God Proven to Exist According to Mainline Physics

[James Redford]

Surely you have to prove that no other religion is a "triune religion" else that one (or even ones) could be possibly be just a valid religion for selection as satisfying the Omega Point as Christianity.

Like the one at: http://www.triune-being.com/ for example.

The Weltanschauung which is the most veridical is the correct one. To date, that is biblical Christianity. Of which Prof. Frank J. Tipler and I have written about.

That is to say, this worldview is the one most in conformance with the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics).

If you can show how that is not the case, then I know I want to hear about it, and I do think that Prof. Tipler would like to hear about it as well.

The history of mindkind is the history of coming out of a condition of extremely ignorant fallacy into lesser states of ignorance, with some massively gruesome setbacks along the way (all of them perpetrated by government).

This is because of minkind's coming out of an animalistic mental state into states of higher degrees of reason. While non-human animals don't appear to hold much fallacious mental content, this is due to apparently not being able to form very much in the way of abstract mental concepts. When the faculty of sapient reasoning and language skills comes into being, this allows forming ideas on a wide range of subjects, but in mankind's history many of those ideas were quite destructively erroneous, with no small amount of that error still with us today (such as Marxism).

Such applies to religious knowledge, as well. For example, the Torah is itself quite evil in many places (such as requiring any Israelite picking up twigs on a Sabbath to be stoned to death: see Numbers 15:32-36; Exodus 31:12-17; 35:1-3). Again, this has to do with mankind's evolution from fallacious ignorance into knowledge: early Judaism is a derivation from prior paganism. Indeed, some forms of human sacrifice for purely religious purposes were retained within Pentateuch Judaism, i.e., Judaic human-sacrifice rituals can actually be found in the Torah and early Nevi'im books, supposedly sanctified by God (viz., Judges 11:29-40; Leviticus 27:28,29; Exodus 13:1,2; 13:11-16; 22:29,30), though most of it was, thankfully, eventually set aside. But then, the actual prophets (principally from Isaiah on) and Yeshua Ha'Mashiach spoke out against much of the supposed Law of Moses, and a number of them were murdered by the Israeli priestcraft for doing so. (For examples of this rejection just regarding the Torah laws on animal sacrifice, see Psalms 40:6-8; Isaiah 1:11-14; Jeremiah 7:21,22; 8:8; Hosea 6:6; Amos 5:21,22; Hebrews 10:4-7.)

The above matters bring up another issue. The teachings of Yeshua Ha'Mashiach's ministry itself necessitates the involvement of a super-intelligence, since it is so spectacularly advanced beyond that age, and indeed this age: as mankind to this date is of a barbaric and primitive nature, and still a long way (morally speaking) from catching up with him. For more on that, see my below article:

James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist," Social Science Research Network (SSRN), revised and expanded edition, March 19, 2009 (originally published at Anti-State.com on December 19, 2001). http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761
http://geocities.com/jrredford/anarchist-jesus.pdf
http://geocities.com/jrredford/anarchist-jesus.html

The following is the abstract from the above article:

""
ABSTRACT: The teachings and actions of Jesus Christ (Yeshua Ha'Mashiach) and the apostles recorded in the New Testament are analyzed in regard to their ethical and political philosophy, with analysis of context vis-á-vis the Old Testament (Tanakh, or Hebrew Bible) being given. From this analysis, it is shown that Jesus is a libertarian anarchist, i.e., a consistent voluntaryist. The implications this has for the world are profound, and the ramifications of Jesus's anarchism to Christians' attitudes toward government (the state) and its actions are explicated.
""

Albert Einstein said that "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" (see Albert Einstein, Science, Philosophy and Religion, A Symposium, published by the Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc., New York, 1941.)

And here is what Einstein wrote regarding Christianity in his book The World as I See It (New York: Philosophical Library, 1949), pp. 111-112:

""
If one purges the Judaism of the Prophets and Christianity as Jesus taught it of all subsequent additions, especially those of the priests, one is left with a teaching which is capable of curing all the social ills of humanity.

It is the duty of every man of good will to strive steadfastly in his own little world to make this teaching of pure humanity a living force, so far as he can. If he makes an honest attempt in this direction without being crushed and trampled under foot by his contemporaries, he may consider himself and the community to which he belongs lucky.
""

So authentic Christianity (i.e., the doctrine taught by Yeshua Ha'Mashiach), according to Einstein, is "capable of curing all the social ills of humanity." It's hard to fathom a stronger endorsement than that bold and clear statement.

In the immediately previous quote of Einstein, he is quite careful to seperate the message preached by Jesus Christ and the Prophets (i.e., the Latter Prophets of the Nevi'im books from Isaiah onward) from that of the Torah, which indeed is filled with much irrationality (much of it derived from earlier pagan practices). But then Jesus Christ and the Prophets spoke out against the irrational aspects of the Torah, and a number of them were murdered by the Israeli priestcraft for doing so. Such was not lost on Einstein, which is why he is careful in the above to specify which aspects of the Bible he finds to be in conformance with the truth.

Unfortunately, the inversion of that organization popularly calling itself the Christian church occured with the pagan Roman government's takeover of said group under Constantine I, himself a lifelong pagan, bloodthirsty tyrant, and unrepentant murderer of his eldest son Crispus and his wife Fausta, to say nothing of all the plebeians he murdered. Since that time, the organizations commonly calling themselves "Christian" have typically acted in the role of intellectual bodyguards of the state, and hence have been hostilely opposed to actually applying Jesus Christ's teachings, since said teachings are incompatible with government and its frequent activities (e.g., taxes, war, the inversion of genuine moral understanding, the sowing of needless discord and strife among the populace [i.e., divide and rule], etc.).

For much more on the above, see my above-cited "Jesus Is an Anarchist" article and the following article:

"A Military Chaplain Repents," an interview of Rev. George B. Zabelka, the Catholic chaplain who blessed the pilots who dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, by Rev. Emmanuel Charles McCarthy, conducted circa 1984, published on the LewRockwell website on April 13, 2007. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/mccarthy5.html

 

[Tranca]

God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J. 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):

Also known as the Unicorn...

 

[James Redford]

Also known as the Unicorn...

Regarding the equivalence of God and the Omega Point: 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. As well, as Stephen Hawking proved, the singularity is not in spacetime, but rather is the boundary of space and time (see S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time [London: Cambridge University Press, 1973], pp. 217-221). So the Omega Point is transcendent to, yet immanent in, space and time.

Additionally, the cosmological singularity consists of a three-part structure: 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). These three distinct parts which perform different physical functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually one singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse.

And given an infinite amount of computational resources, per the Bekenstein Bound, recreating the exact quantum state of our present universe is trivial, requiring at most a mere 10^123 bits (the number which Roger Penrose calculated), or at most a mere 2^10^123 bits for every different quantum configuration of the universe logically possible (i.e., the multiverse in its entirety up to this point in universal history). So the Omega Point will be able to resurrect us using merely an infinitesimally small amount of total computational resources: indeed, the multiversal resurrection will occur between 10^-10^10 and 10^-10^123 seconds before the Omega Point is reached, as the computational capacity of the universe at that stage will be great enough that doing so will require only a trivial amount of total computational resources.

So to recapitulate:

1.) The Omega Point (or, for that matter, the society near the Omega Point) can trivially perform the universal resurrection of the dead, upon which the people resurrected can live eternally in literal heaven, i.e., paradise.
2.) The Omega Point is omniscient.
3.) The Omega Point is omnipresent.
4.) The Omega Point is omnipotent.
5.) The cosmological singularity is a triune structure, of which the Omega Point is one component.
6.) The cosmological singularity is transcendent to, yet immanent in, space and time.
7.) The cosmological singularity is the only achieved (actually existing) infinity.
8.) The Omega Point creates the universe and all of existence.

Those are all the physical properties that have been claimed for God in traditional Christian theology. There are many other congruities between the Omega Point cosmology and Christianity. Below are listed just some of them:

1.) We are gods: John 10:34 (Jesus is quoting Psalm 82:6).
2.) We are God and God is us: Matthew 25:31-46.
3.) We live inside of God: Acts 17:24-28.
4.) God is everything and inside of everything: Colossians 3:11; Jeremiah 23:24.
5.) We are members in the body of Christ: Romans 12:4,5; 1 Corinthians 6:15-19; 12:12-27; Ephesians 4:25.
6.) We are one in Christ: Galatians 3:28.
7.) God is all: Ephesians 1:23; 4:4-6.
8.) God is light: 1 John 1:5; John 8:12.
9.) We have existed before the foundation of the world: Matthew 25:34; Luke 1:70; 11:50; Ephesians 1:4; 2 Timothy 1:9; Isaiah 40:21.
10.) Jesus has existed before the foundation of the world: John 17:24; Revelation 13:8.
11.) The reality of multiple worlds: Hebrews 1:1,2; 11:3.
12.) God is the son of man: Matthew 8:20; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:18; 12:32; 12:40; 13:37; 13:41; 16:13; 16:27,28; 17:9; 17:12; 17:22; 18:11; 19:28; 20:18; 20:28; 24:27; 24:30; 24:37; 24:39; 24:44; 25:13; 25:31; 26:2; 26:24; 26:45; 26:64. (This is just listing how many times Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man in the Gospel of Matthew, althought he refers to himself as this throughout the Gospels. It was the favorite phrase that he used to refer to himself.)

How item Nos. 9 and 10 relate is that within Prof. Tipler's Omega Point Theory the universe is brought into being by the Omega Point, as the end-state of the universe causally brings about the beginning state, i.e., the Big Bang singularity (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). Another way of stating it is that in the Omega Point cosmology, the Omega Point is the fundamental existential and mathematical entity, from which all of reality derives. Indeed, within the Omega Point Theory, the Big Bang singularity and the Omega Point singularity are actually just different functions of the same singularity. Further, anything which at any time will exist will simply be a subset of what is rendered in the Omega Point.

 

[godless dave]

The Weltanschauung which is the most veridical is the correct one. To date, that is biblical Christianity. Of which Prof. Frank J. Tipler and I have written about.

That is to say, this worldview is the one most in conformance with the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics).

If you can show how that is not the case, then I know I want to hear about it, and I do think that Prof. Tipler would like to hear about it as well.

No, first Tipler would have to show how it is the case. If he can do that, then maybe someone will take it seriously enough to refute it. So far it's just gibberish.

 

[Tranca]

Jesus RedFord, how on earth you came with that long answer 2 minutes after i debunked tipler with a bad joke?

 

[Tranca]

RedFord,
Do you realise Tipler's God is a material Supercomputer that exists in the future, and not the traditional beyond time God that believers prefer to believe?

 

[James Redford]

No, first Tipler would have to show how it is the case. If he can do that, then maybe someone will take it seriously enough to refute it. So far it's just gibberish.

Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory has been published in a number of the world's leading physics journals (in addition to many other important physics journals), with praise by the referees and editors.

Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports in Progress in Physics paper 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.)

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 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 Theory.

 

[elbe]

My head is a little off kilter tonight from lack of sleep, so maybe that's it, but a computer, or being, made up of everything in the universe being omniscient doesn't make any sense to me. I know, I know, shocking. To properly qualify everything single atom and photon and subatomic particles would require more information than the universe, itself, can hold.

Take computers for example. The smallest amount of data is a bit, which is just a 1 or 0, set in a transistor. If you wanted to store all the information about one computer's absolute state in another computer you would need to store what that transistor is set to (1 or 0) and which transistor it is. Just knowing a transistor is set to 1, for example, doesn't really help you understand the current state of the entire computer. So even if you can somehow store the current location of the transistor as a single bit, it would still require two bits to store information about one bit.

So a single photon would need information stored about it's current location and vector velocity which, presumably, would require more information than can be stored on one photon... unless you are "storing" the data by actually having the photon really there, but that's not really omniscience as it is the universe existing.

 

[Tranca]

Well, here's a critique. Because i can't post links yet, i'll copy past.
infidels.org/library/modern/graham_oppy/tipler.html

I appologise for this.

Edited by Tricky: 

Here's the link in case anyone wants t read through this.
http://infidels.org/library/modern/graham_oppy/tipler.html

Critical Notice: Frank J. Tipler (1995) The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead London: Macmillan pp.xxvi+528

Some people have wondered whether this book is an elaborate joke.[1] Others have suggested that it is merely a cynical attempt to cash in on the current craze for pop physics treatments of ‘the big questions’.[2] Yet others have speculated that it may be an ill-conceived attempt to secure funding for expensive, large-scale physics research (cf. pp.335-6).[3] In this notice, I shall ignore these kinds of speculations, and proceed under the assumption that the author is serious and in good faith. It would be very disturbing were this assumption mistaken. Some on the religious right have made, and will make, capital from the mere existence of this book, even if the strict letter of its doctrine provides no comfort to them. We do not need more physicists apparently telling the world that the most recent discoveries in cosmology and particle physics confirm traditional religious teachings. What would it profit Frank Tipler ...?

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

Edited and linked

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[Tranca]

clone, sorry
how do i eliminate posts

 

[wollery]

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 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 Theory.

I don't see anything overtly wrong with the overall theory, but then it isn't my field of expertise.

But what I do see as wrong is the unwarranted connection between information and conciousness. The Omega Point contains all information (knowledge) summed over the entire volume and history of space, but this does not make it omniscient. For that you require sentience, which has not been proven by the OPT.

Take the British Library as an analogy. It contains the material (supposedly) of every book ever written in the English language. Does this make it the most knowledgeable being in the world? Of course not, it's just a library. If an individual went and read, and remembered everything in the British Library then they would probably be the most knowledgeable person in the world.

Knowledge, in the form of information or data, is not, in and of itself, sentient, so it cannot be omniscient.

Unless you can demonstrate sentience on the part of the Omega Point then the rest of the God argument is moot.

 

[James Redford]

My head is a little off kilter tonight from lack of sleep, so maybe that's it, but a computer, or being, made up of everything in the universe being omniscient doesn't make any sense to me. I know, I know, shocking. To properly qualify everything single atom and photon and subatomic particles would require more information than the universe, itself, can hold.

Take computers for example. The smallest amount of data is a bit, which is just a 1 or 0, set in a transistor. If you wanted to store all the information about one computer's absolute state in another computer you would need to store what that transistor is set to (1 or 0) and which transistor it is. Just knowing a transistor is set to 1, for example, doesn't really help you understand the current state of the entire computer. So even if you can somehow store the current location of the transistor as a single bit, it would still require two bits to store information about one bit.

So a single photon would need information stored about it's current location and vector velocity which, presumably, would require more information than can be stored on one photon... unless you are "storing" the data by actually having the photon really there, but that's not really omniscience as it is the universe existing.

Elbe, this is why you should attempt to understand what it is that you're replying to before you reply.

The entropy of the universe diverges to infinity, per the Second Law of Thermodynamic. Entropy is informational complexity. So a later state of the universe is able to perfectly emulate (i.e., perfect down to the quantum level) a previous state of the universe.

 

[wollery]

infidels.org/library/modern/graham_oppy/tipler.html

Link added, because I'm sure that post will be removed.

 

[James Redford]

I don't see anything overtly wrong with the overall theory, but then it isn't my field of expertise.

But what I do see as wrong is the unwarranted connection between information and conciousness. The Omega Point contains all information (knowledge) summed over the entire volume and history of space, but this does not make it omniscient. For that you require sentience, which has not been proven by the OPT.

Take the British Library as an analogy. It contains the material (supposedly) of every book ever written in the English language. Does this make it the most knowledgeable being in the world? Of course not, it's just a library. If an individual went and read, and remembered everything in the British Library then they would probably be the most knowledgeable person in the world.

Knowledge, in the form of information or data, is not, in and of itself, sentient, so it cannot be omniscient.

Unless you can demonstrate sentience on the part of the Omega Point then the rest of the God argument is moot.

Actually, the Omega Point Theory involves sapience as a matter of physical necessity. The reason is because sapience is required in order to bring about the Omega Point, as bringing about the Omega Point requires an infinite number of intelligent manipulations.

That is, the universe's Taublike collapses must be intelligently guided into the final singularity every step of the way. Without such intelligent guidance, then the Omega Point cannot come about--and hence the laws of physics would be violated, which is not possible.

For the details on this, see the following:

##########

Why the Acceptance of the Known Laws of Physics Requires Acceptance of the Omega Point Theory

based on articles by Prof. Frank J. Tipler; see:

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. 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, April 24, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276

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

Frank Tipler, "The Omega Point and Christianity," Gamma, Vol. 10, No. 2 (April 2003), pp. 14-23. http://geocities.com/theophysics/tipler-omega-point-and-christianity.html

Frank J. Tipler, "From 2100 to the End of Time," Wired. http://geocities.com/theophysics/tipler-from-2100-to-the-end-of-time.html
http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/wired.html

----------

Astrophysical black holes (i.e., trapped surfaces) exist, but Hawking [1, 2] and Wald [3] have shown that if black holes are allowed to exist for unlimited proper time, then they will completely evaporate, and a fundamental quantum law called "unitarity" will be violated. Unitarity, which roughly says that probability must be conserved, thus requires that the universe must cease to exist after finite proper time, which implies that the universe is closed and has the spatial topology of a 3-sphere [4]. The Second Law of Thermodynamics says the amount of entropy--the amount of disorder--in the universe cannot decrease, but Ellis and Coule [5] and Tipler [6] have shown that the amount of entropy already in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) will eventually contradict the Bekenstein Bound near the final singularity unless there are no event horizons, since in the presence of horizons the Bekenstein Bound implies the universal entropy S is less than or equal that constant (i.e., the Bekenstein Bound) times the radius of the universe squared, and general relativity requires the radius of the universe to go to zero at the final singularity. If there are no horizons then the gravitational shear energy due to the collapse of the universe itself will increase to infinity much faster than the radius of the universe going to zero at the final singularity [6, 7]. The absence of event horizons by definition means that the universe's future c-boundary (causal boundary) is a single point [8], call it the Omega Point. MacCallum [9] has shown that a 3-sphere closed universe with a single point future c-boundary is of measure zero in initial data space (i.e., infinitely improbable acting only under blind and dead forces). Barrow [10, 11], Cornish and Levin [12] and Motter [13] have shown that the evolution of a 3-sphere closed universe into its final singularity is chaotic. Yorke et al. [14, 15] have shown that a chaotic physical system is likely to evolve into a measure zero state if and only if its control parameters are intelligently manipulated. Thus life (which near the final state, is really collectively intelligent computers) must be present all the way into the final singularity in order for the known laws of physics to be mutually consistent at all times. Misner [16, 17, 18] has shown in effect that event horizon elimination requires an infinite number of distinct manipulations, so an infinite amount of information must be processed between now and the final singularity. The amount of information stored at any time diverges to infinity as the Omega Point is approached, since the total entropy of the universe (i.e., S) diverges to infinity there, requiring divergence of the complexity of the system that must be understood to be controlled.

During life's expansion throughout the universe, baryon annihilation (via the inverse of electroweak baryogenesis using electroweak quantum tunneling, which is allowed in the Standard Model, as baryon number minus lepton number [B - L] is conserved) is used for life's energy requirements and for interstellar travel. In the process, the annililation of baryons forces the Higgs field toward its absolute vacuum, thereby cancelling the positive cosmological constant and forcing the universe to collapse [7, 19, 20].

References:

[1] S. W. Hawking, "Breakdown of predictability in gravitational collapse," Physical Review D, Vol. 14, Issue 10 (November 1976), pp. 2460-2473.
[2] Stephen Hawking's paper which attempts to solve the black hole information issue without the universe collapsing is dependent on the conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). That is, it's based upon empirically unconfirmed physics which violate the known laws of physics. 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
[3] Robert M. Wald, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), ISBN 0226870251, Section 7.3, pp. 182-185.
[4] John D. Barrow, Gregory J. Galloway and Frank J. Tipler, "The closed-universe recollapse conjecture," Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 223 (December 1986), pp. 835-844. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986MNRAS.223..835B
[5] G. F. R. Ellis and D. H. Coule, "Life at the end of the universe?," General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 26, No. 7 (July 1994), pp. 731-739.
[6] Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead (New York: Doubleday, 1994), ISBN 0198519494, Appendix C: "The Bekenstein Bound," pg. 410. Said Appendix is reproduced in Frank J. Tipler, "Genesis: How the Universe Began According to Standard Model Particle Physics," arXiv, November 28, 2001, Section 2: "Apparent Inconsistences in the Physical Laws in the Early Universe," Subsection a: "Bekenstein Bound Inconsistent with Second Law of Thermodynamics." http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0111520
[7] Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology," International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (April 2003), pp. 141-148. http://geocities.com/theophysics/tipler-intelligent-life-in-cosmology.pdf Also at arXiv, March 31, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0058
[8] S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time (London: Cambridge University Press, 1973), ISBN 0521200164, pp. 217-221.
[9] Malcolm A. H. MacCallum, "On the mixmaster universe problem," Nature--Physical Science, Vol. 230 (March 1971), pp. 112-3.
[10] John D. Barrow, "Chaotic behaviour in general relativity," Physics Reports, Vol. 85, Issue 1 (May 1982), pp. 1-49.
[11] John D. Barrow and Janna Levin, "Chaos in the Einstein-Yang-Mills Equations," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 80, Issue 4 (January 1998), pp. 656-659. Also at arXiv, June 20, 1997. http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9706065
[12] Neil J. Cornish and Janna J. Levin, "Mixmaster universe: A chaotic Farey tale," Physical Review D, Vol. 55, Issue 12 (June 1997), pp. 7489-7510. Also at arXiv, December 30, 1996. http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9612066
[13] Adilson E. Motter, "Relativistic Chaos is Coordinate Invariant," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 91, Issue 23, Art. No. 231101 (December 2003), four pages. Also at arXiv, December 7, 2003. http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0305020
[14] Troy Shinbrot, Edward Ott, Celso Grebogi and James A. Yorke, "Using chaos to direct trajectories to targets," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 65, Issue 26 (December 1990), pp. 3215-3218.
[15] Troy Shinbrot, William Ditto, Celso Grebogi, Edward Ott, Mark Spano and James A. Yorke, "Using the sensitive dependence of chaos (the 'butterfly effect') to direct trajectories in an experimental chaotic system," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 68, Issue 19 (May 1992), pp. 2863-2866.
[16] Charles W. Misner, "The Isotropy of the Universe," Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 151 (February 1968), pp. 431-457. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1968ApJ...151..431M
[17] Charles W. Misner, "Quantum Cosmology. I," Physical Review, Vol. 186, Issue 5 (October 1969), pp. 1319-1327.
[18] Charles W. Misner, "Mixmaster Universe," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 22, Issue 20 (May 1969), pp. 1071-1074.
[19] 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, Section 11: "Solution to the cosmological constant problem: the universe and life in the far future." 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, April 24, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276
[20] Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its expansion obviates the universe collapsing. But as the following paper demonstrates, there is no set of cosmological observations which can tell us whether the universe will expand forever or eventually collapse: Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner, "Geometry and Destiny," General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 (October 1999), pp. 1453-1459. Also at arXiv, April 1, 1999. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9904020 The reason for that is because that is dependant on the actions of sapient life in annihilating baryons.

 

[nescafe]

The Weltanschauung which is the most veridical is the correct one.

OK. Might I suggest using simpler words where appropriate in the future?

To date, that is biblical Christianity. Of which Prof. Frank J. Tipler and I have written about.

Pull the other one, it gots bells on.

That is to say, this worldview is the one most in conformance with the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics).

Erm, not exactly. In fact, not at all. Laughably wrong is more like it. If Hell is the Absence of God was a documentary, your stance might be reasonable.

If you can show how that is not the case, then I know I want to hear about it, and I do think that Prof. Tipler would like to hear about it as well.

Recent evidence suggests that the Universe is expanding, and will do so forever. 10^100 years (assuming protons decay) from now nothing will exist but low energy photons and the odd very lonely lepton. If protons are in fact stable, it will take slightly longer -- 10 ^ 10 ^ 76 years or so. There is no room for Tipler's scenario in a universe that never recollapses and has a bounded cosmological horizon. Sorry, but unless evidence comes to light that suggests what I have said is incorrect, the Universe is doomed to fall into a night in which nothing ever happens that never ends. The only thing that might happen at that point would be a spontaneous collapse of the false vacuum or another brane collision, but those events have nothing in common with the Tiplerian singularity.

 

[elbe]

Elbe, this is why you should attempt to understand what it is that you're replying to before you reply.

The entropy of the universe diverges to infinity, per the Second Law of Thermodynamic. Entropy is informational complexity. So a later state of the universe is able to perfectly emulate (i.e., perfect down to the quantum level) a previous state of the universe.

You know, I do have some inkling of of the concept of entropy, and I fail to see how it meets your definition.

Unfortunately, even using your premise I don't think it resolves my concern. If the universe contains only so much "stuff"* from its start (assuming the big bang is true) then the universe won't gain anymore "stuff". Matter is turned into energy, energy into matter. All of that "stuff" will have some sort of base element that can be used to describe the thing itself (i.e. matter is made of atoms, so knowing all the information about the atoms in a toaster could allow you to reproduce that toaster). All of that base "stuff" would need X amount of information to store it as data, and that X > individual "stuff". As the universe ages and entropy occurs energy is "lost" from the system, but the amount of "stuff" in the universe doesn't increase - it can't. While the system as a whole is far more complex with entropy, the individual "stuff" are still just individual "stuff" and can be described using some value X.

Assuming that each and every individual "stuff" can be described using the same size X (say a byte each, as an absurd example) then the amount of data needed to describe the universe at the start should be the same amount needed at the end.

Strangely, Tipler's hypothesis sounds a lot like some crap I thought up in high school, sans the god parts. Is he really no better than a stupid high schooler?

*matter, energy, anything**
**my 6th grade english teacher forbid us from using the word stuff, but I think it is oddly appropriate here - words are fun!

ETA: Or, of course, my brain is just making crap up as I go. It's been a long time since I bothered with theoretical physics.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

The Weltanschauung which is the most veridical is the correct one. To date, that is biblical Christianity.

<HUGE SNIP>

How on Earth does that address my point?

How do you know that there is not a philosophy / religion that has a better match?

Similarity does not equal cause and effect.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Just reading through John Barrow's "The Infinite Book", and it seems to me that Tippler would be mightily dissapointed to find that our universe was only one of an essentially infinite number of universes.....The likelyhood of such being well within current cosmological thinking.

So considering the other universes: how's the beer there?

So God is a super-evolved human? Kind of sucks.

Not quite. More like human is a super devolved kind of God.

As someone with a philosophy degree I wish you change that to "Bad philosophy dressed up as science..."

Distinction without a difference, methinks.

DR

 

[aggle-rithm]

Regarding the equivalence of God and the Omega Point: 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.

It is one thing to contain all the information in the Universe; it is another thing to be aware of that information.

After all, each human brain contains all the information necessary to understand a human brain. But how many people understand how their own brains work?

 

[aggle-rithm]

Actually, the Omega Point Theory involves sapience as a matter of physical necessity. The reason is because sapience is required in order to bring about the Omega Point, as bringing about the Omega Point requires an infinite number of intelligent manipulations.

That is, the universe's Taublike collapses must be intelligently guided into the final singularity every step of the way. Without such intelligent guidance, then the Omega Point cannot come about--and hence the laws of physics would be violated, which is not possible.

This reminds me of that stunning display of logic from the Bible:

"If Christ hasn't risen from the dead, then we are lost. But we are not lost, therefore he has risen from the dead."

What you're saying is that intelligent life is required to make the Omega point happen, and for the Omega Point not to happen is in violation of the laws of physics, therefore, it is possible (and necessary) for the Omega Point to be intelligently guided with an infinite number of manipulations.

Somehow, we are to conclude from this that the Omega Point is not only sapient, but omniscient.

You realize this whole house of cards collapses if any one of a number of wild assumptions proves to be wrong?