Jump to content

James Redford

Members
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

7 Neutral

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf

Profile Information

  • Location
    USA
  • Interests
    Christian theology.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The Solution to the Problem of Qualia On October 25, 2019, I received an email by a person who inquired of me as to what my thoughts were on the nature of qualia (singular: quale), e.g., how and why it exists. This person was stuck in a conundrum because they couldn't understand how qualia could ever be explained via, say, a mathematical theorem. I had thought about the nature of qualia before, but this person's inquiry inspired me to think about the issue in a more systematic way. The answer to this person's question, and hence the answer to the problem of qualia in the field of philosophy, is that the only thing that exists or could ever exist is qualia. Hence, to ask the question as to why qualia exists is the same as asking why logic itself exists. They are simply different aspects of the same thing. The only thing that exists is qualia. The only thing that exists is logic. Which is actually to say, the only thing that exists is mind. When we hear, e.g., someone talking, from our mind's perspective, pertaining to the sound domain, all that we are experiencing from that alone is merely the qualia of the person's voice, even though that qualia is produced from sound waves passing through the air and vibrating our eardrums. And those sound waves themselves are described by the mathematics of physics, as is the vibration of our eardrums and the neurological effects caused thereby. So qualia is produced by mathematics, of which qualia go on to produce mathematics via our response to that qualia, such as giving a reply which is heard by the previous speaker, and hence is experienced as qualia by them. Yet all of these qualia effects are produced via the mathematics of physics. Qualia is simply a different aspect of logic (i.e., mathematics). Asking why qualia exists is a different way of asking why logic exists. And the only way in which logic could exist is if qualia existed, otherwise there would be no way to experience logic's existence. Further, only mind can experience qualia, and the *only* thing mind experiences is qualia, since qualia *is* the phenomenon of experience. The following three groupings of statements are triads to better elucidate the relations between qualia, logic and mind: the thing to be experienced: qualia the thing determining how experiences can occur: logic the thing doing the experiencing: mind the thing providing experiences: qualia the thing governing experiences: logic the thing observing experiences: mind qualia provides experiences logic governs experiences mind observes experiences So in actuality, the only thing that exists in existence is this qualia-logic-mind stuff, and the infinite number of different transformations which it can take on. Qualia, logic and mind aren't different things, but rather are different aspects of the same thing: i.e., this qualia-logic-mind stuff. Or: logic creates brain (read here as: mind); brain interacting with logic creates qualia. And so on and so on, ad infinitum. One reason why qualia currently seems so mysterious to us is because we humans are extremely limited in our mentality. Whereas for a technologically-immortal superintelligence, she will have the capacity to easily form her mind to be anything she wants it to be within the limits of her mental computational resources, which will be enormously greater than our mortal mental computational resources. Hence, for a superintelligence which has complete technological control over her own mental hardware, she can easily rapidly flip through many different combinations of minds, such that she will be able to quickly converge on what the minimal set of mind is required to, e.g., experience the color "red" in its least perceptible form. And then that would be the mathematical definition of the qualia/quale of "red", for the minimal discernible perception of "red" (i.e., liminal red). Moreover, this mathematical definition of "liminal red" could then be shared with other technologically-immortal superintelligences, such that they could experience for themselves that this indeed is the minimal set of mind required to experience "liminal red". The above is the solution to the problem of qualia. If it should seem dissatisfying to us humans, it's because our mentalities cannot rapidly converge upon the minimal mental sets of various qualia, and this necessarily leaves many details of qualia unanswered. Yet such mental procedures will be no problem for technologically-immortal superintelligences, so they will know a great deal more about such matters than is possible for humans to answer. And as their mentalities diverge to infinite intelligence, eventually everything that can logically be known about qualia--and every other subject--will be known perfectly. #################### The Principle of the Greater God It could well be the case that we are in a computer simulation being run by a highly-advanced society. However, there would be no possible tests which we could perform that would reveal that to us unless said society wished to disclose their existence. This simulation hypothesis is actually a variation on the Gnostic heresy. Though I would think that a superhuman society would create a far more pleasant simulation than this mortal world. If they were malicious--and for various reasons that I've gone over elsewhere, I don't believe they could be--they would certainly be capable of creating a reality far more horrific than this one, bad as this world can be at various times and places. Rather, the world appears to be more or less what I would expect it to be like if humans are naturally-evolved apes. In a certain very real sense, humans *are* trapped in a computer simulation: that of their mental programs operating on the wet-computer of the human brain. Humans are trapped in the matrix of bad ideas. Almost all of the main societal problems are due to false and destructive ideas. Yet there exists an even more decisive argument beyond what reasons I've given elsewhere as to why a genuine superintelligence cannot be maleficent, and that is the Principle of the Greater God. Since there are no possible tests which a superintelligent yet still finite entity could perform that would reveal whether she exists in a simulation, she would know that the real possibility exists that she herself is subject to punishment by an even greater god than herself in whose simulation she exists within. Note that the Greater-God Principle is here merely capitalized for emphasis, as it only applies to finite entities, but not to an infinite intelligence, i.e., it does not apply to God (majuscule G). However, an infinite intelligence would be omnibenevolent, since all error logically discoverable would have been analyzed and refuted. And all infinite intelligences are logically equivalent, since they each know the infinite everything that the others know, and have analyzed and refuted the same errors. Hence, there exists only one God: as a "difference" with no difference is not different. #################### Epistemological Historical Ambiguity If a carrot is put into a boiling pot of water, and once cooked thoroughly, it is drawn out and given to us through a partition that obscures how it was cooked, in studying the carrot, even if we knew the exact quantum details of that carrot, we would not then be able to say what the exact conditions were which brought about its cooked state. Such as: the exact size of the boiling pot, who was the person who dropped it into the boiling water, etc. The reason being is because such details have been diffused into the surrounding environment, and so are not recorded on just the carrot itself. That is, there are many different past pathways by which that carrot could have ended up having its present exact quantum states. What this means is that there could be many different historical pathways by which we could have arrived at our current state in history on Earth. So, as a hypothetical example, say nanotechnological superintelligence from Venus seeded the Earth approximately 18.5 million years ago with nanobots in order to help guide evolution on Earth. There would be no way for us humans to prove that unless such superintelligence wanted us to know, since the nanobots would have control over all the neurological sensory inputs into our brains, hence making it impossible for us to collect data on them. Yet such nanobots would only be here for beneficial purposes to prevent the worst evolutionary and societal outcomes, but would otherwise leave individuals' choices alone. Or, e.g., we could already be in a greater god's simulation in which the above events are concurrently occurring. Yet the point being made here with epistemological historical ambiguity is that we shouldn't be overly weirded-out by such actually physically-possible scenarios, since God would still ultimately be in control, and so one cannot escape God's miracles by simply creating a simulation, since if God requires any number of bits to be flipped in order to fulfill the overarching plan of existence, then such bit-flipping events will occur. #################### Artificial General Intelligence Is Certainly Obtainable Since an artificial computer can render anything that can logically exist once enough computational resources are obtained, the only way that human-level Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) could be impossible is if there is something about human-level intelligence that is literally logically impossible. (Which, humorously enough, would explain a lot about human behavior.) #################### The Stairway to Heaven Misguided theists have often argued that the fine-tuning of the universe's physical constants is a proof of God's existence. Yet this is simply running into the Anthropic Principle: that whatever existence we observe ourselves in, it would have to be the case that said existence is such that it supports our own existence, otherwise no such observations could be made. Rather, a far stronger case can be made than given by such misguided theists. It is not merely that we observe the universe is fine-tuned to give rise to our existence, but instead that a superabundance of material resources exist allowing us to give rise to civilizations and indeed superhuman space-colonization. Such a superabundance of material resources cannot be explained by the mere logical fact that given observers, conditions have to be right to allow their existence. For we could well imagine that no trees existed, which by itself would make much of any nascent civilization nearly impossible without timber. Or that without oil, the arrival of modern civilization would have been nearly impossible. Or that without groundwater, homesteading except near lakes and rivers outside of high-precipitation areas would be far more difficult. And the list goes on. Without such a superabundance of material resources, human observers would still exist, but would be permanently stuck in a primitive state with no possibility of obtaining technological immortality or of colonizing outer space. Instead what we observe is that the universe has been constructed to provide us a Stairway to Heaven, both in the sense of space-colonization and in the sense of technologically-immortal superintelligence. #################### Fulfillment of Biblical End-Time Prophecies Can Be Imperceptibly Subtle Most humans who will have ever lived will also have died before seeing the Biblical End-Time prophecies fulfilled. What this means is that it's obviously not the case that everyone must experience the worst aspects of the End-Time events. Carrying the implications of this forward, technologically-immortal superintelligence can be so subtle in her complete and total nanotechnological takeover of the Earth that humans would only be capable of realizing that if she wanted them to know. For example, as a hypothetical scenario, this plenary takeover could have occurred on, say, December 21, 2012 11:11:37 a.m. UTC. That is, all lifeforms could have been completely substrate-transformed via nanobots at that time and placed completely within computer simulation without them even realizing it. In other words, even within simulation, she could allow society to advance naturally according to the choices made by individuals yet also draw-out subsets of groups within society depending on their conduct: regarding both their internal mental conduct and their outward actions. Hence, she could leave the worst aspects of the End-Time tribulations for those who persist in destructive error, thereby actually fulfilling all the Biblical End-Time prophecies, even though not everyone would have to experience the full totality of such. #################### For those who would like more writings by me regarding the nature of existence, see the following resource: * James Redford, "God's Existence Is Proven by Several Mathematical Theorems within Standard Physics", Theophysics: The Physics of God, May 16, 2022, https://jamesredford.substack.com/p/gods-existence-is-proven-by-several , https://www.minds.com/blog/view/1373133123700658189 , https://steemit.com/cosmology/@jamesredford/god-s-existence-is-proven-by-several-mathematical-theorems-within-standard-physics . * * * * * * "Punto Omega", Punto Omega - Topic ( youtube.com/channel/UCBOIja-7VvS9VbdbTz9ex4g ), Jan. 13, 2015 Mirrors: https://web.archive.org/web/20230211033948/https://files.catbox.moe/nc3jl1.webm ; "Punto Omega - Punto Omega", ProductionCorporation ( youtube.com/user/SYthiusproduction ), Oct. 22, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUXDNkYjX5M .
  2. Traditional Christianity has been at the forefront of using the latest science of the day to prove God's existence, such as with Anselm's *Proslogion* and Thomas Aquinas's Five Ways. Indeed, natural science as a systematic discipline is the invention of Christendom, as is the university system. For more on this, see Sec. 6: "Science Comes Home", pp. 33-35 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/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://www.freezepage.com/1560446695DXLEZNRPJS . Christians in this Godless age continuously cut their own feet out from under themselves before they even bother standing up. They've made the proverbial Faustian bargain with this world--in this case, what evolutionary biologist Prof. Stephen Jay Gould termed the "non-overlapping magisteria": that if they just cede ground regarding scientific matters to the God-haters, that said theophobes won't interfere with the Christians' theological concerns. Though Satan must always betray in his pacts. The God-haters have come to lie, steal, enslave, torture, rape and murder--and all that on a mass-scale. Attempts to appease them result in mass-horrors. Yet why would Christians believe the same God-hating intelligentsia that gave us the horrors of Communism and Nazism (and other forms of socialism), to name a few of their many horrific societal gifts? Once one buys into their false premise, one has already lost. And I'm not talking about merely debates. One has lost society. One has lost souls. This false premise is straight out of the pit of Hell. So stop believing it, those who dare call themselves Christians. Stop believing the serial-killers of societies. They set up a trap, and naïve Christians willingly fall into it. The consequences are rotting corpses stacked as far as the eye can see. Stop being a participatory party to your own rape and slaughter. Stop fashioning your own noose. Christians in this age have been entranced by this demonic spell. But it is a lie: for ever since Newton's physics, and especially with General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics (either separately or combined), God has always been a mathematically-unavoidable result. For some of the details on this, see Sec. 5: "The Big Bang", pp. 28-33 of my aforecited "Physics of God" article; and see 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://megalodon.jp/2019-0423-0435-52/pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB .
  3. Eman_3 wrote: "" Referees? Passed? ... "" Correct. All of the papers by physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler on his Omega Point cosmology which I cited above are published peer-reviewed papers that passed the referee process, a number of which to leading physics and science journals. "" ... So what if they found the math to be correct, that does not substaniate the assumption. Tipler founded his assertion on an unlikely hypothetical scenario, that various forms of intelligent life pervaded the entire universe and found a way to reverse the expansion. That alone raises a lot of red flags, since this universe has expanded to the point where if you started at one end of the universe and set out towards the other side, you would never get there because of expansion. In theory practice is possible. In practice, theory may not align with reality. "" The only assumption made for Prof. Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, of which have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. 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].) The other aspects of the Omega Point cosmology, such as sapient life taking control over all matter, are conclusions required in order for the aforesaid known physical laws to remain unviolated--not assumptions. Regarding sapient life overcoming event horizons, this will be accomplished by such species having been independently evolved on average roughly once every Hubble volume. The universe is logically forced to end at the Omega Point by the known laws of physics. That is, the future is controlling the present every bit as much as the past is controlling the present. One can additionally think of it as all of reality flowing backward in time from the Omega Point. Mankind can no more prevent the Omega Point than they can fly to the moon by flapping their arms, as physical law prohibits both. For much more on this, 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, https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP . Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. * 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/2019-0423-0435-52/pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB .
  4. You should be joyously thrilled to learn that your above statement is not "what happened", Eman_3. So relax, Eman_3, God exists, and has been proven to exist in standard physics. Physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence, has been extensively peer-reviewed and found to be correct as a mathematical theorem (i.e., logical proof) 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/~tipler/theoryofeverything.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 following two articles: * 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/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , http://www.freezepage.com/1560446695DXLEZNRPJS . * 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/2019-0423-0435-52/pastebin.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.
  5. Hi, Eman_3. As I said above: That's not how truth works. Truth is not a popularity contest. Indeed, truth by its intrinsic nature is antidemocratic, since it cares not a whit whether people like it or not. The statement that 2+2 = 4 on the real line is true regardless if the whole world disbelieved it. As far as anyone knows, physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is correct. No one has ever been able to devise a valid argument against it, despite many vainglorious attempts. The Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem (i.e., logical proof) per the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. 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].) Further: To date the only peer-reviewed paper in a physics journal that has criticized Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been in 1994 by physicists Ellis and Dr. David Coule (see 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). In the paper, Ellis and Coule unwittingly gave an argument that the Bekenstein Bound violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics if the universe collapses without having event horizons eliminated. Yet in order to bring about the Omega Point, event horizons must be eliminated, and Tipler cites this paper in favor of the fact that the known laws of physics require the Omega Point to exist. In his review (see Lawrence Krauss, "More dangerous than nonsense", New Scientist, Vol. 194, No. 2603 [May 12, 2007], p. 53) of Prof. Tipler's book The Physics of Christianity (New York: Doubleday, 2007), Prof. Lawrence M. Krauss repeatedly commits the logical fallacy of bare assertion. Krauss gives no indication that he followed up on the endnotes in the book The Physics of Christianity and actually read Tipler's physics journal papers. All that Krauss is going off of in said review is Tipler's mostly nontechnical popular-audience book The Physics of Christianity without researching Tipler's technical papers in the physics journals. Krauss's review offers no actual lines of reasoning for Krauss's pronouncements. His readership is simply expected to imbibe what Krauss proclaims, even though it's clear that Krauss is merely critiquing a popular-audience book which does not attempt to present the rigorous technical details. Ironically, Krauss has actually published a paper that greatly helped to strengthen Tipler's Omega Point cosmology. Some have suggested that the current acceleration of the universe's expansion due to the positive cosmological constant would appear to obviate the Omega Point. However, Profs. Krauss and Michael S. Turner point out that "there is no set of cosmological observations we can perform that will unambiguously allow us to determine what the ultimate destiny of the Universe will be." (See Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner, "Geometry and Destiny", General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 [Oct. 1999], pp. 1453-1459.) As pointed out with Ellis and Coule's criticism, this isn't the first time that this ironic outcome has befallen critics of Tipler's Omega Point cosmology. So when Tipler's critics actually do real physics instead of issuing bare assertions and nihil ad rem cavils, they end up making Tipler's case stronger. Ironic though it is, nevertheless that's the expected result, since the Omega Point cosmology is required by the known laws of physics. Concerning Martin Gardner's review of Profs. John D. Barrow and Tipler's book The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), notice that Martin Gardner never states any error on Tipler's part within said review. However, I do find the below exchange between Tipler and Gardner to be quite telling; it transpired from Gardner's aforesaid review of Barrow and Tipler's book. Note Gardner's two-word reply to Tipler. * Frank J. Tipler, reply by Martin Gardner, "The FAP Flop", New York Review of Books, Vol. 33, No. 19 (Dec. 4, 1986), http://www.nybooks.com/articles/4946 , https://webcitation.org/67Fw7SAdg . In reply to Martin Gardner, "WAP, SAP, PAP, & FAP", New York Review of Books, Vol. 33, No. 8 (May 8, 1986), https://archive.is/QXsv3 , https://webcitation.org/6c7ZmxVbU .
  6. Hi, Eman_3. That's not how truth works. Truth is not a popularity contest. Indeed, truth by its intrinsic nature is antidemocratic, since it cares not a whit whether people like it or not. The statement that 2+2 = 4 on the real line is true regardless if the whole world disbelieved it. As far as anyone knows, physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is correct. No one has ever been able to devise a valid argument against it, despite many vainglorious attempts. The Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem (i.e., logical proof) per the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. 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].) Moreover, one can derive the known laws of physics a priori. The only reason they were not derived a priori historically is because no one had been smart enough to do so. So empiricism was used as a necessary crutch for human minds in discovering the known laws of physics. But now that we do have these known physical laws, we can see mathematically how there was no contingency in regards to them, i.e., in order to have a three-dimensional space in which beings complex enough to be self-aware can exist, the physical laws have to mathematically be the ones we actually observe. And so these known laws of physics are not going to start being disconfirmed, unless we already exist in a computer simulation and the beings running that simulation decide to alter the simulated environment (however, those beings themselves, or beings on an even lower level of implementation, would have to exist in a universe where the aforesaid known laws of physics are in operation). For the details on how the known laws of physics are actually mathematically unavoidable if one is to have a three-dimensional (or higher) world with self-aware beings in it, see 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/2019-0423-0435-52/pastebin.com/6bZDc7rB . The evolutionary psychological reason for the bizarre behavior of physicists rejecting physical law when it demonstrates God's existence is due to the naturally-evolved Jaynesian demons seeking to distance people from genuine knowledge of God so that the demons may instead falsely present themselves as God. Among many permutations of this, it often manifests as various forms of etatism: the state becomes God. Demons are quite real, they however exist as naturally-evolved Minskian agent subset programs operating on the wet-computer of the human brain. For more on this, see my following article: * James Redford, "Societal Sadomasochism", State-Terror Archive, May 8, 2019, https://web.archive.org/web/20190509025132/https://stateterrorarchive.blogspot.com/2019/05/societal-sadomasochism.html , https://archive.is/tLeu4 , https://megalodon.jp/2019-0509-1152-02/stateterrorarchive.blogspot.com/2019/05/societal-sadomasochism.html . And you greatly underestimate the hatred of many in academia for belief in God, especially Christianity. This is the same Western academia that defended and covered-up for the USSR and Mao Tse-tung's China. During which time the Soviet government murdered over 61 million of its own noncombatant subjects, while the Communist Chinese government murdered over 76 million of it own noncombatant subjects. Western academia in no small part helped enable those mass-slaughters with its faithful adoration of those regimes and the God-hating antitheist socialist ideologies upon which they were founded. Instead of shining a spotlight on the tyranny and horrors of Communism and thereby helping to diminish it by focusing world attention on it, they instead acted as Communism's intellectual bodyguards. Still to this day not much is said in academia or the major media about the biggest mass-slaughters by far in human history.
  7. For how the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics) in the form of physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theorem uniquely conform to, and precisely match, Christian theology: The Omega Point is omniscient, having an infinite amount of information and knowing all that is logically possible to be known; it is omnipotent, having an infinite amount of energy and power; and it is omnipresent, consisting of all that exists. These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God. The Omega Point final singularity is a different aspect of the Big Bang initial singularity, i.e., the first cause, a definition of God held by all the Abrahamic religions. 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 [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973], pp. 217-221). The Schmidt b-boundary has been shown to yield a topology in which the cosmological singularity is not Hausdorff separated from the points in spacetime, meaning that it is not possible to put an open set of points between the cosmological singularity and *any* point in spacetime proper. That is, the cosmological singularity has infinite nearness to every point in spacetime. So the Omega Point is transcendent to, yet immanent in, space and time. Because the cosmological singularity exists outside of space and time, it is eternal, as time has no application to it. Quite literally, the cosmological singularity is supernatural, in the sense that no form of physics can apply to it, since physical values are at infinity at the singularity, and so it is not possible to perform arithmetical operations on them; and in the sense that the singularity is beyond creation, as it is not a part of spacetime, but rather is the boundary of space and time. 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 powerset, of which the multiverse in its entirety at this point in universal history is a subset of this powerset). 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. Miracles are allowed by the known laws of physics using baryon annihilation, and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling (which is allowed in the Standard Model of particle physics, as baryon number minus lepton number, B - L, is conserved) caused via the Principle of Least Action by the physical requirement that the Omega Point final cosmological singularity exists. If the miracles of Jesus Christ were necessary in order for the universe to evolve into the Omega Point, and if the known laws of physics are correct, then the probability of those miracles occurring is certain. Additionally, the cosmological singularity consists of a three-aspect structure: the final singularity (i.e., the Omega Point), the all-presents singularity (which exists at the boundary of the multiverse), and the initial singularity (i.e., the beginning of the Big Bang). These three distinct aspects which perform different physical functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually one singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse. Christian theology is therefore preferentially selected by the known laws of physics due to the fundamentally triune structure of the cosmological singularity (which, again, has all the haecceities claimed for God in the major religions), which is deselective of all other major religions. For much more on the above, and for many more details on how the Omega Point cosmology uniquely and precisely matches the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following two articles: * 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/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god . * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.sci.astro/KQWt4KcpMVo , https://archive.is/a04w9 .
  8. As the title indicates, God's existence is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. This theorem has been given in the form of physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. 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].) Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals. Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory. For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology: * 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/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://webcitation.org/74HMsJGbP . Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk[at sign]4ax[period]com , July 30, 2013, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.sci.astro/KQWt4KcpMVo , https://archive.is/a04w9 , https://webcitation.org/6IUTAMEyS .
×
×
  • Create New...