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: God Is the Ultimate Physicist
http://theophysics.110mb.com , 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, February 9, 2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_J._Tipler&oldid=269587875
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
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 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); with
additional comments by Frank J. Tipler.
http://theophysics.110mb.com/deutsch-ends-of-the-universe.html
The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to resort to
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 dependent 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 empirically unconfirmed
physics which violate the known laws of 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 baryon number minus lepton
number [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 book The Physics of Christianity
(New York: Doubleday, 2007), 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.
##########
Regarding the equivalence of God and the Omega Point, Prof. Tipler has
published on this equivalence in a peer-reviewed academic science
journal. See Frank J. Tipler, "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to
Pannenberg's Questions for Scientists," Zygon: Journal of Religion &
Science, Vol. 24, Issue 2 (June 1989), pp. 217-253;
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.1989.tb01112.x.
http://theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler-omega-point-as-eschaton.pdf ,
http://www.gazup.com/FLQT0-tipler-omega-point-as-eschaton.pdf-download-mirrors
The Omega Point is omniscient, having an infinite amount of
information and knowing all that is logically possible to be known; it
is omnipotent, having an infinite amount of energy and power; and it
is omnipresent, consisting of all that exists. As well, as Stephen
Hawking proved, the singularity is not in spacetime, but rather is the
boundary of space and time (see S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The
Large Scale Structure of Space-Time [London: Cambridge University
Press, 1973], pp. 217-221). So the Omega Point is transcendent to, yet
immanent in, space and time.
Additionally, the cosmological singularity consists of a three-part
structure: the final singularity (i.e., the Omega Point), the
all-presents singularity (which exists at all times at the edge of the
multiverse), and the initial singularity (i.e., the beginning of the
Big Bang). These three distinct parts which perform different physical
functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually one
singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse.
And given an infinite amount of computational resources, per the
Bekenstein Bound, recreating the exact quantum state of our present
universe is trivial, requiring at most a mere 10^123 bits (the number
which Roger Penrose calculated), or at most a mere 2^10^123 bits for
every different quantum configuration of the universe logically
possible (i.e., the multiverse in its entirety up to this point in
universal history). So the Omega Point will be able to resurrect us
using merely an infinitesimally small amount of total computational
resources: indeed, the multiversal resurrection will occur between
10^-10^10 and 10^-10^123 seconds before the Omega Point is reached, as
the computational capacity of the universe at that stage will be great
enough that doing so will require only a trivial amount of total
computational resources.
So to recapitulate:
1.) The Omega Point (or, for that matter, the society near the Omega
Point) can trivially perform the universal resurrection of the dead,
upon which the people resurrected can live eternally in literal
heaven, i.e., paradise.
2.) The Omega Point is omniscient.
3.) The Omega Point is omnipresent.
4.) The Omega Point is omnipotent.
5.) The cosmological singularity is a triune structure, of which the
Omega Point is one component.
6.) The cosmological singularity is transcendent to, yet immanent in,
space and time.
7.) The cosmological singularity is the only achieved (actually
existing) infinity.
8.) The Omega Point creates the universe and all of existence.
Those are all the physical properties that have been claimed for God
in traditional Christian theology. There are many other congruities
between the Omega Point cosmology and Christianity. Below are listed
just some of them:
1.) We are gods: John 10:34 (Jesus is quoting Psalm 82:6).
2.) We are God and God is us: Matthew 25:31-46.
3.) We live inside of God: Acts 17:24-28.
4.) God is everything and inside of everything: Colossians 3:11;
Jeremiah 23:24.
5.) We are members in the body of Christ: Romans 12:4,5; 1 Corinthians
6:15-19; 12:12-27; Ephesians 4:25.
6.) We are one in Christ: Galatians 3:28.
7.) God is all: Ephesians 1:23; 4:4-6.
8.) God is light: 1 John 1:5; John 8:12.
9.) We have existed before the foundation of the world: Matthew 25:34;
Luke 1:70; 11:50; Ephesians 1:4; 2 Timothy 1:9; Isaiah 40:21.
10.) Jesus has existed before the foundation of the world: John 17:24;
Revelation 13:8.
11.) The reality of multiple worlds: Hebrews 1:1,2; 11:3.
12.) God is the son of man: Matthew 8:20; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:18;
12:32; 12:40; 13:37; 13:41; 16:13; 16:27,28; 17:9; 17:12; 17:22;
18:11; 19:28; 20:18; 20:28; 24:27; 24:30; 24:37; 24:39; 24:44; 25:13;
25:31; 26:2; 26:24; 26:45; 26:64. (This is just listing how many times
Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man in the Gospel of Matthew,
althought he refers to himself as this throughout the Gospels. It was
the favorite phrase that he used to refer to himself.)
How item Nos. 9 and 10 relate is that within Prof. Tipler's Omega
Point Theory the universe is brought into being by the Omega Point, as
the end-state of the universe causally brings about the beginning
state, i.e., the Big Bang singularity (since in physics it's just as
accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz.,
the principle of least action; and unitarity). Another way of stating
it is that in the Omega Point cosmology, the Omega Point is the
fundamental existential and mathematical entity, from which all of
reality derives. Indeed, within the Omega Point Theory, the Big Bang
singularity and the Omega Point singularity are actually just
different functions of the same singularity. Further, anything which
at any time will exist will simply be a subset of what is rendered in
the Omega Point.
##########
Nor does the fact that God has been proven to exist according to the
known laws of physics leave no room for faith. Recall that Jesus
Christ in part defined Himself as the truth (John 14:6). Hence, truth,
particularly scientific truth, confirms the existence of God and Jesus
Christ as the Second Person of the Trinity.
Faith in the Christian sense is trust in the truth (i.e.,
equivalently, trust in Jesus Christ), even when things seem hopeless.
It does not mean a lack of rationality in coming to belief in Jesus
Christ. Indeed, Paul appealed to reason when he wrote in Romans
1:19,20 that an understanding of the natural world leads to knowledge
of God:
""
because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has
shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible
attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are
made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without
excuse, ...
""
After all, some form of reason must be used in order for a person to
convert in belief from one religion to another; or from any belief to
another belief, for that matter. It can either be veridical reason, or
false reason--but some process of reasoning must be involved.
Having faith in God is having trust in the truth, since the Godhead in
all its fullness is the highest obtainment of truth: said state is the
perfection of all knowledge.
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 regarding it as lending credence to
the traditional theological position of creatio ex nihilo, and also
because no laws of physics can apply to a singularity itself. The
originator of the Big Bang theory, circa 1930, was Roman Catholic
priest and physicist Prof. Georges Lema�tre; and it was
enthusiastically endorsed by Pope Pius XII in 1951, long before the
scientific community finally came to accept it. As regards physicists
abandoning physical law due to their theological discomfort with the
Big Bang, in an article by Prof. Frank J. Tipler he gives the
following example involving no less than physicist Prof. Steven
Weinberg:
""
The most radical ideas are those that are perceived to support
religion, specifically Judaism and Christianity. When I was a student
at MIT in the late 1960s, I audited a course in cosmology from the
physics Nobelist Steven Weinberg. He told his class that of the
theories of cosmology, he preferred the Steady State Theory because
"it *least* resembled the account in Genesis" (my emphasis). In his
book *The First Three Minutes* (chapter 6), Weinberg explains his
earlier rejection of the Big Bang Theory: "Our mistake is not that we
take our theories too seriously, but that we do not take them
seriously enough. It is always hard to realize that these numbers and
equations we play with at our desks have something to do with the real
world. [b]Even worse, there often seems to be a general agreement that
certain phenomena are just not fit subjects for respectable
theoretical and experimental effort.[/b]" [My emphasis--J. R.]
... But as [Weinberg] himself points out in his book, the Big Bang
Theory was an automatic consequence of standard thermodynamics,
standard gravity theory, and standard nuclear physics. All of the
basic physics one needs for the Big Bang Theory was well established
in the 1930s, some two decades before the theory was worked out.
Weinberg rejected this standard physics not because he didn't take the
equations of physics seriously, but because he did not like the
religious implications of the laws of physics. ...
""
For that and a number of other such examples, see:
Frank J. Tipler, "Refereed Journals: Do They Insure Quality or Enforce
Orthodoxy?," Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design (PCID),
Vols. 2.1 and 2.2 (January-June 2003).
http://www.iscid.org/papers/Tipler_PeerReview_070103.pdf Also
published as Chapter 7 in Uncommon Dissent: Intellectuals Who Find
Darwinism Unconvincing, edited by William A. Dembski, "Foreword" by
John Wilson (Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books, 2004).
Prof. Stephen Hawking reinforces what Weinberg and Tipler wrote about
concerning the antagonism of the scientific community for religion,
resulting in them abandoning good physics. In his book The Illustrated
A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam Books, 1996), pg. 62,
Hawking wrote:
""
Many people do not like the idea that time has a beginning, probably
because it smacks of divine intervention. (The Catholic Church, on the
other hand, seized on the big bang model and in 1951 officially
pronounced it to be in accordance with the Bible). There were
therefore a number of attempts to avoid the conclusion that there had
been a big bang.
""
On pg. 179 of the same book, Hawking wrote "In real time, the universe
has a beginning and an end at singularities that form a boundary to
spacetime and at which the laws of science break down."
Agnostic and physicist Dr. Robert Jastrow, founding director of NASA's
Goddard Institute for Space Studies, wrote in his book God and the
Astronomers (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1978), pg. 113:
""
This religious faith of the scientist [that there is no First Cause]
is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under
conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a
product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that
happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the
implications, he would be traumatized.
""
For more quotes by Robert Jastrow on this, see:
John Ross Schroeder and Bill Bradford, "Science and Discomfiting
Discoveries" in Life's Ultimate Question: Does God Exist? (United
Church of God, 2000)
http://www.gnmagazine.org/booklets/GE/discomfitingdiscoveries.htm ,
http://www.gnmagazine.org/booklets/GE/GE.pdf
For more quotes by scientists along the above lines, see the below
article:
Mariano, "In the Beginning ... Cosmology, Part I," Atheism's
Assertions, February 20, 2007
http://lifeanddoctrineatheism.blogspot.com/2007/02/in-beginning-cosmology-part-i-see.html
,
http://atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/02/in-beginning-cosmology-part-i-pre-big.html
Again, the only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to resort to
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 dependent 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 empirically unconfirmed
physics which violate the known laws of 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.
Contrast that ad libitum approach to doing physics with that of Prof.
Frank J. Tipler, who bases his Omega Point Theory and the
Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity/extended Standard Model Theory of
Everything (TOE) strictly on the known laws of physics, and that of
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). They both believe we have to take the known laws of
physics seriously as true explanations of how the world works, unless
said physics are experimentally, or otherwise, refuted.
----------------------------------------
James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," Social Science Research
Network (SSRN), revised and expanded edition, May 3, 2009 (originally
published December 19, 2001) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 , http://www.geocities.com/jrredford/anarchist-jesus.pdf , http://www.geocities.com/jrredford/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.110mb.com ,
http://geocities.com/theophysics/
BURT
Mitch Raemsch
James Redford
> But God has no need to prove that He exists.
>
> Mitch Raemsch
If God created the universe and acts in it then His existence is a
subject within the purview of physics, since physics concerns itself
with physical reality. And it so happens that the known laws of
physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity,
quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics)--of
which have been confirmed by every experiment to date--require that
the universe end in the Omega Point (the final cosmological
singularity and state of infinite informational capacity identified as
being God).
Additionally, we now have the quantum gravity Theory of Everything
(TOE) correctly describing and unifying 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.
For much more on these matters, see Prof. Tipler's below 2005 Reports
on Progress in Physics paper--which presents the Omega Point quantum
gravity Theory of Everything--and the following resources:
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
"God Proven to Exist According to Mainline Physics," TetrahedronOmega,
December 26, 2008 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=122&mforum=libertyandtruth
Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist http://theophysics.110mb.com
, http://geocities.com/theophysics/
----------------------------------------
BURT
> BURT wrote:
> > But God has no need to prove that He exists.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> If God created the universe and acts in it then His existence is a
> subject within the purview of physics, since physics concerns itself
How do we determine what God is doing?
Personally I believe He is creating gravity.
But order is predetermined or absolute since the beginning.
God has no need to control anything. He designed the end of time.
Mitch Raemsch
Juan R.
> 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):
Tipler is plain wrong even at the scientific side.
> Georges Lemaître; and it was enthusiastically endorsed by Pope Pius XII
--
http://www.canonicalscience.org/
BLOG:
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencetoday/canonicalsciencetoday.html
Uncle Al
>
> God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the
> known laws of physics.
http://www.godchecker.com/
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/religion.htm
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
RichD
> > God has been proven to exist based upon the most
> > reserved view of the known laws of physics.
>
>
Cool.
Which ones combine orgies with their worship
services? I'd be interested in enlisting...
--
Rich
sexologist
tadchem
You need a new dictionary.
Quick definitions (mainline): ▸ verb: inject into the vein
Quick definitions (mainstream): ▸ noun: the prevailing current of
thought ("His thinking was in the American mainstream")
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
tadchem
Ken S. Tucker
Uncle Al wrote:
> James Redford wrote:
> >
> > God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the
> > known laws of physics.
> [snip 430 lines of crap]
>
> http://www.godchecker.com/
It's reasonable to become religious after one dies.
The afterlife will render that possible, and there will
be a lot of spare time, that's my plan.
Ken