|
Post by Lady Renae on Jun 19, 2010 22:10:23 GMT -5
Sorry, Redford, but creative mix-and-match rehashing is still rehashing. You were warned against so doing and thoroughly ignored it. Enjoy your ban.
*banyard go SMACK!*
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Jun 19, 2010 23:25:05 GMT -5
I know he is gone but I would like tot point out...... You apparently didn't read it very closely. In said chapter, Prof. David Deutsch writes: "" I believe that the omega-point theory deserves to become the prevailing theory of the future of spacetime until and unless it is experimentally (or otherwise) refuted. (Experimental refutation is possible because the existence of an omega point in our future places certain constraints on the condition of the universe today.) "" He does agree, as far as the scientific principals involved: "That is all that the omega-point theory – or, rather, the scientific component I am defending – has to say."Meaning that he does not support Tipler's assumptions. Also the article was written in 1997. Since then Heat Death theory has become on of the most accepted theories. Now I know Tipler responds to this by stating that baryon annihilation will lead to the Higgs field to a absolute vacuum state and cause the universe to collapse. This relies on some population using baryon annihilation as power to explore the universe and Higgs field theory to be absolutely correct. Or in non-science terms, a leap of faith.
|
|
|
Post by worlder on Jun 20, 2010 1:11:10 GMT -5
Anyone wanna harvesting some new quotes?
|
|
|
Post by Undecided on Jun 20, 2010 2:02:16 GMT -5
Sorry, Redford, but creative mix-and-match rehashing is still rehashing. You were warned against so doing and thoroughly ignored it. Enjoy your ban.
*banyard go SMACK!* Thank goodness. I might have wasted hours doing the research to counter all his BS.
|
|
|
Post by mechtaur on Jun 20, 2010 2:16:32 GMT -5
I liked how he dodged the Hindu part by saying it was unpopular.
|
|
|
Post by Vypernight on Jun 20, 2010 6:29:30 GMT -5
I liked how he dodged the Hindu part by saying it was unpopular. One billion followers (1/6 of the world's population) is considered unpopular?
|
|
sonickid01
Full Member
DO THE RIGHT THING
Posts: 174
|
Post by sonickid01 on Jun 20, 2010 8:11:04 GMT -5
I would have called him on it if he didn't feel so scientific even though he was copypasta soup.
Seriously though, he just kind of declared that Hinduism =/= Christianity and therefore doesn't work since its concepts never caught on. The quote was derisive and of little relevance and to me showed that he obviously was incapable of good logical analysis and thought other than the Ctrl C+V syndrome.
Having been raised Hindu and instilled somewhat with its culture I'm rather offended that he could simply dismiss it as unpopular and therefore not worthy of consideration. Bandwagon in reverse?
Did anyone else notice how obviously and completely vague his description of Omega Point was? And I don't think I saw exactly where he attempted to say that the Omega Point is specifically the Abrahamic Christian God as opposed to the Jewish Yahweh or Muslim Allah, although he probably didn't at all and I'm too lazy to search.
|
|
|
Post by Rime on Jun 20, 2010 10:52:28 GMT -5
tolpuddlemartyr picked out how redford specifically tried to relate the Omega Point to the Abrahamic god. He also diced it up quite nicely.
|
|
|
Post by worlder on Jun 20, 2010 11:04:23 GMT -5
There is always the possibility of total annihilation by war.
Be it with ourselves or with aliens.
Don't think we will have a utopia in the future.
The Jetsons's future is BS compared to Star Trek's interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by mechtaur on Jun 20, 2010 13:47:56 GMT -5
I liked how he dodged the Hindu part by saying it was unpopular. One billion followers (1/6 of the world's population) is considered unpopular? Apparently, to him anyway.
|
|
|
Post by DeadpanDoubter on Jun 20, 2010 14:02:10 GMT -5
...WTF was that? It looked like a result of 'scientific' paper generators.
|
|
|
Post by Undecided on Jun 20, 2010 19:08:24 GMT -5
...WTF was that? It looked like a result of 'scientific' paper generators. Somebody very formidable and devoted to his crackpottery, or closely related to the like. Possibly an advanced graduate student in mathematical physics or cosmology who has fallen off the deep end, if not Tipler himself.
|
|