Philosoft

So the way each individual supposedly internally represents his own position is more relevant than the ways they would respond to questions about external philosophy and reality? The fact I use different words to answer the question, "What do you believe about God?" is more important than
the fact I will answer similarly to all other questions about supernatural belief?

<strong> First, what difference does it make if that "positive belief" is subject to change just like a "lack of belief"?

Second, I hardly think the fact we can imagine unobservable things that are outside the universe challenges the logical viability of a belief that the observable universe is all there is.

Vic

Has anyone read Frank Tipler's "The Physics Of Immortality" and understood what he is getting at?
Any comments?

eh

Wasn't tippler the one who proposed that we will all live forever after the big crunch singularity?

Well at least we can he is wrong there, since the BC has now been ruled out.

copernicus

Frederik Pohl wrote his "eschaton" trilogy with Tipler's work as the theme. It was about a super powerful group of aliens who specialized in destroying the planets and solar systems of those that refused to join them. They rationalized their behavior as merely sending their victims to Tipler's "omega point" early. A cautionary tale about the way in which a belief in "life after death" can twist morality in knots.

[ July 06, 2002: Message edited by: copernicus ]</p>

Vic

The Physics of Immortality

Any mathematicians around that understand the mathematical jargon of the book? Is Tipler's theory feasable and what do the calculations he provides prove? Just curious.