Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
102 of 122 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Circular Argument, December 23, 2002
By A Customer
I enjoy having my brain stretched, so, with that goal in mind, I picked up Dr. Frank J. Tipler's "Physics of Immortality."
There are a number of serious problems with this book, logical, scientific, philosophical, and theological, to wit:1. The argument is completely circular. (The main thrust is that life, broadly defined, will be able to manipulate the physics of a closed universe in the final moments of its existence in such a way that a form of subjective immortality is possible, for all conscious intelligences, including ourselves.) In order to get from point A to point B, Tipler assumes part of his conclusion. He assumes that life must exist forever, and then uses that assumption in his proof, a definite logical no-no.
Similarly, Tipler includes a "proof" of his argument, saying, in essence that if certain facts about the Higgs boson and the top quark are true, he's right. His conclusions do not follow from his premises at all. 2. Even if one can accept Tipler's main argument, his subsidiary argument is weak. Tipler assumes that his future god-like intelligences will be beings of infinite compassion, who will grant you and I resurrection and immortality, essentially because they're nice guys. This seems like a very slender reed to lean on. The history of intelligent life on this planet (the only intelligence we know anything about) suggests that greater intelligence is not necessarily correlated with greater compassion. 3. Tipler goes off on a strange theological tangent when he attempts to equate his "omega point" being with the God of the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). While there are similarities between his concept and those of some theologians, there are very many more differences, the major one being that most theologians would assert that God transcends time and space, while Tipler's omega point is bounded by both. Whether God exists or not is usually not considered a scientific question; his attempt to make theology a branch of physics is somewhat embarrasing. 4. Finally, even if we can assume that Tipler's argument is plausible, (a stretch), it looks as though the Universe is not cooperating with him. While some of the bounary conditions listed in his proof are as he predicted, the most recent observations seem to show that the Universe's expansion is increasing, not slowing down. Most cosmologists conclude from this evidence that the Universe is open, not closed...and unless the Universe is closed, the rest of Tipler's case falls apart. It's far too early to conclude that the Universe is open (the observations of supernovae in other galaxies which underly the current consensus can be explained in other ways), but at the same time, even without the latest observations, there doesn't seem to be anywhere near enough mass in the universe to allow gravity to eventually slow the expansion down. Frank Tipler was a well respected physicist before this book, and is still regarded as an expert in the field of quantum cosmology. He is not the first world-class scientist to take a flyer on an implausible idea. I think it's interesting that in the book he condemns Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, the French Jesuit paleantologist from whom he took the term "omega point" for doing precisely what Tipler does in this book. Teilhard did outstanding work investigating early hominid primates in Asia before he began working on his "omega point" speculations, which attempted to wed evolutionary biology and theology, and then began to believe that his speculations were scientific facts. Tipler has been caught in the same trap. I give the book two stars, not one, however, because I find the ideas fascinating, and I did spend a considerable amount of time grappling with the physics and philosophy, which is the precise reason I picked up the book. He shouldn't have attempted to present it as a scientific theory, though, at least in my opinion.
|
|
|
32 of 37 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Alpha and Omega are One, August 8, 2001
I read The Physics of Immortality five years ago when it first came out and while I was studying in theological seminary. Recently observing the Amazon.com customer reviews, I was surprised at the number of poor and disfavorable critiques. Yes, it was a challenging book academically. Many people would find it daunting. And Tipler deals with topics about which people can be very sensitive. No one likes to have their sacred beliefs challenged or played around with. Especially by an authoritative and intimidating scientist. Yet for me, as a believer in God and Jesus Christ, The Physics of Immortality was illuminating and inspiring. Why? First of all, I did not expect a cosmological physicist, from his perspective, to confirm my beliefs on terms familiar to me. Second, I learned a lot about science, physics, and the way a scientific mind approaches its object of study. Third, the Omega Point theory was truly astounding. It added a whole new dimension to the way I perceive time, purpose, the universe, God as Creator, and Jesus Christ as the Alpha and Omega. Fourth, I was inspired to see that a scientist, studying the physical universe beginning from a totally scientific and atheistic point of view, was compelled to acknowledge the probability of God.Tipler not only acknowledged the likelihood of Higher Intelligence pulling the universe together teleologically, he compiled a logical proof for Gods existence and the resurrection of the dead, supported by laws of physics. I think it is notable that he had to consult other disciplines (philosophy, ethics, sociology, etc.) in order to develop such a comprehensive theory. In the process he deals with love, sex, altruism, genetics, machines, artificial intelligence, life beyond earth, and many other topics. Tiplers conclusions and speculations are likely to perturb others preconceptions and differing viewpoints. For instance, God is (probably) not a Trinity. Nor is He omnipotent in the traditional absolute sense, although He does possess all the powers that be. The likely existence of multiple, parallel universes. Machines are alive. Human beings (and biological entities in general) can be defined as complex computer programs. Religious visions as precocious contact with the future. Etc. A conspicuous point is the prominence Tipler awards to information, knowledge and intelligence. But shouldnt we expect that from a non-theistically oriented scientist embroiled in the information age? Although God is a God of goodness and love, that appears to be subordinate to the fact of His being (or becoming) the aggregation of all knowledge. Whatever its drawbacks, Tiplers vision provides much food for thought and can expand our perceptions of the unfathomable I AM. His ideas offer fertile ground for various religious traditions and scientific disciplines to pursue overlapping interests. For example, the Omega Point Theory should allow physics to join serious discussion with religious sentiments of mystical unity and the omnipresence of God. Hopefully, people of faith will embrace such scientific endeavors for the good that can come from genuine search for truth, and not blindly condemn new discoveries and new theories simply because they conflict with established world views. God is Who He is. And He will be what He will be. The perfect example of Christs love shines no less brilliantly because a talented man has written a startling book. But such a book can help scientists to sincerely and intelligently broach the question of God, and eventually open their hearts to His eternal message of love. Its fresh perspective for viewing the universe could allow both scientists and religious people to shed old prejudices. The myriad wonders and underlying unity of Gods creation can be examined and expressed in many ways. Lets keep our minds and hearts open to all of them.
|
|
|
36 of 43 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
A Loooong string of "if's", October 4, 2006
The thesis in this book is that God (aka "the Omega Point" - an omniscient entity reminiscent of "Vger" in Star Trek) does not currently exist (but will develop at some point in the future) and will choose to replicate (emulate) exact duplicates of every human who has ever lived, in a virtual-reality Heaven. I made a list of the "if's" mentioned in this book, that all have to happen for this to occur:
IF
*strong (indistinguishable from human) artificial intelligence is possible
AND IF
*we can develop self-replicating interstellar probes
AND IF
*humans can be completely grown/raised/educated from stored DNA
AND IF
*on every planet, these seeded human colonists accept the destiny we assigned to them
AND IF
*nanotechnology is developed
AND IF
*250-gigwatt lasers are feasible
AND IF
*cost of materials relative to wages drops exponentially every 50 years
AND IF
*antimatter exists, can be feasibly manufactured, and harnessed as a means of propulsion
AND IF
*the universe is closed (will eventually contract)
AND IF
*a virtual "emulation" of a person in a computer is the same "consciousness" as the original person
AND IF
*all information in the physical universe can be retrieved without loss or distortion
AND IF
*a simulation of a living being also recreates perfectly its unexpressed internal states
AND IF
*emulations of every person in history can be made without also re-creating their diseases, conflicting ideologies, etc.
AND IF
*the cost of doing good is not significantly greater than the cost of doing evil, then an omniscient entity will choose the good
AND IF
*intelligent beings in the far future will have the desire to resurrect us to a life we will enjoy
THEN
on this basis, we might have hope of eternal life, "heaven," and a benevolent god.
If the thesis of this book is true, it won't matter what you believed anyway - resurrection is inevitable/inescapable. But personally I'm not going to bank my eternal existence on all these dice rolling the right way, billions of millenia from now. In my view, this requires much more "faith" than simply trusting in the conventional claim of Christianity...In my opinion, "Pascal's Wager" is a much better bet.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by John D. Barrow
by John Polkinghorne F.R.S. K.B.E.
by Paul Davies
by Paul Davies
See all Editorial Reviews
