Welcome to the Freedomain Radio Message Board
If you have supported Freedomain Radio financially and would like immediate access to the message board, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with your information for immediate account approval and a donation status upgrade which will enable you to access the donator only premium content section.
The major upgrade is completed, but we're still in the process of improving the message board and chat room. If you notice any issues, dead links, etc please post a message in the "Technical Issues" section of the message board and we'll address those as quickly as possible. If your donator status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with the relevant information and it will be corrected ASAP.
God Proven to Exist According to Mainstream Physics
#1
Posted 15 January 2014 - 04:55 PM
#2
Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:08 PM
Protip: whenever you use wording like "mainstream physics" some people, myself included, might take it as clear evidence you have no idea what you're talking about.
"My common sense is tingling."
#3
Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:38 PM
Protip: whenever you use wording like "mainstream physics" some people, myself included, might take it as clear evidence you have no idea what you're talking about.
Rather, you have no idea what I am talking about.
By "mainstream physics", I mean extensively empirically-verified physics, as opposed to anti-reality, nonempirical physics such as String Theory. That is, I mean the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, of which have been confirmed by every experiment to date.
#4
Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:57 PM
If the definition was in your above post, my apologies. I'm on mobile right now, not the easiest device to read long posts on.
Connect with me: @jamesapyrich, Facebook, james-a-pyrich on Skype
Meetup with fellow local Freedomainers!
I accept BTC: 1DGcCf52Tnyc6pJbyQUwbiLj6Pkt6qHa3Y
#5
Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:58 PM
Should I Pray to the Omega Point? Will it send me to Omega Point hell if I don't follow the 10 Omega Point commandments? Is there an Omega Point Bible, and which burning bush will dictate it to us?
Does the Omega Point love me?
#6
Posted 15 January 2014 - 06:14 PM
What is "god" in your paper? It cannot be the Judeo-Christian god as described in the bible as that one violates the conservation of matter & energy.
If the definition was in your above post, my apologies. I'm on mobile right now, not the easiest device to read long posts on.
Should I Pray to the Omega Point? Will it send me to Omega Point hell if I don't follow the 10 Omega Point commandments? Is there an Omega Point Bible, and which burning bush will dictate it to us?
Does the Omega Point love me?
#7
Posted 15 January 2014 - 07:55 PM
Rather, you have no idea what I am talking about.
By "mainstream physics", I mean extensively empirically-verified physics, as opposed to anti-reality, nonempirical physics such as String Theory. That is, I mean the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, of which have been confirmed by every experiment to date.
So mainstream physics is physics. And physics is tantamount to reality, that which exists outside ourselves. So everything that is not mainstream physics is equivalent to everything that doesn't exist in reality, meaning non-mainstream physics = fantasy. OK. But why point out that god was proven to exist through mainstream reality? Are you implying he was and/or was not proven to exist through fantasy beforehand?
"My common sense is tingling."
#8
Posted 15 January 2014 - 08:11 PM
Last time I checked, physics didn't make claims about consciousness (which is still something biologists and neurologist are in the midst of figuring out anyway)
#9
Posted 15 January 2014 - 08:39 PM
The Omega Point is omniscient, having an infinite amount of information and knowing all that is logically possible to be known; it is omnipotent, having an infinite amount of energy and power; and it is omnipresent, consisting of all that exists. These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.
Does the Omega Point know what it's going to do tomorrow? If so, could it do something else?
Can the Omega Point leave the room?
#10
Posted 15 January 2014 - 09:25 PM
You talk about the Omega point, like it's something verified, when in reality anything before the microwave background radiation event, can be at most considered an educated guess. But do come back to this when the necessary gravitational wave detection equipment is available.
Hawking talks about what you describe as a suggestion of the non existence of God, if everything measured on the Universe adds up to 0, maybe it can't be the result of an outside force.
Maybe the entire Universe can be simulated on a computer, until it happens you might want to skip the word proof and use the correct terminology: science fiction
Proof is a mathematical term and scientists only use it in that context. You can prove that 2 + 2 = 4, but God is not defined mathematically so any calculation won't make sense.
#11
Posted 16 January 2014 - 12:11 AM
I suppose there will always be gaps for gods.
Connect with me: @jamesapyrich, Facebook, james-a-pyrich on Skype
Meetup with fellow local Freedomainers!
I accept BTC: 1DGcCf52Tnyc6pJbyQUwbiLj6Pkt6qHa3Y
#12
Posted 17 January 2014 - 04:37 AM
http://theophysics.h...chist-jesus.pdf
so how does this relate to this paper?
is exodus 20-31 or whatever a free market covenant between a people and god? what happened to those that chose not to agree to the covenant?
#13
Posted 18 January 2014 - 10:40 PM
So mainstream physics is physics. And physics is tantamount to reality, that which exists outside ourselves. So everything that is not mainstream physics is equivalent to everything that doesn't exist in reality, meaning non-mainstream physics = fantasy. OK. But why point out that god was proven to exist through mainstream reality? Are you implying he was and/or was not proven to exist through fantasy beforehand?
One can construct all sorts of models which have nothing to do with actual reality, and of which models may not prove God's existence. What I am interested in, and what others also ought to be interested in, is actual reality, as best as can be determined.
Last time I checked, physics didn't make claims about consciousness (which is still something biologists and neurologist are in the midst of figuring out anyway)
Of course it does. Cf. the Bekenstein Bound.
Does the Omega Point know what it's going to do tomorrow? If so, could it do something else?
Can the Omega Point leave the room?
Yes; No; and No.
The Omega Point--the technical physics term for God the Father--is all action logically possible, and completed--and that to an infinite degree. As Stephen Hawking proved, the cosmological singularity is not is spacetime, and hence is not subject to time. It is eternal and unchanging. The Omega Point's perception of reality is as a timeless, unchanging, infinite whole. It is a state of perfect, infinite bliss.
You talk about the Omega point, like it's something verified, when in reality anything before the microwave background radiation event, can be at most considered an educated guess. But do come back to this when the necessary gravitational wave detection equipment is available.
Hawking talks about what you describe as a suggestion of the non existence of God, if everything measured on the Universe adds up to 0, maybe it can't be the result of an outside force.
Maybe the entire Universe can be simulated on a computer, until it happens you might want to skip the word proof and use the correct terminology: science fiction
Proof is a mathematical term and scientists only use it in that context. You can prove that 2 + 2 = 4, but God is not defined mathematically so any calculation won't make sense.
The field of physics does involve mathematical proofs of physical theories, i.e., physical theorems, such as the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems which proved that singularities necessarily exist per General Relativity and given attractive gravity. Likewise, the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory is a mathematical theorem if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are correct. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)
So… god is a black hole?
I suppose there will always be gaps for gods.
http://theophysics.h...chist-jesus.pdf
so how does this relate to this paper?
is exodus 20-31 or whatever a free market covenant between a people and god? what happened to those that chose not to agree to the covenant?
For the answers to your above questions, see Sec. 7.4.2: "God’s Relation to the Old Testament", Sec. 7.4.3: "Ha’Mashiach", Sec. 7.4.4: "The Soteriology of Existence", and Sec. 8: "The Societal Implications of the Omega Point Cosmology", all of which are contiguous from pp. 46-107 of my following article:
James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708; PDF, 1741424 bytes, MD5: 8f7b21ee1e236fc2fbb22b4ee4bbd4cb. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/d...oryOfEverything , http://theophysics.h...sics-of-God.pdf , http://alphaomegapoi...sics-of-god.pdf , http://sites.google....sics-of-God.pdf
#14
Posted 19 January 2014 - 12:01 AM
For the answers to your above questions, see Sec. 7.4.2: "God’s Relation to the Old Testament", Sec. 7.4.3: "Ha’Mashiach", Sec. 7.4.4: "The Soteriology of Existence", and Sec. 8: "The Societal Implications of the Omega Point Cosmology", all of which are contiguous from pp. 46-107 of my following article:
James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708; PDF, 1741424 bytes, MD5: 8f7b21ee1e236fc2fbb22b4ee4bbd4cb. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/d...oryOfEverything , http://theophysics.h...sics-of-God.pdf , http://alphaomegapoi...sics-of-god.pdf , http://sites.google....sics-of-God.pdf
so if got this right, old testament includes man claiming that mans actions were ordered by god, when the actions were not ordered by god, but in fact ordered by man( government/priests/patriarchs/would be rulers)?
The history of mankind is that of coming out of a condition of extremely ignorant fal-lacy into lesser states of ignorance, accompanying some massively gruesome setbacksalong the way (with all of the greatest atrocities perpetrated by government). This isbecause of mankind’s coming out of an animalistic mental state into states of higherdegrees of reason
So what are your beliefs on human common ancestry and who are ancestors were and were not evolution wise? I have heard other creation theories say god made Adam separate from any other being, and that Adam was the most genetically perfect human, and would have been created with a higher degree of reason than Adams ancestors could have. I do question that as it sounds like Adam in the story quickly disobeyed god, and his son disobeyed god, and his ancestors quickly disobeyed god, all with direct contact with god in the stories. It seems people with more reason would not disobey after such direct evidence?
#15
Posted 19 January 2014 - 04:37 AM
These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.
Oo! Quick! Can you name the logical fallacy?
"You hear that? That's the sound of reality crumbling in our wake."
#16
Posted 20 January 2014 - 02:27 AM
so if got this right, old testament includes man claiming that mans actions were ordered by god, when the actions were not ordered by god, but in fact ordered by man( government/priests/patriarchs/would be rulers)?
So what are your beliefs on human common ancestry and who are ancestors were and were not evolution wise? I have heard other creation theories say god made Adam separate from any other being, and that Adam was the most genetically perfect human, and would have been created with a higher degree of reason than Adams ancestors could have. I do question that as it sounds like Adam in the story quickly disobeyed god, and his son disobeyed god, and his ancestors quickly disobeyed god, all with direct contact with god in the stories. It seems people with more reason would not disobey after such direct evidence?
Oo! Quick! Can you name the logical fallacy?
A haecceity is an attribute that uniquely identifies a thing, i.e., a property which differentiates a thing from all other things that are not that thing. Hence, if a thing has even a single haecceity given by a word's definition, then by definition it is that thing referred to by the word. For more on this, see the Glossary entry "haecceity" in pp. 131 ff. of my following article:
James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708; PDF, 1741424 bytes, MD5: 8f7b21ee1e236fc2fbb22b4ee4bbd4cb. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/d...oryOfEverything , http://theophysics.h...sics-of-God.pdf , http://alphaomegapoi...sics-of-god.pdf , http://sites.google....sics-of-God.pdf
#17
Posted 20 January 2014 - 04:51 AM
I'm confused, if the whole universe will eventually reach an end singularity, how does that singularity have any effect on us today when the universe is, quite noticeably, not a singularity?
VI VERI VENIVERSUM VIVUS VICI.
"By the power of knowledge, I, while living, have conquered the universe."
#18
Posted 20 January 2014 - 04:31 PM
The problem is that I have proof that it isn't god but an all powerful being I like to call The Fart Monster. I have the only copy of the Fart Monster Bible if you want me to quote anything from it.
" And thus he spaketh with his anus, and he sayeth unto the darkness, Pffttthhhhhssddtttttt which translates to "let there be smell." " Fartgenesis 1:1
That has as much validity as your theory does.
#19
Posted 20 January 2014 - 05:24 PM
I mean it's just so boring, I came into this thread hoping to read something interesting. I feel let down
Check out my blog and occasional podcast on writing, liberty and living in China http://sticktowriting.com/wp/
“Good men don’t serve in the army. Good iron doesn’t get turned into nails.”- Chinese saying
#20
Posted 20 January 2014 - 08:03 PM
Evolution of the species is true; however, the Darwinian conception of evolution is false, since Darwinian evolution is predicated upon random mutations, whereas according to the known laws of physics, no such thing as randomness exists in nature. For example, Quantum Mechanics is actually more deterministic than classical mechanics, because the Schrödinger Equation is simply the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation (i.e., the most powerful formulation of Newtonian mechanics) with the constraint imposed that determinism is maintained, as the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation is indeterministic, because when particle trajectories cross paths a singularity is produced, thereby making it impossible (even in principle) to say what occurs afterwards. Quantum unpredictability is due to ignorance as to what the other interacting (i.e., interfering) particles in the multiverse are doing (or if one prefers, how the wave function evolves).So everything that will ever occur, to the end of time, was set in stone from the beginning of existence. A logically-equivalent way of stating the foregoing sentence is that everything in existence is determined by the end-state of the universe. That is to say, existence is radically teleological. Not so much as the placement of a single elementary particle happens by chance. Nothing in reality is actually an accident. Which also means that not one jot, not one tittle is redundant to existence: the smallest iota is crucial for the entirety of existence (a higher-level emergent expression of this fact in the Omega Point cosmology is that event horizons must be eliminated, which means that not so much as the smallest part of existence can be left behind, but that every part of existence--no matter how small--is crucial to make the whole thing work).Quite interestingly, however, simply because the known laws of physics are purely deterministic does not mean that free will does not exist. Free will does exist. Within the constraint of not being able to violate physical law (such as jumping to the moon, or flapping one's arms and flying to the moon), the future truly is wide open for each individual. The reason for this is because before a universe splits into parallel analogues (or again, if one prefers, before the wave function branches in its evolution), not even God Himself can say which version of the "you" you presently call yourself will end up in which universe, because indeed that question makes no logical sense in the first place. The other "you" in the branched-off parallel universe feels himself to be *the* "you" just as much as you do.Per the known laws of physics, all universes in the multiverse evolve into the Omega Point. But within the constraint of physical law, an infinitude of different histories take place, with all histories ending at Point Omega.
if i got this right
physics are deterministic,
gene mutations are part of physics
therefor gene mutations are deterministic.
physics are deterministic,
free will is not part of physics
therefor free will can be non- deterministic?
I'm not thinking of a definition of free will that could be deterministic.
i was thought that will was part of physics, rather than not being apart of physics, so any will would be tied into physics
mutations are not part of free will i would assume, or people could choose to grow gills or have children that grow gills, and growing gills is physical, and other animals do grow gills. perhaps genetic engineering could have people that grow gills by manipulation the genes?
that humans can know the genetics of a baby before the egg and sperm meet because it's deterministic, or do humans just not know because of ignorance rather than randomness? can humans know that a miscarry is going to happen because and then select for a nonmiscary instead?
#21
Posted 20 January 2014 - 09:08 PM
The Omega Point is omniscient, having an infinite amount of information and knowing all that is logically possible to be known; it is omnipotent, having an infinite amount of energy and power; and it is omnipresent, consisting of all that exists. These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.
Does the Omega Point know what it's going to do tomorrow? If so, could it do something else?
Can the Omega Point leave the room?
Yes; No; and No.
The Omega Point--the technical physics term for God the Father--is all action logically possible, and completed--and that to an infinite degree. As Stephen Hawking proved, the cosmological singularity is not is spacetime, and hence is not subject to time. It is eternal and unchanging. The Omega Point's perception of reality is as a timeless, unchanging, infinite whole. It is a state of perfect, infinite bliss.
So, not omnipotent?
#22
Posted 20 January 2014 - 10:35 PM
These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.
Oo! Quick! Can you name the logical fallacy?
A haecceity is an attribute that uniquely identifies a thing, i.e., a property which differentiates a thing from all other things that are not that thing. Hence, if a thing has even a single haecceity given by a word's definition, then by definition it is that thing referred to by the word.
Actually, the correct answer is "the bandwagon fallacy". Just because almost all of the world's leading religions agree on something, doesn't make it true.
"You hear that? That's the sound of reality crumbling in our wake."
#23
Posted 24 January 2014 - 09:47 PM
if the cause is the end point, is that fatalism or determinism? i'm a bit mixed on terms, but i thought determinism was about cause and effect, not effect and cause?
#24
Posted Today, 08:27 PM
I'm confused, if the whole universe will eventually reach an end singularity, how does that singularity have any effect on us today when the universe is, quite noticeably, not a singularity?
The problem is that I have proof that it isn't god but an all powerful being I like to call The Fart Monster. I have the only copy of the Fart Monster Bible if you want me to quote anything from it.
" And thus he spaketh with his anus, and he sayeth unto the darkness, Pffttthhhhhssddtttttt which translates to "let there be smell." " Fartgenesis 1:1
That has as much validity as your theory does.
I really wish someone would come up with a genuinely new argument for god instead of these reheated leftovers...
I mean it's just so boring, I came into this thread hoping to read something interesting. I feel let down
if i got this right
physics are deterministic,
gene mutations are part of physics
therefor gene mutations are deterministic.
physics are deterministic,
free will is not part of physics
therefor free will can be non- deterministic?
I'm not thinking of a definition of free will that could be deterministic.
i was thought that will was part of physics, rather than not being apart of physics, so any will would be tied into physics
mutations are not part of free will i would assume, or people could choose to grow gills or have children that grow gills, and growing gills is physical, and other animals do grow gills. perhaps genetic engineering could have people that grow gills by manipulation the genes?
that humans can know the genetics of a baby before the egg and sperm meet because it's deterministic, or do humans just not know because of ignorance rather than randomness? can humans know that a miscarry is going to happen because and then select for a nonmiscary instead?
No, free will is a physical process.
And yes, humanity will take over its own evolution to become immortal gods.
So, not omnipotent?
Actually, the correct answer is "the bandwagon fallacy". Just because almost all of the world's leading religions agree on something, doesn't make it true.
if the cause is the end point, is that fatalism or determinism? i'm a bit mixed on terms, but i thought determinism was about cause and effect, not effect and cause?
Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: transhumanism, superhumanism, technology, physics, quantum gravity, Theory of Everything, Artificial Intelligence, immortality, God, theology
Freedomain Radio Topics →
Science & Technology →
Amazon Prime Air = Quadrotor DeliveryStarted by Magenta , 02 Dec 2013 automation, futurology and 6 more... |
|
|
||
Freedomain Radio Topics →
Atheism →
Doctor of common sense says "Stop shoving your atheism down Everyone's throat??"Started by selfeducationradio , 10 Sep 2013 atheism, god, religion, church |
|
|
6 user(s) are reading this topic
2 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users
-
JamesRedford, Yeravos