Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post Reply
User avatar
rab
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:50 pm
About me: I follow politics and church/state issues.
Location: Maine U.S.A
Contact:

Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by rab » Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:07 pm

I had a hard time making head or tail with this, but this is what one professor of mathematical physics said about the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Frank Tipler, professor of mathematical physics at Tulane University in New Orleans and author of the book "The Physics of Christianity," maintains that belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a matter of faith founded on scientific fact.

"Believe in the laws of physics and they will tell you Jesus rose from the dead," he said Thursday.

According to the Gospel of Mark, Jesus rose early on the first day of the week and appeared first to Mary Magdalene. According to Tipler, the body of Christ was a "glorified" body capable of de-materializing at one location and materializing in another.

Modern particle physics provides a mechanism for de-materialization, Tipler said.

Tipler said that's the conversion of matter into neutrinos, which are elementary particles that interact very weakly with normal matter, and thus would be invisible.

Reversing the de-materialization process would result in apparently "materializing" out of nothing.
Advertisement

Tipler believes if this was the mechanism of Jesus' resurrection, there are tests that could demonstrate it.

The image of Jesus on the Shroud of Turin has certain features that would arise in the neutrino de-materialization process, according to Tipler.

"What happens is, the matter of Jesus' body was converted into neutrinos," Tipler said. "To a person standing by, he would see exactly what Mel Gibson pictured in (the movie) 'The Passion of the Christ."'
http://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/sanbe ... i_14811411

I dunno. :ask: Sounds like horseshit to me. But I figured some of you science geeks might get a kick out of it.
Support Church/State Separation
Freedom From Religion Foundation

User avatar
Nautilidae
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:10 am
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by Nautilidae » Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:12 pm

rab wrote:I had a hard time making head or tail with this, but this is what one professor of mathematical physics said about the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Frank Tipler, professor of mathematical physics at Tulane University in New Orleans and author of the book "The Physics of Christianity," maintains that belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a matter of faith founded on scientific fact.

"Believe in the laws of physics and they will tell you Jesus rose from the dead," he said Thursday.

According to the Gospel of Mark, Jesus rose early on the first day of the week and appeared first to Mary Magdalene. According to Tipler, the body of Christ was a "glorified" body capable of de-materializing at one location and materializing in another.

Modern particle physics provides a mechanism for de-materialization, Tipler said.

Tipler said that's the conversion of matter into neutrinos, which are elementary particles that interact very weakly with normal matter, and thus would be invisible.

Reversing the de-materialization process would result in apparently "materializing" out of nothing.
Advertisement

Tipler believes if this was the mechanism of Jesus' resurrection, there are tests that could demonstrate it.

The image of Jesus on the Shroud of Turin has certain features that would arise in the neutrino de-materialization process, according to Tipler.

"What happens is, the matter of Jesus' body was converted into neutrinos," Tipler said. "To a person standing by, he would see exactly what Mel Gibson pictured in (the movie) 'The Passion of the Christ."'
http://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/sanbe ... i_14811411

I dunno. :ask: Sounds like horseshit to me. But I figured some of you science geeks might get a kick out of it.
Image

User avatar
Feck
.
.
Posts: 28391
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by Feck » Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:45 pm

Because things just turn into neutrinos ALL the fucking time, especially if you leave then in caves .WTFWTFWTFWTFWTFWTFWTFWTF The Scientist label should be removed from these morons ...
:hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog: :hoverdog:
Give me the wine , I don't need the bread

pcCoder
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:57 am
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by pcCoder » Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:46 pm

Sounds like b/s to me as well. Even if it were to ever be discovered that resurrections are possible, it still does not provide evidence that such an event actually happened, much less that a certain event from a certain strain of mythology actually happened over another event from another strain of mythology.

User avatar
GrahamH
Posts: 921
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:29 pm
Location: South coast, UK
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by GrahamH » Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:54 pm

It proves that Jesus was aided by people with very advanced transporter and replicator technology. It was probably like an Avatar body and a person in a pod aboard a spaceship. The crew just beamed down another avatar body and projected a few holograms. :biggrin:

WTF would a god that could create universes by speaking them into existence mess around with neutrino conversion? Like large parts of the Bible, it makes no sense.

User avatar
FBM
Ratz' first Gritizen.
Posts: 45327
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach"
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by FBM » Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:00 pm

I'm so glad I suggested this smiley several months ago: :airwank:
"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken

"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."

"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."

User avatar
hackenslash
Fundie Baiter...errr. Fun Debater
Posts: 1380
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:05 am
About me: I've got a little black book with my poems in...
Location: Between the cutoff and the resonance
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by hackenslash » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:12 pm

Fuckwitted number-cruncher wrote:Modern particle physics provides a mechanism for de-materialization, Tipler said.

Tipler said that's the conversion of matter into neutrinos, which are elementary particles that interact very weakly with normal matter, and thus would be invisible.
Something tells me that the witnesses to the resurrection might have missed the manifestation of Jeebus, though, due to being distracted by the big fuck off nuclear reactor. Of course, it could be that the residents of Palestine 2,000 years ago would have found such a mundane bit of kit trivial. :lol:
Dogma is the death of the intellect

Trolldor
Gargling with Nails
Posts: 15878
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:57 am
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by Trolldor » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:18 pm

None of that explains how dead cells then come alive again, even if he disappears/reappears/physiks his way out of that damned cave.
"The fact is that far more crime and child abuse has been committed by zealots in the name of God, Jesus and Mohammed than has ever been committed in the name of Satan. Many people don't like that statement but few can argue with it."

User avatar
Pappa
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Posts: 56488
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:42 am
About me: I am sacrificing a turnip as I type.
Location: Le sud du Pays de Galles.
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by Pappa » Tue Apr 06, 2010 11:51 pm

Wait... isn't Tipler the guy who's been discredited a thousand times over already?? :think:
For information on ways to help support Rationalia financially, see our funding page.


When the aliens do come, everything we once thought was cool will then make us ashamed.

User avatar
Reverend Blair
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:22 pm
About me: If I had my way I'd buy a few acres of land and an old tractor. I'd drive the old tractor around the land and passers-by would stop to ask me what kind of crop I was farming. "Crop?" I'd say, "Crops are work, I'm planting ideas."
Location: Most likely to your left
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by Reverend Blair » Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:47 am

I like the "The vinegar they gave Jesus was laced with pot, or maybe mescaline or something, so he only looked dead" theory better. I saw it on the History channel a couple of years ago and, while I doubt the theory, I find I can now claim that Jesus was dope fiend and I know it's rue because I saw it on the History Channel. It drives the Christers nuts. :funny:

User avatar
James Redford
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 6:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by James Redford » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:26 pm

pcCoder wrote:Sounds like b/s to me as well. Even if it were to ever be discovered that resurrections are possible, it still does not provide evidence that such an event actually happened, much less that a certain event from a certain strain of mythology actually happened over another event from another strain of mythology.
God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J. Tipler's below paper, which in addition to giving the Feynman-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics, also demonstrates that the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity identified as being God):

F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964. http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything," arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276

Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's above paper was selected as one of 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles published in Reports on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68]. Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005," Reports on Progress in Physics. http://www.webcitation.org/5o9VkK3eE )

Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists. Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor (according to Journal Citation Reports) than Physical Review Letters, which is the most prestigious American physics journal (one, incidently, which Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once). A journal's impact factor reflects the importance the science community places in that journal in the sense of actually citing its papers in their own papers. (And just to point out, Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper could not have been published in Physical Review Letters since said paper is nearly book-length, and hence not a "letter" as defined by the latter journal.)

See also the below resource for further information on the Omega Point Theory:

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist http://theophysics.host56.com , http://theophysics.ifastnet.com

Tipler is Professor of Mathematics and Physics (joint appointment) at Tulane University. His Ph.D. is in the field of global general relativity (the same rarefied field that Profs. Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking developed), and he is also an expert in particle physics and computer science. His Omega Point Theory has been published in a number of prestigious peer-reviewed physics and science journals in addition to Reports on Progress in Physics, such as Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), Physics Letters, the International Journal of Theoretical Physics, etc.

Prof. John A. Wheeler (the father of most relativity research in the U.S.) wrote that "Frank Tipler is widely known for important concepts and theorems in general relativity and gravitation physics" on p. viii in the "Foreword" to The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986) by cosmologist Prof. John D. Barrow and Tipler, which was the first book wherein Tipler's Omega Point Theory was described. On p. ix of said book, Prof. Wheeler wrote that Chapter 10 of the book, which concerns the Omega Point Theory, "rivals in thought-provoking power any of the [other chapters]."

The leading quantum physicist in the world, Prof. David Deutsch (inventor of the quantum computer, being the first person to mathematically describe the workings of such a device, and winner of the Institute of Physics' 1998 Paul Dirac Medal and Prize for his work), endorses the physics of the Omega Point Theory in his book The Fabric of Reality (1997). For that, see:

David Deutsch, extracts from Chapter 14: "The Ends of the Universe" of The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes--and Its Implications (London: Allen Lane The Penguin Press, 1997); with additional comments by Frank J. Tipler. http://theophysics.chimehost.net/deutsc ... verse.html

The only way to avoid the Omega Point cosmology is to resort to physical theories which have no experimental support and which violate the known laws of physics, such as with Prof. Stephen Hawking's paper on the black hole information issue which is dependent on the conjectured string theory-based anti-de Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence (AdS/CFT correspondence). See S. W. Hawking, "Information loss in black holes," Physical Review D, Vol. 72, No. 8 (October 2005), Art. No. 084013; also at arXiv:hep-th/0507171, July 18, 2005. http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0507171

That is, Prof. Hawking's paper is based upon empirically unconfirmed physics which violate the known laws of physics. It's an impressive testament to the Omega Point Theory's correctness, as Hawking implicitly confirms that the known laws of physics require the universe to collapse in finite time. Hawking realizes that the black hole information issue must be resolved without violating unitarity, yet he's forced to abandon the known laws of physics in order to avoid unitarity violation without the universe collapsing.

Some have suggested that the universe's current acceleration of its expansion obviates the universe collapsing (and therefore obviates the Omega Point). But as Profs. Lawrence M. Krauss and Michael S. Turner point out in "Geometry and Destiny" (General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 31, No. 10 [October 1999], pp. 1453-1459; also at arXiv:astro-ph/9904020, April 1, 1999 http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9904020 ), there is no set of cosmological observations which can tell us whether the universe will expand forever or eventually collapse.

There's a very good reason for that, because that is dependant on the actions of intelligent life. The known laws of physics provide the mechanism for the universe's collapse. As required by the Standard Model, the net baryon number was created in the early universe by baryogenesis via electroweak quantum tunneling. This necessarily forces the Higgs field to be in a vacuum state that is not its absolute vacuum, which is the cause of the positive cosmological constant. But if the baryons in the universe were to be annihilated by the inverse of baryogenesis, again via electroweak quantum tunneling (which is allowed in the Standard Model, as baryon number minus lepton number is conserved), then this would force the Higgs field toward its absolute vacuum, cancelling the positive cosmological constant and thereby forcing the universe to collapse. Moreover, this process would provide the ideal form of energy resource and rocket propulsion during the colonization phase of the universe.

Prof. Tipler's above 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper also demonstrates that the correct quantum gravity theory has existed since 1962, first discovered by Richard Feynman in that year, and independently discovered by Steven Weinberg and Bryce DeWitt, among others. But because these physicists were looking for equations with a finite number of terms (i.e., derivatives no higher than second order), they abandoned this qualitatively unique quantum gravity theory since in order for it to be consistent it requires an arbitrarily higher number of terms. Further, they didn't realize that this proper theory of quantum gravity is consistent only with a certain set of boundary conditions imposed (which includes the initial Big Bang, and the final Omega Point, cosmological singularities). The equations for this theory of quantum gravity are term-by-term finite, but the same mechanism that forces each term in the series to be finite also forces the entire series to be infinite (i.e., infinities that would otherwise occur in spacetime, consequently destabilizing it, are transferred to the cosmological singularities, thereby preventing the universe from immediately collapsing into nonexistence). As Tipler notes in his book The Physics of Christianity (New York: Doubleday, 2007), pp. 49 and 279, "It is a fundamental mathematical fact that this [infinite series] is the best that we can do. ... This is somewhat analogous to Liouville's theorem in complex analysis, which says that all analytic functions other than constants have singularities either a finite distance from the origin of coordinates or at infinity."

When combined with the Standard Model, the result is the Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics.

##########

Christian theology is preferentially selected by the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) due to the fundamentally triune structure of the Omega Point cosmology and due to existence having come into being a finite time in the past (i.e., the traditional theological position of creatio ex nihilo).

Moreover, the Standard Model of particle physics provides the mechanism by which the miracles recorded in the New Testament could be achieved without violating any known laws of physics, even if one were to assume that we currently don't exist on a level of implementation in a computer simulation (in that case, then such miracles would be trivially easy to perform for the society running the simulation, even though it would seem amazing from our perspective). This process uses baryon annihilation, and its inverse, via electroweak quantum tunneling controlled by the cosmological end state of the Omega Point (since in physics it's just as accurate to say that causation goes from future to past events: viz., the principle of least action; and unitarity).

If the coming of Jesus Christ and the miracles that He performed were necessary in order to lead to the Omega Point, then the probability of said event occuring is exactly 1: certain to happen.

Traditional Christian theology has maintained that God never violates natural law, as God, in His omniscience, knew in the beginning all that He wanted to achieve and so, in His omnipotence, He formed the laws of physics in order to achieve His goal. The idea that God would violate His own laws would mean that God is not omniscient. In traditional Christian theology, miracles do not violate natural law--rather, they are events that are so improbable that they can only be explained by the existence of God and His acting in the world.
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (regarding Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything [TOE]), http://theophysics.freevar.com , http://theophysics.host56.com

User avatar
James Redford
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 6:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by James Redford » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:28 pm

Pappa wrote:Wait... isn't Tipler the guy who's been discredited a thousand times over already?? :think:
The only way to avoid the conclusion that the Omega Point exists is to reject the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics), and hence to reject empirical science: as these physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment to date. That is, there exists no rational reason for thinking that the Omega Point Theory is incorrect, and indeed, one must engage in extreme irrationality in order to argue against the Omega Point cosmology.

Additionally, we now have the quantum gravity Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics: of which inherently produces the Omega Point cosmology. So here we have an additional high degree of assurance that the Omega Point cosmology is correct.

Bear in mind that Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory has been published in a number of the world's leading peer-reviewed physics and science journals.[1] Even NASA itself has peer-reviewed his Omega Point Theory and found it correct according to the known laws of physics (see below). No refutation of it exists within the peer-reviewed scientific literature, or anywhere else for that matter.

Below are some of the peer-reviewed papers in science and physics journals wherein Prof. Tipler has published his Omega Point Theory:

- Frank J. Tipler, "Cosmological Limits on Computation," International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 25, No. 6 (June 1986), pp. 617-661; doi:10.1007/BF00670475. (First paper on the Omega Point Theory.)

- Frank J. Tipler, "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions for Scientists," Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, Vol. 24, Issue 2 (June 1989), pp. 217-253; doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.1989.tb01112.x. http://theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler ... chaton.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/5nY0aytpz Republished as Chapter 7: "The Omega Point as Eschaton: Answers to Pannenberg's Questions to Scientists" in Beginning with the End: God, Science, and Wolfhart Pannenberg, edited by Carol Rausch Albright and Joel Haugen (Chicago, Ill.: Open Court Publishing Company, 1997), ISBN: 0812693256, pp. 156-194.

- Frank J. Tipler, "The ultimate fate of life in universes which undergo inflation," Physics Letters B, Vol. 286, Issues 1-2 (July 23, 1992), pp. 36-43; doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90155-W.

- Frank J. Tipler, "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe," NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop Proceedings, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, January 1999, pp. 111-119; an invited paper in the proceedings of a conference held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, August 12-14, 1998; doi:2060/19990023204. Document ID: 19990023204. Report Number: E-11429; NAS 1.55:208694; NASA/CP-1999-208694. http://theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler ... ockets.pdf See also: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?Ntk=Doc ... 9990023204 , http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi. ... 021520.pdf

- Frank J. Tipler, "The Ultimate Future of the Universe, Black Hole Event Horizon Topologies, Holography, and the Value of the Cosmological Constant," arXiv:astro-ph/0104011, April 1, 2001. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0104011 Published in Relativistic Astrophysics: 20th Texas Symposium, Austin, TX, 10-15 December 2000, edited by J. Craig Wheeler and Hugo Martel (Melville, N.Y.: American Institute of Physics, 2001), ISBN: 0735400261, which is AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 586 (October 15, 2001), pp. 769-772; doi:10.1063/1.1419654.

- Frank J. Tipler, "Intelligent life in cosmology," International Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (April 2003), pp. 141-148; doi:10.1017/S1473550403001526. http://theophysics.110mb.com/pdf/tipler ... mology.pdf Also at arXiv:0704.0058, March 31, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0058

- Frank J. Tipler, Jessica Graber, Matthew McGinley, Joshua Nichols-Barrer and Christopher Staecker, "Closed Universes With Black Holes But No Event Horizons As a Solution to the Black Hole Information Problem," arXiv:gr-qc/0003082, March 20, 2000. http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0003082 Published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 379, Issue 2 (August 2007), pp. 629-640; doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11895.x.

- F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964; doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R04. http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything," arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, in which the above August 2007 paper was published, is one of the world's leading peer-reviewed astrophysics journals.

Prof. Tipler's paper "Ultrarelativistic Rockets and the Ultimate Future of the Universe" was an invited paper for a conference held at and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center, so NASA itself has peer-reviewed Tipler's Omega Point Theory (peer-review is a standard process for published proceedings papers; and again, Tipler's said paper was an *invited* paper by NASA, as opposed to what are called "poster papers").

Zygon is the world's leading peer-reviewed academic journal on science and religion.

Out of 50 articles, Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports in Progress in Physics paper--which presents the Omega Point quantum gravity Theory of Everything--was selected as one of 12 for the "Highlights of 2005" accolade as "the very best articles published in Reports on Progress in Physics in 2005 [Vol. 68]. Articles were selected by the Editorial Board for their outstanding reviews of the field. They all received the highest praise from our international referees and a high number of downloads from the journal Website." (See Richard Palmer, Publisher, "Highlights of 2005," Reports on Progress in Physics. http://www.webcitation.org/5o9VkK3eE )

Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists. Further, Reports on Progress in Physics has a higher impact factor (according to Journal Citation Reports) than Physical Review Letters, which is the most prestigious American physics journal (one, incidently, which Prof. Tipler has been published in more than once). A journal's impact factor reflects the importance the science community places in that journal in the sense of actually citing its papers in their own papers.

For much more on these matters, particularly see Prof. Tipler's above 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper in addition to the following resource:

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist http://theophysics.ifastnet.com , http://theophysics.110mb.com

-----

Note:

1. While there is a lot that gets published in physics journals that is anti-reality and non-physical (such as string theory, which violates the known laws of physics and has no experimental support whatsoever), the reason such things are allowed to pass the peer-review process is because the paradigm of assumptions which such papers are speaking to has been made known, and within their operating paradigm none of the referees could find anything wrong with said papers. That is, the paradigm itself may have nothing to do with reality, but the peer-reviewers could find nothing wrong with such papers within the operating assumptions of that paradigm. Whereas, e.g., the operating paradigm of Prof. Tipler's 2005 Reports on Progress in Physics paper is the known laws of physics, i.e., our actual physical reality which has been repeatedly confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. So the professional physicists charged with refereeing this paper could find nothing wrong with it within its operating paradigm, i.e., the known laws of physics.
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (regarding Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything [TOE]), http://theophysics.freevar.com , http://theophysics.host56.com

User avatar
Azathoth
blind idiot god
blind idiot god
Posts: 9418
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by Azathoth » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:37 pm

miracles do not violate natural law--rather, they are events that are so improbable that they can only be explained by the existence of God and His acting in the world.
Or a reasonably competent illusionist plying his trade.
Outside the ordered universe is that amorphous blight of nethermost confusion which blasphemes and bubbles at the center of all infinity—the boundless daemon sultan Azathoth, whose name no lips dare speak aloud, and who gnaws hungrily in inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond time and space amidst the muffled, maddening beating of vile drums and the thin monotonous whine of accursed flutes.

Code: Select all

// Replaces with spaces the braces in cases where braces in places cause stasis 
   $str = str_replace(array("\{","\}")," ",$str);

User avatar
James Redford
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 6:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by James Redford » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:46 pm

Ghatanothoa wrote:
miracles do not violate natural law--rather, they are events that are so improbable that they can only be explained by the existence of God and His acting in the world.
Or a reasonably competent illusionist plying his trade.
Then it wouldn't be an authentic miracle.
Author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (regarding Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything [TOE]), http://theophysics.freevar.com , http://theophysics.host56.com

User avatar
Tigger
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 piccolos
Posts: 15714
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:26 pm
About me: It's not "about" me, it's exactly me.
Location: location location.

Re: Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

Post by Tigger » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:49 pm

Have we got a "bollocks" icon in here?
Image
Seth wrote:Fuck that, I like opening Pandora's box and shoving my tool inside it

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests