Re: God's Existence Is Proven by Several Mathematical Theorems within Standard Physics

On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 22:16:57 -0600, Dawn Flood
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On 2/12/2024 10:04 AM, James Redford wrote:
>> 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 storage) 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 mathematically forced by
>> the aforesaid known physical laws.
>> 
>> 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. Moreover, to here point out, said
>> Singularity Theorems are themselves completely valid proofs of God's
>> existence in the First Cause aspect of God.
>> 
>> The Omega Point final singularity has all the unique properties
>> (quiddities) claimed for God in the traditional religions. 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://web.archive.org/web/20150927090439/http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
>> ,
>> https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
>> , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .
>> 
>> 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?", God and
>> Physics Wiki, May 12, 2019 (orig. pub. Apr. 3, 2013),
>> https://megalodon.jp/2019-0512-1524-14/godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Tipler-Krauss_2007_Debate
>> ,
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20190512062421/https://godandphysics.fandom.com/wiki/Video_of_Profs._Frank_Tipler_and_Lawrence_Krauss%27s_Debate_at_Caltech:_Can_Physics_Prove_God_and_Christianity%3F
>> , https://archive.is/V9njw .
>> 
>> As said, Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology is a mathematical
>> theorem per the aforementioned known laws of physics, of which have
>> been confirmed by every experiment to date. Hence, the only way to
>> avoid the Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof.
>> 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].)
>> 
>> Indeed, in the Feynman path integral formulation of Quantum Mechanics
>> (i.e., sum-over-paths; sum-over-histories) a singularity is even more
>> inevitable than in the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems,
>> since the Singularity Theorems assume attractive gravity, whereas the
>> Feynman sum-over-histories get arbitrarily close to infinite
>> curvature. In other words, the multiverse has its own singularity.
>> 
>> Further, due to Liouville's Theorem in complex analysis, 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.)
>> 
>> * * * * *
>> 
>> Unfortunately, most modern physicists have been all too willing to
>> abandon the laws of physics if it produces results that they're
>> uncomfortable with, i.e., in reference to religion. It's the
>> antagonism for religion on the part of the scientific community which
>> greatly held up the acceptance of the Big Bang (for some 40 years),
>> due to said scientific community's displeasure with it confirming the
>> traditional theological position of *creatio ex nihilo*, and also
>> because no laws of physics can apply to the singularity itself: i.e.,
>> quite literally, the 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.
>> 
>> In Prof. Stephen Hawking's book The Grand Design (New York, NY: Bantam
>> Books) coauthored with physicist Dr. Leonard Mlodinow and published in
>> 2010, Hawking uses the String Theory extension M-Theory to argue that
>> God's existence isn't necessary, although M-Theory has no
>> observational evidence confirming it.
>> 
>> With String Theory and other nonempirical physics, the physics
>> community is reverting back to the epistemological methodology of
>> Aristotelianism, which held to physical theories based upon *a priori*
>> philosophical ideals. One of the *a priori* ideals held by many
>> present-day physicists is that God cannot exist, and so if rejecting
>> the existence of God requires rejecting empirical science, then so be
>> it.
>> 
>> For details on this rejection of physical law by physicists if it
>> conflicts with their distaste for religion, see Sec. 5: "The Big
>> Bang", pp. 28-33 of my "Physics of God" article cited above.
>> 
>> The evolutionary psychological reason for the above-described bizarre
>> behavior of physicists rejecting physical law when it demonstrates
>> God's existence is due to the naturally-evolved Jaynesian gods of
>> old--i.e., the demons--seeking to distance people from genuine
>> knowledge of God so that the demons may instead falsely present
>> themselves as God. Among many permutations of this, it often manifests
>> as various forms of etatism: the state becomes God. Demons are quite
>> real, they however exist as naturally-evolved Minskian agent subset
>> programs operating on the wet-computer of the human brain. For more on
>> this, see my following article:
>> 
>> * James Redford, "Societal Sadomasochism", Social Science Research
>> Network (SSRN), July 4, 2021 (orig. pub. May 29, 2018), 4 pp.,
>> doi:10.2139/ssrn.4500656,
>> https://megalodon.jp/2023-0720-0523-07/archive.org/download/Societal-Sadomasochism/Redford-Societal-Sadomasochism.pdf
>> ,
>> https://archive.org/download/Societal-Sadomasochism/Redford-Societal-Sadomasochism.pdf
>> , https://www.freezepage.com/1689798200YQSGMQCYTZ .
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------
>> 
>> James Redford
>> 
>> Author of The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
>> Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
>> 2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774. See my
>> curriculum vitæ (ark:/13960/t6g19878v):
>> https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf ,
>> https://archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf
>
>Here's the Wikipedia article on Dr. Tipler:
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Tipler
>
>As I said in my other reply, Dr. Tipler does not seem like he is running 
>with all four wheels on the ground.
>
>Dawn

To date the only peer-reviewed paper in a physics journal that has
criticized Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been in 1994 by
physicists Ellis and Dr. David Coule (see G. F. R. Ellis and D. H.
Coule, "Life at the end of the universe?", General Relativity and
Gravitation, Vol. 26, No. 7 [July 1994], pp. 731-739). In the paper,
Ellis and Coule unwittingly gave an argument that the Bekenstein Bound
violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics if the universe collapses
without having event horizons eliminated. Yet in order to bring about
the Omega Point, event horizons must be eliminated, and Tipler cites
this paper in favor of the fact that the known laws of physics require
the Omega Point to exist.

In his review (see Lawrence Krauss, "More dangerous than nonsense",
New Scientist, Vol. 194, No. 2603 [May 12, 2007], p. 53) of Prof.
Tipler's book The Physics of Christianity (New York: Doubleday, 2007),
Prof. Lawrence M. Krauss repeatedly commits the logical fallacy of
bare assertion. Krauss gives no indication that he followed up on the
endnotes in the book The Physics of Christianity and actually read
Tipler's physics journal papers. All that Krauss is going off of in
said review is Tipler's mostly nontechnical popular-audience book The
Physics of Christianity without researching Tipler's technical papers
in the physics journals. Krauss's review offers no actual lines of
reasoning for Krauss's pronouncements. His readership is simply
expected to imbibe what Krauss proclaims, even though it's clear that
Krauss is merely critiquing a popular-audience book which does not
attempt to present the rigorous technical details.

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 Michael S. 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.)

As pointed out with Ellis and Coule's criticism, this isn't the first
time that this ironic outcome has befallen critics of Tipler's Omega
Point cosmology. So when Tipler's critics actually do real physics
instead of issuing bare assertions and nihil ad rem cavils, they end
up making Tipler's case stronger. Ironic though it is, nevertheless
that's the expected result, since the Omega Point cosmology is
required by the known laws of physics.

Concerning Martin Gardner's review of Profs. John D. Barrow and
Tipler's book The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1986), notice that Martin Gardner never states any error on
Tipler's part within said review. However, I do find the below
exchange between Tipler and Gardner to be quite telling; it transpired
from Gardner's aforesaid review of Barrow and Tipler's book. Note
Gardner's two-word reply to Tipler.

* Frank J. Tipler, reply by Martin Gardner, "The FAP Flop", New York
Review of Books, Vol. 33, No. 19 (Dec. 4, 1986),
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/4946 ,
https://webcitation.org/67Fw7SAdg . In reply to Martin Gardner, "WAP,
SAP, PAP, & FAP", New York Review of Books, Vol. 33, No. 8 (May 8,
1986), https://archive.is/QXsv3 , https://webcitation.org/6c7ZmxVbU .

----------------------------------------

James Redford

Author of The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of
Everything: And Other Selected Works (Chisinau, Moldova: Eliva Press,
2021), 268 pp., ISBN-10: 1636482775, ISBN-13: 9781636482774. See my
curriculum vitæ (ark:/13960/t6g19878v):
https://jamesredford.github.io/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf ,
https://archive.org/download/JamesRedford/Redford-Curriculum-Vitae.pdf