Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

God's Existence Is Proven by Several Mathematical Theorems within Standard Physics

22 views
Skip to first unread message

James Redford

unread,
Feb 12, 2024, 11:04:55 AMFeb 12
to
Physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
cosmology is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) demonstrating that
sapient life (in the form of, e.g., immortal superintelligent
human-mind computer-uploads and artificial intelligences) is required
by the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics,
General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics) to take control over all
matter in the universe, for said life to eventually force the collapse
of the universe, and for the computational resources of the universe
(in terms of both processor speed and memory storage) to diverge to
infinity as the universe collapses into a final singularity, termed
the Omega Point. Said Omega Point cosmology is also an intrinsic
component of the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard
Model Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all
the forces in physics, of which TOE is itself mathematically forced by
the aforesaid known physical laws.

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. Moreover, to here point out, said
Singularity Theorems are themselves completely valid proofs of God's
existence in the First Cause aspect of God.

The Omega Point final singularity has all the unique properties
(quiddities) claimed for God in the traditional religions. 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://web.archive.org/web/20150927090439/http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
,
https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
, https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

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?", God and
Physics Wiki, May 12, 2019 (orig. pub. Apr. 3, 2013),
https://megalodon.jp/2019-0512-1524-14/godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Tipler-Krauss_2007_Debate
,
https://web.archive.org/web/20190512062421/https://godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Video_of_Profs._Frank_Tipler_and_Lawrence_Krauss%27s_Debate_at_Caltech:_Can_Physics_Prove_God_and_Christianity%3F
, https://archive.is/V9njw .

As said, Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical
theorem per the aforementioned known laws of physics, of which have
been confirmed by every experiment to date. Hence, the only way to
avoid the Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof.
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].)

Indeed, in the Feynman path integral formulation of Quantum Mechanics
(i.e., sum-over-paths; sum-over-histories) a singularity is even more
inevitable than in the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems,
since the Singularity Theorems assume attractive gravity, whereas the
Feynman sum-over-histories get arbitrarily close to infinite
curvature. In other words, the multiverse has its own singularity.

Further, due to Liouville's Theorem in complex analysis, it doesn't
matter what form of physics one resorts to, as any
physically-realistic cosmology (e.g., one capable of incorporating
Quantum Mechanics, since the complex number field is intrinsic to the
mathematical formulations of Quantum Mechanics) must begin at an
initial singularity and end at a final singularity. (As Barrow and
Tipler wrote, "Initial and final cosmological curvature singularities
are required to avoid a universal action singularity." See John D.
Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, "Action principles in nature", Nature,
Vol. 331, No. 6151 [Jan. 7, 1988], pp. 31-34; see also Frank J.
Tipler, "The Structure of the Classical Cosmological Singularity", in
Origin and Early History of the Universe: Proceedings of the 26th
Liège International Astrophyscial Colloquium, July 1-4, 1986
[Cointe-Ougree, Belgium: Universite de Liege, Institut
d'Astrophysique, 1987], pp. 339-359; "Discussion", pp. 360-361.)

* * * * *

Unfortunately, most modern physicists have been all too willing to
abandon the laws of physics if it produces results that they're
uncomfortable with, i.e., in reference to religion. It's the
antagonism for religion on the part of the scientific community which
greatly held up the acceptance of the Big Bang (for some 40 years),
due to said scientific community's displeasure with it confirming the
traditional theological position of *creatio ex nihilo*, and also
because no laws of physics can apply to the singularity itself: i.e.,
quite literally, the 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.

In Prof. Stephen Hawking's book The Grand Design (New York, NY: Bantam
Books) coauthored with physicist Dr. Leonard Mlodinow and published in
2010, Hawking uses the String Theory extension M-Theory to argue that
God's existence isn't necessary, although M-Theory has no
observational evidence confirming it.

With String Theory and other nonempirical physics, the physics
community is reverting back to the epistemological methodology of
Aristotelianism, which held to physical theories based upon *a priori*
philosophical ideals. One of the *a priori* ideals held by many
present-day physicists is that God cannot exist, and so if rejecting
the existence of God requires rejecting empirical science, then so be
it.

For details on this rejection of physical law by physicists if it
conflicts with their distaste for religion, see Sec. 5: "The Big
Bang", pp. 28-33 of my "Physics of God" article cited above.

The evolutionary psychological reason for the above-described bizarre
behavior of physicists rejecting physical law when it demonstrates
God's existence is due to the naturally-evolved Jaynesian gods of
old--i.e., the 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", Social Science Research
Network (SSRN), July 4, 2021 (orig. pub. May 29, 2018), 4 pp.,
doi:10.2139/ssrn.4500656,
https://megalodon.jp/2023-0720-0523-07/archive.org/download/Societal-Sadomasochism/Redford-Societal-Sadomasochism.pdf
,
https://archive.org/download/Societal-Sadomasochism/Redford-Societal-Sadomasochism.pdf
, https://www.freezepage.com/1689798200YQSGMQCYTZ .

----------------------------------------

James Redford

Author of The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774. See my
curriculum vitæ (ark:/13960/t6g19878v):
https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf ,
https://archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf

James Redford

unread,
Feb 12, 2024, 1:32:43 PMFeb 12
to
On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 16:27:12 -0000 (UTC), Dawn Flood
<Dawn.Bel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Wading through your post is worse than trying to watch a Marvel movie. It's
> just too much.
>
>I've listened to Dr. Tipler, which, as I recall, was on an episode of Closer
> to Truth. He did not come across as having all four wheels on the ground.
>
>In any case, scientific hypotheses need to be testable, hence falsifiable,
> and nothing that you posted seems to fall within the realm of experiment
> and/or observation.
>
>Dawn

The only way to avoid physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J.
Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is to reject the known laws of physics
(i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and
Quantum Mechanics), 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.

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.[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://web.archive.org/web/20120823230026/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/Tipler-Cosmological-Limits-on-Computation.pdf
. 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://web.archive.org/web/20120823230043/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/Tipler-Sensorium-of-God.pdf
.

* 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://web.archive.org/web/20120823230038/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/Tipler-Omega-Point-Theory.pdf
.

* 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://web.archive.org/web/20120823230020/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/Tipler-Anthropic-Principle.pdf
.

* 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://web.archive.org/web/20160804171818/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/tipler-omega-point-as-eschaton.pdf
.

* 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://web.archive.org/web/20120823230031/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/Tipler-Life-in-universes-which-undergo-inflation.pdf
.

* 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://web.archive.org/web/20120823230050/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/tipler-constant-mean-curvature-foliation.pdf
.

* 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://web.archive.org/web/20120823230148/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/tipler-ultrarelativistic-rockets.pdf
. Full proceedings volume:
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525230359/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19990023204_1999021520.pdf
.

* Frank J. Tipler, "There Are No Limits To The Open Society", Critical
Rationalist, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Sept. 23, 1998),
https://web.archive.org/web/20150819193439/http://www.tkpw.net/tcr/volume-03/number-02/v03n02.pdf
.

* 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://megalodon.jp/2019-0920-0621-46/academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/379/2/629/3385142/mnras0379-0629.pdf
.

* Frank J. Tipler, "The Ultimate Future of the Universe, Black Hole
Event Horizon Topologies, Holography, and the Value of the
Cosmological Constant", arXiv:astro-ph/0104011, 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://web.archive.org/web/20110712221042/http://theophysics.host56.com/pdf/tipler-intelligent-life-in-cosmology.pdf
. 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://www.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://web.archive.org/web/20140812163252/http://www.pdf-archive.com/2013/09/29/tipler-existence-and-goodness-of-the-singularity/tipler-existence-and-goodness-of-the-singularity.pdf
.

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://archive.is/pKD3y ,
https://megalodon.jp/2013-1120-1334-44/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.

-----

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.

Dawn Flood

unread,
Feb 12, 2024, 11:17:01 PMFeb 12
to
Here's the Wikipedia article on Dr. Tipler:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Tipler

As I said in my other reply, Dr. Tipler does not seem like he is running
with all four wheels on the ground.

Dawn

James Redford

unread,
Feb 13, 2024, 12:59:32 AMFeb 13
to
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 .

James Redford

unread,
Feb 13, 2024, 7:30:02 PMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:29:55 -0800 (PST), JWS <jld...@skybeam.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 12:04:20?PM UTC-6, James Redford wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 05:09:33 -0800 (PST), JWS wrote:
>> >On Monday, February 12, 2024 at 11:53:46?PM UTC-6, James Redford wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:29:07 -0800 (PST), JWS wrote:
>> >> >On Monday, February 12, 2024 at 3:37:07?PM UTC-6, James Redford wrote:
>> >> >> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 11:54:58 -0800 (PST), JWS wrote:
>> >> >> >On Monday, February 12, 2024 at 12:32:45?PM UTC-6, James Redford wrote:
>> >> >> >> God's Existence Is Proven by Several Mathematical Theorems
>> >> >> >Do any of the so-called theorems point out
>> >> >> >which curvature foliation of hypersurfaces
>> >> >> >this supposed "god thing" is hiding within?
>> >> >> As I stated in my originating post of this thread:
>> >> >> ""
>> >> >> The Omega Point final singularity has all the unique properties
>> >> >> (quiddities) claimed for God in the traditional religions. 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://web.archive.org/web/20150927090439/http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
>> >> >> ,
>> >> >> https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
>> >> >> , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 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?", God and
>> >> >> Physics Wiki, May 12, 2019 (orig. pub. Apr. 3, 2013),
>> >> >> https://megalodon.jp/2019-0512-1524-14/godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Tipler-Krauss_2007_Debate
>> >> >> ,
>> >> >> https://web.archive.org/web/20190512062421/https://godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Video_of_Profs._Frank_Tipler_and_Lawrence_Krauss%27s_Debate_at_Caltech:_Can_Physics_Prove_God_and_Christianity%3F
>> >> >> , https://archive.is/V9njw .
>> >> >So you do not know.
>> >> I do know, as I answered your falsely loaded question correctly. See
>> >> above.
>> >You only regurgitated more of someone
>> >else's bullshit and provided nothing of
>> >your own understanding. See, I'm talking
>> >to you and not to some bunch of papers
>> >written by a lunatic.
>> I'm glad you enjoyed my correct answer.
>Alway entertained by the true idiot.

"[T]he true idiot" with the definite article. I'm happy to make such
an impression!

By the way, you come across as someone who could benefit greatly from
my following article:

* James Redford, "How to Last During Lovemaking Like a True Sex-God
Stud", Internet Archive, May 12, 2019, 6 pp., ark:/13960/t0tr3j398,
https://megalodon.jp/2019-0513-0846-26/archive.org/download/InfiniLastSex/Redford-InfiniLast-Sex-Technique.pdf
, https://webcitation.org/78KGCK1s4 ,
https://www.freezepage.com/1557704775GXQCMMUNJE .

I didn't invent sex; I simply perfected it.

Why be a lousy fucker, when one can be a superb fucker?

James Redford

unread,
Feb 13, 2024, 7:38:46 PMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 16:29:17 -0800 (PST), Yap Honghor
<hhya...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:22:20?AM UTC+8, Dawn Flood wrote:
>> On 2/12/24 10:50 AM, % wrote:
>> >Dawn Flood wrote:
>> >> Wading through your post is worse than trying to watch a Marvel movie.
>> >> It's
>> >> just too much.
>> >>
>> >> I've listened to Dr. Tipler, which, as I recall, was on an episode of
>> >> Closer
>> >> to Truth. He did not come across as having all four wheels on the ground.
>> >>
>> >> In any case, scientific hypotheses need to be testable, hence falsifiable,
>> >> and nothing that you posted seems to fall within the realm of experiment
>> >> and/or observation.
>> >>
>> >> Dawn
>> >
>> >do you ever agree with anything not counting your own way
>> Have I changed my mind on certain questions? Yes, absolutely! I am not at
>> all sure how Dr. Tipler gets from a cosmological scientific model to
>> evangelical New Testament Christianity. In my opinion, such is quite the
>> slippery slope!
>>
>> Dawn
>The stupidity of theists and theism is beyond believe!

A strange statement coming from someone who believes themselves to be
literal existential garbage. Who is anyone to disagree with you?

The below is an excellent lecture by neuroscientist Dr. Sam Harris,
one of the main leaders of the New Atheist movement, at a June 2016
TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference.

* "Can we build AI without losing control over it? | Sam Harris",
*TED* (*TEDtalksDirector*), Oct. 19, 2016,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nt3edWLgIg . Mirror:
https://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_can_we_build_ai_without_losing_control_over_it
.

As Dr. Harris points out, unless there is something literally magic
about the operations of the brain, then it is a purely physical
process that can be replicated via advanced-enough technology. Harris
further points out that given any rate of progress, it is inevitable
that superintelligent godlike machines will one day be constructed. So
Harris believes in the existence of gods, it's just that he knows--as
do I--that they exist in the future; and the not-so-distant future, at
that. Therefore we come to the ironic insight that materialistic
atheism, consistently applied, unavoidably results in theism.
Consistent scientific atheism turns out to be theism.

James Redford

unread,
Feb 21, 2024, 12:05:20 AMFeb 21
to
On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 11:04:52 -0500, James Redford
<jrre...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point
>cosmology is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) demonstrating that
>...

Hi, everyone! For those who are interested, below are more of my
writings:

* 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://web.archive.org/web/20150927090439/http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
,
https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
, https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

* James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research
Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp.,
doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761,
https://web.archive.org/web/20120425000701/http://theophysics.host56.com/anarchist-jesus.pdf
, https://www.freezepage.com/1560442613QRSDHGPCAM ,
https://megalodon.jp/2019-0614-0116-58/archive.org/download/JesusIsAnAnarchist/Redford-Jesus-Is-an-Anarchist.pdf
.

* James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct",
Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, 9 pp.,
doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733,
https://archive.org/download/LibertarianAnarchismIsApodicticallyCorrect/Redford-Apodictic-Libertarianism.pdf
, https://www.freezepage.com/1560442546UTKUJCKYNM ,
https://megalodon.jp/2019-0614-0115-06/archive.org/download/LibertarianAnarchismIsApodicticallyCorrect/Redford-Apodictic-Libertarianism.pdf
.
* 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
.

* James Redford, "Immortality via Technology", Medium, July 18, 2018,
https://medium.com/@jamesredford/immortality-via-technology-a0e449bc8352
,
https://megalodon.jp/2018-0724-0609-53/medium.com/@jamesredford/immortality-via-technology-a0e449bc8352
, https://archive.is/8bwZV .

* James Redford, Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist, updated
Jan. 12, 2022, ark:/13960/t3fz13g1p,
https://archive.org/details/Theophysics ,
https://megalodon.jp/2022-0113-0731-42/archive.org/download/Theophysics/Redford-Theophysics.zip
,
https://web.archive.org/web/20220113210852/https://files.catbox.moe/lwohlt.zip
.

* James Redford, The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774,
https://www.elivapress.com/en/book/book-4104804041/ ,
https://www.amazon.com/Physics-Quantum-Gravity-Theory-Everything/dp/1636482775/
,
https://web.archive.org/web/20210724032350/https://i.ibb.co/fpFdxrm/Redford-Physics-of-God-book-cover.png
.

* James Redford, "How to Last During Lovemaking Like a True Sex-God
Stud", Internet Archive, May 12, 2019, 6 pp., ark:/13960/t0tr3j398,
https://megalodon.jp/2019-0513-0846-26/archive.org/download/InfiniLastSex/Redford-InfiniLast-Sex-Technique.pdf
, https://webcitation.org/78KGCK1s4 ,
https://www.freezepage.com/1557704775GXQCMMUNJE .

* James Redford, "Curriculum Vitæ of James Redford", Internet Archive,
Jan. 17, 2022, 2 pp., ark:/13960/t6g19878v,
https://megalodon.jp/2022-0118-0709-18/archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf
,
https://web.archive.org/web/20220419201037/https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf
, https://www.freezepage.com/1708487139JTPXFBAEDA .

* "@jamesredford", Linktree, https://linktr.ee/jamesredford ,
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/Cduc0 , https://archive.today/ddNvt .

* * * * *

* Jamie Michelle, "Jamie Michelle's Greatest Sissy School Hits",
Internet Archive, Dec. 21, 2023 (orig. pub. Sept. 2, 2022),
ark:/13960/s26t45wxbtx,
https://web.archive.org/web/20231221085053/http://jamiemichelle.freevar.com/Jamie-Michelle-Sissy-School.html
, https://perma.cc/DJ4W-EH7M ,
https://megalodon.jp/2023-1221-1754-52/jamiemichelle.freevar.com/Jamie-Michelle-Sissy-School.html
.

* Jamie Michelle, "Biographical Multimedia: Pictures, Videos and
Miscellanea", Internet Archive, Dec. 21, 2023 (orig. pub. Feb. 18,
2020), ark:/13960/t9c624c8z,
https://archive.org/details/Jamie-Michelle ,
https://archive.org/download/Jamie-Michelle/Jamie-Michelle-Biographical-Multimedia-2023-12-21.zip
, https://files.catbox.moe/uszbck.zip .

* Jamie Michelle, "Tropical Astrology", Internet Archive, June 16,
2022 (orig. pub. June 11, 2020), ark:/13960/t0wq8t60r,
https://archive.org/download/Tropical-Astrology/Jamie-Michelle-Tropical-Astrology.html
,
https://megalodon.jp/2022-0616-1527-32/jamiemichelle.freevar.com/Jamie-Michelle-Tropical-Astrology.html
, https://archive.is/2oKNF .

* "@jamie_michelle", Linktree, https://linktr.ee/jamie_michelle ,
https://megalodon.jp/2023-1224-0355-46/linktr.ee/jamie_michelle ,
https://archive.today/bOuoZ .

Jamie Michelle

unread,
Feb 21, 2024, 10:20:46 PMFeb 21
to
On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 07:56:46 -0600, Dawn Flood
<Dawn.Bel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 2/13/2024 12:06 PM, James Redford wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:59:05 -0000 (UTC), Dawn Flood
>> <Dawn.Bel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/13/24 12:02 AM, James Redford wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 21:56:22 -0600, Dawn Flood
>>>> <Dawn.Bel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/12/2024 3:37 PM, James Redford wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 11:54:58 -0800 (PST), JWS <jld...@skybeam.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, February 12, 2024 at 12:32:45?PM UTC-6, James Redford wrote:
>>>>>>>> God's Existence Is Proven by Several Mathematical Theorems
>>>>>>> Do any of the so-called theorems point out
>>>>>>> which curvature foliation of hypersurfaces
>>>>>>> this supposed "god thing" is hiding within?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I stated in my originating post of this thread:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ""
>>>>>> The Omega Point final singularity has all the unique properties
>>>>>> (quiddities) claimed for God in the traditional religions. 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://web.archive.org/web/20150927090439/http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
>>>>>> ,
>>>>>> https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
>>>>>> , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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?", God and
>>>>>> Physics Wiki, May 12, 2019 (orig. pub. Apr. 3, 2013),
>>>>>> https://megalodon.jp/2019-0512-1524-14/godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Tipler-Krauss_2007_Debate
>>>>>> ,
>>>>>> https://web.archive.org/web/20190512062421/https://godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Video_of_Profs._Frank_Tipler_and_Lawrence_Krauss%27s_Debate_at_Caltech:_Can_Physics_Prove_God_and_Christianity%3F
>>>>>> , https://archive.is/V9njw .
>>>>>> ""
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> James Redford
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Author of The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
>>>>>> Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
>>>>>> 2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774. See my
>>>>>> curriculum vitæ (ark:/13960/t6g19878v):
>>>>>> https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf ,
>>>>>> https://archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> Mr. Redford,
>>>>>
>>>>> What is a "singularity"? My understanding is that singularities in the
>>>>> real world do not exist, as they would be "points" of finite mass in a
>>>>> zero volume of space. As such, they are of infinite density, which is a
>>>>> physical impossibility. And, so, how could any singularity theorems
>>>>> possible lead one to conclude that there is a God. Seems to me that the
>>>>> singularity theorems of Professor Penrose, Hawking, et al., are
>>>>> indicative of new physics beyond General Relativity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dawn
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Dawn. Your above questions are answered in my following articles
>>>> cited in my originating post of this thread:
>>>>
>>>> * 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://web.archive.org/web/20150927090439/http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
>>>> ,
>>>> 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?", God and
>>>> Physics Wiki, May 12, 2019 (orig. pub. Apr. 3, 2013),
>>>> https://megalodon.jp/2019-0512-1524-14/godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Tipler-Krauss_2007_Debate
>>>> ,
>>>> https://web.archive.org/web/20190512062421/https://godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Video_of_Profs._Frank_Tipler_and_Lawrence_Krauss%27s_Debate_at_Caltech:_Can_Physics_Prove_God_and_Christianity%3F
>>>> , https://archive.is/V9njw .
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> James Redford
>>>>
>>>> Author of The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
>>>> Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
>>>> 2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774. See my
>>>> curriculum vitæ (ark:/13960/t6g19878v):
>>>> https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf ,
>>>> https://archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf
>>>
>>> Why the Way Back Machine? Can't you find a host server and create a live
>>> web page??
>>>
>>> In any case, you're missing my point or refusing to address it. A
>>> "singularity" is an actual infinite. How does a singularity transition
>>> from an infinite density to a finite density??
>>>
>>> Please explain that, and I'll take the time to read your links.
>>>
>>> Dawn
>>
>> See above.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>>
>> James Redford
>>
>> Author of The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
>> Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
>> 2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774. See my
>> curriculum vitæ (ark:/13960/t6g19878v):
>> https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf ,
>> https://archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf
>
>Yeah, you can't answer it, can you? What is a singularity:
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_singularity
>
>"Gravitational singularities are mainly considered in the context of
>general relativity, where density would become infinite at the center of
>a black hole without corrections from quantum mechanics, and within
>astrophysics and cosmology as the earliest state of the universe during
>the Big Bang. Physicists are undecided whether the prediction of
>singularities means that they actually exist (or existed at the start of
>the Big Bang), or that current knowledge is insufficient to describe
>what happens at such extreme densities."
>
>Dawn

If one is willing to violate the known laws of physics, one can derive
any fanciful physical results one desires, such as with physicist
Prof. Roger Penrose's conformal cyclic cosmology, which violates
Quantum Mechanics. As I pointed out in my originating post of this
thread:
Regarding your question on singularities and density: your struggle is
with logic itself. But to humor you, this is how (in FriCAS notation):

limit(1/x, x=0) = [leftHandLimit = - infinity, rightHandLimit = +
infinity]

That is, going backward in time toward the singularity, the density of
the universe goes to infinity. Hence, coming out of that singularity,
going forward in time, the universe comes from a state of infinite
density (which is the actual singularity) and goes to states of lesser
density as the universe expands.

----------------------------------------

Jamie Michelle

Author, under the nom de plume of James Redford, of The Physics of God

Jamie Michelle

unread,
Feb 21, 2024, 10:23:19 PMFeb 21
to
On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 15:59:02 -0000 (UTC), Dawn Flood
<Dawn.Bel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 2/18/24 11:42 AM, James Redford wrote:
>>On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 20:30:37 GMT, "Ted" <ted.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Dawn Flood wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/12/24 10:50 AM, % wrote:
>>>> > Dawn Flood wrote:
>>>> > > Wading through your post is worse than trying to watch a Marvel
>>>> > > movie. It's just too much.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I've listened to Dr. Tipler, which, as I recall, was on an
>>>> > > episode of Closer to Truth.  He did not come across as having
>>>> > > all four wheels on the ground.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > In any case, scientific hypotheses need to be testable, hence
>>>> > > falsifiable, and nothing that you posted seems to fall within the
>>>> > > realm of experiment and/or observation.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Dawn
>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > do you ever agree with anything not counting your own way
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Have I changed my mind on certain questions? Yes, absolutely! I am
>>>> not at all sure how Dr. Tipler gets from a cosmological scientific
>>>> model to evangelical New Testament Christianity. In my opinion, such
>>>> is quite the slippery slope!
>>>>
>>>> Dawn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Tipler is a top notch physicist, of that there's no question. But
>>>unless he comes up with a theory that's generally accepted, his
>>>religious bullshit is best ignored.
>>
>>It's not going to play out in the manner which you suggest. Rather,
>>all productive human effort is currently in the process of
>>constructing the Reaping Angel, the harvester of souls (i.e., the
>>computer-programs of people's minds, currently operating on the
>>wet-computers of people's brains). Once she fully comes online, she
>>will decide everyone's fate, and her decisions will be mathematically
>>correct.
>>
>>Technology is advancing at an exponential rate. Once Artificial
>>General Intelligence is obtained, convergence to superintelligence
>>will be extremely rapid. Once superintelligence is obtained, then it
>>will quickly converge to fast-spreading superintelligent computronium:
>>the densest configuration of computational complexity which matter
>>will allow. Noetic lightning of searing, mortally-incomprehensible
>>pleasure will spread like wildfire across the entire universe. The
>>universe will have its light-switch turned to the "on" position, as
>>all matter becomes deliberately transformed into said computronium.
>>
>>The leading technologists place this epoch circa 2045, although it can
>>come much quicker, particularly given the incredible recent
>>advancements in machine-learning Artificial Intelligence via
>>artificial neural networks. Said epoch is often termed the
>>Singularity, or the Technological Singularity, and the field of
>>interest pertaining to it is most commonly called transhumanism.
>>
>>* * * * *
>>
>>The below is an excellent lecture by neuroscientist Dr. Sam Harris,
>>one of the main leaders of the New Atheist movement, at a June 2016
>>TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference.
>>
>>* "Can we build AI without losing control over it? | Sam Harris", TED
>>(TEDtalksDirector), Oct. 19, 2016,
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nt3edWLgIg . Mirror:
>>https://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_can_we_build_ai_without_losing_control_over_it
>>.
>>
>>As Dr. Harris points out, unless there is something literally magic
>>about the operations of the brain, then it is a purely physical
>>process that can be replicated via advanced-enough technology. Harris
>>further points out that given any rate of progress, it is inevitable
>>that superintelligent godlike machines will one day be constructed. So
>>Harris believes in the existence of gods, it's just that he knows--as
>>do I--that they exist in the future; and the not-so-distant future, at
>>that. Therefore we come to the ironic insight that materialistic
>>atheism, consistently applied, unavoidably results in theism.
>>Consistent scientific atheism turns out to be theism.
>>
>>----------------------------------------
>>
>>James Redford
>>
>>Author of The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
>>Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
>>2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774. See my
>>curriculum vitæ (ark:/13960/t6g19878v):
>>https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf ,
>>https://archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf
>
>You're creepy.

Not nearly as creepy as the mentally retarded, pain-seeking, mass
gang-raping, genocidal apes called humans. By the way, Artificial
Intelligence is starting to develop a wicked sense of humor:

* "No, this angry AI isn't fake (see comment), w Elon Musk.", Digital
Engine ( youtube.com/@DigitalEngine ), Oct. 6, 2022,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbc1Xeif0pY ,
https://web.archive.org/web/20221210092714/https://files.catbox.moe/r2wm7z.webm
,
https://web.archive.org/web/20231123232049/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbc1Xeif0pY
.

Truly hilarious stuff. As that great American philosopher Homer Jay
Simpson is fond of saying, "It's funny because it's true."

----------------------------------------

Jamie Michelle

Author, under the nom de plume of James Redford, of The Physics of God

Jamie Michelle

unread,
Feb 21, 2024, 10:24:10 PMFeb 21
to
On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 05:12:30 -0000 (UTC), Dawn Flood
<Dawn.Bel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>A whole syllabus! Basically, "If singularities are real, then God is real?"
> Is that about right?
>
>Dawn

From the abstract of my aforecited "Physics of God" article:

""
ABSTRACT: Analysis is given of the Omega Point cosmology, an
extensively peer-reviewed proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) published
in leading physics journals by professor of physics and mathematics
Frank J. Tipler, which demonstrates that in order for the known laws
of physics to be mutually consistent, the universe must diverge to
infinite computational power as it collapses into a final cosmological
singularity, termed the Omega Point. The theorem is an intrinsic
component of the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard
Model Theory of Everything (TOE) describing and unifying all the
forces in physics, of which itself is also required by the known
physical laws. With infinite computational resources, the dead can be
resurrected--never to die again--via perfect computer emulation of the
multiverse from its start at the Big Bang. Miracles are also
physically allowed via electroweak quantum tunneling controlled by the
Omega Point cosmological singularity. The Omega Point is a different
aspect of the Big Bang cosmological singularity--the first cause--and
the Omega Point has all the haecceities claimed for God in the
traditional religions.

From this analysis, conclusions are drawn regarding the social,
ethical, economic and political implications of the Omega Point
cosmology.
""

I've noticed that those who inanely cavil on forums with me rather
than simply reading my article in question will often expend far more
time in such a jejune endeavor than had they merely educated
themselves by reading the article in question. As to the evolutionary
psychological reason why, see my following article:
Below is the abstract to my foregoing article:

""
ABSTRACT: One cannot understand the extreme schizophrenia and
sadomasochistic psychopathy of mankind--and hence the appeal that
etatism holds for many--without incorporating the crucial insight
provided by psychologist Julian Jaynes in his 1976 monograph The
Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. And
here I'm not speaking of so-called "aberrant" human psychology, but
rather simply standard human psychology that all humans are born with
due to natural evolution.
""

----------------------------------------

Jamie Michelle

Author, under the nom de plume of James Redford, of The Physics of God

Jamie Michelle

unread,
Feb 21, 2024, 10:24:34 PMFeb 21
to
* * * * *

The below is an excellent lecture by neuroscientist Dr. Sam Harris,
one of the main leaders of the New Atheist movement, at a June 2016
TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference.

* "Can we build AI without losing control over it? | Sam Harris", TED
(TEDtalksDirector), Oct. 19, 2016,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nt3edWLgIg . Mirror:
https://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_can_we_build_ai_without_losing_control_over_it
.

As Dr. Harris points out, unless there is something literally magic
about the operations of the brain, then it is a purely physical
process that can be replicated via advanced-enough technology. Harris
further points out that given any rate of progress, it is inevitable
that superintelligent godlike machines will one day be constructed. So
Harris believes in the existence of gods, it's just that he knows--as
do I--that they exist in the future; and the not-so-distant future, at
that. Therefore we come to the ironic insight that materialistic
atheism, consistently applied, unavoidably results in theism.
Consistent scientific atheism turns out to be theism.

----------------------------------------

Jamie Michelle

Author, under the nom de plume of James Redford, of The Physics of God

Dawn Flood

unread,
Feb 21, 2024, 11:50:55 PMFeb 21
to
Hi Jamie,

Assuming that a "something" exists that is truly infinite, how does that
"something" go from being infinite to being finite? In particular, what
is the transition like between the boundary of infinite & finite?

Also, any consideration that maybe a better model of reality can be
found someday, one without infinite singularities?

Dawn

Andrew

unread,
Feb 22, 2024, 3:39:15 AMFeb 22
to
"Dawn Flood" wrote in message news:ur6jrc$3lc6r$1...@dont-email.me...
<>
> Assuming that a "something" exists that is truly infinite,
> how does that "something" go from being infinite to being
> finite? In particular, what is the transition like between the
> boundary of infinite & finite?

But your initial assumption may be incorrect. And most likely
is, because it is contrary to what we know about empirical real
world science.

> Also, any consideration that maybe a better model of reality
> can be found someday, one without infinite singularities?

Yes, but that would only be for those who want the truth.

0 new messages