes are hypothetical constructs?

Quote by: Technosoul None-the-less, you have failed to grasp the relative concepts involved in my topic here nor the purpose of comparing the scientific myth with a biological novelty.

What "relative concepts"? Do you really mean relevant? Actually I grasped the concepts. You just don't seem to understand that there is no basis for any comparison. They are not linked.

Quote by: Technosoul Why would Brian do that? Do your own reserch here

That's what I have been telling you all along. Learn something.

[gallo]

Quote by: Hostile55 C'mon man. No one is impressed by this.

Did you have a meeting and vote?

Quote by: Hostile55 You know he meant brain.

How is it that you know what I know? Maybe I'm not very bright.

Quote by: Hostile55 Technosoul. My point was that K shuts the brain off in a sense. I didn't mean that the brain creates a chemical similar to K, just that the brain switching off, so to speak, when one dies is the same principal as the effects of K. You dig?

Obviously he didn't. Better luch this time.

[Kuroko]

I refuse to be drawn so low as to prove to you that a kettle calling the pot black is some what ironic/hypocritical.

When you cease to make spelling mistakes then you may begin highlighting others, I think that is a right others deserve.

If you didn't understand what I mean by that, proclaiming some one is not perfect means nothing when you yourself, have not witnessed and definitely have not achieved such a state Gallo.

[gallo]

Quote by: Kuroko I refuse to be drawn so low as to prove to you that a kettle calling the pot black is some what ironic/hypocritical. When you cease to make spelling mistakes then you may begin highlighting others, I think that is a right others deserve. If you didn't understand what I mean by that, proclaiming some one is not perfect means nothing when you yourself, have not witnessed and definitely have not achieved such a state Gallo.

I understand. You are saying that you can't represent your position rationally, with proper grammar and correct spelling. So let me see. You found one case where I typed "my be" where I should have typed "maybe." Ah, well. I never claimed to be perfect. And my error, had it been in a paper, would have caused it to be rejected for publication. But on the other hand, we're typing in real time here. My bet is that I make fewer typos than you, that I make fewer spelling errors than you, and that I make fewer grammatical errors than you. I am actually quite comfortable operating at a zero error level. It is required in my world. And even if your idea actually had some scientific significance, your inability to express it (correct spelling, grammar, word usage, etc.) would get your paper rejected. You don't express what you want to say very clearly.

The point is, you are professing expertise in subjects of which you have no knowledge. After I tell you why you are wrong and I hear back from you that I don't understand or that I didn't read what you said, it gets to a point that there is little to do but to show why it is more likely that you are speaking from ignorance than not. The problem isn't that I don't give your ideas some thought. The problem is that I do. And I have responded in an effort to instruct you.

What you don't seem to understand is that your ideas aren't worth spit in a scientific context until you can offer evidence, form an hypothesis, make a prediction, design and execute an experiment, write a paper and submit it for peer review. When it gets published, let's talk.

Otherwise you have a fantasy. Talking about science isn't science.

(Please count the misspelled words in this post - let me know)

Please don't take this as an ad hominem attack. It isn't. It is an explanation. You assert things that violate current science and give no evidence why we should overthrow science in your favor, except that you can imagine it.

Your fantasy doesnt get consideration until you get it published. Until then, there is no obligation to show that you are wrong. You have the obligation to show that you are right. Again, hypothesis, prediction, experiment.

[Technosoul]

Wrong assumption:

When you submit a writing for publication it goes directly to their editor and chief. If it is your first book you must sign a contract giving them permission to edit and even the right to re-write parts of the book, they can even chop parts out to downsize the number of words to be used in the book. Needless to say most writers would simply use "words for windows" to make such correction for their imperfections relative to grammer and spelling. But in the context of a forum (as here) such should not be demanded.

This is not a Jr. High School classroom and we do not need someone standing over us like our teacher.

You cannnot even follow the rules concerning debate procedures which so states that calling a person stupid is "not the right way" to debate a topic. Saying that a person speaks from ignorance is not debating, saying that someone "most likely" is stupid is not an exception. A Monitor in fact could even reject your messages if they went "by the book" and got real technical about the rules.

So a pot should tell the kettle to "follow the rules" if they do not follow rules.
Those who blame are most likely guilty of the same.

Now when medical science first offered treatments for cancer they did not submit long term testing for those procedures (for peer review). The radeation and/or operations used were done (still being done) without proof that they are effective (relative to testing done in a lab) although years of later experience demonstrated that their theory use useful "somewhat" for the purposes intended.

Nowadays many scientists are turning to science fiction writing so they can have more freedom to present their ideas without such peer reviews. They create a fictional storyline to go along with their scientific theory - which they do not have to proove because the book is classified as science fiction. Soon the theory becomes popular and everyone jumps in to try to proove it is right or wrong, which is normally impossible relative to currrent technology or the fact most of the universe is outside of our reach (for real time samples).

Example: I created a prediction for a newspaper headline which will read "Moon Mushroom found in outerspace by scientific probe". The fact that a mushroom could be proof of life on another planet or moon (where water is underground or where it is damp) can be tested. During the three mile island incident they noticed that mushrooms grew well in a radeoactive environment.
You can test it out your self with your own x-ray machine. The pores of a mushroom are microscopic enough that they could journey on cosmic drifts from planet to planet in the universe. Or attached to cosmic dust. Also the DNA of a mushroom is totally alien to any other life form on earth and cannot be linked to any matches on a evolutionary chart with other life forms. You can also test this theory by consuming some of the "mind alternating" mushrooms which contain postcard images of those "other" landscapes which might be located on distant planets in the universe, or located "beyond" this universe in those located on the other side of a wormhole or other kind of portal. So how about that? Go ask Alice.

Unlike biblical predictions I am going to set a timeline. The prediction for such a headline must happen before the year 2015. If not you can put it into the roundfile along with your other science fiction booklets.

Physics would not be a proper method for ceating proof about this. But you can do your own DNA testing on mushrooms to confirm that part of the theory. And you can got to the bottom of the ocean were volcanos erupt to find out if life forms can adopt to harsh environments that are normally not suited to other life forms on earth.

Before testing make sure you have the proper permits to own or use a x-ray machine.

Make sure you are in a country or location where consuming mind alternating mushrooms is lawful. And make sure you research the one used so that you are fully informed about what side-effects to expect. And do not jump out of any windows.

PS - the testing was already done and obtainable to the public if you know how to research for those facts.

So - you got a prediction. You got the testing. and you got the hypothesis for the potential theory. (hypospace hypothesis). Should we publish that in the highschool textbooks?

[gallo]

Quote by: Technosoul You cannnot even follow the rules concerning debate procedures which so states that calling a person stupid is "not the right way" to debate a topic.

I never called you stupid. Stop lying.

Quote by: Technosoul Saying that a person speaks from ignorance is not debating, saying that someone "most likely" is stupid is not an exception.

I guess you are ignorant of the fact that the word "ignorant" doesn't mean "stupid." I never said that you were "most likely" stupid. Stop lying.

Quote by: Technosoul Now when medical science first offered treatments for cancer they did not submit long term testing for those procedures (for peer review).

Yes they did. Besides the initial testing on animals (followed by papers submitted to peer review), long and expensive clinical trials were done (followed by papers submitted to peer review and the FDA). You don't know much about anything having to do with science, do you?

Quote by: Technosoul The radeation and/or operations used were done (still being done) without proof that they are effective (relative to testing done in a lab) although years of later experience demonstrated that their theory use useful "somewhat" for the purposes intended.

Did you mean "radiation"? No matter. You babble nonsense.

Quote by: Technosoul Nowadays many scientists are turning to science fiction writing so they can have more freedom to present their ideas without such peer reviews. They create a fictional storyline to go along with their scientific theory - which they do not have to proove because the book is classified as science fiction. Soon the theory becomes popular and everyone jumps in to try to proove it is right or wrong, which is normally impossible relative to currrent technology or the fact most of the universe is outside of our reach (for real time samples).

Another of your fantasies. It is pure nonsense. Many scientists aren't writing science fiction to present their ideas. The present their science in peer reviewed papers after thorough testing. By the way, there is only 1 'o' in prove and 2 'r' in current.

Quote by: Technosoul Example: I created a prediction for a newspaper headline which will read "Moon Mushroom found in outerspace by scientific probe". The fact that a mushroom could be proof of life on another planet or moon (where water is underground or where it is damp) can be tested. During the three mile island incident they noticed that mushrooms grew well in a radeoactive environment.

Meaningful how? What does that have to do with your fantasy about space mushrooms? What kind of mushrooms were you eating when you dreamed that up? Did you mean "radioactive"?

Quote by: Technosoul You can test it out your self with your own x-ray machine. The pores of a mushroom are microscopic enough that they could journey on cosmic drifts from planet to planet in the universe. Or attached to cosmic dust. Also the DNA of a mushroom is totally alien to any other life form on earth and cannot be linked to any matches on a evolutionary chart with other life forms.

BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA. That's rich. Did you mean "spores"? Actually, the DNA of in mushrooms is exactly like the DNA in other organisms - the same nucleic acids arranged in the same way. And the genetic code is the same as used by all living things.

Quote by: Technosoul You can also test this theory by consuming some of the "mind alternating" mushrooms which contain postcard images of those "other" landscapes which might be located on distant planets in the universe, or located "beyond" this universe in those located on the other side of a wormhole or other kind of portal. So how about that? Go ask Alice.

Absolute blithering nonsense. How is eating a mushroom going to test your fantasy?

Quote by: Technosoul [snip of meaningless tripe]

Quote by: Technosoul Physics would not be a proper method for ceating proof about this. But you can do your own DNA testing on mushrooms to confirm that part of the theory.

Not only isn't it a theory, its wrong.

Quote by: Technosoul And you can got to the bottom of the ocean were volcanos erupt to find out if life forms can adopt to harsh environments that are normally not suited to other life forms on earth.