The Omega Point

[James Redford]

James, does the idea indicate Universalism? It seems like it says that every possible brain state will be emulated, but does everyone get resurrected into paradise?

As both the Old and New Testaments state, everyone gets resurrected, sinners and saints alike. And this is also what physics tells us.

But not everyone will receive eternal life. Those who cannot come to the light upon death will lose their souls. (Of which light is nothing more or less than *the truth*, i.e., Jesus Christ--as Jesus defined Himself in part as *the truth* [John 14:6].)

God has perfect efficiency, so nothing that is good, however slight, will be lost. The only thing that will be lost is pure psychopathy itself, i.e., the mindset which does unto others what it does not want others doing unto it. Only that will be lost.

Yet if a person's inner core of their personality is psychopathy, then they will lose their soul. Yet at the same time, anything that was good about their personality, however small it might have been, will be retained. But if most of a person's ego consists of psychopathy, then they will lose their continuity of consciousness, as the inner core of their being cannot be allowed to continue, as it would destroy existence itself if it were allowed to grow without bound (this is explained within the Omega Point Theory, as the universe's Taublike collapses along different axes requires a high level of cooperation among the sapient beings, and hence a highly complex free-market economy, of which could not exist if evil were allowed to grow without restraint). (Although be careful in attempting to analogize this truth to this world, as those in high places who claim to be righteous and attempting to "protect" us have already obtained their 30 pieces of silver. What in reality they are doing is manufacturing terrorism and wars in order to push the world into what they call their "New World Order," which is the one-world government prophesied in Revelation and Daniel.)

The pure justness of God's theodicy is explained via the existence of the multiverse. In some branches of the multiverse, e.g., Mao Tse-Tung, Joseph Stalin and Adoph Hitler repented of their slaughters before their deaths. In those branches, they would be saved, and hence what was good within their personalities would be retained.

Hence, nothing that is good, however slight, is lost. God has perfect efficiency.

Yet those who do not repent of their crimes will lose the continuity of their consciousness. The inner core of their being will cease to exist.

"Hell" is a pagan word and concept which is never found in the bible. The words translated as "Hell" are in the original languages Sheol, Hades, or Gehenna. Sheol and Hades is the abode of the dead. We all go there upon death, and it is nothing more or less than nonexistence.

The bible states that in our present timeline, Heaven (in the sense of the Kingdom of God, as opposed to the the sky and outer space, as the bible uses both senses of the word) doesn't exist for us (Matthew 6:10; Luke 11:2; 1 Thessalonians 4:1). But when we die, from our perspective we are immediately resurrected (Luke 23:43), due to us experiencing no passage of time when dead.

If Heaven already existed in our present timeline and if people went there right now when they died, then there would be no need for the two resurrection events spoken of in the bible. (That is, the first resurrection, which is the foundation of Christ's Heaven on Earth, when mankind becomes immortal, but in order to become immortal they will have to be transformed, taking on bodies which do not decay, and hence will have to be born again. And the second resurrection, which is the universal resurrection of all who have ever died. As it is said, the first shall be last and the last shall be first, which is precisely what physics tells us.)

This isn't to say that people's so-called near-death experiences (or perhaps after-death experiences would be a better term, since many of these people experience clinical death) aren't real. But they're a preview of things to come, i.e., a message from God (for those genuine events).

Gehenna is a burning up of those who cannot be saved. That is, they will be utterly incinerated: they will forevevr cease to exist. This is the Second Death spoken of in Revelation.

The doctrine of eternal punishment is correct if one understands that this means that the damned will not take part of the infinity of creation, i.e., eternal life. But the damned will not exist forever. They will be shown their crimes from their victim's point of view--i.e., actually feel it and see it from their eyes--and then the damned will be abolished.

To say that the damned exist forever in endless torment is biblically and mathematically incorrect. For that would mean that the damned receive eternal life, albeit a horrible eternal life.

Yet if this were true, this would mathematically mean that Satan's kingdom is numerically and physically equal to God's Kingdom.

This is mathematically unavoidable, for the reason that any finite state will eventually undergo the Poincaré cycle per the Poincaré recurrence theorem. This is very easy to see by considering the simple example of two bits, which have only four possible states (i.e., 2^2): hence, once these four states have been exhausted, states will have to recur. What that means is that any finite state can only have a finite number of experiences (i.e., different states), because any finite state will eventually start to repeat.

Thus, immortality (even if it is a horrible form of immortality) requires the existence of either an infinite computational state or a finite state which diverges to an infinite computational state, thus allowing for states never repeating and hence an infinite number of experiences.

Hence, if the damned really existed forever in endless torment, then mathematically this would require Satan's kingdom to grow to an infinite state, making Satan the equal of God.

So the damned will not and cannot exist forever. They will lose their souls. They will experience the Second Death. They shall not receive eternal life (even if it be a horrible eternal life). The damned will be annihilated after they have been shown their crimes from their victim's point of view. They will be erased from existence. They will be erased from the Book of Life (whatever form of eternal life, even a hypothetical horrible eternal life, i.e., the pagan concept of "Hell").

 

[Dark_Lite]

I'm still waiting for how 3 singularities = Biblical Trinity.

Never mind that there is absolutely nothing in the Bible that describes the Trinity as a bunch of singularities...

 

[Christos Anesti]

I can understand the idea that the three singulairites are signs in creation pointing to the trinitarian nature of God but to say that they are themselves the Trinity doesn't seem right. God is tri-Personal / tri-hypostatic and singularities are not Persons are they?

 

[Chesterton]

Goodness, what is the definition of a "person" though?

 

[James Redford]

I'm still waiting for how 3 singularities = Biblical Trinity.

Never mind that there is absolutely nothing in the Bible that describes the Trinity as a bunch of singularities...

Different times are merely examples of different universes in the multiverse. According to the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics), the Omega Point is logically required to exist in order to avoid their violation (such as unitarity being violated, or entropy decreasing). So if the known laws of physics are true descriptions of the world (and there exists no rational reason to think that they aren't, as they have been confirmed by every experiment to date), then the Omega Point exists apodictically. That is to say, if the known laws of physics are true, then existence could not exist in the first place without the Omega Point existing.

The Omega Point is the Final Singularity. This is God the Father, or the First Person of the Trinity. It consists of infinite entropy and infinite information. Another way of thinking of it is God in all His fullness, since, given that it has infinite computational resources, anything that will ever exist will be perfectly rendered on some level of implementation at this Final Singularity. It knows all that can logically be known.

The All-Presents Singularity exists at all times at the edge of the multiverse. This is God the Son, or the Second Person of the Trinity; or God in the world. Its entropy and information goes from zero to infinity.

The Initial Singularity was the start of the Big Bang. If one desires, one can also call it the Alpha Point. This is God the Holy Spirit, or the Third Person of the Trinity. It started at zero entropy and zero information. Think of it as a guiding influence upon all of existence, since the laws of physics come from it (going by the usual way in which humans think of causation, since the Initial Singularity exists in our past--although in physics it's just as accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz., the principle of least action; and unitarity).

In classical (i.e., relativistic) cosmology, the Initial Singularity and the Final Singularity are permanently separate and distinct singularities. But in quantum cosmology, the Initial and the Final Singularities are connected by a third singularity: the All-Presents Singularity, since all sizes of universes are obtained in the multiverse, which means that there are a class of universes which don't expand out from the Bing Bang singularity at all, but remain as a singularity. In the "Omega Point (Tipler)" article at Wikipedia, there exists a diagram I created that shows this process, which is also at my Theophysics website.

These three distinct parts which perform different physical functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually One Singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse: the Cosmological Singularity, of which consists eternally of three hypostases in a triune homoousian.

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 (i.e., with its Three-in-One structure) has infinite nearness to every point in spacetime. So each Person of the Trinity at all times has infinite nearness to every point in spacetime.

 

[Dark_Lite]

The Omega Point is the Final Singularity. This is God the Father, or the First Person of the Trinity. It consists of infinite entropy and infinite information. Another way of thinking of it is God in all His fullness, since, given that it has infinite computational resources, anything that will ever exist will be perfectly rendered on some level of implementation at this Final Singularity. It knows all that can logically be known.

It knows all that can logically be known, nothing more. In order to get to God the Father you have to add all sorts of extra information to it: active interest in the events of the universe, all-loving, etc.

The All-Presents Singularity exists at all times at the edge of the multiverse. This is God the Son, or the Second Person of the Trinity; or God in the world. Its entropy and information goes from zero to infinity.

And this equates to Jesus how?

The Initial Singularity was the start of the Big Bang. If one desires, one can also call it the Alpha Point. This is God the Holy Spirit, or the Third Person of the Trinity. It started at zero entropy and zero information. Think of it as a guiding influence upon all of existence, since the laws of physics come from it (going by the usual way in which humans think of causation, since the Initial Singularity exists in our past--although in physics it's just as accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz., the principle of least action; and unitarity).

This is probably the closest that any of these get to describing the Trinity, but it is still far off.

For the Omega Point to be described as the Christian Trinity, extra stuff must be added on to it. There's no way around it. Therefore, we can say that the Omega Point does not work as a proof of Christianity. It could be a way of describing the nature of the Trinity, but it is an extrabiblical description, is at best a pious opinion, and does not negate the need for faith to believe in the Christian God in the first place.

 

[James Redford]

It knows all that can logically be known, nothing more. In order to get to God the Father you have to add all sorts of extra information to it: active interest in the events of the universe, all-loving, etc.

On this matter you should research the traditional Christian theological position of divine simplicity. Divine simplicity is quite biblical, as it is indeed from the bible whereby this doctrine derived.

In the New Testament, Jesus called Himself *the truth*. Jesus didn't say that He has the truth, rather Jesus said that He is *truth itself*. And Paul wrote that God *is love*. Paul didn't write that God has love, rather he wrote that God is *love itself*.

That is, God doesn't merely possess truth. God is *truth itself*. God doesn't merely possess love. God is *love itself*.

This is physically explained in the Omega Point Theory, since all of existence derived from the Cosmological Singularity, and so any truth that could possibly exist is merely a derivation of that ultimate reality of God (i.e., that Hypostasis).

But, some may counter, what about all the horrible things in the world? The brutalities, the assaults, the rapes, the murders, the slaughters, the lack of love, the hate, and the natural disasters? After all, they exist, they're real; that's truth.

So is God these things?

And the Omega Point Theory provides the answer to this. All such evils are finite. They are present in our world, but they will not continue forever.

What the Omega Point Theory demonstrates is that sapient society will diverge to a state of infinite computational resources, allowing sapient society to diverge to a state of infinite pleasure, joy, love and truth.

Hence, while the evils in the world are real, they are also finite. They have an end. Whereas good is infinite. Pleasure, joy, love and truth are infinite. They hae no end. (And in actuality, the plural of "they" to describe these things is really an "it," i.e., singular, as they are simply different ways of describing the singular fundamental reality, of which is simply nothing more or less than *the truth*.)

But we as Christians don't even need the Omega Point Theory to derive this truth, since the doctrine of us existing eternally in Heaven logically requires that we diverge to a state of infinite pleasure, joy, love and truth (this is mathematically unavoidable due to the Poincaré recurrence theorem; which, if you're not already familiar with that theorem, see my posts above).

The difference between any finite number (however large it may be) and infinity is an infinite difference. So good is infinitely greater than evil. Hence, God indeed is truth and love *itself*: as any error or hate contained within reality is finite, yet truth and love are infinite.

And this equates to Jesus how?

Quantum wave packets incident on the All-Presents Singulary (i.e., God the Son) are reflected back into the multiverse (and hence the universes which make up the multiverse). So the Final Singularity (i.e., God the Father), via reverse causality (in physics it's just as accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz., the principle of least action; and unitarity), can manipulate physical events in the universes. Jesus the man, existing as human flesh, would be in communion with His eternal aspect, i.e., the All-Presents Singulary, by which he would be able to perform the miracles recorded in the New Testament, and by which He would have the divine knowledge which He displayed.

This is probably the closest that any of these get to describing the Trinity, but it is still far off.

For the Omega Point to be described as the Christian Trinity, extra stuff must be added on to it. There's no way around it. Therefore, we can say that the Omega Point does not work as a proof of Christianity. It could be a way of describing the nature of the Trinity, but it is an extrabiblical description, is at best a pious opinion, and does not negate the need for faith to believe in the Christian God in the first place.

The Omega Point Theory isn't physical proof of Christianity. It is physical proof of the existence of God (i.e., according to the known laws of physics). That is, the known laws of physics state that an omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent Person necessarily exists. Further, these laws require this Person to exist as a triune Being.

Christian theology is preferentially selected by the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) due to the fundamentally triune structure of the Omega Point cosmology and due to existence having come into being a finite time in the past (i.e., the traditional theological position of creatio ex nihilo).

Moreover, the Standard Model provides the mechanism by which the miracles recorded in the New Testament could be achieved. This process uses baryon annihilation, and its inverse, via electroweak quantum tunneling controlled by the cosmological end state of the Omega Point (since in physics it's just as accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz., the principle of least action; and unitarity).

Traditional Christian theology has maintained that God never violates natural law, as God, in His omniscience, knew in the beginning all that He wanted to achieve and so, in His omnipotence, He formed the laws of physics in order to achieve His goal. The idea that God would violate His own laws would mean that God is not omniscient. In traditional Christian theology, miracles do not violate natural law--rather, they are events that are so improbable that they can only be explained by the existence of God and His acting in the world.

Prof. Tipler didn't set out to physically prove the existence of God. Tipler had been an atheist since the age of 16, yet only circa 1998 did he again become a theist due to advancements in the Omega Point Theory which occurred after the publication of his 1994 book The Physics of Immortality (and Tipler even mentions in said book [pg. 305] that he is still an atheist because he didn't at the time have confirmation for the Omega Point Theory).

Tipler's first paper on the Omega Point Theory was in 1986 (Frank J. Tipler, "Cosmological Limits on Computation," International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 25, No. 6 [June 1986], pp. 617-661). What motivated Tipler's investigation as to how long life could go on was not religion (indeed, Tipler didn't even set out to find God), but Prof. Freeman J. Dyson's paper "Time without end: Physics and biology in an open universe" (Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 51, Issue 3 [July 1979], pp. 447-460; available on the aleph.se website).

Further, in a section entitled "Why I Am Not a Christian" in The Physics of Immortality (pg. 310), Tipler wrote, "However, I emphasize again that I do not think Jesus really rose from the dead. I think his body rotted in some grave." This book was written before Tipler realized what the resurrection mechanism is that Jesus could have used without violating any known laws of physics (and without existing on an emulated level of implementation--in that case the resurrection mechanism would be trivially easy to perform for the society running the simulation).

 

[Dark_Lite]

On this matter you should research the traditional Christian theological position of divine simplicity. Divine simplicity is quite biblical, as it is indeed from the bible whereby this doctrine derived.

In the New Testament, Jesus called Himself *the truth*. Jesus didn't say that He has the truth, rather Jesus said that He is *truth itself*. And Paul wrote that God *is love*. Paul didn't write that God has love, rather he wrote that God is *love itself*.

That is, God doesn't merely possess truth. God is *truth itself*. God doesn't merely possess love. God is *love itself*.

This is physically explained in the Omega Point Theory, since all of existence derived from the Cosmological Singularity, and so any truth that could possibly exist is merely a derivation of that ultimate reality of God (i.e., that Hypostasis).

You're applying physics to abstract concepts. You also base this on multiverse theory, which hasn't been proven by physics in any stretch of the imagination. It is a hypothesis, but it doesn't have great empirical evidence, if any.

I also object to this:

But, some may counter, what about all the horrible things in the world? The brutalities, the assaults, the rapes, the murders, the slaughters, the lack of love, the hate, and the natural disasters? After all, they exist, they're real; that's truth.

So is God these things?

And the Omega Point Theory provides the answer to this. All such evils are finite. They are present in our world, but they will not continue forever.

The objection you try to answer is justified. Even if these things are only finite, it does not matter. If the Final Singularity, God, whatever, is responsible for all things, then these evils are most certainly from him/it. Doesn't matter if they're finite or not. They still exist because of him.

Quantum wave packets incident on the All-Presents Singulary (i.e., God the Son) are reflected back into the multiverse (and hence the universes which make up the multiverse). So the Final Singularity (i.e., God the Father), via reverse causality (in physics it's just as accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz., the principle of least action; and unitarity), can manipulate physical events in the universes. Jesus the man, existing as human flesh, would be in communion with His eternal aspect, i.e., the All-Presents Singulary, by which he would be able to perform the miracles recorded in the New Testament, and by which He would have the divine knowledge which He displayed.

...What? Also, I'm no physicist, but the assertion that causality goes backwards is accurate in physics doesn't sound entirely like it's something that's accepted by the physics community at large.

Traditional Christian theology has maintained that God never violates natural law, as God, in His omniscience, knew in the beginning all that He wanted to achieve and so, in His omnipotence, He formed the laws of physics in order to achieve His goal. The idea that God would violate His own laws would mean that God is not omniscient. In traditional Christian theology, miracles do not violate natural law--rather, they are events that are so improbable that they can only be explained by the existence of God and His acting in the world.

I'm not sure if things like stopping the sun from moving across the sky (which we now know would mean stopping the Earth from orbiting) don't violate the laws of physics. According to physics, if the Earth suddenly stopped moving, we would all basically be vaporized from the sudden lurch forward at a few thousand miles per hour.

 

[theFijian]

Jesus said what He said. You here attempt to make Jesus Christ a false prophet. Who are you to correct what Jesus said?

And who are you to put words in Jesus mouth?

 

[James Redford]

And who are you to put words in Jesus mouth?

I didn't write the bible, so you must be thinking of someone else.

 

[James Redford]

You're applying physics to abstract concepts. You also base this on multiverse theory, which hasn't been proven by physics in any stretch of the imagination. It is a hypothesis, but it doesn't have great empirical evidence, if any.

Keep in mind that the physics of the actual Omega Point don't necessitate a multiverse conception. The physics of the Omega Point itself don't invoke the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Yet given an infinite computational state, the multiverse exists, since the multiverse can easily be rendered with such computational resources.

But beyond that, 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.

Prof. Frank J. Tipler points out on pg. 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), Appendix I: "The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics," pp. 483-488.

As well, experiments confirming "nonlocality" are actually confirming the existence of the multiverse: see Frank J. Tipler, "Does Quantum Nonlocality Exist? Bell's Theorem and the Many-Worlds Interpretation," arXiv:quant-ph/0003146, March 30, 2000.

See also David Deutsch, "Comment on Lockwood," British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 47, No 2 (June 1996), pp. 222-228; also released as "Comment on '"Many Minds" Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics by Michael Lockwood,'" 1996.

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 Deutsch writes in The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes--and Its Implications (London: Allen Lane The Penguin Press, 1997), Chapter 9: "Quantum Computers," pg. 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, September 25, 2008.

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.

I also object to this:
The objection you try to answer is justified. Even if these things are only finite, it does not matter. If the Final Singularity, God, whatever, is responsible for all things, then these evils are most certainly from him/it. Doesn't matter if they're finite or not. They still exist because of him.

Well, of course. But the same criticism applies equally to any conception of God, if God is the Creator of existence.

...What? Also, I'm no physicist, but the assertion that causality goes backwards is accurate in physics doesn't sound entirely like it's something that's accepted by the physics community at large.

Any actual physicist knows that such is the case. This is just pure logic at work here. Any action has an opposite and equal reaction. So if you reverse the causal chains they eventually lead back to the Big Bang singularity.

We humans don't commonly tend to think of causation going in both time directions, because our brains only record what we call the past. But from God's point of view, all of reality (i.e, its entire timeline, from beginning to end) is recorded, and so it makes just as much sense to Him to regard causation as going from what we call future to past.

I'm not sure if things like stopping the sun from moving across the sky (which we now know would mean stopping the Earth from orbiting) don't violate the laws of physics. According to physics, if the Earth suddenly stopped moving, we would all basically be vaporized from the sudden lurch forward at a few thousand miles per hour.

Then they wouldn't be actual laws of physics.

This isn't an arbitray notion that the Christian theologians came up with. It's required by logic. Seriously think about it: God, in His omniscience, knew in the beginning all that He wanted to achieve and so, in His omnipotence, He formed the laws of physics in order to achieve His goal. The idea that God would violate His own laws would mean that God is not omniscient.

This is a logical requirement, not an arbitrary doctrine. One might as well strive against the idea that 2+2 = 4.

If we possessed the ultimate physical law, then we would be able to explain miracles. And now we do, and so we can. (Since the quantum gravity Lagrangian is an infinite series [though term-by-term finite], we do not possess the entire law, as that law is infinite, but from what is already known of it, it does require the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics, and so we can analyze physical systems based upon that.)

Regarding Joshua 10:12-14, baryon annihilation can explain this event, whether it was an experience implanted in the minds of people by God, or if God stopped the rotation of the Earth.

And yes, you got that wrong. Stopping the Earth's orbit wouldn't stop the Sun from moving across the sky, as the Earth's orbit around the Sun isn't what causes that. Rather, it's the Earth's rotation about it own axis which causes the Sun to move across the sky. The Earth's orbit around the Sun could stop completely and the Sun would still move across the sky, so long as the Earth's rotation continued. The Earth's rotation moves at about 1038 MPH, or around 1.35 times the speed of sound.

 

[theFijian]

I didn't write the bible, so you must be thinking of someone else.

Well i guess if you're just regurgitating Tipler's nonsense...

 

[Dark_Lite]

Keep in mind that the physics of the actual Omega Point don't necessitate a multiverse conception. The physics of the Omega Point itself don't invoke the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Yet given an infinite computational state, the multiverse exists, since the multiverse can easily be rendered with such computational resources.

But what if the actual nature of the universe is not multiverse? If it is not necessarily invoked in some fashion, then there is a gray area, and the whole idea falls apart. Just because it *could* be rendered with such computational resources (assuming that the universe actually is a giant computer in the first place...), does not mean it has to be.

But beyond that, 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).

I don't think that's true. But now the core of this hypothesis comes out. It relies entirely on the many worlds interpretation. That is not something that is standardized across all of physics. It has found acceptance in many places, but there is still great controversy over how it works, whether or not it's falsifiable, etc.

Well, of course. But the same criticism applies equally to any conception of God, if God is the Creator of existence.

Only conceptions of God that include God as the creator of absolutely everything that exists. Admittedly, this is what most conceptions of the Christian God are.

Any actual physicist knows that such is the case. This is just pure logic at work here. Any action has an opposite and equal reaction. So if you reverse the causal chains they eventually lead back to the Big Bang singularity.

We humans don't commonly tend to think of causation going in both time directions, because our brains only record what we call the past. But from God's point of view, all of reality (i.e, its entire timeline, from beginning to end) is recorded, and so it makes just as much sense to Him to regard causation as going from what we call future to past.

We don't commonly think of causation going in both time directions because it doesn't go in both time directions. Causality is one way. It can (theoretically) be traced backwards, but you can't undo a cause.

This isn't an arbitray notion that the Christian theologians came up with. It's required by logic. Seriously think about it: God, in His omniscience, knew in the beginning all that He wanted to achieve and so, in His omnipotence, He formed the laws of physics in order to achieve His goal. The idea that God would violate His own laws would mean that God is not omniscient.

This is a logical requirement, not an arbitrary doctrine. One might as well strive against the idea that 2+2 = 4.

Really? Many theologians think that God is capable of bending the laws of the universe to accomplish miracles. That God does not violate the laws of physics seems, to me, to be a relatively recent invention because now we have realized that violations of the laws of physics would 1. Make God into a deceiver or 2. Cause horrible imbalances in the natural world.

Regarding Joshua 10:12-14, baryon annihilation can explain this event, whether it was an experience implanted in the minds of people by God, or if God stopped the rotation of the Earth.

From what I read, baryon annihilation is another random thing proposed by Tipler in order to make his theory work. I don't find any other refereces to such things anywhere else.

And yes, you got that wrong. Stopping the Earth's orbit wouldn't stop the Sun from moving across the sky, as the Earth's orbit around the Sun isn't what causes that. Rather, it's the Earth's rotation about it own axis which causes the Sun to move across the sky. The Earth's orbit around the Sun could stop completely and the Sun would still move across the sky, so long as the Earth's rotation continued. The Earth's rotation moves at about 1038 MPH, or around 1.35 times the speed of sound.

Yeah, yeah. I was in a hurry at the time. The orbit causes the seasons, the rotation causes the days. Either way, the result is the same. Stopping the rotation of the Earth instantaneously = instagibbed everything.

 

[Chesterton]

Did Professor Tipler use to play with Hawkwind?

YouTube - Hawkwind - Born To Go (1971)

We were born to go,
We're never turning back
We were born to go,
and leave a burning track
We were born to go,
and leave no star unturned
We were born to grow,
We were born to learn

We're breaking out of the shell,
We're breaking free
We're hatching our dreams into reality

We were born to blaze,
a new clear way through space
A way out of the maze,
that held the human race
We were born to go,
as far as we can fly
We were born to go,
to blow the human mind

 

[Cabal]

Urgh, I was hoping the same Omega Point fanboy wasn't spamming things up in this thread also, but I guess I'll ask my question anyway -

Can someone explain to me how the universe has "computational power"? My main problems with this are:

1. What is the medium for storing information?
2. Wouldn't the organisation of said medium require something external to the universe (much like how a hard drive has to be prepared by an external organiser)?
3. Wouldn't the increase of information storage by the entire universe violate the second law of thermodynamics?

 

[Assyrian]

Urgh, I was hoping the same Omega Point fanboy wasn't spamming things up in this thread also, but I guess I'll ask my question anyway -

Can someone explain to me how the universe has "computational power"? My main problems with this are:

1. What is the medium for storing information?

The earth of course.

2. Wouldn't the organisation of said medium require something external to the universe (much like how a hard drive has to be prepared by an external organiser)?

Pan-dimensional mice.

3. Wouldn't the increase of information storage by the entire universe violate the second law of thermodynamics?

 

[Chesterton]

1. What is the medium for storing information?

The earth of course.

How many terrabytes of information can we store?

Get it? "Terra"? -bytes?

 

[Assyrian]

42

 

[Chesterton]

ahhhhhhhh!

 

[Christos Anesti]

[SIZE=+1]Here is an article from the on line journal "Theandros" that some of you might be interested in. It looks at the ideas of the New Martyr Fr Pavel Florensky in relation to those of Fr Teilhard de Chardin. Fr Florensky was a mathematician, electrical engineer, philosopher, and inventor and has been called the "Leonardo Da Vinci of Russia".[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=+1]Parallel Visions - A consideration of the work of Pavel Florensky and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin[/SIZE]​