|
Post by Lady Renae on May 30, 2010 17:21:49 GMT -5
If redford comes into this thread again. Rip him to shreds. Worlder, consider this your first Official Warning in regards to blatant baiting of a member of the forums. We know he makes you mad, but keep it in F&B, ok? The section is there for a reason.
|
|
|
Post by worlder on May 30, 2010 17:22:42 GMT -5
Sorry I'll keep it there.
Won't happen again.
|
|
|
Post by nowonmai on May 31, 2010 5:13:41 GMT -5
James... you do realise that the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to a closed system, right? Something this planet isn't? There are countless outside influences.
As for the rest of your, dare I say, information is only proof of mass stupidty.
|
|
|
Post by Undecided on May 31, 2010 5:46:42 GMT -5
James... you do realise that the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to a closed system, right? Something this planet isn't? There are countless outside influences. As for the rest of your, dare I say, information is only proof of mass stupidty. What he's copypasting is discussion about the fate of the universe, which is a closed system, so the 2nd law applies, and it is understood as much in the papers he cites. On the other hand, Tipler's papers are fringe science at best anyways. I input all of the papers Redford gave me into Scopus: -"The structure of the world from pure numbers"/"Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything" 1 citation. -"Cosmological Limits on Computation" 10 citations (half of which are from articles of which one particular person is a recurring (co)author.) -"Achieved spacetime infinity" 1 citation. -"The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions for Scientists" Not found on Scopus. (Published in journal with the subject of science-religion dialogue) -"The ultimate fate of life in universes which undergo inflation" 4 citations. -"Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe" Not found on Scopus. (Published in a NASA Workshop proceeding) -"The Ultimate Future of the Universe, Black Hole Event Horizon Topologies, Holography, and the Value of the Cosmological Constant" Not found on Scopus. (Published in AIP anthology) -"Intelligent life in cosmology" Not found on Scopus. (Published in astrobiology journal; impact unknown.) -"Closed Universes With Black Holes But No Event Horizons As a Solution to the Black Hole Information Problem" 2 citations. In other words, the ideas are cited by only a few more than a dozen authors. None of the citing sources discussed the Omega Point idea in depth. Hence the idea is fringe science at best (but we all strongly suspected that anyways).
|
|
|
Post by szaleniec on May 31, 2010 7:04:12 GMT -5
What he's copypasting is discussion about the fate of the universe, which is a closed system, so the 2nd law applies, and it is understood as much in the papers he cites. That aspect of it maybe, but the second law of thermodynamics* doesn't seem to be understood in his posts any more than it is by creationists. The entropy is reduced to a magical variable that means whatever they need it to mean for the sake of the current argument, and mixes characteristics of the thermodynamic, statistical and informational entropies without regard to the actual correspondence between those. * Or should I say the "Second Law of Thermodynamics", because creationists seem to like Capitalising it as though it were some form of Dark Forbidden Magical Esoterica.
|
|
|
Post by worlder on May 31, 2010 12:56:55 GMT -5
"Hi, 64.53.209.200. You're making up your own criteria, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory does not qualify under WP:Fringe. Tipler's Omega Point Theory has been peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals (see WP:reliable sources)." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Omega_Point_(Tipler).
|
|
witchofreason
New Member
President and Customer of Heavy Editing, Inc.
Posts: 46
|
Post by witchofreason on Jun 2, 2010 22:08:17 GMT -5
I wonder why singularities dislike homosexuals. The ones we currently have seem to like taking it in the hole.
|
|
|
Post by mice34 on Jun 3, 2010 1:55:25 GMT -5
[laughing] How did this even make it into the paper? That's the kind of thing every 20th teenager on yahoo answers philosophy posts!
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on Jun 19, 2010 13:57:50 GMT -5
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. Thermodynamic entropy and informational entropy are related, but they're not the same thing. The conversion factor for entropy in natural units (i.e., the form of entropy units often used by theoretical physicists) is S/ln(2) = I, where S is entropy, ln(2) is the logarithm of base 2, and I is information in bits. For the more common form of entropy units used by chemists, then the conversion factor is S/(ln(2)*k) = I, where k is Boltzmann's constant of 1.3806504*10^-16 erg*K^-1.
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on Jun 19, 2010 14:01:24 GMT -5
Redford, you are citing yourself and simply regurgitating sources that originate all from a single person, that being Tipler himself. If the Omega Point Theory actually had any merit, I'd be seeing sources from people other than Tipler himself, as other people would have been publishing work to support/counter the hypothesis. 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,[1] and winner of the Institute of Physics' 1998 Paul Dirac Medal and Prize for his work), endorses the physics of Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory in his book The Fabric of Reality. 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.htmlBelow is what the Royal Society of London says about Prof. Deutsch in its announcement of his becoming a Fellow of the Royal Society in 2008: "" Professor David Elieser Deutsch FRS Visiting Professor, Department of Atomic and Laser Physics, Centre for Quantum Computation, The Clarendon Laboratory, University of Oxford David Deutsch laid the foundations of the quantum theory of computation, and has subsequently made or participated in many of the most important advances in the field, including the discovery of the first quantum algorithms, the theory of quantum logic gates and quantum computational networks, the first quantum error-correction scheme, and several fundamental quantum universality results. He has set the agenda for worldwide research efforts in this new, interdisciplinary field, made progress in understanding its philosophical implications (via a variant of the many-universes interpretation) and made it comprehensible to the general public, notably in his book The Fabric of Reality. "" From "New Fellows 08 Craik - Kaiser", The Royal Society. royalsociety.org/General_WF.aspx?pageid=8952The first book wherein the Omega Point Theory was described was The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), coauthored by astrophysicist John D. Barrow (Professor at the University of Cambridge) along with Tipler. Hence, Barrow must have thought that the Omega Point Theory had merit. In the same book, 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". On p. ix of said book, Wheeler wrote that Chapter 10 of the book, which concerns the Omega Point Theory, "rivals in thought-provoking power any of the [other chapters]." So obviously Wheeler thought that the Omega Point Theory had merit. Prof. Paul Richard Simony, head of the Department of Physics at Jacksonville University, has also endorsed the correctness of the physics of the Omega Point Theory. For that, see Chauncy Glover, "Man says equation proves God exists", Action News (WTEV CBS-47 and WAWS Fox-30, Jacksonville, Florida), May 17, 2010. www.actionnewsjax.com/content/topstories/story/Man-says-equation-proves-God-exists/gy_xLFvgo0a2WZdEyiwvFA.cspx , Direct FLV video link (Prof. Simony's segment is from 3:10 to 3:40 min:sec): wtev.media.entriq.net/FLV_1/20100517223015_74075_000236p5000728p0.flv(Note that the text of the above article misattributes the statement "Everything in here is correct and his interpretation of the equation is correct. ..." to Tipler, when in fact as the video of the report makes clear, it was Prof. Paul Richard Simony who made this statement.) Also keep in mind that Prof. Tipler's Omega Point Theory has been peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, which requires the referees to endorse the paper as sound. Even NASA itself has peer-reviewed his Omega Point Theory and found it correct according to the known laws of physics. (See my Reply #37 in this thread for the details on these matters.) No refutation of it exists within the peer-reviewed scientific literature, or anywhere else for that matter. So in fact, the Omega Point Theory has been endorsed by many professional physicists, including a number of the world's leading physicists. In the case of Prof. Tipler's peer-reviewed papers on the Omega Point Theory, this endorsement was in a formal capacity. Pertaining to your claim on the matter of empirical evidence: the Omega Point cosmology is required in order for the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) to be consistent. This consitutes a massive body of empirical verification for the Omega Point Theory's correctness, as these physical laws have been repeatedly confirmed by every experiment to date. A requirement for any theory to be valid is that it be logically consistent and that it is not contradicted by experiment. The known laws of physics are violated if the universe does not collapse into the Omega Point (e.g., such as unitarity being violated, or entropy decreasing). Your statement regarding empirical evidence is confused. If a new law of physics is being posited, such as string theory, then in order for it to be confirmed it would have to make a unique prediction and that prediction would have to be empirically verified. The above-listed known laws of physics have made many unique predictions which have been repeatedly empirically verified. Further, logical consistency is a standard and valid method in the field of physics. Indeed, if it were not, there would be no point to using equations in the field of physics. For example, in general relativity, singularities are unavoidable with realistic energy conditions (i.e., energy conditions that would apply to our universe): for the Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems proving that according to general relativity the universe began in the Big Bang singularity, see S. W. Hawking and R. Penrose, "The Singularities of Gravitational Collapse and Cosmology," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London; Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 314, No. 1519 (January 27, 1970), pp. 529-548. www.jstor.org/stable/2416467 The only way this result could be untrue is if general relativity is false. ----- Note: 1. D. Deutsch, "Quantum theory, the Church-Turing principle and the universal quantum computer", Proceedings of the Royal Society of London; Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 400, No. 1818 (July 1985), pp. 97-117. www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall04/cos576/papers/deutsch85.pdf
|
|
sonickid01
Full Member
DO THE RIGHT THING
Posts: 174
|
Post by sonickid01 on Jun 19, 2010 15:35:21 GMT -5
From what I get from a few wikipedia searches and a very light scan through the article, this basically attempts to prove the Omega Point Theory, and then equates it with God. I dunno.
|
|
jamesredford
New Member
Head Counselor at the Jesus Camp for Theoretical (meta)Physics
Lux et veritas et libertas
Posts: 16
|
Post by jamesredford on Jun 19, 2010 16:00:07 GMT -5
From what I get from a few wikipedia searches and a very light scan through the article, this basically attempts to prove the Omega Point Theory, and then equates it with God. I dunno. :P Interestingly, physics, in the form of the Big Bang cosmology, has many decades ago already proved that God exists in all of existence's ultimate past, since the Big Bang singularity is the uncaused first cause, one of the ancient definitions of God held by all the Abrahamic religions. Unfortunately, most modern physicists have been all too willing to abandon the laws of physics if it produces results that they're uncomfortable with, i.e., in reference to religion. It's the antagonism for religion on the part of the scientific community which greatly held up the acceptance of the Big Bang (for some 40 years), due to said scientific community's displeasure with it confirming the traditional theological position of creatio ex nihilo, and also because no laws of physics can apply to the singularity itself (i.e., quite literally, the singularity is supernatural, in the sense that no form of physics can apply to it, since physical values are at infinity at the singularity, and so it is not possible to perform 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). The originator of the Big Bang theory, circa 1930, was Roman Catholic priest and physicist Prof. Georges Lemaître; and it was enthusiastically endorsed by Pope Pius XII in 1951, long before the scientific community finally came to accept it. Rabbi Moses Maimonides and Saint Thomas Aquinas, from their readings of biblical scripture, had both defined God as the Uncaused First Cause (which is equivalent to Aristotle's conception of God as the Unmoved Mover), and so the physics community was quite reluctant to confirm with the Big Bang that God exists per this traditional definition of God. As regards physicists abandoning physical law due to their theological discomfort with the Big Bang, in an article by physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler he gives the following example involving no less than physicist Prof. Steven Weinberg: "" The most radical ideas are those that are perceived to support religion, specifically Judaism and Christianity. When I was a student at MIT in the late 1960s, I audited a course in cosmology from the physics Nobelist Steven Weinberg. He told his class that of the theories of cosmology, he preferred the Steady State Theory because "it *least* resembled the account in Genesis" (my emphasis). In his book *The First Three Minutes* (chapter 6), Weinberg explains his earlier rejection of the Big Bang Theory: "Our mistake is not that we take our theories too seriously, but that we do not take them seriously enough. It is always hard to realize that these numbers and equations we play with at our desks have something to do with the real world. Even worse, there often seems to be a general agreement that certain phenomena are just not fit subjects for respectable theoretical and experimental effort." [My emphasis--J. R.] ... But as [Weinberg] himself points out in his book, the Big Bang Theory was an automatic consequence of standard thermodynamics, standard gravity theory, and standard nuclear physics. All of the basic physics one needs for the Big Bang Theory was well established in the 1930s, some two decades before the theory was worked out. Weinberg rejected this standard physics not because he didn't take the equations of physics seriously, but because he did not like the religious implications of the laws of physics. ... "" For that and a number of other such examples, see: Frank J. Tipler, "Refereed Journals: Do They Insure Quality or Enforce Orthodoxy?," Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design (PCID), Vols. 2.1 and 2.2 (January-June 2003). www.iscid.org/papers/Tipler_PeerReview_070103.pdf Also published as Chapter 7 in Uncommon Dissent: Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing, edited by William A. Dembski, "Foreword" by John Wilson (Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books, 2004). Prof. Stephen Hawking reinforces what Weinberg and Tipler wrote about concerning the antagonism of the scientific community for religion, resulting in them abandoning good physics. In his book The Illustrated A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam Books, 1996), p. 62, Hawking wrote: "" Many people do not like the idea that time has a beginning, probably because it smacks of divine intervention. (The Catholic Church, on the other hand, seized on the big bang model and in 1951 officially pronounced it to be in accordance with the Bible). There were therefore a number of attempts to avoid the conclusion that there had been a big bang. "" On p. 179 of the same book, 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. "" For more quotes by Dr. Jastrow on this, see: John Ross Schroeder and Bill Bradford, "Science and Discomfiting Discoveries" in Life's Ultimate Question: Does God Exist? (United Church of God, 2000). www.gnmagazine.org/booklets/GE/GE.pdfFor more quotes by scientists along the above lines, see the below article: Mariano, "In the Beginning ... Cosmology, Part I," Atheism is Dead, February 11, 2009. atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/02/in-beginning-cosmology-part-i-pre-big.htmlFurthermore, 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. 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. For more information on this, in addition to the peer-reviewed papers listed in my Reply #37 in this thread, see the below resources: Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist theophysics.chimehost.net , theophysics.host56.com"God Proven to Exist According to Mainline Physics," TetrahedronOmega, December 26, 2008 www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=122&mforum=libertyandtruth
|
|
|
Post by Rime on Jun 19, 2010 16:33:13 GMT -5
Can you suggest a decent dressing for all that word salad?
There's a few questions, one that I believe you've dodged:
How can you safely assume that it's the Abrahamic God? I can shoehorn almost as much validity in any number of creation myths.
And why bother creating the universe in the first place? Especially if you're going to torment its barbaric citizens for all eternity for not "Staying in line?" all the while claiming that you did this because you love them?
Because He's God and he can do what he wants?
|
|
|
Post by Bluefinger on Jun 19, 2010 16:44:56 GMT -5
I was going to take on your posts, but instead, jamesredford, here is your Official Warning. *Mod-hat On*
jamesredford, please try to post original responses instead of rehashing the same crap over and over again. Allow me to demonstrate:Furthermore, 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. ... is the same as an earlier post: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. Slight modifications, but not enough to disguise the fact that most of this is word for word copy. Also, there's more: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). Compared to: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). There's plenty more, but I think I've shown enough that you are doing nothing but spamming at this point. If you dare post again, DON'T FUCKING POST WALL-O-TEXT OF COPYPASTA, capiche?
Try to circumvent this warning by rehashing ANYTHING you've posted so far and you will get banned for spamming.
*mod-hat off*
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Jun 19, 2010 17:09:10 GMT -5
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,[1] and winner of the Institute of Physics' 1998 Paul Dirac Medal and Prize for his work), endorses the physics of Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory in his book The Fabric of Reality. 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.htmlFrom Deutsh's article: "This question has been explored by the cosmologist Frank Tipler. His answer, the omega-point theory [my emphasis (FJT)], is an excellent example of a theory which is, in the sense of this book, about the fabric of reality as a whole. It is not framed within any one strand, but belongs irreducibly to all four. Unfortunately Tipler himself, in his book The Physics of Immortality, makes exaggerated claims for his theory which have caused most scientists and philosophers to reject it out of hand, thereby missing the valuable core idea which I shall now explain."
|
|