Professor Claims to have proven existance of God...

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2007-09-15 05:30am

Linka wrote:JACKSONVILLE, FL -- The familiar sounds of faith. They are all sounds Frank Tippler heard as a boy. Heard and roundly rejected.

Tippler was born into a Christian family but rejected religion. An atheist at 16, Tippler preferred the sounds of chalk on a blackboard.
The black and white truth found in mathematics.

But just like the biblical story of The Road to Emmaus, Tippler says he was stunned to realize God was right in front of him the entire time.
He simply hadn't recognized him.

Tippler found his faith in physics.

"Really and truly believing the laws of physics.
Believing the implications of where they may lead, God exists," he says.

Tippler's findings have been published in well respected scientific journals. Tulane University where he is a professor of mathematical physics funds his research. But Tippler says his work shouldn't be any great revelation. In fact, he says, it isn't even original.

"All of the basic ideas are developed by people much greater than myself. Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton. The only way I differ from them is that I believe in the consequences of their equations and they don't."

Tippler describes God as the Omega Point in a still expanding universe. He says eventually, billions of years in the future, the universe will be full, and that all life will return to that Omega Point. Return to God.
But his latest research goes even further.

In his new book, The Physics of Christianity, Tippler says not only can he prove the existence of God, but something else. "In reality there is just one, separated into three hypostasis. God is a trinity coming naturally out of the physics. Inalterably, inevitably out of the physics," he says.

Tippler says his equations prove there is only one true religion: Christianity.

It's his conclusion that all the other world religions are, in a word, wrong. "Wrong as a matter of physics," he says.

When asked if he's ready for the firestorm that statement will cause, Tippler is unapologetic.
"Well if people don't like that two plus two equals four, that's their problem," he says.

Math, Tippler says, never lies. He is first and foremost a believer in physics. "Fundamentally, he quips," I am a physics fundamentalist."

mr friendly guy · Post by **mr friendly guy** » 2007-09-15 05:37am

I will now prove the existence of God, using clever word play without the need for complex mathematics. Sort of like Tippler without the maths.

I will define this thing I wear on my wrist to help me tell the time as God.

Therefore God exists.

Shit. Can I get my Nobel prize now?

Seriously, if I read it right, he just arbitarily defines his Omega point by another name, ie God and then goes God exists. What a fucking retard. I am willing to bet he was never really atheist, and the article just added that in to give him more "credibility".

Temjin · Post by **Temjin** » 2007-09-15 05:46am

I like how he says that this proves that Christianity is true. What makes it so Christian like? What's to stop someone else from labeling that point Rama, or Thor, Zeus, or Bob?

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2007-09-15 06:40am

What a moron

This goes straight to fstdt

Darth Tanner · Post by **Darth Tanner** » 2007-09-15 07:32am

the universe will be full, and that all life will return to that Omega Point. Return to God.

So is he trying to use big crunch theory to say we all return to god/singularity or is there some magic/divine source of material that will 'fill up' his finite universe.

I also find it amusing that a university notable for its research into stem cells is credited with funding his research. I think this may extend to them paying him to teach and he comes up with this stuff on his spare time.

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2007-09-15 08:19am

I love how its bent here and there.

He probably has published credible, pure scientific work in the past.

Now he makes insane claims in some book.

Then you add the two together to make it sound like he is a respected scientist who other respected scientists agree has valid religious scientific views...

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2007-09-15 08:21am

I for one would like to see the maths that proves the existence of jewish zombies. What a complete load of bollocks.

SCRawl · Post by **SCRawl** » 2007-09-15 10:02am

Assuming it's the same Frank Tipler who wrote "The Physics of Immortality", he's pretty wacky. I read that book about 10 years ago, and it's all pie in the sky nonsense. Oh, the numbers add up, I suppose, but the conclusions are just silly. I don't remember any religious overtones in it, but then again, it's been 10 years.

Zixinus · Post by **Zixinus** » 2007-09-15 12:47pm

Tippler describes God as the Omega Point in a still expanding universe. He says eventually, billions of years in the future, the universe will be full, and that all life will return to that Omega Point. Return to God.
But his latest research goes even further.

And does the Omega Point describe God, or merely replaceable with God?

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2007-09-15 03:07pm

Zixinus wrote:
Tippler describes God as the Omega Point in a still expanding universe. He says eventually, billions of years in the future, the universe will be full, and that all life will return to that Omega Point. Return to God.
But his latest research goes even further.
And does the Omega Point describe God, or merely replaceable with God?

If I remember correctly, the Omega Point is some kind of infinitely powerful supercomputer (powered by the then-ubiquitous zero point energy that will literally be lying around during the Big Crunch) that recreates the brain-states of everyone who has ever lived via some quantum physics mumbo jumbo, thus reuniting everyone in "heaven". The end of the universe is never actually experienced because this computer allows us to perceive things at a rate that is continually reduced relative to the passage of time in the universe.

It saddens me that even a decent education can't immunize you from this kind of wacky thinking.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2007-09-15 03:40pm

Do any credible cosmologists even anticipate a Big Crunch anymore? It was my understanding that cosmic expansion is actually accelerating in spite of gravitation. It's kind of hard to have a universal family reunion when everyone is beyond your observational frame of reference and getting farther, no?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-09-15 03:45pm

This reminds me of the guy who defined God as "the unknown", and then proceeded to "prove" the existence of God by proving that there are things we don't know. Any asshole can "prove" the existence of God by simply defining him as something that he can demonstrate to exist. The problem is that the resulting "God" bears no resemblance to the Christian one he's ostensibly proving. It's a classic bait-and-switch game.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2007-09-15 04:43pm

Darth Wong wrote:This reminds me of the guy who defined God as "the unknown", and then proceeded to "prove" the existence of God by proving that there are things we don't know. Any asshole can "prove" the existence of God by simply defining him as something that he can demonstrate to exist. The problem is that the resulting "God" bears no resemblance to the Christian one he's ostensibly proving. It's a classic bait-and-switch game.

I'm pretty sure that's the case with all of the logical 'proofs' of God's existence. You can throw the symbols together in a meaningful, inerrant way, but when it comes down to it, to get the result you want you have to define "God" as something so incredibly vague that for all you know, you've just proved the existence of universal logic or the universe itself.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2007-09-15 06:21pm

I'd sure like to know which "well respected scientific journals" published his findings.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-09-15 07:05pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:I'd sure like to know which "well respected scientific journals" published his findings.

They probably published some totally unrelated work. It would be like an engineering professor publishing a paper on new methods to control vibration in electrical transformers, and then declaring that "my findings have been published in respected journals" immediately prior to publishing a book about creationism. It's totally irrelevant to the claim being made. Either that or the professor declares that his new method of vibration control in electrical transformers is actually proof of God, so that when the respected journals published his new method, they actually published his proof of God.

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2007-09-15 07:06pm

Darth Raptor wrote:Do any credible cosmologists even anticipate a Big Crunch anymore? It was my understanding that cosmic expansion is actually accelerating in spite of gravitation. It's kind of hard to have a universal family reunion when everyone is beyond your observational frame of reference and getting farther, no?

I've also heard that Tipler has tried to amend his dreamy teleological get-together to meet this recent consensus, because after all, his "boundary condition" forbids that humanity should ever be wiped out. Not only that, but the same boundary condition apparently forbids the Higgs Boson from having a mass outside of Tipler's predictions.

I gotta get me a "boundary condition" to call my own.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-09-15 07:30pm

When was the last time we had a biologist claiming to prove the existence of God? It always seems to be physicists.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2007-09-15 08:24pm

Darth Wong wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:I'd sure like to know which "well respected scientific journals" published his findings.
They probably published some totally unrelated work. It would be like an engineering professor publishing a paper on new methods to control vibration in electrical transformers, and then declaring that "my findings have been published in respected journals" immediately prior to publishing a book about creationism. It's totally irrelevant to the claim being made.

That's what I assumed, but you never know if they are trying to pass off some news magazine as a scientific journal or the like.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-09-15 08:57pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:I'd sure like to know which "well respected scientific journals" published his findings.
They probably published some totally unrelated work. It would be like an engineering professor publishing a paper on new methods to control vibration in electrical transformers, and then declaring that "my findings have been published in respected journals" immediately prior to publishing a book about creationism. It's totally irrelevant to the claim being made.
That's what I assumed, but you never know if they are trying to pass off some news magazine as a scientific journal or the like.

Good point. Some creationists like to try and pass off creationist journals as "peer-reviewed". After all, the term "peer-reviewed" doesn't really specify what kind of "peers" we're talking about.

Master_Baerne · Post by **Master_Baerne** » 2007-09-15 09:15pm

General Zod wrote:When was the last time we had a biologist claiming to prove the existence of God? It always seems to be physicists.

"Physics is the only thing! All the rest is stamp collecting." some physicist who's name I forget.

Spin Echo · Post by **Spin Echo** » 2007-09-15 09:32pm

Master_Baerne wrote:
General Zod wrote:When was the last time we had a biologist claiming to prove the existence of God? It always seems to be physicists.
"Physics is the only thing! All the rest is stamp collecting." some physicist who's name I forget.

Ernest Rutherford, thank you very much.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2007-09-15 11:34pm

Someone should point out to him his same logic and reasoning, etc, can be used to prove the existence of Zeus and Cthulhu.

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2007-09-15 11:54pm

Solauren wrote:Someone should point out to him his same logic and reasoning, etc, can be used to prove the existence of Zeus and Cthulhu.

Haven't you heard? They're merely variations of the same creative force as expressed through various cultures throughout human history.

"Reflections of the light itself" or some jazz like that.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2007-09-16 12:21am

Seems Dr. Tipler should have stuck to time travel.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2007-09-16 12:34am

I can prove the non-existence of God. -1 + 1 = 0. Since we define 0 as the non-existence of God, and 0 is the result of a mathematical operation, we've shown that God does not exist.

It's basic arithmetic, really.