Resurrection Real, According to Some Scientists

[Azathoth]

I will have none of that. Twats are useful. Tipler is a hemorrhoid

[James Redford]

He is a gaping cunt of the quality seen only from crack whores in trailer parks.

Your above comment doesn't address the matters under discussion within this thread. Besides obviously being merely a figurative statement of your own dislike of a person, it's also the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. Hence, this and your previous statement have added nothing to this discussion other than adding noise.

[Trolldor]

Irony, it is delicious.

[James Redford]

Irony, it is delicious.

Please elaborate.

[Tigger]

Irony, it is delicious.

Please elaborate.

Oh, irony. Sorry, my bad.

[mistermack]

James Redford, you say that this Omega Point stuff is undeniable, without contadicting the laws of phyics. The problem with that is that the only people who think so are generally considered to be a bit cranky.
It's hardly encouraging, and why is anyone going to waste their time and energy trying to replicate his results and conclusions?
It's up to him to convince someone with clout to champion it. It's not down to the world to make the effort. And it doesn't help if you use reductionist logic that only two people use. That is tying a very big cannonbal to your legs.

Having said that, many people on these forums get their kicks from knocking other peoples' ideas, it seems to help boost our self esteem, so I wouldn't take it too seriously.

[colubridae]

Irony, it is delicious.

Please elaborate.

Sorry Baldrick's law applies

Having said that, many people on these forums get their kicks from knocking other peoples' ideas, it seems to help boost our self esteem, so I wouldn't take it too seriously.

Don’t mind him, he just found a sense of humour on another thread. I would take it seriously if I were you James.

[James Redford]

James Redford, you say that this Omega Point stuff is undeniable, without contadicting the laws of phyics. The problem with that is that the only people who think so are generally considered to be a bit cranky.
It's hardly encouraging, and why is anyone going to waste their time and energy trying to replicate his results and conclusions?
It's up to him to convince someone with clout to champion it. It's not down to the world to make the effort. And it doesn't help if you use reductionist logic that only two people use. That is tying a very big cannonbal to your legs.

Having said that, many people on these forums get their kicks from knocking other peoples' ideas, it seems to help boost our self esteem, so I wouldn't take it too seriously.

Actually, you have that in reverse. Cranks are people who violate the laws of physics with their theories, such as introducing new, experimentally-unconfirmed physics which violate the laws of physics. String theory falls under this category, since it has no experimental support whatsoever and it violates the known laws of physics.

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.

Nor does Prof. Tipler need anyone to "champion" his Omega Point Theory, as it has been published in a number of the world's leading peer-reviewed physics and science journals. Even NASA itself has peer-reviewed his Omega Point Theory and found it correct according to the known laws of physics (see my second post in this thread for the details on that). No refutation of it exists within the peer-reviewed scientific literature, or anywhere else for that matter.

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

Regarding your last sentence, thank you for your kind words there. But don't worry, as it's hard for me to get upset with certain people when they behave so sillily. It's certainly no skin off of my nose. That's why I ask them to elaborate, as I already know that their ideas on the subject aren't well-formed, and that they're just behaving in a jejune manner against something they think they're against (as they themselves aren't sure what they're against regarding this matter, and if they did understand it then they would be unlikely to be against it). Hence, I like to provide them ample opportunity to display their immaturity.

[Randydeluxe]

More copypasta. The above has already been posted word-for-word here and here and here and here and here and here, among many others.

You see this discussion forum as a place for you to paste a copy of things that you or others have posted elsewhere on the web. You're a clutter monger, and I do not welcome your clutter here. Perhaps others do, but I doubt it.

[Tigger]

More copypasta. The above has already been posted word-for-word here and here and here and here and here and here, among many others.

You see this discussion forum as a place for you to paste a copy of things that you or others have posted elsewhere on the web. You're a clutter monger, and I do not welcome your clutter here. Perhaps others do, but I doubt it.

I like the T-shirt/vesty thingy.

[colubridae]

somebody say "tits"?

[Randydeluxe]

Tits.

[Feck]

He is a gaping cunt of the quality seen only from crack whores in trailer parks.

[ginckgo]

Advertisement

I ... don't understand

[Svartalf]

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 ...

what d'you think... I bet they are OECs too...