|
Post by tolpuddlemartyr on May 29, 2010 5:09:35 GMT -5
Using stupid (non) logic.
1. God defies our understanding of natural laws. 2. God can fuck your shit up. 3. The universe is supposed to have started with God.
Singularities have the following properties.
1. Singularities defy our understanding of physics. 2. Hitting the singularity of a black hole will crush you to an infinite density, most definitely fucking your shit up! 3. The universe likely started with a singularity.
So...yeah!
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on May 29, 2010 11:12:40 GMT -5
If that's how he chooses to define god, that's fine, but it's more of a deist/pantheist god. Such a definition does NOT "prove" the Judeo-Christian god. If anything, it contradicts all but the most metaphorical readings of the bible. The initial Big Bang singularity is the uncaused first cause, a definition of God held by all the Abrahamic religions. Yet Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory 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 form of the cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity identified as being God. The universe was also brought into being by the Omega Point, as the end-state of the universe causally brings about the beginning state, i.e., the Big Bang singularity (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). 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 of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God. 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 multiverse in its entirety up to this point in universal history). 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. Additionally, we now have the quantum gravity Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics: of which inherently produces the Omega Point cosmology. So here we have an additional high degree of assurance that the Omega Point cosmology is correct. For the details on the Omega Point cosmology and the quantum gravity TOE, 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. 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. arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276Out 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 Reports 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," Reports on Progress in Physics. www.webcitation.org/5o9VkK3eE ) Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists. Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor (according to Journal Citation Reports) 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 importance 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 Reports 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 resource for further information on the Omega Point Theory: Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist theophysics.host56.com , theophysics.110mb.comTipler is Professor of Physics and Mathematics (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 Reports on Progress in Physics, such as Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), Physics Letters, 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 important concepts and theorems in general relativity and gravitation physics" on p. viii in the "Foreword" to The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986) by cosmologist Prof. John D. Barrow and Tipler, which was the first book wherein Tipler's Omega Point Theory was described. On p. 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); with additional comments by Frank J. Tipler. theophysics.chimehost.net/deutsch-ends-of-the-universe.htmlThe only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to resort to physical theories which have no experimental support and 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 (October 2005), Art. No. 084013; also at arXiv:hep-th/0507171, July 18, 2005. arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0507171That is, Prof. Hawking's paper is based upon empirically unconfirmed physics which violate the known laws of 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 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 baryon number minus lepton number 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 Reports 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 book The Physics of Christianity (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 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.
|
|
|
Post by worlder on May 29, 2010 11:15:20 GMT -5
^^^ Yeah, the Big Crunch thing.
I rather have Heat Death, it is less noisy.
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on May 29, 2010 11:23:45 GMT -5
^^^ Yeah, the Big Crunch thing. I rather have Heat Death, it is less noisy. You can trivially simulate such an environment when the computational capacity of the universe becomes great enough, as eventually any desired amount of computational resources will be available.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 29, 2010 11:33:46 GMT -5
Sounds stupid. You can't take what might vaguely resemble what some people might call "god" and call it God. Holy books make predictions and verifiable claims. Holy books heavily contradict each other. Holy books even contradict themselves. They're useless in science.
Oh, and by the way, the Abrahamic god is far from omnipotent, iron chariots. Not to mention he lost a wrestling match with a man. The eastern religions don't have omnipotent gods, and neither do the European. And while we're at it, neither do the American religions. The only group of religions that pretend to have an omnipotent god are those from the middle east. So, one of the main assumptions of the argument is flawed, if you have flawed assumptions, you have a flawed argument. This means the entire thing is useless drivel.
Edit: Oh, yes, and the big crunch. Heat death is just the consequence of entropy, so it would have to happen before then. But, and here's my question, what is the mechanism? The universe's expansion has only been getting faster. Why do you think that the opposite will happen?
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on May 29, 2010 11:42:30 GMT -5
Sounds stupid. You can't take what might vaguely resemble what some people might call "god" and call it God. Holy books make predictions and verifiable claims. Holy books heavily contradict each other. Holy books even contradict themselves. They're useless in science. Oh, and by the way, the Abrahamic god is far from omnipotent, iron chariots. Not to mention he lost a wrestling match with a man. The eastern religions don't have omnipotent gods, and neither do the European. And while we're at it, neither do the American religions. The only group of religions that pretend to have an omnipotent god are those from the middle east. So, one of the main assumptions of the argument is flawed, if you have flawed assumptions, you have a flawed argument. This means the entire thing is useless drivel. 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 of particle physics provides the mechanism by which the miracles recorded in the New Testament could be achieved without violating any known laws of physics, even if one were to assume that we currently don't exist on a level of implementation in a computer simulation (in that case, then such miracles would be trivially easy to perform for the society running the simulation, even though it would seem amazing from our perspective). 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). If the coming of Jesus Christ and the miracles that He performed were necessary in order to lead to the Omega Point, then the probability of said event occuring is exactly 1: certain to happen. 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. The only way to avoid the conclusion that the Omega Point exists is to reject the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics), and hence to reject empirical science: as these physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date. That is, there exists no rational reason for thinking that the Omega Point Theory is incorrect, and indeed, one must engage in extreme irrationality in order to argue against the Omega Point cosmology. Additionally, we now have the quantum gravity Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics: of which inherently produces the Omega Point cosmology. So here we have an additional high degree of assurance that the Omega Point cosmology is correct. Bear in mind that Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory has been published in a number of the world's leading peer-reviewed physics and science journals.[1] Even NASA itself has peer-reviewed his Omega Point Theory and found it correct according to the known laws of physics (see below). No refutation of it exists within the peer-reviewed scientific literature, or anywhere else for that matter. Below are some of the peer-reviewed papers in science and physics journals wherein Prof. Tipler has published his Omega Point Theory: - Frank J. Tipler, "Cosmological Limits on Computation," International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 25, No. 6 (June 1986), pp. 617-661; doi:10.1007/BF00670475. (First paper on the Omega Point Theory.) - Frank J. Tipler, "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions for Scientists," Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, Vol. 24, Issue 2 (June 1989), pp. 217-253; doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.1989.tb01112.x. theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler-omega-point-as-eschaton.pdf , www.webcitation.org/5nY0aytpz Republished as Chapter 7: "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions to Scientists" in Beginning with the End: God, Science, and Wolfhart Pannenberg, edited by Carol Rausch Albright and Joel Haugen (Chicago, Ill.: Open Court Publishing Company, 1997), ISBN: 0812693256, pp. 156-194. - Frank J. Tipler, "The ultimate fate of life in universes which undergo inflation," Physics Letters B, Vol. 286, Issues 1-2 (July 23, 1992), pp. 36-43; doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90155-W. - Frank J. Tipler, "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe," NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop Proceedings, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, January 1999, pp. 111-119; an invited paper in the proceedings of a conference held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, August 12-14, 1998; doi:2060/19990023204. Document ID: 19990023204. Report Number: E-11429; NAS 1.55:208694; NASA/CP-1999-208694. theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler-ultrarelativistic-rockets.pdf See also: ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?Ntk=DocumentID&Ntt=19990023204 , ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19990023204_1999021520.pdf- Frank J. Tipler, "The Ultimate Future of the Universe, Black Hole Event Horizon Topologies, Holography, and the Value of the Cosmological Constant," arXiv:astro-ph/0104011, April 1, 2001. arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0104011 Published in Relativistic Astrophysics: 20th Texas Symposium, Austin, TX, 10-15 December 2000, edited by J. Craig Wheeler and Hugo Martel (Melville, N.Y.: American Institute of Physics, 2001), ISBN: 0735400261, which is AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 586 (October 15, 2001), pp. 769-772; doi:10.1063/1.1419654. - Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology," International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (April 2003), pp. 141-148; doi:10.1017/S1473550403001526. theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler-intelligent-life-in-cosmology.pdf Also at arXiv:0704.0058, March 31, 2007. arxiv.org/abs/0704.0058- Frank J. Tipler, Jessica Graber, Matthew McGinley, Joshua Nichols-Barrer and Christopher Staecker, "Closed Universes With Black Holes But No Event Horizons As a Solution to the Black Hole Information Problem," arXiv:gr-qc/0003082, March 20, 2000. arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0003082 Published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 379, Issue 2 (August 2007), pp. 629-640; doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11895.x. - 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; doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04. 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. arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, in which the above August 2007 paper was published, is one of the world's leading peer-reviewed astrophysics journals. Prof. Tipler's paper "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe" was an invited paper for a conference held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, so NASA itself has peer-reviewed Tipler's Omega Point Theory (peer-review is a standard process for published proceedings papers; and again, Tipler's said paper was an *invited* paper by NASA, as opposed to what are called "poster papers"). Zygon is the world's leading peer-reviewed academic journal on science and religion. Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports in Progress in Physics paper--which presents the Omega Point quantum gravity Theory of Everything--was selected as one of 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles published in Reports 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," Reports on Progress in Physics. www.webcitation.org/5o9VkK3eE ) Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists. Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor (according to Journal Citation Reports) 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 importance 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 Reports 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.) For much more on these matters, particularly see Prof. Tipler's above 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper in addition to the following resources: "God Proven to Exist According to Mainline Physics," TetrahedronOmega, December 26, 2008 www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=122&mforum=libertyandtruthTheophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist theophysics.chimehost.net , theophysics.host56.com----- Note: 1. While there is a lot that gets published in physics journals that is anti-reality and non-physical (such as string theory, which violates the known laws of physics and has no experimental support whatsoever), the reason such things are allowed to pass the peer-review process is because the paradigm of assumptions which such papers are speaking to has been made known, and within their operating paradigm none of the referees could find anything wrong with said papers. That is, the paradigm itself may have nothing to do with reality, but the peer-reviewers could find nothing wrong with such papers within the operating assumptions of that paradigm. Whereas, e.g., the operating paradigm of Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper is the known laws of physics, i.e., our actual physical reality which has been repeatedly confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. So the professional physicists charged with refereeing this paper could find nothing wrong with it within its operating paradigm, i.e., the known laws of physics.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 29, 2010 11:49:29 GMT -5
Thank you for confirming the craziness of your ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on May 29, 2010 11:50:58 GMT -5
Ummm... if I understand correctly, the main issue with the Omega Point hypothesis is really the fact that the Universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, which is a particular problem for the hypothesis since it throws out the notion that there is enough matter in the Universe to create the conditions for a collapse. Secondly, it also requires the assumption that the current laws of physics are completely correct, which to me seems a bit hap-hazard considering that there's still various obstacles to current theories to even begin formulating a ToE. Now, you've pointed out that Hawking's problem of Information loss means that his hypothesis is incorrect, however, you are ignoring the proposed solutions since that paper on the Black Hole Information Paradox. Basically, the problem of information loss in black holes can be mitigated if it turns out that the Universe is holographic, as proposed with string based theories {link}. And considering the strong link with black holes and eliminating the need for a singularity for these objects, I'd say it is at least a better hypothesis on the matter of information and the state of this Universe. Also, why do you have the same page distributed across multiple domains? I do not like this. I've also noted that all the different papers are coming from one person.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on May 29, 2010 12:00:34 GMT -5
I normally don't say this, but... tl;dr
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 29, 2010 12:01:44 GMT -5
I've also noted that all the different papers are coming from one person. The same person who is being talked about in the thread's title.
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on May 29, 2010 12:02:28 GMT -5
... Edit: Oh, yes, and the big crunch. Heat death is just the consequence of entropy, so it would have to happen before then. But, and here's my question, what is the mechanism? The universe's expansion has only been getting faster. Why do you think that the opposite will happen? Most of this is already addressed in my first post above. What heat death is is when the temperature of everything becomes too similar for any work to be done. During the collapse phase of the universe, life uses gravitational shear energy by forcing a Taub universe collapse, thereby creating a temperature differential whereby usable energy can be obtained. The Taublike collapse in one direction, and then another direction (i.e., Mixmaster oscillations) is also used to eliminate event horizons, which is necessary for information processing (and hence life) to continue. This mode of collapse ends (in proper time, as in computer clock time it never ends) in a single c-boundary (i.e., causal boundary) point: the Omega Point. The gravitational shear energy thereby available to life diverges to infinity as the Omega Point is approached. Due to the increasing temperature of the universe during the collapse phase (wherein the temperature diverges to infinity), life will have to transfer its information processes to higher energy states, eventually using elementary particles to directly compute on via travelling waves and standing waves. Regarding entropy: entropy is informational complexity (see the works of mathematician Claude Shannon for more on this). In the Omega Point cosmology, entropy diverges to infinity.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 29, 2010 12:04:39 GMT -5
You're quite mad, aren't you?
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on May 29, 2010 12:27:13 GMT -5
Ummm... if I understand correctly, the main issue with the Omega Point hypothesis is really the fact that the Universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, which is a particular problem for the hypothesis since it throws out the notion that there is enough matter in the Universe to create the conditions for a collapse. Secondly, it also requires the assumption that the current laws of physics are completely correct, which to me seems a bit hap-hazard considering that there's still various obstacles to current theories to even begin formulating a ToE. This was already addressed in my original post. To quote myself from said post: "" 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 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 baryon number minus lepton number 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. ""
Regarding the quantum gravity Theory of Everything, also from said post:
"" Prof. Tipler's above 2005 Reports 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 book The Physics of Christianity (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 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. ""
The problem with all such proposed solutions to the Black Hole Information Issue that involve the preservation of unitarity but without the universe ending by collapse in finite proper time is that they all involve proposed new physics (such as string theory) which violate the known laws of physics and which have no experimental support whatsoever.
Because the free websites that I use tend to go defunct, so I like to practice precautionary redundancy.
That's because Prof. Frank J. Tipler is the originator of the Omega Point Theory, and as far as anyone knows, the Omega Point Theory is correct. To date no refutation of it has appeared in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, or anywhere else for that matter. And the only criticism of it that has appeared in a refereed science paper actually unintentionally greatly strengthened the Omega Point Theory! In a paper published by Prof. George F. R. Ellis and Dr. David H. Coule criticizing Tipler's Omega Point Theory ("Life at the end of the universe?," General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 26, No. 7 [July 1994], pp. 731-739), Ellis and Coule gave an argument that the Bekenstein Bound violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics if the universe collapses without having event horizons eliminated. Unwittingly, Ellis and Coule thereby actually gave a powerful argument that the Omega Point is required by the laws of physics.
So when Tipler's critics actually do real physics instead of issuing bare assertions and nebulous cavils, they end up making Tipler's case stronger. I find that deliciously ironic. (Ironic though it is, it's the expected result, given that the Omega Point is required by the known laws of physics.)
|
|
|
Post by worlder on May 29, 2010 12:31:07 GMT -5
redford
We haven't got a Theory of Everything yet.
BTW we don't have the technology to confirm your statements or the statements of Tipler.
PS: You've just earned yourself a quote on CSTDT.
PPS: redford something tells me you just joined the forums to spoil this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Shano on May 29, 2010 12:49:30 GMT -5
... Edit: Oh, yes, and the big crunch. Heat death is just the consequence of entropy, so it would have to happen before then. But, and here's my question, what is the mechanism? The universe's expansion has only been getting faster. Why do you think that the opposite will happen? Most of this is already addressed in my first post above. What heat death is is when the temperature of everything becomes too similar for any work to be done. During the collapse phase of the universe, life uses gravitational shear energy by forcing a Taub universe collapse, thereby creating a temperature differential whereby usable energy can be obtained. The Taublike collapse in one direction, and then another direction (i.e., Mixmaster oscillations) is also used to eliminate event horizons, which is necessary for information processing (and hence life) to continue. This mode of collapse ends (in proper time, as in computer clock time it never ends) in a single c-boundary (i.e., causal boundary) point: the Omega Point. The gravitational shear energy thereby available to life diverges to infinity as the Omega Point is approached. Due to the increasing temperature of the universe during the collapse phase (wherein the temperature diverges to infinity), life will have to transfer its information processes to higher energy states, eventually using elementary particles to directly compute on via travelling waves and standing waves. Regarding entropy: entropy is informational complexity (see the works of mathematician Claude Shannon for more on this). In the Omega Point cosmology, entropy diverges to infinity. 1. No. It was not addressed. It assumes so many things that are not confirmed, that I don't even know where to start. But I will mention in particular the following: a) existence of Higgs. Not confirmed and only necessary for the currently dominant formulation of the Standard Model. Why that should be the case I don't see the Omega point explaining. And if it did that would be extremely weird since there seem to exist one and only one fundamental principle of nature (extremal action) and even it is only considered a principle as long we don't find anything that contradicts it. b) the whole absolute vacuum state for the Higgs is just an assumption on its own. No explanation as to why there should be one or why the universe would be forced to get into it. That somehow the removal of the barionic matter would force it is retarded. Do you even understand how they would be removed? There is no such thing as inverse baryogenesis (and it is as we all already know asymetric) - the removal comes by falling into black holes and subsequent evaporation of said black holes. That process is extremely poorly understood and moreover is a Quantum Gravity process and needs a well developed theory of it. And while you sputter against String theory, it is the best we have in a Quantum gravity (and of course that doesn't mean string theory is true, but it certainly by design doesn't violate other physics theories (and the propositions we currently consider to be well confirmed and thus call laws)). c) The Higgs vacuum being an explanation of the cosmological constant is a very very weak hypothesis as any self respecting high energy theorist would tell you. Those orders of magnitude and hierarchy problems don't go away on their own you know... In addition what that talks about is exactly the lowest vacuum of the Higgs and not any other one. Why the lowest vacuum should have no cosmological constant is not explained (and would require a lot of work by the Omega theory to explain, since currently it does have a lot of it). And even if it does, getting any other vacuum to have the correct order cosmological constant will be fun to watch being done by said Omega theory. 2. About entropy... It is a statistical measure. It seems that that measure is always increasing. Connecting it with information is a distinctly biased towards the assupmtion that somehow intelligent observers are necessary. Thus it is a flawed argument. Sigh... I had more thing to say, but now I am exhausted and I'd liek to spend my weekends away from work. So I will stop.
|
|