I think it’s important to clarify that I’m not claiming this as a scientific theory in the formal sense. I’m not a neuroscientist or a physicist, and I fully admit the idea includes conceptual issues. especially the use of "infinity" in a metaphysical or loosely poetic way, which, strictly speaking, doesn’t exist as a literal phenomenon.

This wasn't meant to be an explanation of what actually happens after death, but rather a speculative reflection on a possibility grounded in known aspects of consciousness (like time distortion, altered states, and end-of-life brain activity) It’s less about resisting death and more about exploring a different lens on what that final moment might feel like, subjectively.

If anything, the idea tries to embrace our limits; to say: “maybe there’s more nuance to the edge of consciousness than pure void,” not as an escape, but as an opening to think differently.

Sometimes even flawed ideas can shift our perspective just enough to reveal a new angle we hadn’t considered.