God Proven to Exist According to Mainline Physics
James Redford
known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J.
Tipler's below paper, which among other things demonstrates that the
known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general
relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle
physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final
cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity
identified as being God):
F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports
on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964.
http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as
"Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a
Theory of Everything," arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276
Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's above paper was selected as one of
12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles
published in Reports on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68].
Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding
reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our
international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal
Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005,"
Reports on Progress in Physics.
http://www.iop.org/EJ/journal/-page=extra.highlights/0034-4885 )
Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute
of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists.
Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor
(according to Journal Citation Reports) than Physical Review Letters,
which is the most prestigious American physics journal (one,
incidently, which Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once).
A journal's impact factor reflects the importance the science
community places in that journal in the sense of actually citing its
papers in their own papers. (And just to point out, Tipler's 2005
Reports on Progress in Physics paper could not have been published in
Physical Review Letters since said paper is nearly book-length, and
hence not a "letter" as defined by the latter journal.)
See also the below resources for further information on the Omega
Point Theory:
Theophysics http://geocities.com/theophysics/
"Omega Point (Tipler)," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omega_Point_%28Tipler%29&oldid=206077125
"Frank J. Tipler," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_J._Tipler&oldid=205920802
Tipler is Professor of Mathematics and Physics (joint appointment) at
Tulane University. His Ph.D. is in the field of global general
relativity (the same rarefied field that Profs. Roger Penrose and
Stephen Hawking developed), and he is also an expert in particle
physics and computer science. His Omega Point Theory has been
published in a number of prestigious peer-reviewed physics and science
journals in addition to Reports on Progress in Physics, such as
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's
leading astrophysics journals), Physics Letters B, the International
Journal of Theoretical Physics, etc.
Prof. John A. Wheeler (the father of most relativity research in the
U.S.) wrote that "Frank Tipler is widely known for important concepts
and theorems in general relativity and gravitation physics" on pg.
viii in the "Foreword" to The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (1986)
by cosmologist Prof. John D. Barrow and Tipler, which was the first
book wherein Tipler's Omega Point Theory was described. On pg. ix of
said book, Prof. Wheeler wrote that Chapter 10 of the book, which
concerns the Omega Point Theory, "rivals in thought-provoking power
any of the [other chapters]."
The leading quantum physicist in the world, Prof. David Deutsch
(inventor of the quantum computer, being the first person to
mathematically describe the workings of such a device, and winner of
the Institute of Physics' 1998 Paul Dirac Medal and Prize for his
work), endorses the physics of the Omega Point Theory in his book The
Fabric of Reality (1997). For that, see:
David Deutsch, extracts from Chapter 14: "The Ends of the Universe" of
The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes--and Its
Implications (London: Allen Lane The Penguin Press, 1997), ISBN:
0713990619; with additional comments by Frank J. Tipler.
http://geocities.com/theophysics/deutsch-ends-of-the-universe.html
The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to invent tenuous
physical theories which have no experimental support and which violate
the known laws of physics, such as with Prof. Stephen Hawking's paper
on the black hole information issue which is dependant on the
conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field
theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). See S. W. Hawking,
"Information loss in black holes," Physical Review D, Vol. 72, No. 8,
084013 (October 2005); also at arXiv:hep-th/0507171, July 18, 2005.
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0507171
That is, Prof. Hawking's paper is based upon proposed, unconfirmed
physics. It's an impressive testament to the Omega Point Theory's
correctness, as Hawking implicitly confirms that the known laws of
physics require the universe to collapse in finite time. Hawking
realizes that the black hole information issue must be resolved
without violating unitarity, yet he's forced to abandon the known laws
of physics in order to avoid unitarity violation without the universe
collapsing.
Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its
expansion obviates the universe collapsing (and therefore obviates the
Omega Point). But as Profs. Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner
point out in "Geometry and Destiny" (General Relativity and
Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 [October 1999], pp. 1453-1459; also at
arXiv:astro-ph/9904020, April 1, 1999
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9904020 ), there is no set of
cosmological observations which can tell us whether the universe will
expand forever or eventually collapse.
There's a very good reason for that, because that is dependant on the
actions of intelligent life. The known laws of physics provide the
mechanism for the universe's collapse. As required by the Standard
Model, the net baryon number was created in the early universe by
baryogenesis via electroweak quantum tunneling. This necessarily
forces the Higgs field to be in a vacuum state that is not its
absolute vacuum, which is the cause of the positive cosmological
constant. But if the baryons in the universe were to be annihilated by
the inverse of baryogenesis, again via electroweak quantum tunneling
(which is allowed in the Standard Model, as B - L is conserved), then
this would force the Higgs field toward its absolute vacuum,
cancelling the positive cosmological constant and thereby forcing the
universe to collapse. Moreover, this process would provide the ideal
form of energy resource and rocket propulsion during the colonization
phase of the universe.
Prof. Tipler's above 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper also
demonstrates that the correct quantum gravity theory has existed since
1962, first discovered by Richard Feynman in that year, and
independently discovered by Steven Weinberg and Bryce DeWitt, among
others. But because these physicists were looking for equations with a
finite number of terms (i.e., derivatives no higher than second
order), they abandoned this qualitatively unique quantum gravity
theory since in order for it to be consistent it requires an
arbitrarily higher number of terms. Further, they didn't realize that
this proper theory of quantum gravity is consistent only with a
certain set of boundary conditions imposed (which includes the initial
Big Bang, and the final Omega Point, cosmological singularities). The
equations for this theory of quantum gravity are term-by-term finite,
but the same mechanism that forces each term in the series to be
finite also forces the entire series to be infinite (i.e., infinities
that would otherwise occur in spacetime, consequently destabilizing
it, are transferred to the cosmological singularities, thereby
preventing the universe from immediately collapsing into
nonexistence). As Tipler notes in his 2007 book The Physics of
Christianity (pp. 49 and 279), "It is a fundamental mathematical fact
that this [infinite series] is the best that we can do. ... This is
somewhat analogous to Liouville's theorem in complex analysis, which
says that all analytic functions other than constants have
singularities either a finite distance from the origin of coordinates
or at infinity."
When combined with the Standard Model, the result is the Theory of
Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in
physics.
----------------------------------------
James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," revised and expanded
edition, June 1, 2006 (originally published December 19, 2001)
http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/jrredford/anarchist-jesus.html
Theophysics (a website with information on Prof. Frank J. Tipler's
Omega Point Theory) http://geocities.com/theophysics/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/omega-point/
http://www.myspace.com/theophysics
dlzc
> God has been proven to exist ...
None of your citations are proof of anything. You know nothing about
Science. Please provide a quantitative prediction to potentially
disprove the existence of God.
Failing that, you have defined the cold, dark, end of the Universe,
where no particle has no other particle in it future, the complete
*loss* of any information... God.
You owe someone an apology.
David A. Smith
Tonico
Indeed; to intelligency. But I think it really doesn't give a damn,
so...
Regards
Tonio
> David A. Smith
Igor
> God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the
> known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J.
> Tipler's below paper, which among other things demonstrates that the
> known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general
> relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle
> physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final
> cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity
> identified as being God):
>
> F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports
> "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a
>
> Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's above paper was selected as one of
> 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles
> published in Reports on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68].
> Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding
> reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our
> international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal
> Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005,"
> Reports on Progress in Physics.http://www.iop.org/EJ/journal/-page=extra.highlights/0034-4885)
> Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute
> of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists.
>
> Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor
> (according to Journal Citation Reports) than Physical Review Letters,
> which is the most prestigious American physics journal (one,
> incidently, which Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once).
> A journal's impact factor reflects the importance the science
> community places in that journal in the sense of actually citing its
> papers in their own papers. (And just to point out, Tipler's 2005
> Reports on Progress in Physics paper could not have been published in
> Physical Review Letters since said paper is nearly book-length, and
> hence not a "letter" as defined by the latter journal.)
>
> See also the below resources for further information on the Omega
> Point Theory:
>
>
> "Omega Point (Tipler)," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omega_Point_%28Tipler%29&ol...
>
> "Frank J. Tipler," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_J._Tipler&oldid=20592...
>
> The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to invent tenuous
> physical theories which have no experimental support and which violate
> the known laws of physics, such as with Prof. Stephen Hawking's paper
> on the black hole information issue which is dependant on the
> conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field
> theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). See S. W. Hawking,
> "Information loss in black holes," Physical Review D, Vol. 72, No. 8,
>
> That is, Prof. Hawking's paper is based upon proposed, unconfirmed
> physics. It's an impressive testament to the Omega Point Theory's
> correctness, as Hawking implicitly confirms that the known laws of
> physics require the universe to collapse in finite time. Hawking
> realizes that the black hole information issue must be resolved
> without violating unitarity, yet he's forced to abandon the known laws
> of physics in order to avoid unitarity violation without the universe
> collapsing.
>
> Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its
> expansion obviates the universe collapsing (and therefore obviates the
> Omega Point). But as Profs. Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner
> point out in "Geometry and Destiny" (General Relativity and
> Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 [October 1999], pp. 1453-1459; also at
>
> Theophysics (a website with information on Prof. Frank J. Tipler's
> Omega Point Theory)http://geocities.com/theophysics/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/omega-point/http://www.myspace.com/theophysics
If you'd take some time to learn a little philosphy of science, you'd
understand that science is incapable of proving anything. All it can
do is falsify hypotheses through observation and experimentation.
Salmon Egg
James Redford <jrre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the
> known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J.
> Tipler's below paper, which among other things demonstrates that the
> known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general
> relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle
> physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final
> cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity
> identified as being God):
And I have a bridge to sell to you.
Bill
--
Private Profit; Public Poop! Avoid collateral windfall!
Salmon Egg
<f75070c4-80e4-4d09...@g25g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Igor <thoo...@excite.com> wrote:
> If you'd take some time to learn a little philosphy of science, you'd
> understand that science is incapable of proving anything. All it can
> do is falsify hypotheses through observation and experimentation.
This thought seems to be used quite often. Using standard grammar, it
does not seem to make sense to me. "Falsify" to me is converting
something true into something untrue. It is like taking milk and adding
melamine while calling it more nutritious than the original. Sweetening
your drink does not mean that you observe it to be sweet.
Is this use of language something that makes people think that physics
is bunk?
extremesou...@yahoo.com
> In article
> <f75070c4-80e4-4d09-a259-340ce0868...@g25g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
did they happen to find satan hiding behind the dark matter as well
Jens Stueckelberger
You mean ignorant people? Those with a modicum of education know
about the meaning of "falsify" in this context, as explained in any
decent dictionary.
phil-new...@ipal.net
Will you ship it for no additional cost?
--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |
Clyve
> God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the
> known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J.
> Tipler's below paper, which among other things demonstrates that the
> known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general
> relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle
> physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final
> cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity
> identified as being God):
>
> F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports
> "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a
>
> Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's above paper was selected as one of
> 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles
> published in Reports on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68].
> Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding
> reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our
> international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal
> Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005,"
> Reports on Progress in Physics.http://www.iop.org/EJ/journal/-page=extra.highlights/0034-4885)
> Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute
> of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists.
>
> Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor
> (according to Journal Citation Reports) than Physical Review Letters,
> which is the most prestigious American physics journal (one,
> incidently, which Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once).
> A journal's impact factor reflects the importance the science
> community places in that journal in the sense of actually citing its
> papers in their own papers. (And just to point out, Tipler's 2005
> Reports on Progress in Physics paper could not have been published in
> Physical Review Letters since said paper is nearly book-length, and
> hence not a "letter" as defined by the latter journal.)
>
> See also the below resources for further information on the Omega
> Point Theory:
>
>
> "Omega Point (Tipler)," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omega_Point_%28Tipler%29&ol...
>
> "Frank J. Tipler," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_J._Tipler&oldid=20592...
>
> The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to invent tenuous
> physical theories which have no experimental support and which violate
> the known laws of physics, such as with Prof. Stephen Hawking's paper
> on the black hole information issue which is dependant on the
> conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field
> theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). See S. W. Hawking,
> "Information loss in black holes," Physical Review D, Vol. 72, No. 8,
>
> That is, Prof. Hawking's paper is based upon proposed, unconfirmed
> physics. It's an impressive testament to the Omega Point Theory's
> correctness, as Hawking implicitly confirms that the known laws of
> physics require the universe to collapse in finite time. Hawking
> realizes that the black hole information issue must be resolved
> without violating unitarity, yet he's forced to abandon the known laws
> of physics in order to avoid unitarity violation without the universe
> collapsing.
>
> Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its
> expansion obviates the universe collapsing (and therefore obviates the
> Omega Point). But as Profs. Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner
> point out in "Geometry and Destiny" (General Relativity and
> Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 [October 1999], pp. 1453-1459; also at
>
> Theophysics (a website with information on Prof. Frank J. Tipler's
> Omega Point Theory)http://geocities.com/theophysics/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/omega-point/http://www.myspace.com/theophysics
Tactics of the Creationist:
One general tactic to attract believers is to raise doubt in regards
to the essence of science by showing that scientists generally have no
agreement amongst one another and therefore are to be less trusted as
authoritarians with regards to origins. At the same time it is
beneficial to create this atmosphere by adding their own members to
the fold to show that evidence favors alternate origins of the
Universe.
Anselm's telelogical argument allows them one main technique for
accomplishing this. The original argument asks you to imagine
everything and anything that exists in what we might now refer to as
'Totality'. The absolute ALL and everthing that ever existed including
time perhaps itself. He then begs you that this absolute existence is
named, "God" (as opposed to our "Totality"). Because you can certainly
imagine this existence must be certain to exist even thought you
cannot represent it, it therefore, MUST exit! Thus, his defined 'God'
exists.
The trick hasn't changed. It is now just made more diffused so the
listeners who are unwary can be tricked a little easier. What the
Creationists have done is to advocate writers who create a model of a
scientific theory that is framed with the goal of proving the
existence of a general concept of an essential quality of what most
stereotypically assume to be representative of a Divine entity, get
this material published in scientific papers if they can to gain
credibility, and then add the information as fodder to the religious
movement.
The material arguments of their science may or may not have sound
argumentation. It is not necessarily aimed at the professional so much
as to intimidate the uninformed who would tend to read a little
lighter and trust in their educational claims, quotes out of context
from others' authorities favoring them, and showing that they are an
equal amongs the logically-minded scientific community.
If the listener trusts his credibility and his theory then he or
she concludes that X is true about reality. But then they are begged
to defined this X as the essential meaning of "God". Although the
listener is likely to have defined "God" to be much more intimate,
personal, inclusive, and a historical essence, they easily transfer
the new definition to also necessarily imply the latter. Thus, if so-
and-sos theory of say, ?Omega Point?, sounds just, and the author of
theory (or some other disconnected Creationist), define this as the
essential definition of "God", then "God" exists! (And in the minds of
the believers, thus, all the transferred emotional meanings associated
with the term "God" is proven)
Clyve Perry