Hey Guys,
I was wondering about something.
Are ghosts and or spirits confined to a location? House, room, park etc.
If the answer to the question is yes,
WHY?
Tim
The prevailing guess made by the "experts" is that spirits become attached. If they're intelligent hauntings, they habituate themselves to objects, architecture and people. I don't know what the all the theories are about residual hauntings, but at least one of them suggests that the location, itself, is "recording and playing back" an event in the matrix of its space-time; there's also a controversial hypothesis that certain kinds of rock can hold the memory of past events, like a hard drive, and that most residual spirit phenomena occur in such locations. (Yes, I am rolling my eyes.) Attachment is supposed to occur out of some sort of denial and confusion: a sudden or traumatic death; an unresolved issue; a strong will; a self-perpetuating soap opera of intrigue and seduction.
You can plainly see what's wrong with all of these: if true hauntings really do occur, why don't they happen all the time, and to everyone who dies? There's nothing odd about living beings fixating on people, places and things. (I guess that makes them noun-aholics.) Why isn't every square inch of civilized space overcrowded with ghostly squatters? It must be owing to the physical properties of the place or the space, and not the motives, because random perturbations in the physics should be at least as rare as true hauntings.
Still a theory with a lot o' holes, I gotta say. No wonder people just make up crap to explain it.
That is interesting Karl,
I wondered about it because of something I think I got while investigating.
During a EVP session, I asked the question "Can you go outside?" The answer was no.
That made me wonder if there was something containing the spirit or ghost making it not able to leave the confines of the house.
(building materials, artifacts, the great book of rules of being a ghost) I don't know.
Are spirits more connected to obects or people?
Quote from: PPI Karl on October 05, 2008, 09:58:54 PM
The prevailing guess made by the "experts" is that spirits become attached. If they're intelligent hauntings, they habituate themselves to objects, architecture and people. I don't know what the all the theories are about residual hauntings, but at least one of them suggests that the location, itself, is "recording and playing back" an event in the matrix of its space-time; there's also a controversial hypothesis that certain kinds of rock can hold the memory of past events, like a hard drive, and that most residual spirit phenomena occur in such locations. (Yes, I am rolling my eyes.) Attachment is supposed to occur out of some sort of denial and confusion: a sudden or traumatic death; an unresolved issue; a strong will; a self-perpetuating soap opera of intrigue and seduction.
You can plainly see what's wrong with all of these: if true hauntings really do occur, why don't they happen all the time, and to everyone who dies? There's nothing odd about living beings fixating on people, places and things. (I guess that makes them noun-aholics.) Why isn't every square inch of civilized space overcrowded with ghostly squatters? It must be owing to the physical properties of the place or the space, and not the motives, because random perturbations in the physics should be at least as rare as true hauntings.
Still a theory with a lot o' holes, I gotta say. No wonder people just make up crap to explain it.
Karl - Make sure not to forget the ever popular theory that SOME paranormal investigators have come up with (probably in a drunken stupor) that recording a spirit's voice (evp) can actually trap them. Maybe I'll argue that the same thing can be done with video or photographs, but somehow, I don't think that would go over well. Do you?
(Come on Karl.....let's do the eye rolling thing together. It'll be the "Optical Wave")
I tried to get the little face to roll it's eyes but all I got was a :)
I'm rolling my eyes too.
Yeah. Why doesn't this smiley work anymore? I've gone through the smiley set installed on the forum, and the code is correct. I'm stumped... ???
I think at some point in time we also lost the spell check. um...er....ah...not that I need it, of course.
God knows I doo. ;D