Reply to Christian Polson-Brown, No. 2
James Redford
Your write in reference to the abstract of my article "Jesus Is an
Anarchist" (Social Science Research Network [SSRN], revised and
expanded edition, October 17, 2009 [originally published December 19,
2001] http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 ): "Mr Redford describes the
implications his research have on the world as 'profound', a small
slice of hyperbole if I’ve ever seen it!" It's hardly hyperbole if
Jesus Christ exists and he is God's Messiah. Your response is the
logical fallacy of circular reasoning, as you're assuming as true that
which has not been demonstrated to be true: that Jesus Christ doesn't
exists and he is not God's Messiah.
For the historical reliability of Jesus Christ's existence and his
bodily resurrection, and the untenability of theories which deny his
resurrection, see Prof. William Lane Craig, "Contemporary Scholarship
and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ",
Truth, Vol. 1 (1985), pp. 89-95.
http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth22.html For more on the historicity
of Jesus Christ's resurrection, see William Lane Craig, Reasonable
Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books,
3rd ed., 2008), Chap. 8: "The Resurrection of Jesus", pp. 333-404,
particularly pp. 360 ff.
You go on to write:
""
Mr Redford then acknowledges that in 1994 Tipler didn’t have
experimental confirmation of his theory but claims he does now. Not
only does this contradict Mr Redford’s initial assertion that evidence
lies in the laws of physics themselves but he fails to provide a link
or description of this supposed experimental confirmation (which I
failed to find myself).
""
Actually, in that forum discussion I cited the following peer-reviewed
papers published in physics journals wherein Prof. Frank J. Tipler
provides a proof that the Omega Point cosmology is a logically
unavoidable result of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general
relativity, and quantum mechanics:
* Frank J. Tipler, "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future
of the Universe", NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop
Proceedings, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, January
1999, pp. 111-119; an invited paper in the proceedings of a conference
held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio,
August 12-14, 1998; doi:2060/19990023204. Document ID: 19990023204.
Report Number: E-11429; NAS 1.55:208694; NASA/CP-1999-208694.
http://www.webcitation.org/5nY13xRip Full proceedings volume:
http://www.webcitation.org/5nwu4fT31
* Frank J. Tipler, Jessica Graber, Matthew McGinley, Joshua
Nichols-Barrer and Christopher Staecker, "Closed Universes With Black
Holes But No Event Horizons As a Solution to the Black Hole
Information Problem", arXiv:gr-qc/0003082, March 20, 2000.
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0003082 Published in Monthly Notices of the
Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 379, Issue 2 (August 2007), pp.
629-640, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11895.x, bibcode:
2007MNRAS.379..629T.
* Frank J. Tipler, "The Ultimate Future of the Universe, Black Hole
Event Horizon Topologies, Holography, and the Value of the
Cosmological Constant", arXiv:astro-ph/0104011, April 1, 2001.
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0104011 Published in J. Craig Wheeler
and Hugo Martel (editors), Relativistic Astrophysics: 20th Texas
Symposium, Austin, TX, 10-15 December 2000 (Melville, N.Y.: American
Institute of Physics, 2001), pp. 769-772, ISBN 0735400261, LCCN
2001094694, which is AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 586 (October 15,
2001), doi:10.1063/1.1419654, bibcode: 2001AIPC..586.....W.
* Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology", International
Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (April 2003), pp. 141-148,
doi:10.1017/S1473550403001526, bibcode: 2003IJAsB...2..141T.
http://www.webcitation.org/5o9QHKGuW Also at arXiv:0704.0058, March
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 (April 2005), pp.
897-964, doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04, bibcode: 2005RPPh...68..897T.
http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as
"Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a
Theory of Everything", arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, in which the above
August 2007 paper was published, is one of the world's leading
peer-reviewed astrophysics journals.
Prof. Tipler's paper "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate
Future of the Universe" was an invited paper for a conference held at
and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, so NASA itself has
peer-reviewed Tipler's Omega Point Theory (peer-review is a standard
process for published proceedings papers; and again, Tipler's said
paper was an *invited* paper by NASA, as opposed to what are called
"poster papers").
Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports in Progress in Physics
paper--which presents the Omega Point/Feynman-Weinberg-DeWitt quantum
gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE)--was selected as one
of 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles
published in Reports on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68].
Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding
reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our
international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal
Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005,"
Reports on Progress in Physics. http://www.webcitation.org/5o9VkK3eE )
Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute
of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists. Further,
Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor (according
to Journal Citation Reports) than Physical Review Letters, which is
the most prestigious American physics journal (one, incidently, which
Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once). A journal's impact
factor reflects the importance the science community places in that
journal in the sense of actually citing its papers in their own
papers. (And just to point out, Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in
Physics paper could not have been published in Physical Review Letters
since said paper is nearly book-length, and hence not a "letter" as
defined by the latter journal.)
You further write: "When Michael Shermer wrote 'science will find a
way' he was fairly and accurately paraphrasing the elaborate special
pleading that Tipler goes through to justify his arguments." This
statement is incorrect, as I've already pointed out in the forum
discussion. On p. 395 of Prof. Tipler's book The Physics of
Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead
(New York: Doubleday, 1994), Tipler said that he himself does not yet
accept the Omega Point Theory, and that he is still an atheist, but
that if the Omega Point Theory is confirmed, then he shall be a
theist. Since the publication of this book it has been shown that the
Omega Point cosmology is a logically unavoidable result of the Second
Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, and quantum mechanics.
Additionally, you write:
""
As stated above the argument that the only way to avoid Omega Point is
to violate the known laws of physics is patently false. By invoking so
many established foundations of science (thermodynamics, relativity
etc.) I believe Mr Redford is attempting to intimidate me into
thinking that in order to argue against him I will have to reject
these established sciences. Sorry Mr Redford, no dice.
""
See the aforecited peer-reviewed papers published in physics journals,
each of which was already cited in the forum discussion.
Later, you write:
""
Whether or not Tipler set out to prove the existence of god when he
developed Omega Point Theory has no impact on the fact that when he
presents his arguments (in their most recent form) he argues from a
Judeo-Christian standpoint. That is to say that the Omega Point Theory
constructs a future where a single entity (mono-theistic god of
Abraham) resurrects every human (Rapture). This idea runs counter to
many of the other thousands of religions that have come on gone in
human history and this deeply flawed scientific theory just happens to
create a universe where the Judeo-Christian outcome is inevitable? Oh
please Mr Redford, don’t patronize me by suggesting that Tipler’s
Omega Point is anything but an attempt at proving the biblical end of
days.
Mr Redford only serves to damage further his and Mr Tipler’s
credibility when he argues in the third paragraph that not only has he
discovered the mechanism that Jesus Christ may have used to rise from
the dead but that it’s in any way "trivially easy". This is about the
point where I begin to feel insulted not just for all the
non-believers out their but for all the Christians as well. How
pathetic and insulting it is that this small group of fringe believers
claims to have scientific proof of how the miracles of the bible could
be (and were) performed.
""
As I pointed out, Prof. Tipler didn't set out to physically prove the
existence of God. Tipler had been an atheist since the age of 16, yet
only circa 1998 did he again become a theist due to advancements in
the Omega Point Theory which occured after the publication of his 1994
book The Physics of Immortality.
You're here again committing the logical fallacy of circular reasoning
by *a priori* assuming what must be true and designating its contrary
as *by definition* false.
We should hardly be shocked that the religion which invented the
university system, which invented natural science in the modern sense
by giving us the Scientific Revolution, and which created modern
Western civilization should turn out to be correct.
You further write:
""
In reference to Omega Point this means that even if the super computer
is able to reconstruct a brain that is functionally identical to my
brain, continuity between my consciousness as it is now and this
re-created consciousness is unlikely as we would be two different
entities. Mr Redford’s continued argument that replicating a human
mind would result in "resurrection" is fundamentally flawed. Yes the
recreation might think it’s "me" but I won’t know anything about it
because the copy of the information that is currently me will be dead.
Instead of resurrecting every human the Omega Point computer would
instead be recreating copies.
""
To maintain that a perfect emulation is not the thing being emulated
is to commit a logical contradiction. As an exact emulation of, e.g.,
a human is merely a very large number. Indeed, even the entire
lifetime of a human can be perfectly described by a single number--a
tremendously large number compared to the numbers we're used to
dealing with, but still quite finite.
It would be the same as saying that 3765258724 does not = 3765258724,
i.e., that there is something about the number 3765258724 on the
left-hand side which makes it nonequivalent to the version on the
right-hand side. But this is a logical contradiction, as it violates
the Law of Identity that A = A.
Additionally, the laws of physics, particularly quantum mechanics and
thermodynamics, require that quantum indistinguishability be true,
i.e., that identical quantum states are in every way
indistinguishable, even in principle. (For more on this, see Frank J.
Tipler, The Physics of Immortality [New York: Doubleday, 1994], Chap.
IX: "The Physics of Resurrection of the Dead to Eternal Life", Sec.:
"Quantum Mechanics Supports the Pattern Identity Theory", pp. 230-233,
and Appendix D: "The Law of Mass Action Requires Quantum
Indistinguishability", pp. 412-416.)
In Shermer's book Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience,
Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time (New York: A. W. H.
Freeman/Owl Book, revised and expanded, 2002; original ed. 1997), his
argument against the continuity of consciousness is confused and
self-refuting. As Shermer writes,
""
If Omega/God resurrects me with all of my memories, which memories
will they be? The memories I had at a particular point in my lifetime?
Then, that won't be all of me. All the memories I had at every point
in my life? That won't be me either. Thus, whatever would be
resurrected by Omega/God, it cannot possibly be me, with my very own
memories. And if a Michael Shermer is resurrected, and he does not
have my memories, who will he be? For that matter, who am I?
""
If one were to take what Shermer is saying there seriously, then one
would have to maintain that human consciousness doesn't even exist,
since one isn't exactly the same person one was a moment ago. But
Shermer's confused objection presents no problem to the civilization
near the Omega Point, as it will be a trivial matter for them to
perfectly emulate, down to the quantum level, the entire timeline of
the multiverse from its start at the Big Bang (which starts at zero
informational capacity and diverges to infinite informational capacity
as the universe progresses in time, thereby allowing sufficiently
later states of the universe to perfectly render earlier states). In
this manner, they ensure that not so much as a single bit of
information is lost. We who die would necessarily experience this as a
continuation of our consciousness and identity, according to the
aforesaid Law of Identity and the principle of quantum
indistinguishability.
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.
You also write:
""
The fact that Michael Shermer isn’t a mathematician or a physicist
does not mean that he isn’t a world class critical thinker and
intellectual. Michael Shermer’s arguments against Omega Point Theory
stand on their own merits, rather than their authors credentials. No
such thing can be said for Mr Tipler, who Mr Redford feels the need to
defend with a long-winded recounting of every single book, paper and
article he has ever written. I have omitted from my quotation of Mr
Redford the last part of his reply which was a many hundred word
listing of such references, adding nothing to the argument at hand but
an extension of the already established argument from authority.
""
It's interesting that you would write this, given that you previously
wrote, "Not only does this contradict Mr Redford’s initial assertion
that evidence lies in the laws of physics themselves but he fails to
provide a link or description of this supposed experimental
confirmation (which I failed to find myself)." Yet here you're
complaining about all the citations I provided to peer-reviewed papers
published in physics journals wherein Prof. Frank J. Tipler provides a
proof that the Omega Point cosmology is a logically unavoidable result
of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, and quantum
mechanics.
----------------------------------------
James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science
Research Network (SSRN), revised and expanded edition, October 17,
2009 (originally published December 19, 2001)
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 ,
http://theophysics.chimehost.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf ,
http://theophysics.ifastnet.com/anarchist-jesus.html
Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (a website with information
on Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity
Theory of Everything [TOE]) http://theophysics.chimehost.net ,
http://theophysics.host56.com