Technological Immortality

[James Redford]

Hi, FatAndFaithless. 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".

...and yet, despite what you see as their distaste, and despite the vast and capable "conspiracy of science".......we still have BB..not only that, it's the standard model.   :dodgy:

Fuckin god hating conspiratorial sons of bitches......if only they were better at their jobs.....

Hi, Rhythm.

Prof. Stephen Hawking reinforces what Profs. Einstein, Weinberg and Tipler spoke about concerning the antagonism of the 20th century scientific community for religion, resulting in the scientific community abandoning good physics. In his famous book A Brief History of Time, Hawking wrote that (see p. 62 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988])

""
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. The proposal that gained widest support was called the steady state theory. ...
""

In the same chapter (pp. 66-67), Hawking wrote about how attempts to avoid the Big Bang were dashed in the form of the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems:

""
The final result [of the Singularity Theorems] was a joint paper by Penrose and myself in 1970, which at last proved that there must have been a big bang singularity provided only that general relativity is correct and the universe contains as much matter as we observe. There was a lot of opposition to our work, partly from the Russians because of their Marxist belief in scientific determinism, and partly from people who felt that the whole idea of singularities was repugnant and spoiled the beauty of Einstein's theory. However, one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem. So in the end our work became generally accepted and nowadays nearly everyone assumes that the universe started with a big bang singularity. ...
""

For additional history 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 following article:

* James Redford, “The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything”, Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 .

Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

* James Redford, “Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss’s Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?”, alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk[at sign]4ax[period]com , July 30, 2013, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/...QWt4KcpMVo .