God's Existence Is a Mathematical Theorem within Standard Physics James Redford: God's existence is a mathematical theorem within standard physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. This theorem has been given in the form of physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].) Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals. Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory. For much more on the above, see my following article: "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", SSRN, orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011, doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf  theHating: "These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. " Ah, so the physical laws are true. Arguing with them is to reject science. This means my theory is true. Sounds like a religion.  Zanjan: Traditional Application: Tipler = one who occasionally swigs from a bottle of Spirits. Omega = last resort Point = no return. Theorem = drink and be merry for tomorrow we die TOPT right up. Zanjan: Black holes are nature's vacuum cleaners. They suck it up on one end and spew it out on the other. God recycles everything. Zanjan: "God geometrizes continually" (Plato) "Mathematics is the language in which God has written the universe." (Gallileo) What we learn with String Theory is exactly what we always knew - the universe was created by Intelligent design, not by accident. However much we learn about the recipe, everyone should remember that the design is not the Designer. (That was the error of the ancients) Knowledge can lead to both success and failure. The key is in the application; ergo, we look for this wisdom. Where shall we find it? With complex architecture, we're not looking so much at the knowledge as the art. Skill can be acquired but great art is elusive. (Edited by Zanjan) theHating: "What we learn with String Theory is exactly what we always knew" Okay, there, deepok.... Way to misuse scientific notation to make fallacious conclusions...   firstdown857: https://sites.hampshire.edu/scienceandislamvideoportal/video/scientific-proof-for-the-existence-of-allah/ James Redford: Hi, theHating. You wrote: "" "These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. " Ah, so the physical laws are true. Arguing with them is to reject science. This means my theory is true. Sounds like a religion. "" As far as anyone knows, they are true. The known laws of physics have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. In order to argue against them being true would be to reject empirical science. Regarding that "Sound[ing] like a religion" to you, your religion obviously is to pick whatever conclusion you desire to be true, empirical science and logic be damned. Moreover, one can derive the known laws of physics a priori. The only reason they were not derived a priori historically is because no one had been smart enough to do so. So empiricism was used as a necessary crutch for human minds in discovering the known laws of physics. But now that we do have these known physical laws, we can see mathematically how there was no contingency in regards to them, i.e., in order to have a three-dimensional space in which beings complex enough to be self-aware can exist, the physical laws have to mathematically be the ones we actually observe. And so these known laws of physics are not going to start being disconfirmed, unless we already exist in a computer simulation and the beings running that simulation decide to alter the simulated environment (however, those beings themselves, or beings on an even lower level of implementation, would have to exist in a universe where the aforesaid known laws of physics are in operation). For the details on that, see the following resource: * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", Apr. 18, 2019, https://archive.is/uHEyL (Edited by James Redford) firstdown857: James Thehating is an athiest Jewish but believe God give him the holy land Can this be right? theHating: The intelligent beings would have to exist in order to facilitate that point of infinity or does that point of infinity necessitate the existence of the intelligent beings? theHating: Actually im not sure yet what im asking. Im very confused about this big crunch theist argument because it argues that abrahamic traditions have applied the same qualities to god as we are applying to the singularity event. However, not the first cause singularity, but a different aspect of the singularity. The other thing that gets me here is how humanity fits into that picture. So how am I supposed to know we somehow will fit into that picture, assuming the universe actually collapses on itself? (Edited by theHating) theHating: I think probably the grossest abuse of science happens when miracles become a reality in the theory of this big crunch event. The big crunch event which has to be tweaked in order to bring god into manifest reality... Nevermind, i probably haven't the slightest clue... Zanjan: The big crunch is a reasonable theory but doesn't actually have to happen as we've envisioned it occurring. Science isn't advanced enough that it can determine other means the universe could remain eternal. When speaking about the disappearance of energy, there are other ways we can confirm energy continues to exist. We can take this from empirical evidence we already possess. For example, if one tightly line breeds a mammalian species to the 7th generation, the last few generations are so weak and fragile, with many birth defects and such poor health, most of the offspring are either stillborn or die before adulthood. Should an offspring reach adulthood, the odds it would even be fertile are mighty slim. The thing is, if you do make it to that 7th generation offspring, those offspring will miraculously all be born fully robust and completely healthy; as adults, they'll produce fully healthy, strong offspring. Nobody knows why. Total mystery. This is one of God's operating principles, which He, Himself affirms - that the force which has spent itself suddenly returns with full vigor and power. This is how something comes from "nothing", since "nothing" is a relative term. I don't think we need to fully understand the universe to know it has a creator. (Edited by Zanjan) firstdown857: IGNORANT OR ARROGANT-THEHATING :- On that day We will fold the heaven, like the folding of a book. Just as We initiated the first creation, We will revert it. This is Our promise. We will certainly fulfill it. (21:104) Do not these disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were an integrated mass, which We then split, and from water We made all living things? Will they not believe even then? (21:30) With power did We construct Heaven. Verily, We are expanding it. (51:47) firstdown857:
IGNORANT OR ARROGANT-THEHATING :- 29:19 - 29:20 - Have they not seen how God initiates the creation, then repeats it? This is easy for God to do. Say, "Roam the Earth and find out the origin of life." For God will thus initiate the creation in the Hereafter. God is Omnipotent. - EXPENATIONS :- From here to the end of (Verses 23 )is a parenthesis, which has been interposed in the story of the Prophet Abraham and addressed to the disbelievers of Makkah. The relevance of this interposition in the story, which is being related for the admonition of the disbelievers, is that they were basically involved in two kinds of deviation: shirk and idol worship, and the denial of the Hereafter. The first of these has been refuted in the Prophet Abraham’s (peace be upon him) speech as related above. Now the second is being refuted in these few sentences by God Himself. That is, On the one hand, countless new things come into existence from non existence, and on the other, similar new members continue coming into existence to take the place of the dying members of every species. The polytheists acknowledged that that was all due to Allah’s power of creation and invention. They never denied Allah being a Creator, just as the polytheists of today do not do. Therefore, the argument has been based upon what they themselves acknowledged as a reality, as if to say, “How do you think that God, Who, according to your own belief, brings things into existence from non existence, and does not create things just once, but goes on bringing into existence similar things in place of the dying things repeatedly in front of your very eyes, will not be able to raise you back to life after death? - EXPENATIONS 29:20 :- That is, “When you yourselves are witnessing things being created in the first instance by God’s competence and skill, you should understand it well that re-creation shall also take place by the same competence and skill. Such a thing is not beyond His power nor can it be.” 18:51 I did not make them witness to the creation of the heavens and the earth or to the creation of themselves, and I would not have taken the misguiders as assistants...... - EXPLENATIONS :- This thing has been asserted to impress on the disbelievers that the satans were not entitled to their submission and worship, for they had no share at all in the creation of the heavens and the earth, nay, they themselves were the creation of God: therefore God alone was worthy of worship. VERY SIMPLE QUESTION FOR YOU MR ATHIEST IS : 👉 , "Roam the Earth and find out the origin of life?. 👈 WITH OUT BRINGING EVIDNCE FOR THE ORIGIN OF LIFE YOU DID NOT COVENCED ME ??? firstdown857: REPEATING :- 18:51 I did not make them witness to the creation of the heavens and the earth or to the creation of themselves, and I would not have taken the misguiders as assistants.... | Religion Chat Room 21 People Chatting Similar Conversations |
