Einstein was quite the philosopher as well as a physicist. Its an
interesting question you raise. This highlights the issue that nobody
really knows what is the ultimate reality.

Some jerk in my office will not quit talking so this is a little
difficult.

How about this for an idea Red? Suppose there is only one person in the
world, you. Everyone else is a mock-up image created just for your own
personal interaction. Once you are gone from their presence, they no
longer exist, bits in a memory machine, ready to manipulate to create a
new experience for you when your life returns to that track. Above you
somewhere is a committee of people monitoring your every action and
reaction, and giving through some means, stimuli to reinforce the
illusion that you exist within a world.
The committee maintains your life history as a memory you can access
anytime according to a preplanned scenario. Then the group manipulates
you this way and that way, experimentally, watching carefully to see how
you respond, and taking notes, expressing approval or disapproval among
themselves.
They present situations with new images, views, sensations such as
cold or heat, texture such as satin or sand, floor surface such as
whatever you might walk upon. These feed generally into your 6 senses
and saturate your ability to sense so that you never suspect that the
world actually does not exist around you in the manner you think.
This scenario might play out again and again, but ultimately under the
complete control and influence of others. In this way millions or even
billions of lives can be set up, run and finished.
Now this sounds from the onset unlikely and maybe even impossible. But
to give a little more credibility to the idea consider this. In a few
thousand years mankind has gone from being essentially illiterate to the
point of being able to create television, video, radio and computerized
robotic control. Now the world is more than billions of years old. I
haven't heard the age of the universe lately and within the scope of
this discussion I think it might be somewhat unimportant. So if mankind
can advance so far in a few thousand years, what might be done in a
million, or a billion. Perhaps it is reasonable to consider that a more
advanced collection of sentient beings exists than mankind. This
scenario would mean of course that a person might remember past life
experiences or not, entirely depending on the input provided. It would
also make predicting the future possible if the input was right. So
basically anything would be possible.
With this sort of consideration, it might be more important than ever
to manage your thoughts and responses to life situations. As for what
might happen after life in such a world, that would be a guess and most
likely determined by the committee monitoring and manipulating the
inputs. Perhaps the one in the experience rejoins the committee and they
run a new life program.

Hey MD - hope you come back. Thanks for your option. I think, however,
you are still thinking on a linear time scale. When action causes
reaction, one thing "naturally" follows another. But what if time is
relevant? From our earliest childhood we have been focused on believing
that every event happens only once in a line of events and that event
affects, directly, only the original reaction which continues in a
straight line of time.

What if time in this univers does not act on that course. What if there
is something else in the universe that that allows all time to exist at
once?

Philosopher, Hope you read this. OK, so far in your last post is an
episode of Star Trek, One Step Beyond, and The Outer Limits, just to
name a few. You speak of an OLD philosophy, a Transendental reality.
This was put to rest with Descares philosophical view - I THINK,
THEREFORE IAM. If a person exists they think without you're presence,
away from your view. If one other person (who thinks on their own)lol -
see and descripes an inanimate object similiar to what you see, then
that object also exists. This laid to rest the old theories and proved
the validity of other poeple and thinks within our world of senses and
perceptions. Therefore, I can not consider your last responce.

Want to try again? I know you have more, can't wait to hear.

It seems rather obvious to me that the scenario I described is neither
real nor even realistic. You are right in general that the comment "I
think therefore I am" disputes the idea. The comment might actually be
incorrect, but that's another matter. What I was trying to illustrate is
that there are so many possible ways to interpret life, from the
simplistic creationism of Adam and Eve as global progenitors 10,000
years ago, to the sprinkling of DNA from outer space, carried across the
eons on cosmic clouds. My comment was also intended as a counter notion
to the vibrating strings through the universe involving parallel time
strands. Most likely it was too glib of a response for your considerable
comment. Sorry for that. Yes there may in fact be crossovers in time and
they may in fact be accessible through some means. Worm holes are an
example where a normal time line can be altered. But the reason for my
response is more simplistic, Treky as it may have been, we do not know
what there is beyond life. Some may claim to know. Nobody can prove that
they know. Therefore it makes a lot of sense to live your life in such a
way to enhance the living situation for yourself and others here in this
world, and through that eternity looks brighter and brighter for
everyone involved, now and in the future.
I might question common memory as going beyond life in this way: If
memory is the collection of impressions about the past, and these
impressions are saved in brain cells and accessed by the mind through a
complex electrochemical process which depends on blood and oxygen to
function, then it would seem that a free spirit would be unlikely to
have access to the memory. I wonder though and think that the lack of
access to the memory would not necessarily preclude an ongoing emotional
essence carried over spiritually into an ongoing awareness. No evidence
of such an ongoing sensation has been given either as far as I know, so
once again we are back to the current world, and how we might best live
our lives.

AHA! I FOUND IT!

Regarding Descartes, quoting Robert Thurman here from his version of
Tibetan Book of the Dead. This portion was a prelude to the actual
translation of The Great Book of Natural Liberation Through
Understanding in the Between.
He was discussing the fact that when you look within yourself and try
to find the kernel that is doing the looking....

"Even Descartes found that too: he found that he could find nothing at
the point of origin of thought. He erroneously asserted that it was
because a subject could not be an object. And then he went wild and said
that this subject, this one thing he could not find, demonstrate,
establish in any way, was the one thing he could be fundamentally
certain of! He could doubt everything, but could not doubt that he
doubted, So: I think, therefore I am. Only the laziest Buddhist
philosopher would make such a statement."

Well there is more to the point that he is making, But the argument "I
think, therefore I am", is both obvious and yet not clearly a proof.

Philosopher, Thanks. I did indeed misunderstand the point in your
previous post, that's what happens when you're working on wakefulness at
the 21st hour. Thanks for the clarification. It's actually quite
interesting. And thank-you also for the other information, I will refer
to the backup you gave. I am a very curious person, and reading
philosophy make me think and gave me things to ponder when I was alone,
but never had anyone to discuss it with. So meeting several of you here
has been exhilarating to the max and I'm learning so much.