Author Topic: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point  (Read 2730 times)

James Redford and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online James Redford

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Lux et libertas et veritas
    • View Profile
    • Jesus Is an Anarchist
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #15 on: Feb 28, 2010, 08:06:02 PM »
Mr Redford says: "Teilhard's and Prof. Tipler's omega point concepts are different ideas:"

I'm not disputing the physics, which - for all I know - may well be correct. I'm disputing the fantasy element .............

"Tipler have come under a lot of attack for his theories, not entirely undeserved. Applying theology to physics (or the reverse) have long been a taboo, and he boldly breaks it. Whether this is a good or bad thing is hard to tell; there is enormous potential for misunderstanding, confusion and pure pseudoscience, but at the same time it might force some fresh air into the stale dialogue between faith and science. As I see it, Tipler has made several quite audacious claims which probably don't hold water, but many of his ideas and lines of reasoning are probably sound, and might one day be used for other purposes than to prove the existence of the personal God Tipler seeks. ...........

........... The Eternal Life Postulate claims that life will exist forever. If one accept it, Tipler claims one have to accept the Omega Point since it provides the only possible way to bring this about (I would rather say it provides the only known or conjectured way to do this, there might be others). Since life in general seems to evolve towards increased changes of survival in any given environment, one could argue that evolution will favour this Postulate, even if it is not a ontological truth. However, we should always remember that evolution is blind, and many species or groups of organisms have become trapped in blind alleys (like the insects, whose size cannot increase due to their tracheatic system). It is possible that life (and intelligent thought) may become trapped in such a way as to make eternal life impossible. However, the postulate is just one of the reasons Tipler accepts Omega as inevitable."

http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Global/Omega/tipler_page.html

Here's a less kind review:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/tipler.html

......... and it gets worse .............

"How can the three persons of the Trinity be one God?

    The Cosmological Singularity consists of three Hypostases: the Final Singularity, the All-Presents Singularity, and the Initial Singularity. These can be distinguished by using Cauchy sequences of different sorts of person, so in the Cauchy completion, they become three distinct Persons. But still, the three Hypostases of the Singularity are just one Singularity. The Trinity, in other words, consists of three Persons but only one God. (pp. 269–270.) .............

(Spiney comment: In other words, the early Christians were experts at Complex Analysis ......... !)
     
............... How did Jesus walk on water?

    For example, walking on water could be accomplished by directing a neutrino beam created just below Jesus' feet downward. If we ourselves knew how to do this, we would have the perfect rocket! (p. 200) ..............

(Spiney comment: Dr Who only has a sonic screwdriver, and Tardis, but after all this is Jesus!)

.......... How can long-dead saints intercede in the lives of people who pray to them?

    According to the Universal Resurrection theory, everyone, in particular the long-dead saints, will be brought back into existence as computer emulations in the far future, near the Final Singularity, also called God the Father. … Future-to-past causation is usual with the Cosmological Singularity. A prayer made today can be transferred by the Singularity to a resurrected saint—the Virgin Mary, say—after the Universal Resurrection. The saint can then reflect on the prayer and, by means of the Son Singularity acting through the multiverse, reply. The reply, via future-to-past causation, is heard before it is made. It is heard billions of years before it is made. (p. 235)".

No Comment!

http://www.fourmilab.ch/fourmilog/archives/2007-06/000851.html


You're here engaging in the logical fallacy of circular argument, as you're taking for granted that Christianity is incorrect. Yet if Christianity is true, then your objection to the Omega Point cosmology being in conformance with traditional Christian descriptions of God's nature (such as God existing as a triune being) is in error.

Prof. Tipler didn't set out to physically prove the existence of God. Tipler had been an atheist since the age of 16, yet only circa 1998 did he again become a theist due to advancements in the Omega Point Theory which occured after the publication of his 1994 book The Physics of Immortality (and Tipler even mentions in said book [pg. 305] that he is still an atheist because he didn't at the time have confirmation for the Omega Point Theory).

Tipler's first paper on the Omega Point Theory was in 1986 (Frank J. Tipler, "Cosmological Limits on Computation," International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 25, No. 6 [June 1986], pp. 617-661). What motivated Tipler's investigation as to how long life could go on was not religion (indeed, Tipler didn't even set out to find God), but Prof. Freeman J. Dyson's paper "Time without end: Physics and biology in an open universe" (Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 51, Issue 3 [July 1979], pp. 447-460 http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Global/Omega/dyson.txt ).

Further, in a section entitled "Why I Am Not a Christian" in The Physics of Immortality (pg. 310), Tipler wrote, "However, I emphasize again that I do not think Jesus really rose from the dead. I think his body rotted in some grave." This book was written before Tipler realized what the resurrection mechanism is that Jesus could have used without violating any known laws of physics (and without existing on an emulated level of implementation--in that case the resurrection mechanism would be trivially easy to perform for the society running the emulation).

The only way to avoid the conclusion that the Omega Point exists is to reject the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics), and hence to reject empirical science: as these physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date. That is, there exists no rational reason for thinking that the Omega Point Theory is incorrect, and indeed, one must engage in extreme irrationality in order to argue against the Omega Point cosmology.

Additionally, we now have the quantum gravity Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics: of which inherently produces the Omega Point cosmology. So here we have an additional high degree of assurance that the Omega Point cosmology is correct.

Bear in mind that Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory has been published in a number of the world's leading peer-reviewed physics journals.[1] Even NASA itself has peer-reviewed his Omega Point Theory and found it correct according to the known laws of physics (see below). No refutation of it exists within the peer-reviewed scientific literature, or anywhere else for that matter.

Below are some of the peer-reviewed science and physics journals in which Prof. Tipler's Omega Point Theory has been published:

- Frank J. Tipler, "Cosmological Limits on Computation," International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 25, No. 6 (June 1986), pp. 617-661; doi:10.1007/BF00670475. (First paper on the Omega Point Theory.)

- Frank J. Tipler, "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions for Scientists," Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, Vol. 24, Issue 2 (June 1989), pp. 217-253; doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.1989.tb01112.x. http://theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler-omega-point-as-eschaton.pdf , http://www.gazup.com/FLQT0-tipler-omega-point-as-eschaton.pdf-download-mirrors Republished as Chapter 7: "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions to Scientists" in Beginning with the End: God, Science, and Wolfhart Pannenberg, edited by Carol Rausch Albright and Joel Haugen (Chicago, Ill.: Open Court Publishing Company, 1997), ISBN: 0812693256, pp. 156-194.

- Frank J. Tipler, "The ultimate fate of life in universes which undergo inflation," Physics Letters B, Vol. 286, Issues 1-2 (July 23, 1992), pp. 36-43; doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90155-W.

- Frank J. Tipler, "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe," NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop Proceedings, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, January 1999, pp. 111-119; an invited paper in the proceedings of a conference held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, August 12-14, 1998; doi:2060/19990023204. Document ID: 19990023204. Report Number: E-11429; NAS 1.55:208694; NASA/CP-1999-208694. http://theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler-ultrarelativistic-rockets.pdf See also: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?Ntk=DocumentID&Ntt=19990023204 , http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19990023204_1999021520.pdf

- Frank J. Tipler, "The Ultimate Future of the Universe, Black Hole Event Horizon Topologies, Holography, and the Value of the Cosmological Constant," arXiv:astro-ph/0104011, April 1, 2001. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0104011 Published in Relativistic Astrophysics: 20th Texas Symposium, Austin, TX, 10-15 December 2000, edited by J. Craig Wheeler and Hugo Martel (Melville, N.Y.: American Institute of Physics, 2001), ISBN: 0735400261, which is AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 586 (October 15, 2001), pp. 769-772; doi:10.1063/1.1419654.

- Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology," International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (April 2003), pp. 141-148; doi:10.1017/S1473550403001526. http://theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler-intelligent-life-in-cosmology.pdf Also at arXiv:0704.0058, March 31, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0058

- Frank J. Tipler, Jessica Graber, Matthew McGinley, Joshua Nichols-Barrer and Christopher Staecker, "Closed Universes With Black Holes But No Event Horizons As a Solution to the Black Hole Information Problem," arXiv:gr-qc/0003082, March 20, 2000. http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0003082 Published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 379, Issue 2 (August 2007), pp. 629-640; doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11895.x.

- F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964; doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04. http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything," arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, in which the above August 2007 paper was published, is one of the world's leading peer-reviewed astrophysics journals.

Prof. Tipler's paper "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe" was an invited paper for a conference held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, so NASA itself has peer-reviewed Tipler's Omega Point Theory (peer-review is a standard process for published proceedings papers; and again, Tipler's said paper was an *invited* paper by NASA, as opposed to what are called "poster papers").

Zygon is the world's leading peer-reviewed academic journal on science and religion.

Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports in Progress in Physics paper--which presents the Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE)--was selected as one of 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles published in Reports on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68]. Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005," Reports on Progress in Physics. http://www.iop.org/EJ/journal/-page=extra.highlights/0034-4885 )

Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists. Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor (according to Journal Citation Reports) than Physical Review Letters, which is the most prestigious American physics journal (one, incidently, which Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once). A journal's impact factor reflects the importance the science community places in that journal in the sense of actually citing its papers in their own papers. (And just to point out, Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper could not have been published in Physical Review Letters since said paper is nearly book-length, and hence not a "letter" as defined by the latter journal.)

For much more on these matters, particularly see Prof. Tipler's above 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper in addition to the following resource:

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist http://theophysics.ifastnet.com , http://theophysics.110mb.com

-----

Note:

1. While there is a lot that gets published in physics journals that is anti-reality and non-physical (such as string theory, which violates the known laws of physics and has no experimental support whatsoever), the reason such things are allowed to pass the peer-review process is because the paradigm of assumptions which such papers are speaking to has been made known, and within their operating paradigm none of the referees could find anything wrong with said papers. That is, the paradigm itself may have nothing to do with reality, but the peer-reviewers could find nothing wrong with such papers within the operating assumptions of that paradigm. Whereas, e.g., the operating paradigm of Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper is the known laws of physics, i.e., our actual physical reality which has been repeatedly confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. So the professional physicists charged with refereeing this paper could find nothing wrong with it within its operating paradigm, i.e., the known laws of physics.
Modify message
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2011-12-4 (orig. pub. 2001-12-19) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity TOE) http://theophysics.host56.com

Offline Moloch

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2601
  • sic semper molemannis
    • View Profile
    • Friend of Reason Blog
    • Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #16 on: Feb 28, 2010, 09:13:40 PM »
Quote
You're here engaging in the logical fallacy of circular argument, as you're taking for granted that Christianity is incorrect.
Ummm no.

Spiney is taking the rational position that until the miracles of christian mythology are proven scientifically to have taken place (through testable falsifiable means) then there is no reason what so ever to believe that they did. 

note: complex explanations of how they could have been possible is not evidence that they took place

And by the way, there is no need to repeatedly paste the same information about Prof. Tipler in each of your posts. You have already presented his credentials and references in earlier posts, please spare us the unnessacary repitition and sophistry if we are to continue this discussion.
« Last Edit: Feb 28, 2010, 09:18:37 PM by Cpolsonb »

Offline spiney

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8831
    • View Profile
    • Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #17 on: Mar 01, 2010, 07:49:05 AM »
1 Has Tipler - or has he not - written a book called "The Physics of Christianity", and if so then in what sense is he an atheist ?

2. We don't yet have a TOE.

3. As an agnostic, I think Jesus probably wasn't part of God, but anyway, I'm damn sure he wasn't a hyper-quantum-computer at the-end-of-the-universe, using exotic subatomic particles to perform miracles ......... notice I'm not even mentioning the ethics of why "the eventual fully conscious quantum computer universe" would want to tell us such crazy lies!

Online James Redford

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Lux et libertas et veritas
    • View Profile
    • Jesus Is an Anarchist
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #18 on: Mar 03, 2010, 04:06:58 PM »
Quote
You're here engaging in the logical fallacy of circular argument, as you're taking for granted that Christianity is incorrect.
Ummm no.

Spiney is taking the rational position that until the miracles of christian mythology are proven scientifically to have taken place (through testable falsifiable means) then there is no reason what so ever to believe that they did. 

note: complex explanations of how they could have been possible is not evidence that they took place

And by the way, there is no need to repeatedly paste the same information about Prof. Tipler in each of your posts. You have already presented his credentials and references in earlier posts, please spare us the unnessacary repitition and sophistry if we are to continue this discussion.

The known laws of physics (specifically, the Standard Model of particle physics), allows the miracles of Jesus Christ to have taken place. So it's perfectly physically possible, using only known physical laws that have been repeatedly confirmed.

Of course, the objection could be that even if it's physically possible, that doesn't thereby prove that such events took place via such means. Yet it does prove (if the Standard Model is correct) that such miraculous events are perfectly in conformance with physics. And hence, there's no reason for objecting to Christian theology based upon physical science--indeed, quite the opposite, given that the known laws of physics requires the Omega Point, of which cosmology produces a triune structure of physical infinity, with the completion of that structure consisting of infinite computational power, infinite energy, and being the totality of existence: i.e., omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence.
Modify message
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2011-12-4 (orig. pub. 2001-12-19) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity TOE) http://theophysics.host56.com

Online James Redford

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Lux et libertas et veritas
    • View Profile
    • Jesus Is an Anarchist
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #19 on: Mar 03, 2010, 04:42:12 PM »
1 Has Tipler - or has he not - written a book called "The Physics of Christianity", and if so then in what sense is he an atheist ?

Of course he wrote a book with that title, as I have cited said book within this thread. Nor is Prof. Frank J. Tipler currently an atheist, as I have repeatedly pointed out here. Tipler was an atheist at the time of the publication of his book The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead (New York: Doubleday, 1994). I also have pointed that out here repeatedly. Yet he said therein that the reason he was still an atheist is because he didn't at the time have confirmation for the Omega Point Theory. The Omega Point Theory has advanced since that time, such that it's been shown that the only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to violate the known laws of physics. Hence, Tipler now considers himself a theist.

Please pay attention, as this has already been elaborated on in my prior posts.

Quote
2. We don't yet have a TOE.

We do if one conforms with the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics), as the only way to avoid the Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE)--which inherently produces the Omega Point cosmology--is to violate said known laws of physics, of which physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date. That is, there exists no rational reason for thinking that the Omega Point quantum gravity TOE is incorrect, and indeed, one must engage in extreme irrationality in order to argue against it (since to argue against it one would have to violate one or more of the known laws of physics).

Quote
3. As an agnostic, I think Jesus probably wasn't part of God, but anyway, I'm damn sure he wasn't a hyper-quantum-computer at the-end-of-the-universe, using exotic subatomic particles to perform miracles ......... notice I'm not even mentioning the ethics of why "the eventual fully conscious quantum computer universe" would want to tell us such crazy lies!

The miracles of Jesus Christ are made possible via the existence of the Omega Point (since in physics it's just as accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz., the principle of least action; and unitarity).
Modify message
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2011-12-4 (orig. pub. 2001-12-19) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity TOE) http://theophysics.host56.com

Offline Lukas

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3185
    • View Profile
    • Email
    • Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #20 on: Mar 03, 2010, 04:54:26 PM »
The known laws of physics (specifically, the Standard Model of particle physics), allows the miracles of Jesus Christ to have taken place. So it's perfectly physically possible, using only known physical laws that have been repeatedly confirmed.

Given that QM is an inherently probabilistic theory, nearly everything is possible, at least in a mathematical sense. It would be possible for all the atoms that currently make up yourself to spontaneously reassemble themselves into an army of badgers. The only problem with this is that the probability is so close to zero that it is practically impossible.

Seriously, trying to argue the reality of alleged miracles in some holy books with the standard model is just batshit crazy. I don't care what great work Tipler has done in the past, but he apparently completely lost it at some point.

Online James Redford

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Lux et libertas et veritas
    • View Profile
    • Jesus Is an Anarchist
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #21 on: Mar 03, 2010, 05:18:26 PM »
The known laws of physics (specifically, the Standard Model of particle physics), allows the miracles of Jesus Christ to have taken place. So it's perfectly physically possible, using only known physical laws that have been repeatedly confirmed.

Given that QM is an inherently probabilistic theory, nearly everything is possible, at least in a mathematical sense. It would be possible for all the atoms that currently make up yourself to spontaneously reassemble themselves into an army of badgers. The only problem with this is that the probability is so close to zero that it is practically impossible.

Seriously, trying to argue the reality of alleged miracles in some holy books with the standard model is just batshit crazy. I don't care what great work Tipler has done in the past, but he apparently completely lost it at some point.

This is where the Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE)--which inherently produces the Omega Point cosmology--comes into play. Only those possibilities with an Omega Point end-point will actually exist.

So the Omega Point TOE actually introduces rationality into an existence that would otherwise be just a random existence of probabilities--in which case, anything could happen, and indeed, everything will happen, even if the probability is low. Instead, with the Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE, the only probabilities that are possible are those which lead to the Omega Point.

If the coming of Jesus Christ was necessary in order to lead to the Omega Point, then the probability of said event occuring is exactly 1: certain to happen.
Modify message
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2011-12-4 (orig. pub. 2001-12-19) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity TOE) http://theophysics.host56.com

Offline spiney

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8831
    • View Profile
    • Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #22 on: Mar 04, 2010, 05:38:04 AM »
Quote
You're here engaging in the logical fallacy of circular argument, as you're taking for granted that Christianity is incorrect.
Ummm no.

Spiney is taking the rational position that until the miracles of christian mythology are proven scientifically to have taken place (through testable falsifiable means) then there is no reason what so ever to believe that they did. 

note: complex explanations of how they could have been possible is not evidence that they took place

And by the way, there is no need to repeatedly paste the same information about Prof. Tipler in each of your posts. You have already presented his credentials and references in earlier posts, please spare us the unnessacary repitition and sophistry if we are to continue this discussion.

The known laws of physics (specifically, the Standard Model of particle physics), allows the miracles of Jesus Christ to have taken place. So it's perfectly physically possible, using only known physical laws that have been repeatedly confirmed.

Of course, the objection could be that even if it's physically possible, that doesn't thereby prove that such events took place via such means. Yet it does prove (if the Standard Model is correct) that such miraculous events are perfectly in conformance with physics. And hence, there's no reason for objecting to Christian theology based upon physical science--indeed, quite the opposite, given that the known laws of physics requires the Omega Point, of which cosmology produces a triune structure of physical infinity, with the completion of that structure consisting of infinite computational power, infinite energy, and being the totality of existence: i.e., omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence.

In fact, ANY THEORY ABOUT ANYTHING "allows" miracles to talke place. Since they are - by definition - miracles, and hence outside whatever ususal laws apply.

The known laws of physics DO NOT "require" The Omega Point.

"If the coming of Jesus Christ was necessary in order to lead to the Omega Point, then the probability of said event occuring is exactly 1: certain to happen."

Logical fallacy (and complete drivel!).
« Last Edit: Mar 04, 2010, 05:39:39 AM by spiney »

Online James Redford

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Lux et libertas et veritas
    • View Profile
    • Jesus Is an Anarchist
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2012, 05:53:04 PM »
For more on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence according to the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), see 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, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp
Modify message
« Last Edit: Today at 02:11:45 PM by James Redford »
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2011-12-4 (orig. pub. 2001-12-19) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity TOE) http://theophysics.host56.com

Offline Lukas

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3185
    • View Profile
    • Email
    • Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2012, 06:26:02 PM »
For more on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence according to the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), see my following article:

James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Apr. 9, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://theophysics.ifastnet.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://webcitation.org/66pCpB7Zs


There are lots of non-sequiturs in Tipler's and your arguments. Let's just start off with a simple one: Why exactly does the universe have to collapse to a point? How do you (and Tipler) know that it can't keep expanding forever? In that case, unless I am mistaken, Tipler's argument with the Bekenstein bound falls apart completely.

Online James Redford

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Lux et libertas et veritas
    • View Profile
    • Jesus Is an Anarchist
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #25 on: May 15, 2012, 07:32:40 PM »
For more on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence according to the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), see my following article:

James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Apr. 9, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://theophysics.ifastnet.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://webcitation.org/66pCpB7Zs


There are lots of non-sequiturs in Tipler's and your arguments. Let's just start off with a simple one: Why exactly does the universe have to collapse to a point? How do you (and Tipler) know that it can't keep expanding forever? In that case, unless I am mistaken, Tipler's argument with the Bekenstein bound falls apart completely.


If the universe kept expanding forever, then that would violate unitarity. For more on this, see Sec. 3.1: "The Omega Point" and App. A.2: "The Bekenstein Bound and the Ultimate Future of the Universe" 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, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp
Modify message
« Last Edit: Today at 02:16:29 PM by James Redford »
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2011-12-4 (orig. pub. 2001-12-19) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity TOE) http://theophysics.host56.com

Online Beleth

  • Administrator Emeritus
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7417
    • Twitter
    • View Profile
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #26 on: May 15, 2012, 11:09:43 PM »
Re the paper linked to in Reply 25: I haven't read it all yet, but here are some of my initial questions.

Page 4: "The known laws of physics require there be intelligent civilizations in existence at the appropriate time in order to force the collapse of the universe and then manipulate its collapse so that the computational capacity of the universe can diverge to infinity."
This sounds like a disproof of free will to me. If the laws of physics require life to not only exist, but to perform certain tasks at certain times, then there cannot be a case where those tasks don't happen, and therefore there's no choice or free will possible.

Section 7.1 (page 35): The paper states that the haecceities of the Omega Point are omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. It then goes on to say that "These three properties are the traditional definitions of God held by almost all of the world’s leading religions."
Yet there are religions that don't have a singular God with these haecceities (the polytheistic religions of ancient Greece and Rome, for instance), and even the Abrahamic religions give Yahweh/God/Allah additional haecceities than just these. Exodus 34:14 describes Yahweh as being "jealous" of "other gods". For the Omega Point to be identical with Yahweh, it too must be jealous. What is it jealous of? Are there other Omega Points that the intelligent civilizations in this universe can experience and worship?

Section 7.3 (page 43): The paper states that the trinity of God is reflected in the three-in-one nature of the singularities involved: the Initial Singularity (the Big Bang, I assume), the Final Singularity (the Omega Point), and a term I can only find in Omega Point-related papers: the All-Presents Singularity (everything in between). I assume that the Father is synonymous with the Initial Singularity. Which one is synonymous with the Son? By that I mean, which one redeems us humans on this planet? And why do we need redeeming, since, as I showed above, there's no free will in this model?

Back to page 4: "[A]s the universe comes to an end at this singularity in a particular form of the Big Crunch, the computational capacity of the universe (in terms of both its processor speed and memory storage) increases unlimitedly [sic] with a hyperbolic growth rate as the radius of the universe collapses to zero, allowing an infinite number of bits to be processed and stored before the end of spacetime." So the computational power only gets powerful enough to become God at the end of the universe? Where, then, is God at the beginning and the middle? If it's only God at the end and we're in a simulation, then isn't it a category error to confuse the simulated universe created by the Omega Point with the actual universe which created the Omega Point?

More page 4: "Via this supertask, a simulation run on this cosmological computer can thereby continue forever in its own terms (i.e., in computer clock time, or experiential time), even though the universe lasts only a finite amount of proper time."
Don't supertasks violate the known laws of physics? No computation can happen in faster than Planck time. Eventually (i.e. in finite time) the infinite series of the supertask will get to that limit and stop being able to get faster.

I eagerly await your replies.
I expect to pass through this world but once;
any good thing therefore that I can do, or any kindness that I can show to any fellow creature, let me do it now;
let me not defer or neglect it, for I shall not pass this way again.
-- Stephan Grellet

Offline Lukas

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3185
    • View Profile
    • Email
    • Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #27 on: May 16, 2012, 01:00:25 AM »
For more on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence according to the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), see my following article:

James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Apr. 9, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://theophysics.ifastnet.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://webcitation.org/66pCpB7Zs


There are lots of non-sequiturs in Tipler's and your arguments. Let's just start off with a simple one: Why exactly does the universe have to collapse to a point? How do you (and Tipler) know that it can't keep expanding forever? In that case, unless I am mistaken, Tipler's argument with the Bekenstein bound falls apart completely.


If the universe kept expanding forever, then that would violate unitarity. For more on this, see Sec. 3.1: "The Omega Point" and App. A.2: "The Bekenstein Bound and the Ultimate Future of the Universe" of my following article: [...]


I see, so it the apparent black hole information paradox? However, physics has moved on and most physicists nowadays seem to think that the holographic principle solves this problem, including Hawking himself.

Also, much of your and Tipler's argument seem to rely on a supposed consistent "Theory of Everything" ("Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity"). I don't think any mainstream physicist (including Feynman, DeWitt, and Weinberg) would agree or would have agreed that this is really a "theory of everything".

Here is how one mainstream physicist, Sean Carroll from CalTech, views Tipler: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/01/05/the-varieties-of-crackpot-experience/

Online hfleming

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
    • View Profile
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #28 on: May 16, 2012, 01:06:44 AM »
As far as anyone knows, the Omega Point Theory is correct. To date no refutation of it has appeared in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, or anywhere else for that matter.


No refutation of the Omega Point Theory appears in the scientific literature because the Omega Point Theory itself does not appear (to any significant degree) in the scientific literature. There are an extraordinary number of crank theories not refuted in the scientific literature. This means nothing.

For much more on the Omega Point Theory, see Prof. Tipler's below paper, which among other things demonstrates that the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity identified as being God): ...


This is a paper on canonical quantized gravity, not the Omega Point Theory. As you say, this article is published in a reputable physics journal. On the other hand, Tipler's crank theories are not. It appears that you are trying to make something seem to be what it is not.

The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to resort to physical theories which have no experimental support and which violate the known laws of physics, such as with Prof. Stephen Hawking's paper on the black hole information issue which is dependent on the conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). See S. W. Hawking, "Information loss in black holes," Physical Review D, Vol. 72, No. 8, 084013 (October 2005); also at arXiv:hep-th/0507171, July 18, 2005. http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0507171 ...


Either you don't understand the science or you are being dishonest. All of canonical quantized gravity falls under the category of having no experimental support. You are treating your pet theory in a completely different manner than other competing theories.

Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its expansion obviates the universe collapsing (and therefore obviates the Omega Point). But as Profs. Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner point out in "Geometry and Destiny" (General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 [October 1999], pp. 1453-1459; also at arXiv:astro-ph/9904020, April 1, 1999 http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9904020 ), there is no set of cosmological observations which can tell us whether the universe will expand forever or eventually collapse..


Have you even read this paper... or followed any of the subsequent research, like the CMB? Your characterization is misleading and wrong. Recollapse is contingent on the cosmological constant not coming up positive. How positive it needs to be has been lessening with increased observations and all measurements of the cosmological constant so far have been positive. The WMAP is one of the greatest observations (and analysis) in science and it is obliterating your pet theory. The LHC could as well.

Your subsequent posts are much worse, reducing to blathering nonsense. I'm not going to bother with any more.

Online James Redford

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Lux et libertas et veritas
    • View Profile
    • Jesus Is an Anarchist
    • Personal Message (Online)
Re: Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
« Reply #29 on: Today at 05:16:36 PM »
Re the paper linked to in Reply 25: I haven't read it all yet, but here are some of my initial questions.

Page 4: "The known laws of physics require there be intelligent civilizations in existence at the appropriate time in order to force the collapse of the universe and then manipulate its collapse so that the computational capacity of the universe can diverge to infinity."

This sounds like a disproof of free will to me. If the laws of physics require life to not only exist, but to perform certain tasks at certain times, then there cannot be a case where those tasks don't happen, and therefore there's no choice or free will possible.


Free will is physically allowed because in the multiverse all choices which do not violate physical law do in fact happen. Additionally, at the quantum level, within any single universe the outcome of quantum states is undetermined.

For further information on how free will is physically allowed, see Ch. 7 of Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1994).

Quote
Section 7.1 (page 35): The paper states that the haecceities of the Omega Point are omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. It then goes on to say that "These three properties are the traditional definitions of God held by almost all of the world’s leading religions."
Yet there are religions that don't have a singular God with these haecceities (the polytheistic religions of ancient Greece and Rome, for instance), and even the Abrahamic religions give Yahweh/God/Allah additional haecceities than just these. Exodus 34:14 describes Yahweh as being "jealous" of "other gods". For the Omega Point to be identical with Yahweh, it too must be jealous. What is it jealous of? Are there other Omega Points that the intelligent civilizations in this universe can experience and worship?


Jealousy is not a unique property (i.e., haecceity) claimed for God, as it's a property that applies to ordinary humans. Regarding the Old Testament, see Sec. 7.4.2: "God's Relation to the Old Testament" 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, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp

Quote
Section 7.3 (page 43): The paper states that the trinity of God is reflected in the three-in-one nature of the singularities involved: the Initial Singularity (the Big Bang, I assume), the Final Singularity (the Omega Point), and a term I can only find in Omega Point-related papers: the All-Presents Singularity (everything in between). I assume that the Father is synonymous with the Initial Singularity. Which one is synonymous with the Son? By that I mean, which one redeems us humans on this planet? And why do we need redeeming, since, as I showed above, there's no free will in this model?


Prof. Frank J. Tipler identifies the Final Singularity (i.e., the Omega Point), the All-Presents Singularity (which exists at all times at the edge of the multiverse), and the Initial Singularity (i.e., the beginning of the Big Bang) with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, respectively (successively, the First, Second and Third Persons of the Trinity).

For the physics of the Trinity, see Sec. 6: "The quantized FRW universe", Subsec. 6.3: "Singularity structure of the multiverse", pp. 922–924, which is pp. 41-43 of the arXiv version, of Prof. Tipler's below paper:

F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers", Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964, doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04, bibcode: 2005RPPh...68..897T. http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything", arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276

See pp. 82, 97 and 100 of the following book for more on the physics of the Trinity; and pp. 226–235 for how Jesus the Man can be united with the All-Presents Singularity: Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Christianity (New York, NY: Doubleday, 2007).

Quote
Back to page 4: "[A]s the universe comes to an end at this singularity in a particular form of the Big Crunch, the computational capacity of the universe (in terms of both its processor speed and memory storage) increases unlimitedly [sic] with a hyperbolic growth rate as the radius of the universe collapses to zero, allowing an infinite number of bits to be processed and stored before the end of spacetime." So the computational power only gets powerful enough to become God at the end of the universe? Where, then, is God at the beginning and the middle? If it's only God at the end and we're in a simulation, then isn't it a category error to confuse the simulated universe created by the Omega Point with the actual universe which created the Omega Point?


See Sec.: "Worlds within Worlds", pp. 39 ff. of my aforecited "Physics of God" article.

Quote
More page 4: "Via this supertask, a simulation run on this cosmological computer can thereby continue forever in its own terms (i.e., in computer clock time, or experiential time), even though the universe lasts only a finite amount of proper time."
Don't supertasks violate the known laws of physics? No computation can happen in faster than Planck time. Eventually (i.e. in finite time) the infinite series of the supertask will get to that limit and stop being able to get faster.


Physics recognizes that physical processes take place which are smaller than the Planck scales. For example, the Big Bang initial singularity was of zero radius, which is infinitely smaller than the Planck length. And the Planck mass is approximately 21.7651 µg, whereas obviously there are many physically real things which are much less massive than this.

Quote
I eagerly await your replies.
Modify message
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), 2011-12-4 (orig. pub. 2001-12-19) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity TOE) http://theophysics.host56.com

 
personate-rain
000webhost logo