Who or What really has a Soul?

[FruminousBandersnatch]

Is it just me, or does this post make absolutely no sense. The energy that makes a heart beat, makes brain waves, that are produced within the cells, leaves the body once it dies. Where does this energy go after the body dies? It has to go somewhere. It clearly isn't leeching onto the body because the EEG's show no activity when a person is dead.

It's just you. The energy that makes a heart beat is electricity, the same as is measured in brain waves (EEG stands for electro-encephalograph).

Where does the "energy" go when you turn off a light? Where does the "energy" go when you turn off the generator that provided the electricity that powered the light? Where does the "energy" that powers your car go when you turn off the engine?

The body converts food to energy used by the body in different forms. Cells use that energy to perform certain functions. When you stop taking in food, the body has reserves that the cells can use for a while, but ultimately, they run out of "gas." When you turn off an incandescent light bulb, the filament continues to glow briefly as it cools off and releases all of its radiant energy, and if you looked at it in the infrared spectrum it would glow for a lot longer, but without electricity continuing to pump energy into the filament, the light goes dark.

When you die, higher functions of your brain cease. Among other things, the brain stops sending the electrical nerve impulses that cause the heart muscle to contract, and you stop breathing. If the heart doesn't beat and the lungs don't exchange CO2 for oxygen, then the rest of the body runs out of fuel pretty quickly.

There's no mystery to this. It's a pretty well understood biological process.

[Anonymous]

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.

Explain it, atheist!

The law of conservation of energy is not "Einstein's law." (Einstein is most famous for his Theories of General Relativity and Special Relativity. You might be thinking of Einstein's formulation of the mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, but that's not a statement of the law of conservation of energy.) The law of conservation of energy applies to a closed system (i.e. nothing gets in or out) and says that the total amount of energy in that system cannot change.

For the universe to be a closed system and for the soul to be physical energy of some kind has significant theological implications. Among other things, if you want this "soul energy" to be within a closed system, that would mean that Heaven (and Hell) would have to be part of that closed system, which would mean that Heaven and Hell would be subject to the physical laws that apply to the observable physical universe. AFAIK, none of the various sects of the Abrahamic traditions professes to believe this. If you want to talk about the religious traditions that involve reincarnation (e.g., Hinduism), on the other hand, that would be consistent with a closed system and would not require a Heaven/Hell.

It would also require that "soul energy" to be subject to physical laws, and the energy would have to be carried by a particle of some kind in the same way that photons are the fundamental particle associated with light and gravitons are the theorized particle associated with gravity. Such a fundamental "soul" particle would have physical characteristics that could be measured and detected.

Dark matter?

[Anonymous]

I don't think the soul is a thing.

Is you consciousness a thing?

[FruminousBandersnatch]

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.

Explain it, atheist!

The law of conservation of energy is not "Einstein's law." (Einstein is most famous for his Theories of General Relativity and Special Relativity. You might be thinking of Einstein's formulation of the mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, but that's not a statement of the law of conservation of energy.) The law of conservation of energy applies to a closed system (i.e. nothing gets in or out) and says that the total amount of energy in that system cannot change.

For the universe to be a closed system and for the soul to be physical energy of some kind has significant theological implications. Among other things, if you want this "soul energy" to be within a closed system, that would mean that Heaven (and Hell) would have to be part of that closed system, which would mean that Heaven and Hell would be subject to the physical laws that apply to the observable physical universe. AFAIK, none of the various sects of the Abrahamic traditions professes to believe this. If you want to talk about the religious traditions that involve reincarnation (e.g., Hinduism), on the other hand, that would be consistent with a closed system and would not require a Heaven/Hell.

It would also require that "soul energy" to be subject to physical laws, and the energy would have to be carried by a particle of some kind in the same way that photons are the fundamental particle associated with light and gravitons are the theorized particle associated with gravity. Such a fundamental "soul" particle would have physical characteristics that could be measured and detected.

Dark matter?

I had a feeling this was going to go that way. Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain why there's more gravity in the universe than there ought to be given the amount of matter/energy we can observe. Dark matter can't be seen directly with telescopes - as far as we can tell it neither emits nor absorbs light or any other electromagnetic radiation at any detectable level. So, the properties of dark matter are inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, radiation, and the large-scale structure of the universe.

Based on the current theory about how the universe works, called the Standard Model, the total mass–energy of the known universe contains roughly 5%ordinary matter/energy and roughly 95% dark matter and a force called dark energy. The total mass of that 5% is estimated to be around 1x10^53 kg. (There are several different ways this estimate has been reached, and they generally agree with each other.)

The dark matter is believed to be composed of particles called WIMPs - Weakly Interacting Massive Particles.

It's possible that if souls exist then they are made of WIMPs. (Note, when I say "possible" that means I can't disprove it, not that I think it's likely.)

But if souls are made of some kind of WIMP, then that has consequences and raises significant questions, all of which make it less likely that they are.

First, dark matter and dark energy are relatively uniform across the universe, including "empty" space. Does that imply that the universe is just full of "soul stuff"? Why scatter it equally all over the place? Does that imply that there are other beings with souls all over the universe?

Second, why would the WIMPs interact with human bodies if they don't interact with other forms of matter? And, just as importantly, HOW would they interact with the matter that forms our bodies? (For example, neutrinos are a type of weakly interacting particle and a neutrino could travel through roughly 35 LIGHT YEARS of water without interacting with the ordinary matter.) Since human bodies are physically and chemically identical to those of pretty much all other living things on the planet, why would the WIMPs only interact with humans and not all other living things (which gets to the question of whether all other living things have souls, as well)? What would keep the particles around a human? How would WIMPs "attach" to a human fetus/baby at whatever point it gets attached, or would the human fetus/baby somehow generate it's own WIMPs as part of development? What would keep these non-interacting particles "attached" to a human?

Third, even though they are virtually undetectable, WIMPs are still subject to physical laws. Among other things, that means that if a hypothesis called Super Symmetry is correct, then each WIMP particle would have a corresponding anti-particle and they would occasionally annihilate each other. It would kinda suck to have your "immortal" soul bump into its anti-particle and blow up. Staying with the physical limits concept, WIMPs are still subject to the limitations of the speed of light. So you get to the question of if souls are made out of WIMPs, what happens when they detach from their human and go to Heaven (or Hell)? If WIMPs are bound into this physical universe, how would they make the transition to some other place, or does that mean that Heaven/Hell are part of this physical universe? Would a soul made of WIMPs experience the passage of time travelling through space to get to Heaven/Hell?

These are just the issues that come up off the top of my head. I'm sure that others who are similarly acquainted with physics could add more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.

Explain it, atheist!

And you're saying that that energy becomes a soul? I won't ask you to explain it, because you can't. You can believe, it but not explain it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, an interesting take on the age-old question: which religion is true?

From the Judeo-Christian point of view: God made man in his image and only humans have souls.

This is based on the Bible and, to Christians, the teachings of Jesus Christ in the Gospels/ New Testament.

Therefore, to answer your question, it would seem to me that you need to understand why the Bible itself is truth. That is not the same thing as saying it should be interpreted literally word for word, I hasten to add, but as God's revelation to his people throughout the ages.

And for that, you need to start a whole new discussion: How do we know the Bible is the truth?

Those who believe the Bible (or Koran, Torah, Book of Mormon, etc.) have faith that their respective scriptures are "true" (for whatever definition of "true" you care to assign, ranging from, "I realize that it's a collection of stories, but not literally the verbatim words of a deity," on up to, "The Bible is the true and inerrant Word of God and you must obey every word as written."), but there is no way to know with certainty that such a religious text is true.

Correct, I suppose. But if studied from an archeological and historic point of view, the Bible is far more on point than either the Koran or Book of Mormon. It's not even close.

Which is not saying much. Sort of like saying that Santa Claus is more believable than the easter bunny, because it's more likely that a person would bring presents than a rabbit would bring candy.

Actually, it is saying quite a lot. For one thing, the Bible (alone among other religious texts) is filled with prophesy from the Old Testament that came to fruitition in the New. There are something like 275 references to Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ in the OT alone. That in and of itself is pretty miraculous and nothing of the sort can be found in any other holy books. On top of that is the historic, geographic and archeological findings that back up the fact of the Bible's accuracy as the word of god.

Keep in mind that the story tellers in the NT had the OT to go by. It's pretty easy to make up and story and solve a mystery when all the clues are already handed to you.

[Anonymous]

Beowulf

[Anonymous]

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Is it just me, or does this post make absolutely no sense. The energy that makes a heart beat, makes brain waves, that are produced within the cells, leaves the body once it dies. Where does this energy go after the body dies? It has to go somewhere. It clearly isn't leeching onto the body because the EEG's show no activity when a person is dead.

It's just you. The energy that makes a heart beat is electricity, the same as is measured in brain waves (EEG stands for electro-encephalograph).

Where does the "energy" go when you turn off a light? Where does the "energy" go when you turn off the generator that provided the electricity that powered the light? Where does the "energy" that powers your car go when you turn off the engine?

The body converts food to energy used by the body in different forms. Cells use that energy to perform certain functions. When you stop taking in food, the body has reserves that the cells can use for a while, but ultimately, they run out of "gas." When you turn off an incandescent light bulb, the filament continues to glow briefly as it cools off and releases all of its radiant energy, and if you looked at it in the infrared spectrum it would glow for a lot longer, but without electricity continuing to pump energy into the filament, the light goes dark.

When you die, higher functions of your brain cease. Among other things, the brain stops sending the electrical nerve impulses that cause the heart muscle to contract, and you stop breathing. If the heart doesn't beat and the lungs don't exchange CO2 for oxygen, then the rest of the body runs out of fuel pretty quickly.

There's no mystery to this. It's a pretty well understood biological process.

Fruminous, I'm no physicist but apparently, neither are you. You pull quite a bit of information from other sources, including wikipedia. If I understood correctly, you said food is what provides our bodies energy. When food is deprived, so is the energy provided to our bodies. So you imply that our bodies do not have any energy on their own. I believe you are incorrect in this assumption. The best example I can give is of a stick of dynamite. A stick of dynamite, under your analysis, has no energy on its own. It can not explode without being ignited. So the flame that ignites it is what provides the stick of dynamite energy to explode. However, this is incorrect. Actually the stick of dynamite has energy, but it is in the form of chemical energy or potential energy. When it is ignited, it explodes into a different form of energy, kinetic energy. So here's an explanation of why energy from our body doesn't just "die" from wikipedia:

Matter is composed of such things as atoms, electrons, neutrons, and protons. It has intrinsic or rest mass. In the limited range of recognized experience of the nineteenth century it was found that such rest mass is conserved. Einstein's 1905 theory of special relativity showed that it corresponds to an equivalent amount of rest energy. This means that it can be converted to or from equivalent amounts of other (non-material) forms of energy, for example kinetic energy, potential energy, and electromagnetic radiant energy. When this happens, as recognized in twentieth century experience, rest mass is not conserved, unlike the total mass or total energy. All forms of energy contribute to the total mass and total energy.

[u]For example an electron and a positron each have rest mass. They can perish together, converting their combined rest energy into photons having electromagnetic radiant energy, but no rest mass. If this occurs within an isolated system that does not release the photons or their energy into the external surroundings, then neither the total mass nor the total energy of the system will change. The produced electromagnetic radiant energy contributes just as much to the inertia (and to any weight) of the system as did the rest mass of the electron and positron before their demise. Conversely, non-material forms of energy can perish into matter, which has rest mass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, an interesting take on the age-old question: which religion is true?

From the Judeo-Christian point of view: God made man in his image and only humans have souls.

This is based on the Bible and, to Christians, the teachings of Jesus Christ in the Gospels/ New Testament.

Therefore, to answer your question, it would seem to me that you need to understand why the Bible itself is truth. That is not the same thing as saying it should be interpreted literally word for word, I hasten to add, but as God's revelation to his people throughout the ages.

And for that, you need to start a whole new discussion: How do we know the Bible is the truth?

Those who believe the Bible (or Koran, Torah, Book of Mormon, etc.) have faith that their respective scriptures are "true" (for whatever definition of "true" you care to assign, ranging from, "I realize that it's a collection of stories, but not literally the verbatim words of a deity," on up to, "The Bible is the true and inerrant Word of God and you must obey every word as written."), but there is no way to know with certainty that such a religious text is true.

Correct, I suppose. But if studied from an archeological and historic point of view, the Bible is far more on point than either the Koran or Book of Mormon. It's not even close.

Which is not saying much. Sort of like saying that Santa Claus is more believable than the easter bunny, because it's more likely that a person would bring presents than a rabbit would bring candy.

Actually, it is saying quite a lot. For one thing, the Bible (alone among other religious texts) is filled with prophesy from the Old Testament that came to fruitition in the New. There are something like 275 references to Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ in the OT alone. That in and of itself is pretty miraculous and nothing of the sort can be found in any other holy books. On top of that is the historic, geographic and archeological findings that back up the fact of the Bible's accuracy as the word of god.

Keep in mind that the story tellers in the NT had the OT to go by. It's pretty easy to make up and story and solve a mystery when all the clues are already handed to you.

Did you not read the pp.'s post? She / he just told you that prophesies were made in the OT. They were validated, confirmed not only by the New Testament but historic records. There were many such prophesies such as that Jesus would die in Jerusalem, that Jerusalem would be destroyed, etc..etc…Prophesies are one way we know the old testament was not simply "story telling." So many prophesies could not have come true if they were all just "stories." Check out the web site harvardhouse on religion.

[Anonymous]

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.

Explain it, atheist!

The law of conservation of energy is not "Einstein's law." (Einstein is most famous for his Theories of General Relativity and Special Relativity. You might be thinking of Einstein's formulation of the mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, but that's not a statement of the law of conservation of energy.) The law of conservation of energy applies to a closed system (i.e. nothing gets in or out) and says that the total amount of energy in that system cannot change.

For the universe to be a closed system and for the soul to be physical energy of some kind has significant theological implications. Among other things, if you want this "soul energy" to be within a closed system, that would mean that Heaven (and Hell) would have to be part of that closed system, which would mean that Heaven and Hell would be subject to the physical laws that apply to the observable physical universe. AFAIK, none of the various sects of the Abrahamic traditions professes to believe this. If you want to talk about the religious traditions that involve reincarnation (e.g., Hinduism), on the other hand, that would be consistent with a closed system and would not require a Heaven/Hell.

It would also require that "soul energy" to be subject to physical laws, and the energy would have to be carried by a particle of some kind in the same way that photons are the fundamental particle associated with light and gravitons are the theorized particle associated with gravity. Such a fundamental "soul" particle would have physical characteristics that could be measured and detected.

Dark matter?

I had a feeling this was going to go that way. Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain why there's more gravity in the universe than there ought to be given the amount of matter/energy we can observe. Dark matter can't be seen directly with telescopes - as far as we can tell it neither emits nor absorbs light or any other electromagnetic radiation at any detectable level. So, the properties of dark matter are inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, radiation, and the large-scale structure of the universe.

Based on the current theory about how the universe works, called the Standard Model, the total mass–energy of the known universe contains roughly 5%ordinary matter/energy and roughly 95% dark matter and a force called dark energy. The total mass of that 5% is estimated to be around 1x10^53 kg. (There are several different ways this estimate has been reached, and they generally agree with each other.)

The dark matter is believed to be composed of particles called WIMPs - Weakly Interacting Massive Particles.

It's possible that if souls exist then they are made of WIMPs. (Note, when I say "possible" that means I can't disprove it, not that I think it's likely.)

But if souls are made of some kind of WIMP, then that has consequences and raises significant questions, all of which make it less likely that they are.

First, dark matter and dark energy are relatively uniform across the universe, including "empty" space. Does that imply that the universe is just full of "soul stuff"? Why scatter it equally all over the place? Does that imply that there are other beings with souls all over the universe?

Second, why would the WIMPs interact with human bodies if they don't interact with other forms of matter? And, just as importantly, HOW would they interact with the matter that forms our bodies? (For example, neutrinos are a type of weakly interacting particle and a neutrino could travel through roughly 35 LIGHT YEARS of water without interacting with the ordinary matter.) Since human bodies are physically and chemically identical to those of pretty much all other living things on the planet, why would the WIMPs only interact with humans and not all other living things (which gets to the question of whether all other living things have souls, as well)? What would keep the particles around a human? How would WIMPs "attach" to a human fetus/baby at whatever point it gets attached, or would the human fetus/baby somehow generate it's own WIMPs as part of development? What would keep these non-interacting particles "attached" to a human?

Third, even though they are virtually undetectable, WIMPs are still subject to physical laws. Among other things, that means that if a hypothesis called Super Symmetry is correct, then each WIMP particle would have a corresponding anti-particle and they would occasionally annihilate each other. It would kinda suck to have your "immortal" soul bump into its anti-particle and blow up. Staying with the physical limits concept, WIMPs are still subject to the limitations of the speed of light. So you get to the question of if souls are made out of WIMPs, what happens when they detach from their human and go to Heaven (or Hell)? If WIMPs are bound into this physical universe, how would they make the transition to some other place, or does that mean that Heaven/Hell are part of this physical universe? Would a soul made of WIMPs experience the passage of time travelling through space to get to Heaven/Hell?

These are just the issues that come up off the top of my head. I'm sure that others who are similarly acquainted with physics could add more.

These are "just issues that came up off the top" of your head? Hilarious. This is word for word from a web site I read not too long ago. Quote your source otherwise this is plagiarizing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Actually, it is saying quite a lot. For one thing, the Bible (alone among other religious texts) is filled with prophesy from the Old Testament that came to fruitition in the New. There are something like 275 references to Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ in the OT alone. That in and of itself is pretty miraculous and nothing of the sort can be found in any other holy books. On top of that is the historic, geographic and archeological findings that back up the fact of the Bible's accuracy as the word of god.

Keep in mind that the story tellers in the NT had the OT to go by. It's pretty easy to make up a story and solve a mystery when all the clues are already handed to you.

Did you not read the pp.'s post? She / he just told you that prophesies were made in the OT. They were validated, confirmed not only by the New Testament but historic records. There were many such prophesies such as that Jesus would die in Jerusalem, that Jerusalem would be destroyed, etc..etc…Prophesies are one way we know the old testament was not simply "story telling." So many prophesies could not have come true if they were all just "stories." Check out the web site harvardhouse on religion.

-------
I read the post. it's the NT that could have been made up so that it appeared to fulfill the prophesies in the OT. Plus, you're wrong about "historic records" - very little in the OT is found in historical records, including biggies like the Exodus.

But religious belief isn't based on facts, it's based on faith.

[Anonymous]

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals.

C Hitchens

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Faith is the surrender of the mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals.

C Hitchens

That's the easy, cliched answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Faith is the surrender of the mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals.

C Hitchens

That's the easy, cliched answer.

Oh, truth hurts does it?

[FruminousBandersnatch]

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

FruminousBandersnatch wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.

Explain it, atheist!

The law of conservation of energy is not "Einstein's law." (Einstein is most famous for his Theories of General Relativity and Special Relativity. You might be thinking of Einstein's formulation of the mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, but that's not a statement of the law of conservation of energy.) The law of conservation of energy applies to a closed system (i.e. nothing gets in or out) and says that the total amount of energy in that system cannot change.

For the universe to be a closed system and for the soul to be physical energy of some kind has significant theological implications. Among other things, if you want this "soul energy" to be within a closed system, that would mean that Heaven (and Hell) would have to be part of that closed system, which would mean that Heaven and Hell would be subject to the physical laws that apply to the observable physical universe. AFAIK, none of the various sects of the Abrahamic traditions professes to believe this. If you want to talk about the religious traditions that involve reincarnation (e.g., Hinduism), on the other hand, that would be consistent with a closed system and would not require a Heaven/Hell.

It would also require that "soul energy" to be subject to physical laws, and the energy would have to be carried by a particle of some kind in the same way that photons are the fundamental particle associated with light and gravitons are the theorized particle associated with gravity. Such a fundamental "soul" particle would have physical characteristics that could be measured and detected.

Dark matter?

I had a feeling this was going to go that way. Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain why there's more gravity in the universe than there ought to be given the amount of matter/energy we can observe. Dark matter can't be seen directly with telescopes - as far as we can tell it neither emits nor absorbs light or any other electromagnetic radiation at any detectable level. So, the properties of dark matter are inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, radiation, and the large-scale structure of the universe.

Based on the current theory about how the universe works, called the Standard Model, the total mass–energy of the known universe contains roughly 5%ordinary matter/energy and roughly 95% dark matter and a force called dark energy. The total mass of that 5% is estimated to be around 1x10^53 kg. (There are several different ways this estimate has been reached, and they generally agree with each other.)

The dark matter is believed to be composed of particles called WIMPs - Weakly Interacting Massive Particles.

It's possible that if souls exist then they are made of WIMPs. (Note, when I say "possible" that means I can't disprove it, not that I think it's likely.)

But if souls are made of some kind of WIMP, then that has consequences and raises significant questions, all of which make it less likely that they are.

First, dark matter and dark energy are relatively uniform across the universe, including "empty" space. Does that imply that the universe is just full of "soul stuff"? Why scatter it equally all over the place? Does that imply that there are other beings with souls all over the universe?

Second, why would the WIMPs interact with human bodies if they don't interact with other forms of matter? And, just as importantly, HOW would they interact with the matter that forms our bodies? (For example, neutrinos are a type of weakly interacting particle and a neutrino could travel through roughly 35 LIGHT YEARS of water without interacting with the ordinary matter.) Since human bodies are physically and chemically identical to those of pretty much all other living things on the planet, why would the WIMPs only interact with humans and not all other living things (which gets to the question of whether all other living things have souls, as well)? What would keep the particles around a human? How would WIMPs "attach" to a human fetus/baby at whatever point it gets attached, or would the human fetus/baby somehow generate it's own WIMPs as part of development? What would keep these non-interacting particles "attached" to a human?

Third, even though they are virtually undetectable, WIMPs are still subject to physical laws. Among other things, that means that if a hypothesis called Super Symmetry is correct, then each WIMP particle would have a corresponding anti-particle and they would occasionally annihilate each other. It would kinda suck to have your "immortal" soul bump into its anti-particle and blow up. Staying with the physical limits concept, WIMPs are still subject to the limitations of the speed of light. So you get to the question of if souls are made out of WIMPs, what happens when they detach from their human and go to Heaven (or Hell)? If WIMPs are bound into this physical universe, how would they make the transition to some other place, or does that mean that Heaven/Hell are part of this physical universe? Would a soul made of WIMPs experience the passage of time travelling through space to get to Heaven/Hell?

These are just the issues that come up off the top of my head. I'm sure that others who are similarly acquainted with physics could add more.

These are "just issues that came up off the top" of your head? Hilarious. This is word for word from a web site I read not too long ago. Quote your source otherwise this is plagiarizing.

Sheesh. I try to be nice and explain something about the universe and get accused of plagiarism for my troubles. I have a degree in physics and wrote that today, which is why I said it was the issues that came up off the top of my head. If I actually put some thought into it, I could probably come up with a lot more reasons why the idea of souls being made of dark matter wouldn't work. If you're going to accuse me of plagiarism (cowardly anonymous poster on a discussion board) either cite to the website you "read not too long ago" or apologize.