God spare us from kooks.
James Redford wrote:
> God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the
> known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J.
> Tipler's below paper, which among other things demonstrates that the
> known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general
> relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle
> physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final
> cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity
> identified as being God):
>
> F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Re****ts
> on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964.
> http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf
Also released as
> "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a
> Theory of Everything," arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007.
> http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276
>
> Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's above paper was selected as one of
> 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles
> published in Re****ts on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68].
> Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding
> reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our
> international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal
> Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005,"
> Re****ts on Progress in Physics.
> http://www.iop.org/EJ/journal/-page=extra.highlights/0034-4885
)
> Re****ts on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute
> of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists.
>
> Further, Re****ts on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor
> (according to Journal Citation Re****ts) than Physical Review Letters,
> which is the most prestigious American physics journal (one,
> incidently, which Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once).
> A journal's impact factor reflects the im****tance the science
> community places in that journal in the sense of actually citing its
> papers in their own papers. (And just to point out, Tipler's 2005
> Re****ts on Progress in Physics paper could not have been published in
> Physical Review Letters since said paper is nearly book-length, and
> hence not a "letter" as defined by the latter journal.)
>
> See also the below resources for further information on the Omega
> Point Theory:
>
> Theophysics http://geocities.com/theophysics/
>
> "Omega Point (Tipler)," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omega_Point_%28Tipler%29&oldid=206077125
>
> "Frank J. Tipler," Wikipedia, April 16, 2008
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_J._Tipler&oldid=205920802
>
> Tipler is Professor of Mathematics and Physics (joint appointment) at
> Tulane University. His Ph.D. is in the field of global general
> relativity (the same rarefied field that Profs. Roger Penrose and
> Stephen Hawking developed), and he is also an expert in particle
> physics and computer science. His Omega Point Theory has been
> published in a number of prestigious peer-reviewed physics and science
> journals in addition to Re****ts on Progress in Physics, such as
> Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's
> leading astrophysics journals), Physics Letters B, the International
> Journal of Theoretical Physics, etc.
>
> Prof. John A. Wheeler (the father of most relativity research in the
> U.S.) wrote that "Frank Tipler is widely known for im****tant concepts
> and theorems in general relativity and gravitation physics" on pg.
> viii in the "Foreword" to The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (1986)
> by cosmologist Prof. John D. Barrow and Tipler, which was the first
> book wherein Tipler's Omega Point Theory was described. On pg. ix of
> said book, Prof. Wheeler wrote that Chapter 10 of the book, which
> concerns the Omega Point Theory, "rivals in thought-provoking power
> any of the [other chapters]."
>
> The leading quantum physicist in the world, Prof. David Deutsch
> (inventor of the quantum computer, being the first person to
> mathematically describe the workings of such a device, and winner of
> the Institute of Physics' 1998 Paul Dirac Medal and Prize for his
> work), endorses the physics of the Omega Point Theory in his book The
> Fabric of Reality (1997). For that, see:
>
> David Deutsch, extracts from Chapter 14: "The Ends of the Universe" of
> The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes--and Its
> Implications (London: Allen Lane The Penguin Press, 1997), ISBN:
> 0713990619; with additional comments by Frank J. Tipler.
> http://geocities.com/theophysics/deutsch-ends-of-the-universe.html
>
> The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to invent tenuous
> physical theories which have no experimental sup****t and which violate
> the known laws of physics, such as with Prof. Stephen Hawking's paper
> on the black hole information issue which is dependant on the
> conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field
> theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). See S. W. Hawking,
> "Information loss in black holes," Physical Review D, Vol. 72, No. 8,
> 084013 (October 2005); also at arXiv:hep-th/0507171, July 18, 2005.
> http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0507171
>
> That is, Prof. Hawking's paper is based upon proposed, unconfirmed
> physics. It's an impressive testament to the Omega Point Theory's
> correctness, as Hawking implicitly confirms that the known laws of
> physics require the universe to collapse in finite time. Hawking
> realizes that the black hole information issue must be resolved
> without violating unitarity, yet he's forced to abandon the known laws
> of physics in order to avoid unitarity violation without the universe
> collapsing.
>
> Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its
> expansion obviates the universe collapsing (and therefore obviates the
> Omega Point). But as Profs. Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner
> point out in "Geometry and Destiny" (General Relativity and
> Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 [October 1999], pp. 1453-1459; also at
> arXiv:astro-ph/9904020, April 1, 1999
> http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9904020
), there is no set of
> cosmological observations which can tell us whether the universe will
> expand forever or eventually collapse.
>
> There's a very good reason for that, because that is dependant on the
> actions of intelligent life. The known laws of physics provide the
> mechanism for the universe's collapse. As required by the Standard
> Model, the net baryon number was created in the early universe by
> baryogenesis via electroweak quantum tunneling. This necessarily
> forces the Higgs field to be in a vacuum state that is not its
> absolute vacuum, which is the cause of the positive cosmological
> constant. But if the baryons in the universe were to be annihilated by
> the inverse of baryogenesis, again via electroweak quantum tunneling
> (which is allowed in the Standard Model, as B - L is conserved), then
> this would force the Higgs field toward its absolute vacuum,
> cancelling the positive cosmological constant and thereby forcing the
> universe to collapse. Moreover, this process would provide the ideal
> form of energy resource and rocket propulsion during the colonization
> phase of the universe.
>
> Prof. Tipler's above 2005 Re****ts on Progress in Physics paper also
> demonstrates that the correct quantum gravity theory has existed since
> 1962, first discovered by Richard Feynman in that year, and
> independently discovered by Steven Weinberg and Bryce DeWitt, among
> others. But because these physicists were looking for equations with a
> finite number of terms (i.e., derivatives no higher than second
> order), they abandoned this qualitatively unique quantum gravity
> theory since in order for it to be consistent it requires an
> arbitrarily higher number of terms. Further, they didn't realize that
> this proper theory of quantum gravity is consistent only with a
> certain set of boundary conditions imposed (which includes the initial
> Big Bang, and the final Omega Point, cosmological singularities). The
> equations for this theory of quantum gravity are term-by-term finite,
> but the same mechanism that forces each term in the series to be
> finite also forces the entire series to be infinite (i.e., infinities
> that would otherwise occur in spacetime, consequently destabilizing
> it, are transferred to the cosmological singularities, thereby
> preventing the universe from immediately collapsing into
> nonexistence). As Tipler notes in his 2007 book The Physics of
> Christianity (pp. 49 and 279), "It is a fundamental mathematical fact
> that this [infinite series] is the best that we can do. ... This is
> somewhat analogous to Liouville's theorem in complex analysis, which
> says that all analytic functions other than constants have
> singularities either a finite distance from the origin of coordinates
> or at infinity."
>
> When combined with the Standard Model, the result is the Theory of
> Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in
> physics.
>
> ----------------------------------------
>
> James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," revised and expanded
> edition, June 1, 2006 (originally published December 19, 2001)
> http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf
> http://www.geocities.com/jrredford/anarchist-jesus.html
>
> Theophysics (a website with information on Prof. Frank J. Tipler's
> Omega Point Theory) http://geocities.com/theophysics/
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/omega-point/
> http://www.myspace.com/theophysics
|
