Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 4, 2024, 2:17 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Technological Immortality
#46
RE: Technological Immortality
(May 1, 2015 at 4:59 pm)Esquilax Wrote:
(May 1, 2015 at 1:57 pm)James Redford Wrote: Hi, Esquilax. In the very post of mine which you partially quote, I then go on to show how the Omega Point cosmology uniquely conforms to Christian theology. For much more on this matter, and for many more details on how the Omega Point cosmology uniquely and precisely matches the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my aforecited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything"; and my article "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", also previously cited within this thread.

But you didn't though: omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence are not exclusive to the christian god, that's all you said, and there's a bunch of additional characteristics of the christian god that are more important to it, yet not present in what you're saying. Like ninety percent of christian apologetics, you're stretching from a deist god to the christian one with no justification at all.



Quote:Regarding your second paragraph above, 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 arithmetical operations 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.

I'm not going to take any accusations of a grand anti-theistic scientific conspiracy seriously; you literally have no way of knowing what you've just claimed.

Hi, Esquilax.

The Big Bang cosmology was an automatic consequence of standard thermodynamics, standard gravity theory, and standard nuclear physics that were already well-established in the 1930s. And many of the leading physicists of that time, such as Albert Einstein and Steven Weinberg, are on record as stating that their rejection of the Big Bang cosmology was because to them it smacked too much of divine creation. For details on this rejection of physical law by physicists if it conflicts with their distaste for religion, see Sec. 5: "The Big Bang", pp. 28 ff. of my aforecited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything".

Regarding how physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, Christian theology:

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 (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.

The Omega Point final singularity is a different aspect of the Big Bang initial singularity, i.e., the first cause, a definition of God held by all the Abrahamic religions.

As well, as Stephen Hawking proved, the singularity is not in spacetime, but rather is the boundary of space and time (see S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973], pp. 217-221).

The Schmidt b-boundary has been shown to yield a topology in which the cosmological singularity is not Hausdorff separated from the points in spacetime, meaning that it is not possible to put an open set of points between the cosmological singularity and *any* point in spacetime proper. That is, the cosmological singularity has infinite nearness to every point in spacetime.

So the Omega Point is transcendent to, yet immanent in, space and time. Because the cosmological singularity exists outside of space and time, it is eternal, as time has no application to it.

Quite literally, the cosmological singularity is supernatural, in the sense that no form of physics can apply to it, since physical values are at infinity at the singularity, and so it is not possible to perform arithmetical operations 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.

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 powerset, of which the multiverse in its entirety at this point in universal history is a subset of this powerset). 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.

Miracles are allowed by the known laws of physics using baryon annihilation, and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling (which is allowed in the Standard Model of particle physics, as baryon number minus lepton number, B - L, is conserved) caused via the Principle of Least Action by the physical requirement that the Omega Point final cosmological singularity exists. If the miracles of Jesus Christ were necessary in order for the universe to evolve into the Omega Point, and if the known laws of physics are correct, then the probability of those miracles occurring is certain.

Additionally, the cosmological singularity consists of a three-aspect structure: the final singularity (i.e., the Omega Point), the all-presents singularity (which exists at the boundary of the multiverse), and the initial singularity (i.e., the beginning of the Big Bang). These three distinct aspects which perform different physical functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually one singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse.

Christian theology is therefore preferentially selected by the known laws of physics due to the fundamentally triune structure of the cosmological singularity (which, again, has all the haecceities claimed for God in the major religions), which is deselective of all other major religions.

For much more on the above, and for many more details on how the Omega Point cosmology uniquely and precisely matches the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my aforecited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything"; and my article "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", also previously cited within this thread.
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761;

and "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", SSRN, Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, which details Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE).
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 12:25 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by FatAndFaithless - May 1, 2015 at 12:27 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Chas - May 1, 2015 at 12:29 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 12:37 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Chas - May 1, 2015 at 12:44 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by LostLocke - May 1, 2015 at 12:51 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 1:46 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by LostLocke - May 1, 2015 at 1:57 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 2:02 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by AFTT47 - May 1, 2015 at 5:39 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 12, 2015 at 2:23 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by dyresand - May 12, 2015 at 2:26 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by dyresand - May 12, 2015 at 1:54 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 12, 2015 at 2:46 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by dyresand - May 12, 2015 at 3:54 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 1:24 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Homeless Nutter - May 1, 2015 at 1:36 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Chas - May 1, 2015 at 7:17 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 12, 2015 at 2:38 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Homeless Nutter - May 1, 2015 at 12:49 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 12:30 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Esquilax - May 1, 2015 at 1:07 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 1:57 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Esquilax - May 1, 2015 at 4:59 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 12, 2015 at 1:57 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Mudhammam - May 1, 2015 at 3:11 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 12, 2015 at 1:51 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Homeless Nutter - May 1, 2015 at 12:36 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by AFTT47 - May 1, 2015 at 12:50 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 1:43 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by FatAndFaithless - May 1, 2015 at 1:08 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by FatAndFaithless - May 1, 2015 at 1:46 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by FatAndFaithless - May 1, 2015 at 1:48 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Homeless Nutter - May 1, 2015 at 1:53 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by FatAndFaithless - May 1, 2015 at 1:59 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 2:11 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Iroscato - May 1, 2015 at 2:03 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by LostLocke - May 1, 2015 at 2:13 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 1, 2015 at 2:23 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Exian - May 1, 2015 at 2:23 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by The Grand Nudger - May 1, 2015 at 2:45 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by Iroscato - May 1, 2015 at 3:13 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by AdamLOV - May 1, 2015 at 5:07 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by KevinM1 - May 1, 2015 at 5:32 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by AdamLOV - May 1, 2015 at 5:51 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by AFTT47 - May 1, 2015 at 6:12 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by KevinM1 - May 1, 2015 at 6:13 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by AdamLOV - May 1, 2015 at 6:29 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - May 12, 2015 at 2:06 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by dyresand - May 12, 2015 at 2:11 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by FatAndFaithless - May 12, 2015 at 1:49 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by LastPoet - May 12, 2015 at 2:00 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by LastPoet - May 12, 2015 at 2:34 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by dyresand - May 12, 2015 at 2:39 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by LastPoet - May 12, 2015 at 2:56 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by robvalue - May 12, 2015 at 3:44 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by AFTT47 - May 12, 2015 at 7:52 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by James Redford - June 19, 2015 at 9:59 pm
RE: Technological Immortality - by The Grand Nudger - June 19, 2015 at 11:01 pm



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)