Originally Posted by **Exiledoomsayer** He does not break the law, he's above the law.

Right thanks for clearing that up thats so totally different.

That's just standard physics. 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 the arithmetical operations of addition or subtraction 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.

On p. 179 of the The Illustrated A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam Books, 1996), Hawking wrote "In real time, the universe has a beginning and an end at singularities that form a boundary to spacetime and at which the laws of science break down."

Agnostic and physicist Dr. Robert Jastrow, founding director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, wrote in his book God and the Astronomers (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1978), p. 113:

""

This religious faith of the scientist [that there is no First Cause] is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized.

""

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.

Regarding Tiplers arguement I watched the video clip but I am not sure I follow his reasoning. Particulary he tries to argue that we cannot possibly destroy ourselfs even if we think we can, but he does not back this up at all as far as I can see other then to state that if we did there would be no intelligent life in the future.

So if we cant destroy ourselfs because then his arguement fails.

His arguement cant fail because we cant destroy ourself.

err okay either thats circular or I did not hear his reason.

edit:

Interestingly enough near the end of the vid he suddenly decides not only is the omega point filled with the knowledge we as life aquire through time and can be called god. But that it is certainly the judeochristian god, dispite that even if you accept his entire arguement that does not follow.

To sum the whole thing up as I understand it he says.

1. We are smart now, in the future we will be even smarter.

2. We will be so smart we can simulate the universe so we can see what happened before.

3. This simulation will be so good that we created our own universe from the past people included.

4. for some reason this will mean all those people come back to life in this simulation but they cannot die again.

5. As such in the future we are god.

You didn't understand Prof. Frank J. Tipler's argument. Here it is:

----------

Why the Acceptance of the Known Laws of Physics Requires Acceptance of the Omega Point Theory

based on articles by Prof. Frank J. Tipler; see:

F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964.

http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything," arXiv, April 24, 2007.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276
Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology," International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (April 2003), pp. 141-148.

http://theophysics.chimehost.net/pdf...-cosmology.pdf Also at arXiv, March 31, 2007.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0058
Frank Tipler, "The Omega Point and Christianity," Gamma, Vol. 10, No. 2 (April 2003), pp. 14-23.

http://theophysics.chimehost.net/tip...istianity.html
Frank J. Tipler, "From 2100 to the End of Time," Wired.

http://theophysics.chimehost.net/tip...d-of-time.html ,

http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/wired.html
----------

Astrophysical black holes (i.e., trapped surfaces) exist, but Hawking [1, 2] and Wald [3] have shown that if black holes are allowed to exist for unlimited proper time, then they will completely evaporate, and a fundamental quantum law called "unitarity" will be violated. Unitarity, which roughly says that probability must be conserved, thus requires that the universe must cease to exist after finite proper time, which implies that the universe is closed and has the spatial topology of a 3-sphere [4]. The Second Law of Thermodynamics says the amount of entropy--the amount of disorder--in the universe cannot decrease, but Ellis and Coule [5] and Tipler [6] have shown that the amount of entropy already in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) will eventually contradict the Bekenstein Bound near the final singularity unless there are no event horizons, since in the presence of horizons the Bekenstein Bound states the universal entropy S is less than or equal that constant (i.e., the Bekenstein Bound) times the radius of the universe squared, and general relativity requires the radius of the universe to go to zero at the final singularity. If there are no horizons then the gravitational shear energy due to the collapse of the universe itself will increase to infinity much faster than the radius of the universe going to zero at the final singularity [6, 7]. The absence of event horizons by definition means that the universe's future c-boundary (causal boundary) is a single point [8], call it the Omega Point. MacCallum [9] has shown that a 3-sphere closed universe with a single point future c-boundary is of measure zero in initial data space (i.e., infinitely improbable acting only under blind and dead forces). Barrow [10, 11], Cornish and Levin [12] and Motter [13] have shown that the evolution of a 3-sphere closed universe into its final singularity is chaotic. Yorke et al. [14, 15] have shown that a chaotic physical system is likely to evolve into a measure zero state if and only if its control parameters are intelligently manipulated. Thus life (which near the final state, is really collectively intelligent computers) must be present all the way into the final singularity in order for the known laws of physics to be mutually consistent at all times. Misner [16, 17, 18] has shown in effect that event horizon elimination requires an infinite number of distinct manipulations, so an infinite amount of information must be processed between now and the final singularity. The amount of information stored at any time diverges to infinity as the Omega Point is approached, since the total entropy of the universe (i.e., S) diverges to infinity there, requiring divergence of the complexity of the system that must be understood to be controlled.

During life's expansion throughout the universe, baryon annihilation (via the inverse of electroweak baryogenesis using electroweak quantum tunneling, which is allowed in the Standard Model, as baryon number minus lepton number [B - L] is conserved) is used for life's energy requirements and for rocket propulsion for interstellar travel. In the process, the annililation of baryons forces the Higgs field toward its absolute vacuum, thereby cancelling the positive cosmological constant and forcing the universe to collapse [7, 19, 20].

References:

[1] S. W. Hawking, "Breakdown of predictability in gravitational collapse," Physical Review D, Vol. 14, Issue 10 (November 1976), pp. 2460-2473.

[2] Stephen Hawking's paper which attempts to solve the black hole information issue without the universe collapsing is dependent on the conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). That is, it's based upon empirically unconfirmed physics which violate the known laws of physics. 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
[3] Robert M. Wald, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), ISBN 0226870251, Section 7.3, pp. 182-185.

[4] John D. Barrow, Gregory J. Galloway and Frank J. Tipler, "The closed-universe recollapse conjecture," Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 223 (December 1986), pp. 835-844.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986MNRAS.223..835B
[5] 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.

[6] Frank J. Tipler, The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God and the Resurrection of the Dead (New York: Doubleday, 1994), ISBN 0198519494, Appendix C: "The Bekenstein Bound," pg. 410. Said Appendix is reproduced in Frank J. Tipler, "Genesis: How the Universe Began According to Standard Model Particle Physics," arXiv, November 28, 2001, Section 2: "Apparent Inconsistences in the Physical Laws in the Early Universe," Subsection a: "Bekenstein Bound Inconsistent with Second Law of Thermodynamics."

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0111520
[7] Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology," International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (April 2003), pp. 141-148.

http://theophysics.chimehost.net/pdf...-cosmology.pdf Also at arXiv, March 31, 2007.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0058
[8] S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time (London: Cambridge University Press, 1973), ISBN 0521200164, pp. 217-221.

[9] Malcolm A. H. MacCallum, "On the mixmaster universe problem," Nature--Physical Science, Vol. 230 (March 1971), pp. 112-3.

[10] John D. Barrow, "Chaotic behaviour in general relativity," Physics Reports, Vol. 85, Issue 1 (May 1982), pp. 1-49.

[11] John D. Barrow and Janna Levin, "Chaos in the Einstein-Yang-Mills Equations," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 80, Issue 4 (January 1998), pp. 656-659. Also at arXiv, June 20, 1997.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9706065
[12] Neil J. Cornish and Janna J. Levin, "Mixmaster universe: A chaotic Farey tale," Physical Review D, Vol. 55, Issue 12 (June 1997), pp. 7489-7510. Also at arXiv, December 30, 1996.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9612066
[13] Adilson E. Motter, "Relativistic Chaos is Coordinate Invariant," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 91, Issue 23, Art. No. 231101 (December 2003), four pages. Also at arXiv, December 7, 2003.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0305020
[14] Troy Shinbrot, Edward Ott, Celso Grebogi and James A. Yorke, "Using chaos to direct trajectories to targets," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 65, Issue 26 (December 1990), pp. 3215-3218.

[15] Troy Shinbrot, William Ditto, Celso Grebogi, Edward Ott, Mark Spano and James A. Yorke, "Using the sensitive dependence of chaos (the 'butterfly effect') to direct trajectories in an experimental chaotic system," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 68, Issue 19 (May 1992), pp. 2863-2866.

[16] Charles W. Misner, "The Isotropy of the Universe," Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 151 (February 1968), pp. 431-457.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1968ApJ...151..431M
[17] Charles W. Misner, "Quantum Cosmology. I," Physical Review, Vol. 186, Issue 5 (October 1969), pp. 1319-1327.

[18] Charles W. Misner, "Mixmaster Universe," Physical Review Letters, Vol. 22, Issue 20 (May 1969), pp. 1071-1074.

[19] F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964, Section 11: "Solution to the cosmological constant problem: the universe and life in the far future."

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, April 24, 2007.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276
[20] Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its expansion obviates the universe collapsing. But as the following paper demonstrates, there is no set of cosmological observations which can tell us whether the universe will expand forever or eventually collapse: Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner, "Geometry and Destiny," General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 (October 1999), pp. 1453-1459. Also at arXiv, April 1, 1999.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9904020 The reason for that is because that is dependant on the actions of sapient life in annihilating baryons.