Scientific Proof For The Existence of God/ Heaven

[Subduction Zone]

So what's the "test" that would or could falsify M-theory, Multiverse theory, or the LCMD model? Do you have *any* idea of how many times the so called "tests" of the dark matter model have produced NULL results? Billions of dollars of laboratory "tests" of DM have been conducted to date and nothing has ever been found.

Ask a physicist. I do believe that they have some.

And are you aware of the tests for Dark Matter that have produced positive results? If you look only at the failures then you are just as guilty of cherry picking as those that only pick out the successes.

Meanwhile there is no "EM theory" to speak of at all. It cannot explain the motion of the galaxies, all that is given is wild handwaving. That is why it is all but universally rejected. A few loons here and there support it in the world of science. Have you ever wondered why?

 

[Michael]

Ask a physicist. I do believe that they have some.

They don't.

And are you aware of the tests for Dark Matter that have produced positive results? If you look only at the failures then you are just as guilty of cherry picking as those that only pick out the successes.

First run of ABRACADABRA experiment finds no evidence of 'ghost-like' axion particles | Computing

What "tests" might those be, and what's the control mechanism used in the test?

Meanwhile there is no "EM theory" to speak of at all.

That's totally false:
Resources and mathematical models describing the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology theory : plasmacosmology

It cannot explain the motion of the galaxies, all that is given is wild handwaving.

False again:

Galaxy rotation patterns are better explained by Birkeland currents than by dark matter.

The Birkeland current mathematical model is fully specified. The only "handwaving" going on in that thread is the handwaving of it's skeptics, most of which has already been *shown to be erroneous*.

Not only does EU/PC theory explain galaxy rotation, it explains *counter rotation*, unlike DM theory.

That is why it is all but universally rejected.

Actually the EU/PC community is growing, and electricity in space is already accepted by Geospace science.

Geospace scientists are already embracing the idea of an electric universe.

A few loons here and there support it in the world of science. Have you ever wondered why?

Geospace science isn't filled with "loons". Your need to resort to name calling, and your inability to cite any error in Scott's galaxy rotation paper simply demonstrates the weakness of your argument.

You also totally avoided me point. Almost *no* theory in physics has a falsification mechanism. You can't even name one.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They don't.



First run of ABRACADABRA experiment finds no evidence of 'ghost-like' axion particles | Computing

What "tests" might those be, and what's the control mechanism used in the test?



That's totally false:
Resources and mathematical models describing the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology theory : plasmacosmology



False again:

Galaxy rotation patterns are better explained by Birkeland currents than by dark matter.

The Birkeland current mathematical model is fully specified. The only "handwaving" going on in that thread is the handwaving of it's skeptics, most of which has already been *shown to be erroneous*.

Not only does EU/PC theory explain galaxy rotation, it explains *counter rotation*, unlike DM theory.



Actually the EU/PC community is growing, and electricity in space is already accepted by Geospace science.

Geospace scientists are already embracing the idea of an electric universe.



Geospace science isn't filled with "loons". Your need to resort to name calling, and your inability to cite any error in Scott's galaxy rotation paper simply demonstrates the weakness of your argument.

You also totally avoided me point. Almost *no* theory in physics has a falsification mechanism. You can't even name one.

Let's not go down the road of excessively breaking up a post. It is a rude and usually dishonest technique. And referring to your own link is a quick way to lose a debate. You are not a valid source, neither am I . So care to try again?

 

[James Redford]

Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( Definition of SPAM .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( Yahoo .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.



That's very simple: disconfirm either the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, or Quantum Mechanics, since physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem per said known laws of physics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

However, the above is only true within a given level of computer implementation, as it is logically impossible to disconfirm the known laws of physics themselves, i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics.

The reason for this is because one can derive the known laws of physics a priori. The only reason they were not derived a priori historically is because no one had been smart enough to do so. So empiricism was used as a necessary crutch for human minds in discovering the known laws of physics. But now that we do have these known physical laws, we can see mathematically how there was no contingency in regards to them, i.e., in order to have a three-dimensional space in which beings complex enough to be self-aware can exist, the physical laws have to mathematically be the ones we actually observe. And so these known laws of physics are not going to start being disconfirmed, unless we already exist in a computer simulation and the beings running that simulation decide to alter the simulated environment (however, those beings themselves, or beings on an even lower level of implementation, would have to exist in a universe where the aforesaid known laws of physics are in operation).

For the details on how the known laws of physics are actually mathematically unavoidable if one is to have a three-dimensional (or higher) world with self-aware beings in it, see the following resource.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

 

[Michael]

I don't know why you think it's rude or dishonest to separate different claims and respond to them individually.

While I linked to threads that I've participated in, the references that are cited in those different threads isn't my own personal material.

 

[Subduction Zone]

However, the above is only true within a given level of computer implementation, as it is logically impossible to disconfirm the known laws of physics themselves, i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics.

The reason for this is because one can derive the known laws of physics a priori. The only reason they were not derived a priori historically is because no one had been smart enough to do so. So empiricism was used as a necessary crutch for human minds in discovering the known laws of physics. But now that we do have these known physical laws, we can see mathematically how there was no contingency in regards to them, i.e., in order to have a three-dimensional space in which beings complex enough to be self-aware can exist, the physical laws have to mathematically be the ones we actually observe. And so these known laws of physics are not going to start being disconfirmed, unless we already exist in a computer simulation and the beings running that simulation decide to alter the simulated environment (however, those beings themselves, or beings on an even lower level of implementation, would have to exist in a universe where the aforesaid known laws of physics are in operation).

For the details on how the known laws of physics are actually mathematically unavoidable if one is to have a three-dimensional (or higher) world with self-aware beings in it, see the following resource.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

Is this the debate that you tried to link?

Edit: Better version above. The comments tell the tale.

 

[James Redford]

What does Omega Point predict about the universe?

As it just so coincidentally happens to occur, I've written an article on this very topic.

Soon technology will become advanced enough to convert our human brains into artificial computer hardware (i.e., at the cellular level, such as by using nanobots), at which point we will be technologically immortal; and due to the vast amounts of computational resources at that time, we will also be superintelligent. 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.

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 space) 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 logically forced by the aforesaid known physical laws.

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

 

[James Redford]

TLDR. Spam is not limited to email. Dictionaries are often behind the time. When a person posts a bunch of nonsense that no one will read he is spamming the thread. That is what you have done. Since your answer to my question probably does not exist it looks as if you admitted that your heroes work is not a theory. Congratulations!

Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( Definition of SPAM .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( Yahoo .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.

Further, physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory.

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

 

[Subduction Zone]

Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( Definition of SPAM .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( Yahoo .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.

Further, physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory.

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

Wow! A spamming response defending his spam and repeating his earlier errors. That is the very essence of spam.

 

[James Redford]

Hilarious.

So cool how you just copy-pasted the same lame 'defense'.

I also thought it was so cool how you sign yourself up on all of these 'research' pages, like Research Gate, apparently thinking it will make you look like a scholar of something. Pity you have no citations on your amazing God paper....

Bye.

Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( Definition of SPAM .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( Yahoo .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.

Further, physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory.

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

 

[Subduction Zone]

Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( Definition of SPAM .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( Yahoo .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.

Further, physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory.

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

See my response above. Spamming the thread while denying that act is a threat to irony meters everywhere.

 

[James Redford]

With advances in technology or development and testing of other hypotheses, these are POTENTIALLY falsifiable by the scientific method. God is not because he is not physical/material. Therefore God as the Intelligent Designer is not falsifiable and thus ID is not a valid scientific hypothesis.

For how the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics) in the form of physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theorem uniquely conform to, and precisely match, Christian theology:

The Omega Point is omniscient, having an infinite amount of information and knowing all that is logically possible to be known; it is omnipotent, having an infinite amount of energy and power; and it is omnipresent, consisting of all that exists. These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.

The Omega Point final singularity is a different aspect of the Big Bang initial singularity, i.e., the first cause, a definition of God held by all the Abrahamic religions.

As well, as Stephen Hawking proved, the singularity is not in spacetime, but rather is the boundary of space and time (see S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973], pp. 217-221).

The Schmidt b-boundary has been shown to yield a topology in which the cosmological singularity is not Hausdorff separated from the points in spacetime, meaning that it is not possible to put an open set of points between the cosmological singularity and *any* point in spacetime proper. That is, the cosmological singularity has infinite nearness to every point in spacetime.

So the Omega Point is transcendent to, yet immanent in, space and time. Because the cosmological singularity exists outside of space and time, it is eternal, as time has no application to it.

Quite literally, the cosmological singularity is supernatural, in the sense that no form of physics can apply to it, since physical values are at infinity at the singularity, and so it is not possible to perform arithmetical operations on them; and in the sense that the singularity is beyond creation, as it is not a part of spacetime, but rather is the boundary of space and time.

And given an infinite amount of computational resources, per the Bekenstein Bound, recreating the exact quantum state of our present universe is trivial, requiring at most a mere 10^123 bits (the number which Roger Penrose calculated), or at most a mere 2^10^123 bits for every different quantum configuration of the universe logically possible (i.e., the powerset, of which the multiverse in its entirety at this point in universal history is a subset of this powerset). So the Omega Point will be able to resurrect us using merely an infinitesimally small amount of total computational resources: indeed, the multiversal resurrection will occur between 10^-10^10 and 10^-10^123 seconds before the Omega Point is reached, as the computational capacity of the universe at that stage will be great enough that doing so will require only a trivial amount of total computational resources.

Miracles are allowed by the known laws of physics using baryon annihilation, and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling (which is allowed in the Standard Model of particle physics, as baryon number minus lepton number, B - L, is conserved) caused via the Principle of Least Action by the physical requirement that the Omega Point final cosmological singularity exists. If the miracles of Jesus Christ were necessary in order for the universe to evolve into the Omega Point, and if the known laws of physics are correct, then the probability of those miracles occurring is certain.

Additionally, the cosmological singularity consists of a three-aspect structure: the final singularity (i.e., the Omega Point), the all-presents singularity (which exists at the boundary of the multiverse), and the initial singularity (i.e., the beginning of the Big Bang). These three distinct aspects which perform different physical functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually one singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse.

Christian theology is therefore preferentially selected by the known laws of physics due to the fundamentally triune structure of the cosmological singularity (which, again, has all the haecceities claimed for God in the major religions), which is deselective of all other major religions.

For much more on the above, and for many more details on how the Omega Point cosmology uniquely and precisely matches the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following two articles:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… .

 

[James Redford]

See my response above. Spamming the thread while denying that act is a threat to irony meters everywhere.

Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( Definition of SPAM .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( Yahoo .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.

Further, physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory.

For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

* James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If Tipler's version of the Omega Point depends on the 'conscious collapse' version of the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM, that alone would explain why it gets no attention from the physics community.

Oh, and repeatedly posting lengthy definitions of 'spam' is spamming...

 

[James Redford]

Is this the debate that you tried to link?

Edit: Better version above. The comments tell the tale.

Below is my commentary on the video posted in the foregoing quote. The following are the bibliographical details for this video.

* Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss, Michael Shermer (Producer), A Great Debate: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity? (prod. co.: Skeptics Society [Altadena, Cal.]), run time: 2:13 h:min. Video of a debate held at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech; Pasadena, Cal.) on June 3, 2007.

----------

Prof. Michael Shermer (founder of the Skeptics Society) is the moderator of the debate. Bill Nye (of the television show Bill Nye the Science Guy) is among the audience members.


Physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler starts his presentation at 15:57 min:sec. Tipler points out that we have had a Theory of Everything (TOE) in physics for some 30 years with the arrival of the Standard Model of particle physics, since the Standard Model describes all forces in nature except for gravity. The Standard Model is a quantum field theory, i.e., it involves Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics. And gravity is described by General Relativity. The problem has been to make General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics consistent with each other, which Tipler points out is done with the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg theory of quantum gravity when the appropriate boundary conditions on the universe are used, which includes the initial Big Bang, and the final Omega Point, cosmological singularities.

Tipler shows a presentation slide listing General Relativity as having the general linear group of GL(4, R) symmetry group; and the Standard Model of particle physics as having the Lie group of 3 Lie symmetry group.

19:33 min:sec ff.: In the 1960s Richard Feynman at Caltech quantized a spin-2 field using his path integral method. Quantizing a spin-2 field requires it to be a spacetime metric and imposes the full GL(4, R) symmetry group.

At 19:54 min:sec ff., Tipler points out that the Feynman quantum gravity theory is unique, i.e., it is the only quantum gravity theory possible if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are correct (cf. 32:11 min:sec ff.), since General Relativity requires gravity to be a spin-2 field, and the Hulse and Taylor pulsar confirmation of Einstein's quadrupole formula verified that gravity is a spin-2 field. General Relativity also states that gravity is a phenomenon of the curvature of the spacetime metric with observer independence, i.e., physics cannot depend locally on the observer, which gives the GL(4, R) symmetry group of General Relativity.

20:44 min:sec ff.: Steven Weinberg later showed that the Feynman theory of quantum gravity is renormalizable, which means that the term-by-term infinities in the Feynman diagrams can be absorbed into constants, so it is no worse than other quantum field theories. However, there are actually two sources of infinity in quantum field theory: the ones that are renormalized away, as previously mentioned; and the ones that generate the divergence of the power series of the S-matrix (i.e., scattering matrix).

21:21 min:sec ff.: It has been known for 50 years what the cause of this series divergence is: it's a bad choice of the vacuum state, which Freeman Dyson showed in a paper in Physical Review in 1952 (see F. J. Dyson, "Divergence of Perturbation Theory in Quantum Electrodynamics", Physical Review, Vol. 85, No. 4 [Feb. 1952], pp. 631-632). Geroch showed that perturbation theory in String Theory also has a series divergence for essentially the same reason.

22:18 min:sec ff.: Tipler mentions Liouville's Theorem in complex analysis. One way of stating said Theorem is that all analytic functions (i.e., holomorphic functions) other than constants have singularities either a finite distance from the origin of coordinates or at infinity, which is analogous to what occurs with the universe: the only way to avoid infinities in spacetime (consequently causing the instantaneous collapse of the entire universe) is for the universe to begin and end at singularities. Moreover, 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.)

23:23 min:sec ff.: Feynman quantum gravity makes a singularity even more inevitable than the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems, since the Singularity Theorems assume attractive gravity, whereas with Feynman quantum gravity the sum-over-histories (i.e., sum-over-paths; path integral formulation) get arbitrarily close to infinite curvature. In other words, the multiverse has its own singularity.

24:04 min:sec ff.: Imposing unitarity avoids the spacetime infinities of quantum field theory, since if there were not a cut-off to the energies of quantum field theory then miniature black holes would be created and quickly evaporate, thereby violating unitarity. 25:12 min:sec ff.: This energy cut-off mechanism also means that some misnomered "constants" increase with cosmic time. 26:21 min:sec ff.: This mechanism to stabilize quantum field theory only works if there is an initial singularity and a final singularity and if there are no event horizons, which also solves the black hole information problem. 26:55 min:sec ff.: The absence of event horizons is only possible if the universe is spatially closed, and in particular has the spatial topology of a three-sphere (i.e., 3-sphere; S^3); also, only if the final singularity is a single point in the Penrose c-boundary construction, called the Omega Point.

27:18 min:sec ff.: This picks out a global vacuum state which must define a classical universe now; this means that the wave function of the universe must have initially been a Dirac delta function, which explains the observed flatness of the universe without resorting to nonempirical new physics such as Inflation Theory (requiring the unobserved inflation field, i.e., inflaton particles), but rather is simply quantum kinematics: a result of wave-packet spreading (as an analogy, Tipler gives a version of wave-packet spreading as sound waves heard around the corner of a building, which is an example of wave diffraction).

28:05 min:sec ff.: In such a universe, quantum field theory in the form of the Bekenstein Bound forces the initial state of the universe to be homogeneous and isotropic; and it also picks out a unique field of the Standard Model, the SU(2)_L field which gives the observed excess of matter over antimatter, whereas the usual boundary condition used by physicists--which is inconsistent with quantum field theory--gives a baryon-generating mechanism that produces far too many photons to baryons. Also, the perturbation spectrum is necessarily scale-invariant since the universe is necessarily flat (as was basically shown by Edward Robert Harrison long before Inflation Theory was even thought of).

29 min ff.: What the above all means is that reality consists of a multiverse, with each universe in the multiverse starting at an initial singularity and eventually collapsing into a final singularity. Said Big Bang initial singularity and Omega Point final singularity are actually connected by a third singularity: the All-Presents singularity, which exists at each time for each universe in the multiverse. That is, there exists three connected hypostases to existence: the First Cause, the Sustaining Cause, and the Final Cause, which are not in spacetime but instead are the boundary of space and time, and which are not themselves subject to any possible form of physics, i.e., they are quite literally supernatural.

32:11 min:sec ff.: Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity is the unique quantization of General Relativity, i.e., it's the only way to quantize General Relativity, since gravity in General Relativity is a spin-2 field, and General Relativity is a spacetime metric and possesses the full GL(4, R) symmetry group. (Herein "unique" means the only one mathematically possible within the context of parsimony, as one can always add arbitrary yet small terms which change the output so insignificantly that no current instruments can measure the difference, and hence it would presently still conform to experiment, but such arbitrary terms would not then be parsimonious, since they are not justified by mathematical necessity [i.e., in order to obtain a mathematically-consistent theory] nor are they experimentally justified.) General Relativity is the unique specialization (i.e., subset; special case) of Newtonian mechanics with the specification imposed that Newtonian mechanics be consistent with Maxwell's Equations, i.e., that the speed of light is the same for all observers. Elie Cartan showed that in Newtonian mechanics, gravity is curvature of time only; whereas in General Relativity, gravity is curvature of space and time, i.e., spacetime (cf. Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Christianity [New York: Doubleday, 2007], p. 33; and pp. 79-80 of Frank J. Tipler, "Albert Einstein: A Scientific Reactionary", pp. 73-83, in John Brockman [Ed.], My Einstein [New York: Vintage Books, 2007; orig. pub. 2006]). 33 min ff.: Similarly, Quantum Mechanics is the unique specialization of Newtonian mechanics in its most powerful formulation, the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation, with the specification imposed that determinism is maintained: since the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation is indeterministic, because when particle trajectories cross paths a singularity is produced (i.e., the values in the equations become infinite) and so it is not possible to predict (even in principle) what happens after that (cf. id., The Physics of Christianity, pp. 48-49; and 7:17 min:sec ff. of Casey Luskin, interview of Frank Tipler, "Part 1: Einstein Vs. Darwin", Intelligent Design the Future, Feb. 13, 2013, audio run time: 17:25 min:sec).

33:17 min:sec ff.: For these reasons--the fact that the history of physics since Newton has been a series of specializations, rather than generalizations, of fundamental physics--we can be confident that we have the correct Theory of Everything (TOE) in physics and that there is not going to be any new physics that comes along to displace the current known laws of physics. That is, since after Newton's physics, there has been no "revolution" in physics (e.g., such as with General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, etc.), but instead an evolution of physics: the fundamental physics of today are simply more specific subsets of Newtonian mechanics, i.e., Newtonian mechanics with specific constrains put on it in order to make it consistent with observations and to make its resulting subsets mutually mathematically consistent with each other. So in over 300 years we have never left the realm of Newton's physics. And all the forces in physics are now described and made mutually consistent with the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory and the Standard Model of particle physics.

Prof. Tipler then goes on to show how, using only the known laws of physics, the miracles of Jesus Christ are physically possible. This process uses baryon annihilation (which is allowed in the Standard Model, as baryon number minus lepton number, B - L, is conserved), and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling caused via the Principle of Least Action by the physical requirement that the Omega Point final cosmological singularity exists. Tipler also proposes that the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary could be possible via Jesus being a special type of XX male who obtained all of his genetic material from Mary (i.e., an instance of parthenogenesis). Tipler concludes that the Star of Bethlehem was either a Type Ic hypernova located in the Andromeda Galaxy, or a Type Ia supernova located in a globular cluster of our own Milky Way Galaxy.

If the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and the miracles attributed to him in the New Testament were necessary in order to lead to the formation of the Omega Point--and if the known laws of physics are correct--then the probability of these events occurring is certain. Furthermore, Tipler proposes tests on particular relics associated with Jesus which, if the relics are genuine, could verify whether in fact said miracles took place via the aforementioned mechanisms.


Physicist Prof. Lawrence M. Krauss starts his presentation at 49:36 min:sec. 52:54 min:sec ff.: Krauss begins by engaging in the logical fallacy of bare assertion. Krauss asserts that (1) the Standard Model of particle physics isn't complete; (2) we don't have a consistent theory of quantum gravity; (3) the universe doesn't have to collapse; (4) we don't understand the nature of dark energy; and (5) we don't know why there is more matter than antimatter in the universe.

In answer to Krauss: (1) The Standard Model describes all forces in nature except for gravity. And gravity is described by General Relativity. (2) The problem has been to make General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics consistent with each other, which is done with the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory. (3) The universe must collapse in finite proper time or otherwise unitarity will be violated (see p. 925 [cf. pp. 904-905] of 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). (4) The dark energy is the positive cosmological constant. As required by the Standard Model of particle physics, 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 observed cosmological constant. (5) The universe's initial SU(2)_L field of the Standard Model--which is required by quantum field theory--gives the observed excess of matter over antimatter. See op. cit. for details on the foregoing matters.

[Continued in a following post.]

 

[James Redford]

[Continued from a previous post.]

Prof. Krauss attempts to rebut Prof. Tipler's proposed mechanism for the miracles of Jesus Christ by relating how statistically improbable such events are, yet this doesn't actually address Tipler's arguments since Tipler's point is that such seemingly improbable events would be forced to occur by the known laws of physics via the Principle of Least Action if said events are required in order for the universe to evolve into the Omega Point final singularity. Krauss himself in his review of Tipler's book The Physics of Christianity admits that this mechanism which Tipler proposes for Jesus Christ's miracles is physically sound if said miracles were necessary in order to lead to the formation of the Omega Point and if the Omega Point is required in order for existence to exist (see Lawrence Krauss, "More dangerous than nonsense", New Scientist, Vol. 194, No. 2603 [May 12, 2007], p. 53).

1:00:52 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss provides a quote from Gerardus 't Hooft, but as with Krauss's discussion of probabilities, 't Hooft's remarks are irrelevant to Tipler's actual argument, since 't Hooft is assuming boundary conditions on the universe which are inconsistent with quantum field theory rather than the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE boundary conditions which make all the laws of physics mutually mathematically consistent with each other.

1:02:01 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss provides a quote from Steven Weinberg, of which again is irrelevant to Tipler's actual argument, since as with 't Hooft, Weinberg is assuming inconsistent boundary conditions.

Krauss, 't Hooft, and Weinberg are all particle physicists. Whereas Tipler is not only an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) but also an expert in Global General Relativity and computer theory. Furthermore, neither Krauss, 't Hooft, nor Weinberg display any awareness of Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper which presents the technical details of the Omega Point TOE.

1:03:15 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss claims that all the evidence in nature indicates that the universe will expand forever. 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 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.) While cosmological observations cannot tell us what the ultimate fate of the universe will be, the known laws of physics themselves can, as the universe is forced to end in finite proper time in order for unitarity to remain unviolated (again, see p. 925 [cf. pp. 904-905] of id., "The structure of the world from pure numbers", op. cit.).


1:23:06 h:min:sec ff.: Tipler starts his response to Krauss, wherein Tipler addresses Krauss's claims.


1:29:22 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss starts his second response to Tipler.

1:30:34 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss claims that the laws of physics prevent sapient life from harnessing baryon annihilation. However, the laws of physics allow baryon annihilation using electroweak quantum tunneling via quantum coherence. As Tipler writes, "Atoms have energy levels that differ by a few electron volts. Quantum coherence among a trillion atoms would allow the atoms to concentrate the energy differences of the levels on a single atom, and this would be 10 TeV, the amount of energy needed for the baryon-annihilation process to go forward." (See Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Christianity [New York: Doubleday, 2007], p. 73.)

1:31:09 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss talks about "the energy of empty space", by which he means the dark energy. See my above response to Krauss's previous comments on the dark energy.


1:32:29 h:min:sec ff.: Tipler and Krauss take questions from the audience.

1:35:57 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss claims that we don't understand physics well enough to know whether unitarity is violated if an astrophysical black hole were to evaporate.

Regarding proposed solutions to the black hole information issue, all except for Tipler's Omega Point cosmology share the common feature of using proposed new laws of physics that have never been experimentally confirmed--and indeed 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 [Oct. 15, 2005], Art. No. 084013, 4 pp.) Hence, the end of the universe in finite proper time via collapse before a black hole completely evaporates is required if unitarity is to remain unviolated, i.e., if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics--which are what the proofs of Hawking radiation derive from--are true statements of how the world works.

1:42:13 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss invokes the Christ myth theory, including incorrectly claiming that nearly every religion has had virgin births.

Regarding the Christ myth theory, virtually all the items which the Christ myth theorists claim as facts which show the parallels of Christianity with earlier pagan religions are completely fabricated modern claims that can't be found in the historical record. For an excellent discussion on this, see the following video:

* "Shattering the Christ Myth", DrCraigJohnson (YouTube), Apr. 17, 2009, Shattering the Christ Myth - YouTube . Mirror: "Veritas Forum: Shattering the Christ Myth", Bethel Christian Fellowship, 26:39 min:sec, https://www.[bless and do not curse... and do not curse]ute.com/video/Uo1HFlDMDhtS/ , http://bethelchristianfellowship.info/flash_media/jp3ChristMythCopyCat.m4v , Wayback Machine .

The above video is an interview of James Patrick Holding (editor of Shattering the Christ Myth: Did Jesus Not Exist? [Maitland, Fla.: Xulon Press, 2008], https://amazon.com/dp/1606472712 ) by Dr. Craig Johnson on the topic of the Christ myth theory. See also the below resources regarding the Christ myth theory on J. P. Holding's website:

* "Were Bible stories and characters stolen from pagan myths?", Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry, http://www.tektonics.org/copycathub.html .

* "Did Jesus exist?", op. cit., http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexisthub.html .

1:47:06 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss agrees that the only hope for eternal life is in a collapsing universe.

1:48:06 h:min:sec ff.: An audience member asks Tipler about Matthew 10:23, Mark 9:1 and John 5:25 as being examples of where Jesus Christ incorrectly thought that the End Time was imminent, i.e., within Jesus's own generation.

Matthew 10:23, New King James Version (NKJV) states, "When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." And indeed they did not go through all the cities of Israel before they died, and hence before Christ's Second Coming.

Mark 9:1, NKJV (cf. Matthew 16:28; Luke 9:27) states, "And He said to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power.'" And then the very next passages concern Christ's Transfiguration, whereby Heaven was also shown.

John 5:25, NKJV states, "Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live." But the next passages, John 5:26-29, go on to state, "For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation." These passages relate to Jesus's statement that "I am the resurrection and the life." (John 11:25, NKJV. Cf. John 8:12 [cf. 1 John 1:5]; 14:6.) In other words, those raised from death are already existing within Jesus Christ in His transcendent Second Person aspect, since the Father and the Son are One (see Isaiah 9:6; John 10:30; 14:6-13). So when Jesus said this, it was a different way of saying that the Resurrection and the Life stood there before them right then in His human aspect.

So in each of these scripture passages which this audience member gave as examples of Christ getting some things wrong are all examples of Him being correct.

Sometimes people also give Matthew 24:32-35 as being an example of Christ making an incorrect prophecy. However, "this generation" referred to in Matthew 24:34 concerns the generation which witnesses the signs of the End Time which Jesus discusses.

2:02:13 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss talks about Newtonian mechanics being replaced by General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, and hence that we shouldn't be surprised that the current known laws of physics might also be replaced. However, as Tipler pointed out in his presentation, the fundamental physics of today are simply more specific subsets of Newtonian mechanics, i.e., Newtonian mechanics with specific constrains put on it in order to make it consistent with observations and to make its resulting subsets mutually mathematically consistent with each other. Hence, we have never left the realm of Newton's physics. And all the forces in physics are now described and made mutually consistent with the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. (See above for more on that.) 2:03:26 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss states that the Standard Model of particle physics produces nonsense answers when pushed to high enough energies, as does Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). However, as Tipler previously pointed out in his presentation, imposing unitarity avoids the spacetime infinities of quantum field theory, since if there were not a cut-off to the energies of quantum field theory then miniature black holes would be created and quickly evaporate, thereby violating unitarity. Krauss also gives the infinities of quantum field theory as a reason for thinking that new forms of physics will be required at higher energy scales. However, this mechanism to the energy cut-off also allows the energies to gradually scale to infinity during the collapse phase of the universe (the energies only become actually infinite at the cosmological singularity), which means that there is no need for new physics at higher energy scales.

* * * * *

Since the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE) is mathematically required by the known laws of physics, of which said physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date, the only way Krauss could have actually argued against Tipler is to argue that the known laws of physics might be wrong. But because those physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date, there exists no rational reason to think that they are wrong. Hence, Krauss's irrelevant arguments (or bare assertions, as Krauss also engaged in) against Tipler were unavoidable, since Krauss set himself a logically-impossible task.

For details on the Omega Point TOE, see the following paper by Prof. Tipler:

* F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers", Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (Apr. 2005), pp. 897-964, doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04, bibcode: 2005RPPh...68..897T, http://dauns01.math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf , WebCite query result . Also released as Frank J. Tipler, "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything", arXiv:0704.3276, Apr. 24, 2007, Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model... .

The following is the first article on the Omega Point TOE:

* Frank J. Tipler, "Genesis: How the Universe Began According to Standard Model Particle Physics", arXiv:astro-ph/0111520, Nov. 28, 2001, Genesis: How the Universe Began According to Standard Model... . For images that go with the article, see "Frank J. Tipler, Diagrams", Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist, WebCite query result .

For the details regarding the point Prof. Tipler made in his presentation about how modern physics (i.e., General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) are simply special cases of classical mechanics (i.e., Newtonian mechanics, particularly in its most powerful formulation of the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation), see the following articles:

* Frank J. Tipler, "The Obama-Tribe 'Curvature of Constitutional Space' Paper is Crackpot Physics", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Oct. 26, 2008, 45 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1271310, The Obama-Tribe 'Curvature of Constitutional Space' Paper is Crackpot Physics by Frank J. Tipler :: SSRN .

* Maurice J. Dupré and Frank J. Tipler, "General Relativity as an Æther Theory", International Journal of Modern Physics D, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Feb. 2012), Art. No. 1250011, 16 pp., doi:10.1142/S0218271812500113, bibcode: 2012IJMPD..2150011D, http://worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0218271812500113 . Also at arXiv:1007.4572, July 26, 2010, https://arxiv.org/abs/1007.4572 .

* Frank J. Tipler, "Hamilton-Jacobi Many-Worlds Theory and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle", arXiv:1007.4566, July 26, 2010, https://arxiv.org/abs/1007.4566 .

The foregoing articles, in addition to many other papers by Prof. Tipler on the Omega Point cosmology, are also available in the below archive:

* Frank-J-Tipler-Omega-Point-Papers.zip , 26712158 bytes, MD5: 6e5d29b994bc2f9aa4210d72ef37ab68, https://webcitation.org/6GjhT6t52 , https://amazon.com/clouddrive/share?s=bTI58F1dSAIjSrxJ26R7d8 , https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B7k4r80YepnxNjNOX2x0XzBOV00/edit .

 

[James Redford]

If Tipler's version of the Omega Point depends on the 'conscious collapse' version of the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM, that alone would explain why it gets no attention from the physics community.

There exists only one interpretation of quantum mechanics, and that is the many-worlds interpretation. All other so-called "interpretations" either make no attempt to actually explain quantum phenomena (such as the Statistical interpretation), or they are merely the many-worlds interpretation in denial (such as David Bohm's pilot-wave interpretation).

Anything that acts on reality is real and exists. Quite strange then that quantum phenomena behave exactly as if the other particles in the multiverse exist if in fact they don't exist. If the actual physical nature of the "wave functions" and "pilot waves" are not the other particles in the multiverse, then new physical entities with their own peculiar physics are being invoked: for if these aren't the other particles in the multiverse interacting with the particles in this universe, then we will do well to ask what is their actual physical nature? Pinball flippers, bumpers and ramps? What is their actual physical form, and why do they behave exactly as if the other particles in the multiverse exist?

Furthermore, all wave phenomena are nothing more than particle phenomena: there is no particle-wave duality. A wave is simply a collection of particles interacting with each other. It is the particles that actually exist; the wave is simply an action by particles interacting with each other. We see this with waves through, e.g., liquids: the individual molecules are jostled about via interacting with the other molecules. Likewise, a single photon in this universe behaves as a wave because it's interacting with the ocean of its parallel photons in the multiverse.

As well, experiments confirming "nonlocality" are actually confirming the existence of the multiverse. For the details on that, see the following articles:

* Frank J. Tipler, "Quantum nonlocality does not exist", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), Vol. 111, No. 31 (Aug. 5, 2014), pp. 11281-11286, doi:10.1073/pnas.1324238111, https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/111/31/11281.full.pdf , WebCite query result .

* Frank J. Tipler, "Nonlocality as Evidence for a Multiverse Cosmology", Modern Physics Letters A, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Feb. 10, 2012), Art. No. 1250019, 6 pp., doi:10.1142/S0217732312500198, bibcode: 2012MPLA...2750019T, WebCite query result , Nonlocality as Evidence for a Multiverse Cosmology .

Prof. Frank J. Tipler also points out on p. 95 of The Physics of Christianity (New York: Doubleday, 2007), "if the other universes and the multiverse do not exist, then quantum mechanics is objectively false. This is not a question of physics. It is a question of mathematics. I give a mathematical proof of [this] in my earlier book ...". For that, see Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead (New York: Doubleday, 1994), App. I: "The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics", pp. 483-488.

See also the following paper by 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):

* David Deutsch, "Comment on Lockwood", British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 47, No. 2 (June 1996), pp. 222-228, doi:10.1093/bjps/47.2.222; also released as "Comment on '"Many Minds" Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics by Michael Lockwood'", 1996, Comment on “‘Many Minds’ Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics” by Michael Lockwood , https://webcitation.org/5wajACpeI .

Quantum mechanics is strictly deterministic across the multiverse. If one does away with causation then one also does away with the possibility of explanation, as all explanation is predicated on explicating cause-and-effect relationships. So if by "interpretation" it is meant explanation, then Prof. Deutsch's point in his above paper about there actually only being one known interpretation of quantum mechanics is again found to be inescapable.

And as Prof. Deutsch writes in The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes--and Its Implications (London: Allen Lane The Penguin Press, 1997), Ch. 9: "Quantum Computers", p. 217:

""
The argument of Chapter 2, applied to *any* interference phenomenon destroys the classical idea that there is only one universe. Logically, the possibility of complex quantum computations adds nothing to a case that is already unanswerable. But it does add psychological impact. With Shor's algorithm, the argument has been writ very large. To those who still cling to a single-universe world view, I issue this challenge: *explain how Shor's algorithm works*. I do not merely mean predict that it will work, which is merely a matter of solving a few uncontroversial equations. I mean provide an explanation. When Shor's algorithm has factorized a number, using 10^500 or so times the computational resources that can be seen to be present, where was that number factorized? There are only about 10^80 atoms in the entire visible universe. So if the visible universe were the extent of physical reality, physical reality would not even remotely contain the resources required to factorize such a large number. Who did factorize it, then? How, and where, was the computation performed?
""

See also the below paper by Prof. Tipler:

* Frank J. Tipler, "Testing Many-Worlds Quantum Theory By Measuring Pattern Convergence Rates", arXiv:0809.4422, Sept. 25, 2008, https://arxiv.org/abs/0809.4422 .

And most leading physicists do accept the Many-Worlds Interpretation as true. The political scientist L. David Raub conducted a poll of 72 leading quantum cosmologists and other quantum field theorists regarding their view on the truth of the Many-Worlds Interpretation. The possible answers were: (1) "Yes, I think the MWI is true"; (2) "No, I don't accept the MWI"; (3) "Maybe it's true, but I'm not yet convinced"; and (4) "I have no opinion one way or the other". The results of the poll were: 58% said yes; 18% said no; 13% said maybe; and 11% said no opinion. In the "yes" category were Stephen Hawking, Richard Feynman, and Murray Gell-Mann, while the "no" answers included Roger Penrose.

Oh, and repeatedly posting lengthy definitions of 'spam' is spamming...

Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spam .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/spam .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.

 

[Subduction Zone]

[Continued from a previous post.]

Prof. Krauss attempts to rebut Prof. Tipler's proposed mechanism for the miracles of Jesus Christ by relating how statistically improbable such events are, yet this doesn't actually address Tipler's arguments since Tipler's point is that such seemingly improbable events would be forced to occur by the known laws of physics via the Principle of Least Action if said events are required in order for the universe to evolve into the Omega Point final singularity. Krauss himself in his review of Tipler's book The Physics of Christianity admits that this mechanism which Tipler proposes for Jesus Christ's miracles is physically sound if said miracles were necessary in order to lead to the formation of the Omega Point and if the Omega Point is required in order for existence to exist (see Lawrence Krauss, "More dangerous than nonsense", New Scientist, Vol. 194, No. 2603 [May 12, 2007], p. 53).

1:00:52 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss provides a quote from Gerardus 't Hooft, but as with Krauss's discussion of probabilities, 't Hooft's remarks are irrelevant to Tipler's actual argument, since 't Hooft is assuming boundary conditions on the universe which are inconsistent with quantum field theory rather than the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE boundary conditions which make all the laws of physics mutually mathematically consistent with each other.

1:02:01 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss provides a quote from Steven Weinberg, of which again is irrelevant to Tipler's actual argument, since as with 't Hooft, Weinberg is assuming inconsistent boundary conditions.

Krauss, 't Hooft, and Weinberg are all particle physicists. Whereas Tipler is not only an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) but also an expert in Global General Relativity and computer theory. Furthermore, neither Krauss, 't Hooft, nor Weinberg display any awareness of Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper which presents the technical details of the Omega Point TOE.

1:03:15 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss claims that all the evidence in nature indicates that the universe will expand forever. 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 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.) While cosmological observations cannot tell us what the ultimate fate of the universe will be, the known laws of physics themselves can, as the universe is forced to end in finite proper time in order for unitarity to remain unviolated (again, see p. 925 [cf. pp. 904-905] of id., "The structure of the world from pure numbers", op. cit.).


1:23:06 h:min:sec ff.: Tipler starts his response to Krauss, wherein Tipler addresses Krauss's claims.


1:29:22 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss starts his second response to Tipler.

1:30:34 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss claims that the laws of physics prevent sapient life from harnessing baryon annihilation. However, the laws of physics allow baryon annihilation using electroweak quantum tunneling via quantum coherence. As Tipler writes, "Atoms have energy levels that differ by a few electron volts. Quantum coherence among a trillion atoms would allow the atoms to concentrate the energy differences of the levels on a single atom, and this would be 10 TeV, the amount of energy needed for the baryon-annihilation process to go forward." (See Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Christianity [New York: Doubleday, 2007], p. 73.)

1:31:09 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss talks about "the energy of empty space", by which he means the dark energy. See my above response to Krauss's previous comments on the dark energy.


1:32:29 h:min:sec ff.: Tipler and Krauss take questions from the audience.

1:35:57 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss claims that we don't understand physics well enough to know whether unitarity is violated if an astrophysical black hole were to evaporate.

Regarding proposed solutions to the black hole information issue, all except for Tipler's Omega Point cosmology share the common feature of using proposed new laws of physics that have never been experimentally confirmed--and indeed 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 [Oct. 15, 2005], Art. No. 084013, 4 pp.) Hence, the end of the universe in finite proper time via collapse before a black hole completely evaporates is required if unitarity is to remain unviolated, i.e., if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics--which are what the proofs of Hawking radiation derive from--are true statements of how the world works.

1:42:13 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss invokes the Christ myth theory, including incorrectly claiming that nearly every religion has had virgin births.

Regarding the Christ myth theory, virtually all the items which the Christ myth theorists claim as facts which show the parallels of Christianity with earlier pagan religions are completely fabricated modern claims that can't be found in the historical record. For an excellent discussion on this, see the following video:

* "Shattering the Christ Myth", DrCraigJohnson (YouTube), Apr. 17, 2009, Shattering the Christ Myth - YouTube . Mirror: "Veritas Forum: Shattering the Christ Myth", Bethel Christian Fellowship, 26:39 min:sec, https://www.[bless and do not curse... and do not curse]ute.com/video/Uo1HFlDMDhtS/ , http://bethelchristianfellowship.info/flash_media/jp3ChristMythCopyCat.m4v , Wayback Machine .

The above video is an interview of James Patrick Holding (editor of Shattering the Christ Myth: Did Jesus Not Exist? [Maitland, Fla.: Xulon Press, 2008], https://amazon.com/dp/1606472712 ) by Dr. Craig Johnson on the topic of the Christ myth theory. See also the below resources regarding the Christ myth theory on J. P. Holding's website:

* "Were Bible stories and characters stolen from pagan myths?", Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry, http://www.tektonics.org/copycathub.html .

* "Did Jesus exist?", op. cit., http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexisthub.html .

1:47:06 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss agrees that the only hope for eternal life is in a collapsing universe.

1:48:06 h:min:sec ff.: An audience member asks Tipler about Matthew 10:23, Mark 9:1 and John 5:25 as being examples of where Jesus Christ incorrectly thought that the End Time was imminent, i.e., within Jesus's own generation.

Matthew 10:23, New King James Version (NKJV) states, "When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." And indeed they did not go through all the cities of Israel before they died, and hence before Christ's Second Coming.

Mark 9:1, NKJV (cf. Matthew 16:28; Luke 9:27) states, "And He said to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power.'" And then the very next passages concern Christ's Transfiguration, whereby Heaven was also shown.

John 5:25, NKJV states, "Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live." But the next passages, John 5:26-29, go on to state, "For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation." These passages relate to Jesus's statement that "I am the resurrection and the life." (John 11:25, NKJV. Cf. John 8:12 [cf. 1 John 1:5]; 14:6.) In other words, those raised from death are already existing within Jesus Christ in His transcendent Second Person aspect, since the Father and the Son are One (see Isaiah 9:6; John 10:30; 14:6-13). So when Jesus said this, it was a different way of saying that the Resurrection and the Life stood there before them right then in His human aspect.

So in each of these scripture passages which this audience member gave as examples of Christ getting some things wrong are all examples of Him being correct.

Sometimes people also give Matthew 24:32-35 as being an example of Christ making an incorrect prophecy. However, "this generation" referred to in Matthew 24:34 concerns the generation which witnesses the signs of the End Time which Jesus discusses.

2:02:13 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss talks about Newtonian mechanics being replaced by General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, and hence that we shouldn't be surprised that the current known laws of physics might also be replaced. However, as Tipler pointed out in his presentation, the fundamental physics of today are simply more specific subsets of Newtonian mechanics, i.e., Newtonian mechanics with specific constrains put on it in order to make it consistent with observations and to make its resulting subsets mutually mathematically consistent with each other. Hence, we have never left the realm of Newton's physics. And all the forces in physics are now described and made mutually consistent with the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. (See above for more on that.) 2:03:26 h:min:sec ff.: Krauss states that the Standard Model of particle physics produces nonsense answers when pushed to high enough energies, as does Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). However, as Tipler previously pointed out in his presentation, imposing unitarity avoids the spacetime infinities of quantum field theory, since if there were not a cut-off to the energies of quantum field theory then miniature black holes would be created and quickly evaporate, thereby violating unitarity. Krauss also gives the infinities of quantum field theory as a reason for thinking that new forms of physics will be required at higher energy scales. However, this mechanism to the energy cut-off also allows the energies to gradually scale to infinity during the collapse phase of the universe (the energies only become actually infinite at the cosmological singularity), which means that there is no need for new physics at higher energy scales.

* * * * *

Since the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE) is mathematically required by the known laws of physics, of which said physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date, the only way Krauss could have actually argued against Tipler is to argue that the known laws of physics might be wrong. But because those physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date, there exists no rational reason to think that they are wrong. Hence, Krauss's irrelevant arguments (or bare assertions, as Krauss also engaged in) against Tipler were unavoidable, since Krauss set himself a logically-impossible task.

For details on the Omega Point TOE, see the following paper by Prof. Tipler:

* F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers", Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (Apr. 2005), pp. 897-964, doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04, bibcode: 2005RPPh...68..897T, http://dauns01.math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf , WebCite query result . Also released as Frank J. Tipler, "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything", arXiv:0704.3276, Apr. 24, 2007, Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model... .

The following is the first article on the Omega Point TOE:

* Frank J. Tipler, "Genesis: How the Universe Began According to Standard Model Particle Physics", arXiv:astro-ph/0111520, Nov. 28, 2001, Genesis: How the Universe Began According to Standard Model... . For images that go with the article, see "Frank J. Tipler, Diagrams", Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist, WebCite query result .

For the details regarding the point Prof. Tipler made in his presentation about how modern physics (i.e., General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) are simply special cases of classical mechanics (i.e., Newtonian mechanics, particularly in its most powerful formulation of the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation), see the following articles:

* Frank J. Tipler, "The Obama-Tribe 'Curvature of Constitutional Space' Paper is Crackpot Physics", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Oct. 26, 2008, 45 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1271310, The Obama-Tribe 'Curvature of Constitutional Space' Paper is Crackpot Physics by Frank J. Tipler :: SSRN .

* Maurice J. Dupré and Frank J. Tipler, "General Relativity as an Æther Theory", International Journal of Modern Physics D, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Feb. 2012), Art. No. 1250011, 16 pp., doi:10.1142/S0218271812500113, bibcode: 2012IJMPD..2150011D, http://worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0218271812500113 . Also at arXiv:1007.4572, July 26, 2010, General Relativity As an Aether Theory .

* Frank J. Tipler, "Hamilton-Jacobi Many-Worlds Theory and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle", arXiv:1007.4566, July 26, 2010, Hamilton-Jacobi Many-Worlds Theory and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle .

The foregoing articles, in addition to many other papers by Prof. Tipler on the Omega Point cosmology, are also available in the below archive:

* Frank-J-Tipler-Omega-Point-Papers.zip , 26712158 bytes, MD5: 6e5d29b994bc2f9aa4210d72ef37ab68, WebCite query result , https://amazon.com/clouddrive/share?s=bTI58F1dSAIjSrxJ26R7d8 , Frank-J-Tipler-Omega-Point-Papers.zip .

I see that you did not follow the video. Krauss did refute Tipler.

 

[James Redford]

I see that you did not follow the video. Krauss did refute Tipler.

Below is my commentary on the video that you refer to. The following are the bibliographical details for this video.

* Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss, Michael Shermer (Producer), A Great Debate: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity? (prod. co.: Skeptics Society [Altadena, Cal.]), run time: 2:13 h:min. Video of a debate held at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech; Pasadena, Cal.) on June 3, 2007.

----------

Prof. Michael Shermer (founder of the Skeptics Society) is the moderator of the debate. Bill Nye (of the television show Bill Nye the Science Guy) is among the audience members.


Physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler starts his presentation at 15:57 min:sec. Tipler points out that we have had a Theory of Everything (TOE) in physics for some 30 years with the arrival of the Standard Model of particle physics, since the Standard Model describes all forces in nature except for gravity. The Standard Model is a quantum field theory, i.e., it involves Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics. And gravity is described by General Relativity. The problem has been to make General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics consistent with each other, which Tipler points out is done with the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg theory of quantum gravity when the appropriate boundary conditions on the universe are used, which includes the initial Big Bang, and the final Omega Point, cosmological singularities.

Tipler shows a presentation slide listing General Relativity as having the general linear group of GL(4, R) symmetry group; and the Standard Model of particle physics as having the Lie group of 3 Lie symmetry group.

19:33 min:sec ff.: In the 1960s Richard Feynman at Caltech quantized a spin-2 field using his path integral method. Quantizing a spin-2 field requires it to be a spacetime metric and imposes the full GL(4, R) symmetry group.

At 19:54 min:sec ff., Tipler points out that the Feynman quantum gravity theory is unique, i.e., it is the only quantum gravity theory possible if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are correct (cf. 32:11 min:sec ff.), since General Relativity requires gravity to be a spin-2 field, and the Hulse and Taylor pulsar confirmation of Einstein's quadrupole formula verified that gravity is a spin-2 field. General Relativity also states that gravity is a phenomenon of the curvature of the spacetime metric with observer independence, i.e., physics cannot depend locally on the observer, which gives the GL(4, R) symmetry group of General Relativity.

20:44 min:sec ff.: Steven Weinberg later showed that the Feynman theory of quantum gravity is renormalizable, which means that the term-by-term infinities in the Feynman diagrams can be absorbed into constants, so it is no worse than other quantum field theories. However, there are actually two sources of infinity in quantum field theory: the ones that are renormalized away, as previously mentioned; and the ones that generate the divergence of the power series of the S-matrix (i.e., scattering matrix).

21:21 min:sec ff.: It has been known for 50 years what the cause of this series divergence is: it's a bad choice of the vacuum state, which Freeman Dyson showed in a paper in Physical Review in 1952 (see F. J. Dyson, "Divergence of Perturbation Theory in Quantum Electrodynamics", Physical Review, Vol. 85, No. 4 [Feb. 1952], pp. 631-632). Geroch showed that perturbation theory in String Theory also has a series divergence for essentially the same reason.

22:18 min:sec ff.: Tipler mentions Liouville's Theorem in complex analysis. One way of stating said Theorem is that all analytic functions (i.e., holomorphic functions) other than constants have singularities either a finite distance from the origin of coordinates or at infinity, which is analogous to what occurs with the universe: the only way to avoid infinities in spacetime (consequently causing the instantaneous collapse of the entire universe) is for the universe to begin and end at singularities. Moreover, 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.)

23:23 min:sec ff.: Feynman quantum gravity makes a singularity even more inevitable than the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems, since the Singularity Theorems assume attractive gravity, whereas with Feynman quantum gravity the sum-over-histories (i.e., sum-over-paths; path integral formulation) get arbitrarily close to infinite curvature. In other words, the multiverse has its own singularity.

24:04 min:sec ff.: Imposing unitarity avoids the spacetime infinities of quantum field theory, since if there were not a cut-off to the energies of quantum field theory then miniature black holes would be created and quickly evaporate, thereby violating unitarity. 25:12 min:sec ff.: This energy cut-off mechanism also means that some misnomered "constants" increase with cosmic time. 26:21 min:sec ff.: This mechanism to stabilize quantum field theory only works if there is an initial singularity and a final singularity and if there are no event horizons, which also solves the black hole information problem. 26:55 min:sec ff.: The absence of event horizons is only possible if the universe is spatially closed, and in particular has the spatial topology of a three-sphere (i.e., 3-sphere; S^3); also, only if the final singularity is a single point in the Penrose c-boundary construction, called the Omega Point.

27:18 min:sec ff.: This picks out a global vacuum state which must define a classical universe now; this means that the wave function of the universe must have initially been a Dirac delta function, which explains the observed flatness of the universe without resorting to nonempirical new physics such as Inflation Theory (requiring the unobserved inflation field, i.e., inflaton particles), but rather is simply quantum kinematics: a result of wave-packet spreading (as an analogy, Tipler gives a version of wave-packet spreading as sound waves heard around the corner of a building, which is an example of wave diffraction).

28:05 min:sec ff.: In such a universe, quantum field theory in the form of the Bekenstein Bound forces the initial state of the universe to be homogeneous and isotropic; and it also picks out a unique field of the Standard Model, the SU(2)_L field which gives the observed excess of matter over antimatter, whereas the usual boundary condition used by physicists--which is inconsistent with quantum field theory--gives a baryon-generating mechanism that produces far too many photons to baryons. Also, the perturbation spectrum is necessarily scale-invariant since the universe is necessarily flat (as was basically shown by Edward Robert Harrison long before Inflation Theory was even thought of).

29 min ff.: What the above all means is that reality consists of a multiverse, with each universe in the multiverse starting at an initial singularity and eventually collapsing into a final singularity. Said Big Bang initial singularity and Omega Point final singularity are actually connected by a third singularity: the All-Presents singularity, which exists at each time for each universe in the multiverse. That is, there exists three connected hypostases to existence: the First Cause, the Sustaining Cause, and the Final Cause, which are not in spacetime but instead are the boundary of space and time, and which are not themselves subject to any possible form of physics, i.e., they are quite literally supernatural.

32:11 min:sec ff.: Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity is the unique quantization of General Relativity, i.e., it's the only way to quantize General Relativity, since gravity in General Relativity is a spin-2 field, and General Relativity is a spacetime metric and possesses the full GL(4, R) symmetry group. (Herein "unique" means the only one mathematically possible within the context of parsimony, as one can always add arbitrary yet small terms which change the output so insignificantly that no current instruments can measure the difference, and hence it would presently still conform to experiment, but such arbitrary terms would not then be parsimonious, since they are not justified by mathematical necessity [i.e., in order to obtain a mathematically-consistent theory] nor are they experimentally justified.) General Relativity is the unique specialization (i.e., subset; special case) of Newtonian mechanics with the specification imposed that Newtonian mechanics be consistent with Maxwell's Equations, i.e., that the speed of light is the same for all observers. Elie Cartan showed that in Newtonian mechanics, gravity is curvature of time only; whereas in General Relativity, gravity is curvature of space and time, i.e., spacetime (cf. Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Christianity [New York: Doubleday, 2007], p. 33; and pp. 79-80 of Frank J. Tipler, "Albert Einstein: A Scientific Reactionary", pp. 73-83, in John Brockman [Ed.], My Einstein [New York: Vintage Books, 2007; orig. pub. 2006]). 33 min ff.: Similarly, Quantum Mechanics is the unique specialization of Newtonian mechanics in its most powerful formulation, the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation, with the specification imposed that determinism is maintained: since the Hamilton-Jacobi Equation is indeterministic, because when particle trajectories cross paths a singularity is produced (i.e., the values in the equations become infinite) and so it is not possible to predict (even in principle) what happens after that (cf. id., The Physics of Christianity, pp. 48-49; and 7:17 min:sec ff. of Casey Luskin, interview of Frank Tipler, "Part 1: Einstein Vs. Darwin", Intelligent Design the Future, Feb. 13, 2013, audio run time: 17:25 min:sec).

33:17 min:sec ff.: For these reasons--the fact that the history of physics since Newton has been a series of specializations, rather than generalizations, of fundamental physics--we can be confident that we have the correct Theory of Everything (TOE) in physics and that there is not going to be any new physics that comes along to displace the current known laws of physics. That is, since after Newton's physics, there has been no "revolution" in physics (e.g., such as with General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, etc.), but instead an evolution of physics: the fundamental physics of today are simply more specific subsets of Newtonian mechanics, i.e., Newtonian mechanics with specific constrains put on it in order to make it consistent with observations and to make its resulting subsets mutually mathematically consistent with each other. So in over 300 years we have never left the realm of Newton's physics. And all the forces in physics are now described and made mutually consistent with the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory and the Standard Model of particle physics.

Prof. Tipler then goes on to show how, using only the known laws of physics, the miracles of Jesus Christ are physically possible. This process uses baryon annihilation (which is allowed in the Standard Model, as baryon number minus lepton number, B - L, is conserved), and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling caused via the Principle of Least Action by the physical requirement that the Omega Point final cosmological singularity exists. Tipler also proposes that the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary could be possible via Jesus being a special type of XX male who obtained all of his genetic material from Mary (i.e., an instance of parthenogenesis). Tipler concludes that the Star of Bethlehem was either a Type Ic hypernova located in the Andromeda Galaxy, or a Type Ia supernova located in a globular cluster of our own Milky Way Galaxy.

If the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and the miracles attributed to him in the New Testament were necessary in order to lead to the formation of the Omega Point--and if the known laws of physics are correct--then the probability of these events occurring is certain. Furthermore, Tipler proposes tests on particular relics associated with Jesus which, if the relics are genuine, could verify whether in fact said miracles took place via the aforementioned mechanisms.


Physicist Prof. Lawrence M. Krauss starts his presentation at 49:36 min:sec. 52:54 min:sec ff.: Krauss begins by engaging in the logical fallacy of bare assertion. Krauss asserts that (1) the Standard Model of particle physics isn't complete; (2) we don't have a consistent theory of quantum gravity; (3) the universe doesn't have to collapse; (4) we don't understand the nature of dark energy; and (5) we don't know why there is more matter than antimatter in the universe.

In answer to Krauss: (1) The Standard Model describes all forces in nature except for gravity. And gravity is described by General Relativity. (2) The problem has been to make General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics consistent with each other, which is done with the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory. (3) The universe must collapse in finite proper time or otherwise unitarity will be violated (see p. 925 [cf. pp. 904-905] of 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). (4) The dark energy is the positive cosmological constant. As required by the Standard Model of particle physics, 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 observed cosmological constant. (5) The universe's initial SU(2)_L field of the Standard Model--which is required by quantum field theory--gives the observed excess of matter over antimatter. See op. cit. for details on the foregoing matters.

[Continued in a following post.]

 

[Subduction Zone]

There exists only one interpretation of quantum mechanics, and that is the many-worlds interpretation. All other so-called "interpretations" either make no attempt to actually explain quantum phenomena (such as the Statistical interpretation), or they are merely the many-worlds interpretation in denial (such as David Bohm's pilot-wave interpretation).

Anything that acts on reality is real and exists. Quite strange then that quantum phenomena behave exactly as if the other particles in the multiverse exist if in fact they don't exist. If the actual physical nature of the "wave functions" and "pilot waves" are not the other particles in the multiverse, then new physical entities with their own peculiar physics are being invoked: for if these aren't the other particles in the multiverse interacting with the particles in this universe, then we will do well to ask what is their actual physical nature? Pinball flippers, bumpers and ramps? What is their actual physical form, and why do they behave exactly as if the other particles in the multiverse exist?

Furthermore, all wave phenomena are nothing more than particle phenomena: there is no particle-wave duality. A wave is simply a collection of particles interacting with each other. It is the particles that actually exist; the wave is simply an action by particles interacting with each other. We see this with waves through, e.g., liquids: the individual molecules are jostled about via interacting with the other molecules. Likewise, a single photon in this universe behaves as a wave because it's interacting with the ocean of its parallel photons in the multiverse.

As well, experiments confirming "nonlocality" are actually confirming the existence of the multiverse. For the details on that, see the following articles:

* Frank J. Tipler, "Quantum nonlocality does not exist", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), Vol. 111, No. 31 (Aug. 5, 2014), pp. 11281-11286, doi:10.1073/pnas.1324238111, https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/111/31/11281.full.pdf , WebCite query result .

* Frank J. Tipler, "Nonlocality as Evidence for a Multiverse Cosmology", Modern Physics Letters A, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Feb. 10, 2012), Art. No. 1250019, 6 pp., doi:10.1142/S0217732312500198, bibcode: 2012MPLA...2750019T, WebCite query result , Nonlocality as Evidence for a Multiverse Cosmology .

Prof. Frank J. Tipler also points out on p. 95 of The Physics of Christianity (New York: Doubleday, 2007), "if the other universes and the multiverse do not exist, then quantum mechanics is objectively false. This is not a question of physics. It is a question of mathematics. I give a mathematical proof of [this] in my earlier book ...". For that, see Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead (New York: Doubleday, 1994), App. I: "The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics", pp. 483-488.

See also the following paper by 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):

* David Deutsch, "Comment on Lockwood", British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 47, No. 2 (June 1996), pp. 222-228, doi:10.1093/bjps/47.2.222; also released as "Comment on '"Many Minds" Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics by Michael Lockwood'", 1996, Comment on “‘Many Minds’ Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics” by Michael Lockwood , https://webcitation.org/5wajACpeI .

Quantum mechanics is strictly deterministic across the multiverse. If one does away with causation then one also does away with the possibility of explanation, as all explanation is predicated on explicating cause-and-effect relationships. So if by "interpretation" it is meant explanation, then Prof. Deutsch's point in his above paper about there actually only being one known interpretation of quantum mechanics is again found to be inescapable.

And as Prof. Deutsch writes in The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes--and Its Implications (London: Allen Lane The Penguin Press, 1997), Ch. 9: "Quantum Computers", p. 217:

""
The argument of Chapter 2, applied to *any* interference phenomenon destroys the classical idea that there is only one universe. Logically, the possibility of complex quantum computations adds nothing to a case that is already unanswerable. But it does add psychological impact. With Shor's algorithm, the argument has been writ very large. To those who still cling to a single-universe world view, I issue this challenge: *explain how Shor's algorithm works*. I do not merely mean predict that it will work, which is merely a matter of solving a few uncontroversial equations. I mean provide an explanation. When Shor's algorithm has factorized a number, using 10^500 or so times the computational resources that can be seen to be present, where was that number factorized? There are only about 10^80 atoms in the entire visible universe. So if the visible universe were the extent of physical reality, physical reality would not even remotely contain the resources required to factorize such a large number. Who did factorize it, then? How, and where, was the computation performed?
""

See also the below paper by Prof. Tipler:

* Frank J. Tipler, "Testing Many-Worlds Quantum Theory By Measuring Pattern Convergence Rates", arXiv:0809.4422, Sept. 25, 2008, Testing Many-Worlds Quantum Theory By Measuring Pattern Convergence Rates .

And most leading physicists do accept the Many-Worlds Interpretation as true. The political scientist L. David Raub conducted a poll of 72 leading quantum cosmologists and other quantum field theorists regarding their view on the truth of the Many-Worlds Interpretation. The possible answers were: (1) "Yes, I think the MWI is true"; (2) "No, I don't accept the MWI"; (3) "Maybe it's true, but I'm not yet convinced"; and (4) "I have no opinion one way or the other". The results of the poll were: 58% said yes; 18% said no; 13% said maybe; and 11% said no opinion. In the "yes" category were Stephen Hawking, Richard Feynman, and Murray Gell-Mann, while the "no" answers included Roger Penrose.



Never in my life have I posted any spam. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines spam as "unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses". ( Definition of SPAM .) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines spam as "Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail." ( Yahoo .)

So from these standard lexicographical sources, the idea clearly imparted by these definitions is that spam is bulk electronic advertizement messages for commercial purposes. The idea further imparted is that these bulk messages are not intended for discussion.

You know quite well that my posts are not spam, but you have no rational response in order to attempt to refute them.

I've noticed this jejune tactic by ideologues of various stripes who hold to fallacious worldviews that when their Weltanschauung is veridically challenged they will call those who present correct positions and arguments "spammers" and call their arguments and positions "spam" rather than attempt to do the impossible, i.e., rather than attempt to refute them with rational arguments, since it's not logically possible to refute a correct position which is backed by correct arguments.

You need to learn how to edit out the spam from your responses. Try to make your point short and sweet. If your post is several times as long as the one that you answer to with links to bogus papers you can rest assured that it has massive amounts of spam in it.