Technological Immortality

[Chas]

Only if one accepts the premise of an "Omega Point".  I don't.  
The existence of an Omega Point is not required by the laws of physics.

Hi, Chas. Actually, the Omega Point final singularity is mathematically unavoidable per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), of which have been confirmed by every experiment to date. Hence, the only way to avoid the Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. For the details on this, see Sec. 3: "Physics of the Omega Point Cosmology", Subsec. 3.1: "The Omega Point", pp. 12-19 of my aforecited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything".

No, it is not mathematically unavoidable.  You have swallowed some fishy story hook, line, and sinker.

The known laws of physics require there be intelligent civilizations in existence at
the appropriate time in order to force the collapse of the universe and then manipulate
its collapse so that the computational capacity of the universe can diverge to infinity.

Martin Gardner called it the "completely ridiculous anthropic principle" (CRAP).

You haven't actually done the math.

[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 .

[FatAndFaithless]

Ugh..more of this.

[James Redford]

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.

:roflol:
You gullible fucking idiot. 
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_deity

Hi, Nestor. Trinitarianism holds that there is one God (i.e., one substance), Who consists of three Persons (i.e., hypostases)--not multiple Gods.

Occasionally it's suggested that Hinduism also holds to a concept of a divine Trinity, involving "the 'triple form' (trimurti) in which the cosmic functions of creation, maintenance, and destruction are personified by the forms of Brahma, Visnu, and Siva respectively." (See p. 139 of Freda Matchett, Ch. 6: "The Puranas", in Gavin Flood [Ed.], The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism [Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2003], pp. 129-143.) In actuality, this notion appears to be mostly a case of Westerners' eagerness to find corollaries with Christianity in other religions. As historian and Indologist Prof. Arthur Llewellyn Basham writes (see pp. 310-311 of A[rthur]. L. Basham, The Wonder that Was India: A Survey of the Culture of the Indian Sub-Continent Before the Coming of the Muslims [New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1959]):

""
Early western students of Hinduism were impressed by the parallel between the Hindu trinity and that of Christianity. In fact the parallel is not very close, and the Hindu trinity, unlike the Holy Trinity of Christianity, never really "caught on". All Hindu trinitarianism tended to favor one god of the three; thus, from the context it is clear that Kālidāsa's hymn to the Trimūrti is really addressed to Brahmā, here looked on as the high god. The Trimūrti was in fact an artificial growth, and had little real influence.
""

For more on the triune nature of the Cosmological Singularity, see Sec. 7.3: "The Trinity of God", pp. 43-45 of my previously-cited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", which also gives many more details on how the Omega Point cosmology uniquely and precisely matches the cosmology described in the New Testament; additionally on this topic, see 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.

[dyresand]

Only if one accepts the premise of an "omega Point".  I don't.  
The existence of an Omega Point is not required by the laws of physics.

And, from what I understand so far, the current idea is that the universe won't collapse.
Rather, it will expand until it rips itself apart.

Last time i checked no its collapsing back in on itself 
http://phys.org/news/2015-03-universe-br...scale.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scienc...31256.html

its a good thing it would be depressing in that scenario of it ripping itself apart at least with this we get a universal do over....forever

[James Redford]

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.

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.

[LastPoet]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=63UlBsdElsY

[James Redford]

Why would anyone want to prolong human life? Why go through such a hassle just to avoid something as painless as death? In the view of Epicurus, death is something to be embraced, for it puts an end to suffering and pain. Transhumanism seems like just another way of trying to avoid or sublimate the threatening, but, for better or worse, "unavoidable shipwreck" (Schopenhauer) that nonexistence poses.

Hi, AdamLOV. When the nanotechnology becomes sophisticated enough, humanity at that stage will be able to upload the computer programs of their minds onto artificial computer hardware, of which will have far vaster computational resources than the wet-computer of the human brain. Such posthumans will be superintelligent immortal gods. The environments which they will interact with the most will be simulated environments which they find to be pleasurable: in other words, Heaven. For much more on this, see my aforecited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything".

[dyresand]

Why would anyone want to prolong human life? Why go through such a hassle just to avoid something as painless as death? In the view of Epicurus, death is something to be embraced, for it puts an end to suffering and pain. Transhumanism seems like just another way of trying to avoid or sublimate the threatening, but, for better or worse, "unavoidable shipwreck" (Schopenhauer) that nonexistence poses.

Hi, AdamLOV. When the nanotechnology becomes sophisticated enough, humanity at that stage will be able to upload the computer programs of their minds onto artificial computer hardware, of which will have far vaster computational resources than the wet-computer of the human brain. Such posthumans will be superintelligent immortal gods. The environments which they will interact with the most will be simulated environments which they find to be pleasurable: in other words, Heaven. For much more on this, see my aforecited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything".

No not even possible we can store memories we won't be able to upload a consciousness yet even if we get nano robotics perfected we do not fully understand consciousness to even do that yet.  When we do it will pose a ethical and religious boundary since no one is able to die that would really had a negative affect on religion not to mention we would really be separating humans in categories at that point. 

[James Redford]

The field of physics does involve mathematical proofs of physical theories, i.e., physical theorems, such as the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems which proved that the Big Bang initial singularity necessarily exists per General Relativity and given attractive gravity. Likewise, the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory is a mathematical theorem if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are correct. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have been confirmed by every experiment to date, and so the only way to avoid the Omega Point theory of quantum gravity is to reject empirical science.

So being that it is that tight, why have I never heard of it? Even allowing for a grand conspiracy among the physics community, they couldn't avoid this if it's that ironclad. And people get famous when they overthrow the established order, you know. Yet in over two decades, no graduate student has latched onto this and launched himself to the forefront. Probably because it's nowhere near as ironclad as you make it sound.

I never claimed that there was a conspiracy regarding this matter. That was other people's characterization of it on this forum.

There are a lot of things which are perfectly true yet which are not followed by mass culture, such as anarcho-capitalism. In case you haven't noticed, mass society is seriously screwed-up. This world is certainly not suffering from an overabundance of truth: quite the contrary.

As to why that is, it's because humans are apes still evolving from a very primitive state of ignorance and barbarism. Humans to this day are still very primitive and a long way from catching up with Christ.