9/11 Paper Accepted to Major Conference

[Jaytje46]

So it seems that they need cash for a German mathematician to show his paper to the engineering world in New York.

http://action.ae911truth.org/o/50694...st_KEY=1402270

Quote:

German mathematician Ansgar Schneider was pleased to learn last month that his new paper, “The Structural Dynamics of the World Trade Center Catastrophe” — which refutes the official theory of the Twin Towers’ total destruction — was accepted to one of the most prestigious engineering conferences in the world: the annual congress of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE), being held in New York City.

This hugely positive development has created a major problem for Ansgar — a “good problem,” that is. If he doesn’t attend this conference in person, he cannot present his findings and won’t be included in the congress journal. The conference is little more than a month away, and the cost of attending is simply too much for this young academic.

The article has several links going to the donation page, but not a single link to the site of the Conference. I wonder why... Also no link to the paper.

I did find some other papers which he wrote.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06207
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06183

He is not one of the speakers.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=9140

He is also not an engineer, else AE9/11 would have called him that, so he also wont be speaking at the Young engineers program.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=7915

So not sure when they are going to let him speak tbh..

https://venuewest-my.sharepoint.com/...%2010,2019.pdf

And how can a paper be accepted to a congress btw? Or am I missing something?

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

And how can a paper be accepted to a congress btw? Or am I missing something?

Most of the papers presented at conferences are submitted by the attendees. I'm not sure what criteria they used for accepting papers. From their website, they also have a "poster session", and if history is any guide, I'd bet good money that he's actually just presenting a poster. These have very little vetting, in my experience. They're like training wheels for science publications, they give new scientists low-cost and low-risk places to present some simple work.

I don't imagine this will go as well for them as they think, though. From the conference invitation pdf, there's a Pre-Congress Workshop on Structural Failures – "Investigations, Causes, Lessons Learned and Used to Mitigate Failures".

So there will be actual experts in the house to talk to this fellow. I suspect it will be like a live-action post from JayUtah or Nick Terry.

[Captain_Swoop]

Maybe he is the cabaret?

[bknight]

Just another beggar with his paw out for the unsuspecting.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

So it seems that they need cash for a German mathematician to show his paper to the engineering world in New York.

http://action.ae911truth.org/o/50694...st_KEY=1402270

I'll see if I can google anything on him from German sites.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

The article has several links going to the donation page, but not a single link to the site of the Conference. I wonder why...

Uhm - now it has one, to http://www.iabse2019.com/

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

Also no link to the paper.

I think the point of a conference presentation is to have a paper first presented, then published with the conference procedings

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

I did find some other papers which he wrote.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06207
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06183

Taking a brief look at the first of the two, I find two "problems" already:
1. He apparently sets out to debunk Bazant & Verdure (2007) - the "crush-down-then-crush-up" paper. Well, It has already been debunked - GIGO-style: The model that B&V look at does not actually describe the observed collapse mechanisms.^{* edited to add footnote}
2. Ansgar Schneider believes that "the underlying Newtonian equation of motions" play a role in the model - that would be a foolish approach if it really were so.

I'll read it completely later, also the other ... uhm ... write-up.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

He is not one of the speakers.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=9140

He is not one of the keynote speakers - that's the page you link to. Keynote speakers are individuals with estreemed prestige, sometimes outside the field (e.g. journalsists, politicians, ...), invited by the Congress organizers to set the tone, invite vision, broaden the scope. These are separate from any technical and academic presentation.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

He is also not an engineer, else AE9/11 would have called him that, so he also wont be speaking at the Young engineers program.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=7915

Could be true.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

So not sure when they are going to let him speak tbh..

Try the Program? http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=9151

"The IABSE NY team is working hard to provide you with an exciting program!

Take a look at our draft program here and stay tuned for more updates."

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

https://venuewest-my.sharepoint.com/...%2010,2019.pdf

Ah - you found it
Details are yet to be filled in.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

And how can a paper be accepted to a congress btw? Or am I missing something?

Horatius already explained



<sup>* footnote added on edit:
Here is what's wrong with Bazant & Verdure (2007), and why subsequently Schneider's debunking of it is irrelevant, even if valid: B&V consider that columns buckle all across the buildings, top-down. Page 4-5 of Schneider's first "paper":

"In [Bazant and Zhou, 2002] and [Bazant et al. 2008] a maximal possible value of W = 500 MJ is mentioned, which is based on computations for a three-hinge buckling scenario. Yet meanwhile Korol and Sivakumaran have made empirical studies of buckling columns, which indicate that this value should be about 3 to 4 times bigger [Korol and Sivakumaran, 2014]."

However, it is pretty obvious from looking at the debris on the ground and also the extant videos of the collapses that hardly any columns developed any, let alone 3, buckling hinges. This is not what happened, so arguing the correct numerical magnitude of energy dissipation is purely academic and irrelevant to the actual, historic collapses.</sup>

[Oystein]

AE911T claims that this is "one of the most prestigious engineering conferences in the world".

AE are always quick with unqualified superlatives. Is this claim true?

The IABSE was founded in 1929 in Switzerland, and still has its international headquarters at the Swiss Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zürich, Switzerland. It has 3900 members world-wide, ca. 500 of which in Switzerland. The English Wikipedia is pretty short, with only 4 paragraphs, for a body or event labeled "one of the most prestigious in the world". The German Wiki has a bit more meat (that's where I got the 3900 figure from) - but there doesn't even exist a French or Spanish, let alone Russian, Japanese or Chinese Wiki version, only EN, DE, IT and Tamil. How prestigeous can something be "in the world" that doesn't even have a Wiki article in one of the major native languages of the counbtry where it is centered?


Soooo ... any engineers in the room who have heard of the IABSE before?

[Oystein]

By the way, from the IABSE2019 homepage:

Originally Posted by IABSE

Key Dates

June 1, 2018	Deadline for Congress contributions
June 15, 2018	Call for abstracts
November 1, 2018	Deadline for abstract submissions
November 20, 2018	NEW deadline for abstract submissions
February 1, 2019	Notify authors of abstract acceptance
May 1, 2019	Submittal deadline for full papers
June 24, 2019	Notification of acceptance of full papers and announcement of presentation types
July 15, 2019	Registration deadline for all presenting authors
July 15, 2019	Deadline for early-bird registration
September 2–3, 2019	IABSE Annual Meetings
September 4–6, 2019	Congress

So the "Registration deadline for all presenting authors" is already 10 days past - has Schneider registered? The AE aticle sounds as if not...

[beachnut]

Quote:

German Author Whose Paper Refutes Official Theory of Twin Towers’ Destruction Needs Your Help

There is no official theory, there is reality. 19 terrorists took four planes, caused massive fires and damage to the WTC, Pentagon, and a field in PA. The impact and resulting fires caused the collapse of the WTC towers: not a theory, it is called reality.

Idiots begging for money to spread lies.

[timhau]

Originally Posted by Oystein

By the way, from the IABSE2019 homepage:
[/table]

So the "Registration deadline for all presenting authors" is already 10 days past - has Schneider registered? The AE aticle sounds as if not...

I note an abstract deadline extension there. That is usually a symptom of them not receiving enough submissions, which doesn't sound like the kind of problem that "one of the most prestigious conferences in the world" would have.

[pgimeno]

Originally Posted by Oystein

So the "Registration deadline for all presenting authors" is already 10 days past - has Schneider registered? The AE aticle sounds as if not...

My take is that he has.

On one hand, there's this:

Quote:

Cancellation Policy:

* Cancellation until August 1st, 2019: full refund less a $ 100 administrative fee.

* No cancellation possible after August 1st, 2019.

http://www.iabse2019.com/showcontent.aspx?MenuID=7891

On the other hand, I'm sure that AE911T has more than enough money to cover the expenses, from membership fees if nothing else. They are just trying to monetize on this. I don't recall AE911T ever saying "The goal has been reached, you can stop sending money".

And yeah, the bigger they make it sound, the more motivated will the donors be, no matter if it's a lie.

[Jaytje46]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Uhm - now it has one, to http://www.iabse2019.com/

I don't see the link in the article.

[Oystein]

Scanning the two former papers by Schneider, they reek of a mathematician using his tools with competence, albeit on a problem he doesn't have sufficient understanding of. Being good at math doesn't automatically mean you are good at physics, and even less that you are good at forensic engineering.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Jaytje46

I don't see the link in the article.

You linked the newsletter - link is not in there. It is however in the website article, which you find on the ae911truth.org homepage:

https://www.ae911truth.org/news/538-...eeds-your-help

[James Redford]

This is great news.

For irrefragable physicochemical proof that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job by deep-state elements of the US government--i.e., via the use of large quantities of thermite in the case of the collapse of the three destroyed World Trade Center towers--see pp. 75-84 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, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

My foregoing article concerns physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics). Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals. However, it also analyzes the societal implications of said, particularly the implications of the exponential advancement of technology and hence also the coming radical life-extension technologies (i.e., transhumanism) in light of a world dominated by a callous oligarchy.

[bknight]

Originally Posted by James Redford

This is great news.

For irrefragable physicochemical proof that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job by deep-state elements of the US government--i.e., via the use of large quantities of thermite in the case of the collapse of the three destroyed World Trade Center towers--see pp. 75-84 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, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

My foregoing article concerns physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics). Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals. However, it also analyzes the societal implications of said, particularly the implications of the exponential advancement of technology and hence also the coming radical life-extension technologies (i.e., transhumanism) in light of a world dominated by a callous oligarchy.

How does mathematics prove that there is a GOD? How does mathematics prove that the government used thermite? When was it place in occupied buildings so that people did not notice? Point out on structures that had been cut with thermite images that confirm they were cut with thermite. Link to outside sources, not your report, please. There must be independent sources to corroborate your report.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by James Redford

...(viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, ...) ...

See my signature.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by James Redford

This is great news.

For irrefragable physicochemical proof that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job by deep-state elements of the US government--i.e., via the use of large quantities of thermite in the case of the collapse of the three destroyed World Trade Center towers--see pp. 75-84 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, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP . ...

lol, what a pile of steaming crap, and woo, like, "The Mark of the Beast" -

"The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything" has lies about thermite used on 9/11. The rest of the paper is offtopic at best.

Why do you spread lies about 9/11?

[James Redford]

Originally Posted by bknight

How does mathematics prove that there is a GOD? How does mathematics prove that the government used thermite? When was it place in occupied buildings so that people did not notice? Point out on structures that had been cut with thermite images that confirm they were cut with thermite. Link to outside sources, not your report, please. There must be independent sources to corroborate your report.

You're in great luck, Bknight. As it just so happens, a free article (actually, a book) has been written on these very topics which uses the Scholarly Method extensively, with 490 entries in the Bibliography and 330 footnotes. For the answer to your first question, see Sec. 3: "Physics of the Omega Point Cosmology", pp. 12 ff. and Sec. 5: "The Big Bang", pp. 28 ff. of my below article. For the answers to your second and third questions, see pp. 75-84 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, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .

And since you asked for direct links posted within this thread:

Physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence, has been peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals as a mathematical theorem per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics).[1] Even NASA itself has peer-reviewed his Omega Point Theorem and found it correct according to the known physical laws (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 papers in physics and science journals and proceedings wherein Prof. Tipler has published his Omega Point cosmology.

* 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, bibcode: 1986IJTP...25..617T, https://webcitation.org/64KHgOccs . First paper on the Omega Point cosmology.

* Frank J. Tipler, "The Sensorium of God: Newton and Absolute Space", bibcode: 1988nnds.conf..215T, in G[eorge]. V. Coyne, M[ichal]. Heller and J[ozef]. Zycinski (Eds.), "Message" by Franciszek Macharski, Newton and the New Direction in Science: Proceedings of the Cracow Conference, 25 to 28 May 1987 (Vatican City: Specola Vaticana, 1988), pp. 215-228, LCCN 88162460, bibcode: 1988nnds.conf.....C, https://webcitation.org/69Vb0JF1W .

* Frank J. Tipler, "The Omega Point Theory: A Model of an Evolving God", in Robert J. Russell, William R. Stoeger and George V. Coyne (Eds.), message by John Paul II, Physics, Philosophy, and Theology: A Common Quest for Understanding (Vatican City: Vatican Observatory, 2nd ed., 2005; orig. pub. 1988), pp. 313-331, ISBN 0268015775, LCCN 89203331, bibcode: 1988pptc.book.....R, https://webcitation.org/69VaKG2nd .

* Frank J. Tipler, "The Anthropic Principle: A Primer for Philosophers", in Arthur Fine and Jarrett Leplin (Eds.), PSA 1988: Proceedings of the 1988 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers (East Lansing, Mich.: Philosophy of Science Association, 1989), pp. 27-48, ISBN 091758628X, https://webcitation.org/69VarCM3I .

* Frank J. Tipler, "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions for Scientists", Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, Vol. 24, No. 2 (June 1989), pp. 217-253, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.1989.tb01112.x. Republished as Chapter 7: "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions to Scientists" in Carol Rausch Albright and Joel Haugen (Eds.), Beginning with the End: God, Science, and Wolfhart Pannenberg (Chicago, Ill.: Open Court Publishing Company, 1997), pp. 156-194, ISBN 0812693256, LCCN 97000114, https://webcitation.org/5nY0aytpz .

* Frank J. Tipler, "The ultimate fate of life in universes which undergo inflation", Physics Letters B, Vol. 286, Nos. 1-2 (July 23, 1992), pp. 36-43, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90155-W, bibcode: 1992PhLB..286...36T, https://webcitation.org/64Uskd785 .

* Frank J. Tipler, "A New Condition Implying the Existence of a Constant Mean Curvature Foliation", bibcode: 1993dgr2.conf..306T, in B[ei]. L. Hu and T[ed]. A. Jacobson (Eds.), Directions in General Relativity: Proceedings of the 1993 International Symposium, Maryland, Volume 2: Papers in Honor of Dieter Brill (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 306-315, ISBN 0521452678, bibcode: 1993dgr2.conf.....H, https://webcitation.org/5qbXJZiX5 .

* Frank J. Tipler, "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe", NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop Proceedings, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Jan. 1999, pp. 111-119; an invited paper in the proceedings of a conference held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, Aug. 12-14, 1997; doi:2060/19990023204, Document ID: 19990023204, Report Number: E-11429; NAS 1.55:208694; NASA/CP-1999-208694, https://webcitation.org/5zPq69I0O . Full proceedings volume: https://webcitation.org/69zAxm0sT .

* Frank J. Tipler, "There Are No Limits To The Open Society", Critical Rationalist, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Sept. 23, 1998), https://webcitation.org/5sFYkHgSS .

* 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, Mar. 20, 2000, http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0003082 . Published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 379, No. 2 (Aug. 2007), pp. 629-640, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11895.x, bibcode: 2007MNRAS.379..629T, https://webcitation.org/5vQ3M8uxB .

* 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, Apr. 1, 2001, http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0104011 . Published in J. Craig Wheeler and Hugo Martel (Eds.), Relativistic Astrophysics: 20th Texas Symposium, Austin, Texas, 10-15 December 2000 (Melville, NY: American Institute of Physics, 2001), pp. 769-772, ISBN 0735400261, LCCN 2001094694, which is AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 586 (Oct. 15, 2001), doi:10.1063/1.1419654, bibcode: 2001AIPC..586.....W.

* Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology", International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Apr. 2003), pp. 141-148, doi:10.1017/S1473550403001526, bibcode: 2003IJAsB...2..141T, https://webcitation.org/5o9QHKGuW . Also at arXiv:0704.0058, Mar. 31, 2007, http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0058 .

* F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers", Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (Apr. 2005), pp. 897-964, doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04, bibcode: 2005RPPh...68..897T, http://dauns01.math.tulane.edu/~tipl...everything.pdf . Also released as "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything", arXiv:0704.3276, Apr. 24, 2007, http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276 .

* Frank J. Tipler, "Inevitable Existence and Inevitable Goodness of the Singularity", Journal of Consciousness Studies, Vol. 19, Nos. 1-2 (2012), pp. 183-193, https://webcitation.org/69JEi5wHp .

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 Theorem (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 on Progress in Physics paper--which presents the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-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 website, ca. 2006, https://webcitation.org/5o9VkK3eE , https://archive.is/pKD3y .)

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.

For much more on these matters, see my above-cited "Physics of God" article in addition to the following resource:

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Apr. 18, 2019, https://pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB , https://archive.is/uHEyL , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-...n.com/6bZDc7rB .

The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to reject the aforestated known laws of 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 cosmology is incorrect, and indeed, one must engage in extreme irrationality in order to argue against the Omega Point cosmology. 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].)

Additionally, we now have the quantum gravity Theory of Everything (TOE) required by the known laws of physics and that correctly describes and unifies 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.

-----

Note:

1. While there is a lot that gets published in physics journals that is anti-reality and nonphysical (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 crucially wrong with said papers. That is, the paradigm itself may have nothing to do with reality, but the peer-reviewers could find nothing fundamentally 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 and his other papers on the Omega Point Theorem 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 these papers could find nothing fundamentally wrong with them within their operating paradigm, i.e., the known laws of physics.

[James Redford]

Originally Posted by Oystein

See my signature.

I did. It's a jejune non sequitur that reads "Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)". Now I'll direct you to my signature, whereby one can actually learn something existentially vital.

On the matter of the intensive conditioning of the public by government to recoil from conspiracy charges which inculpate it (while at the same time accepting the mendacious, anti-veridical and self-serving conspiracy theories the government promulgates which often lead to mass-death via war, etc.), the following passage by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard is quite edifying:

""
It is also important for the State to inculcate in its subjects an aversion to any "conspiracy theory of history"; for a search for "conspiracies" means a search for motives and an attribution of responsibility for historical misdeeds. If, however, any tyranny imposed by the State, or venality, or aggressive war, was caused not by the State rulers but by mysterious and arcane "social forces," or by the imperfect state of the world or, if in some way, everyone was responsible ("We Are All Murderers," proclaims one slogan), then there is no point to the people becoming indignant or rising up against such misdeeds. Furthermore, an attack on "conspiracy theories" means that the subjects will become more gullible in believing the "general welfare" reasons that are always put forth by the State for engaging in any of its despotic actions. A "conspiracy theory" can unsettle the system by causing the public to doubt the State's ideological propaganda.
""

(From Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, "The Anatomy of the State", Rampart Journal of Individualist Thought, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Summer 1965), pp. 1-24, https://mises.org/system/tdf/rampart...&type=document , https://webcitation.org/6ZvAbaX8z , http://www.freezepage.com/1447053835DURFWXQOPM . Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays (Washington, DC: Libertarian Review Press, 1974), https://mises.org/sites/default/file...20Essays_2.pdf , https://webcitation.org/6XfwvbslB .)

The inherent, unchangeable nature of government is colossal conspiracy. Recall that a conspiracy is simply when two or more people take part in an action which involves doing something improper to others (of which action may or may not be kept secret, i.e., secrecy is not a necessary component for actions to be a conspiracy). The mere fact that governments set for themselves legal double-standards is alone quite enough to logically demonstrate that governments themselves consider their own actions improper (i.e., if their same actions which they do to others are done to them they regard it as a crime). Thus, the conclusion that government itself is the largest conspiracy to ever exist or that could ever exist is logically unavoidable.

[James Redford]

Originally Posted by beachnut

lol, what a pile of steaming crap, and woo, like, "The Mark of the Beast" -

"The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything" has lies about thermite used on 9/11. The rest of the paper is offtopic at best.

Why do you spread lies about 9/11?

I spread the truth about the US government-staged 9/11 attacks, unlike the genocidal maniacs who have been ruling over us.

The US government has routinely mass-murdered is own subjects in staged terrorist attacks in order to have a pretext for usurping ever more power, such as with the 9/11 attacks, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the Pearl Harbor attack, etc. Regarding the US government's Gulf of Tonkin false-flag operation, some 58,000 US citizens died in the Vietnam War which directly resulted from said false-flag operation. This was nothing less than mass-murder by the US government against these US citizens, since their deaths were the result of malice aforethought by the US government: the US president and the US's highest military leaders involved in staging this false-flag operation cannot coherently claim that they are not responsible for these US citizens' deaths, no more than one who throws a person into a lion's den can veridically claim innocence in the victim's resulting death. Such an abuser is fully guilty of murder.

For a much deeper examination into the aforesaid three US government-staged pretext-attacks, see Sec. 8.2.1 of my following article, in particular pp. 70-86:

* 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, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP .