1. Comment #37642 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on May 5, 2007 at 12:13 pm

Centuries? Try millenia. Maybe he's right. There is a creator. Is it Allah, Jesus, Jehovah, Zeus?

That Tornado piece at the end was an amusing touch.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

2. Comment #37643 by Hylo on May 5, 2007 at 12:17 pm

Eh, so what exactly was his proof?

Hopefully somebody like Neil DeGrasse Tyson or Victor Stenger will respond to his claims. I doubt they'll make the news though.

Other Comments by Hylo

3. Comment #37644 by mintcheerios on May 5, 2007 at 12:17 pm

If your formula has the word "quantum" in it, it must be right.

Other Comments by mintcheerios

4. Comment #37646 by Connor on May 5, 2007 at 12:19 pm

Sigh...oh hey, look, a tornado.

Other Comments by Connor

5. Comment #37647 by exegesis_saves on May 5, 2007 at 12:21 pm

News Media: Can you prove the existence of God?

Crackpot Hack: Sure I can! LOOK AT TEH (sic) EQUAL SIGNS!

News Media: I don't get it...IT MUST BE GOD!

Crackpot Hack: EXACTLY!

Seriously...were there really no sectarian murders in Iraq that we could be reporting instead? No grotesque abuses of the Constitution by our elected officials? When it comes to the banality of the media and the public, I'm not sure which came first.

Other Comments by exegesis_saves

6. Comment #37650 by Lagomort on May 5, 2007 at 12:24 pm

Whenever you ask yourself just how delusional people can get, simply remember that guy...

Other Comments by Lagomort

7. Comment #37651 by savagemickey on May 5, 2007 at 12:24 pm

Did anyone notice the irony of the story at the end where the god whose existence was just proved was sending a tornado to wipe out some homes? wtf?

Other Comments by savagemickey

8. Comment #37653 by Quetzalcoatl on May 5, 2007 at 12:25 pm

God is the divine substance outside of space, time and matter

So, completely beyond our ability to sense. How... convenient.

Was that a noodley appendage that just swept past my window?

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

9. Comment #37654 by ktillyer on May 5, 2007 at 12:26 pm

I was really hoping the tornado had come to take him back to Oz.

Other Comments by ktillyer

10. Comment #37655 by Tobbe on May 5, 2007 at 12:27 pm

Micheal Shermer has a whole chapter on Tipler in his "Why people believe weird things". Another piece I read is from the great philosopher of religion Graham Oppy (he should be an icon on this page, at least for those with some background in philosophy). It´s a review of Tiplers "The physics of immortality". It´s long but very readable.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/graham_oppy/tipler.html

Other Comments by Tobbe

11. Comment #37656 by v4ri4bl3 on May 5, 2007 at 12:29 pm

I like the part where he says God is not of Space, Time or Matter and yet he can use PHYSICS to prove God exists. Does anyone else find this laughable?

It really is pathetic that they didn't get a group of real scientists to disseminate this obvious BS. When something is true you don't have to interview sources who are completely incapable of validating a claim like the Baptist Minister and the Catholic individual. I think thats enough to place you 99.99999999999999999% certainty that this guys is full of S**T.

Other Comments by v4ri4bl3

12. Comment #37658 by phil rimmer on May 5, 2007 at 12:30 pm

You notice in his equations nothing actually EQUALS god, merely that (first?) cause is EQUIVALENT to god. Bit of a cop out that.

When's the next Templeton prize due to be awarded?

Other Comments by phil rimmer

13. Comment #37661 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 12:34 pm

I heard the story once that Catherine the Great asked Euler to refute Diderot, after he'd been claiming God didn't exist.

So Euler said x=(a+b^n)/n therefore God exists.

And Diderot didn't know much algebra so he didn't call Euler's bluff!

[Edit: I'm told this isn't actually true, but nice story wasn't it?]

Other Comments by BaronOchs

14. Comment #37663 by the great teapot on May 5, 2007 at 12:35 pm

At last science has proven it self worthy.
Perhaps faith isn't the only way of knowing after all.

Other Comments by the great teapot

15. Comment #37666 by HappyPrimate on May 5, 2007 at 12:37 pm

I am so glad most of you did not miss the irony of the tornado at the end. I was alway told a tornado is the finger of God upon the earth. Must have been wiping out some bad sinners. No really I am so ashamed that the University would allow this man to put forth such a proclamation of evidence without it being tested by anyone else in the field of physics. What does Steve Hawking have to say about this? Has this been peer reviewed? Come on - how can this get media coverage as fact?

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

16. Comment #37669 by arildno on May 5, 2007 at 12:43 pm

Frank Tipler is an excellent physicist.
However:
His religious mumbo-jumbo has been an embarassment for the physicist community for decades.
He suffers from a complete compartmentalization of his brain, and is not averse to use numerology to "prove" the rationality of his faith.

Other Comments by arildno

17. Comment #37670 by Roy_H on May 5, 2007 at 12:46 pm

I loved the "Reality check" at the end of that report... a destructive tornado! ( sent by an all loving God no doubt? )

Other Comments by Roy_H

18. Comment #37671 by mjwemdee on May 5, 2007 at 12:47 pm

Ha! Did you notice? The God Equation man is left-handed. See? That PROVES it.

Other Comments by mjwemdee

19. Comment #37673 by phil rimmer on May 5, 2007 at 12:51 pm

Tobbe.

Great link. Tipler could be the next L. Ron Hubbard. This is Stephen Hawking crossed with the Matrix. Forget the Templeton Prize think of the movie rights!

Other Comments by phil rimmer

20. Comment #37674 by Vardu on May 5, 2007 at 12:52 pm

I don't require any equation to know that there is a God!
I speak to him in prayer every night.
Of course, I'm speaking to myself, and I know that I exist.

Other Comments by Vardu

21. Comment #37675 by Chad on May 5, 2007 at 12:53 pm

That tornado part was a great ending, I lol'ed.

It's typical the way the news covered the story. They left the story as a few soundbites and didn't examine any of his proofs what-so-ever. What do you expect when they'd rather not upset their viewers or have them think all that hard?

As for the guy thinking physics proves god, it seems like the typical new age bullshit to me. They think if they can use a bunch of scientific sounding words and make it fairly confusing, then people will just believe it.

Other Comments by Chad

22. Comment #37689 by Goshzilla on May 5, 2007 at 1:18 pm

Embarassing. Seriously where was the evidence? Why didn't this reporter bother to talk to other professors at Tulane?

The guy writes out "{quantum mechanics}+{general relativity}" on a chalk board as if both sets have values. So what exactly are the elements in those sets? Don't bother asking him, I'm pretty sure his response will be looney.

But I did see the wireframe bannana, not too subtle is it? I hope that guy is just pulling our leg, cause he must be an embarassment to the other professors.

Other Comments by Goshzilla

23. Comment #37690 by k1mgy on May 5, 2007 at 1:19 pm

What a pathetic piece of "news" "reporting". They must have needed some filler.

Not once was a contrary view given. Not once was the "professor" asked to lay out his "evidence". All we got was a bunch of preachers.

What sort of journalists are these TV outlets hiring?

Other Comments by k1mgy

24. Comment #37692 by EnsilZah on May 5, 2007 at 1:21 pm

I believe this is the formula in question.


Other Comments by EnsilZah

25. Comment #37695 by nullnull on May 5, 2007 at 1:22 pm

http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/images/farside_create.gif
Anyone remember this old Far Side Comic?

Other Comments by nullnull

26. Comment #37696 by PeterK on May 5, 2007 at 1:24 pm

As the co-discoverer of the term 'sarcastheism' ( along with my dear wife ) I hereby proclaim Tipler represents the Lollipop Guild of Science in the Land Of Oz.

Other Comments by PeterK

27. Comment #37697 by GBile on May 5, 2007 at 1:27 pm

I must admit that I read Tiplers 'The Physics of immortality'. One thing he suggests in the book is to send 'selfreplicating robots' to 'every corner' of the universe. The purpose, as far as I recall, is to gather enough information about every particle in the universe to be able to predict the future en thereby 'the end of times'. Immortality is supposed to come from recreating the personalities (souls?) of every person in ... giant computers. Presto, you have achieved immortality (but you could be hacked, scary idea). I like the 'selfreplicating robots' idea, but don't care much about the immortality.
Maybe the God-equation is Tiplers next scientific breakthrough.

Other Comments by GBile

28. Comment #37699 by arthursanford on May 5, 2007 at 1:30 pm

BaronOchs,

That story about Diderot is widely circulated, but not true at all. Diderot had a very good education and was very competent at mathematics. He would have called Euler out there on the spot.

No enlightment scholar takes that story seriously for two reasons: 1) Diderot was good at Math along other subjects, 2) the story itself is too apochryphal.

Other Comments by arthursanford

29. Comment #37700 by Eureka Step on May 5, 2007 at 1:36 pm

!!!!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Where was the equation??!?!?!?

Nutbag.

Other Comments by Eureka Step

30. Comment #37702 by The author on May 5, 2007 at 1:41 pm

Blabla Quantum Mechanics Blabla Relativity Blabla God exists

Blabla!

You can literally feel your brains fall out.

Other Comments by The author

31. Comment #37703 by Azven on May 5, 2007 at 1:43 pm

"Oh! That was easy", says man, and goes on to prove that black is white, and gets killed on the next zebra crossing...

Other Comments by Azven

32. Comment #37709 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 1:53 pm

arthursanford, well I did wonder it might be so. What are you going to tell me next! That Noah's Ark never existed?

Also Vardu I've always said I'm a self-made man and I worship my creator.

Other Comments by BaronOchs

33. Comment #37710 by PrimeNumbers on May 5, 2007 at 1:59 pm

He is so stupid he managed to offend the religious and the scientist!

Other Comments by PrimeNumbers

34. Comment #37711 by Azven on May 5, 2007 at 2:00 pm

GBile, I expect the Self replicating Robots (SRRs) will report back that the universe is full of SRRs!

At least when local popuations of SRRs become dense it will become obviouse that evolution is true.

Other Comments by Azven

35. Comment #37718 by Snomann32 on May 5, 2007 at 2:21 pm

What a surprise - He's got a book out about this.

Other Comments by Snomann32

36. Comment #37719 by Wonko the Sane on May 5, 2007 at 2:22 pm

Suppose God (the unique Supreme Being) exists.
Then there can only be one God, so God^2 must be imaginary.
But nothing real can have an imaginary square.
Therefore: God = r^(ei (2k+1)/4 Pi), where r is nonzero and k is an integer.

Other Comments by Wonko the Sane

37. Comment #37721 by ridelo on May 5, 2007 at 2:23 pm

If God could make 2 + 2 = 5 then I would believe in Him. Easy as that.

Other Comments by ridelo

38. Comment #37725 by Kamahuakala on May 5, 2007 at 2:32 pm

11. Comment #37656 by v4ri4bl3 on May 5, 2007 at 12:29 pm
I like the part where he says God is not of Space, Time or Matter and yet he can use PHYSICS to prove God exists. Does anyone else find this laughable?
...

Yeah, I fell out of chair laughing until I thought about his poor students who listen to his BS and try to get a decent grade from him.

Other Comments by Kamahuakala

39. Comment #37744 by Michael P. on May 5, 2007 at 3:14 pm

Here's his C.V. and contact information:

http://www.math.tulane.edu/~tipler/biography.htm

Other Comments by Michael P.

40. Comment #37757 by charlesj on May 5, 2007 at 3:56 pm

This is Josh (Charles) here. Yeah, I left the tornado piece in at the end of the video on purpose :)

RE: Euler. Someone has recently tried to use the famous e^(ipi) = -1 formula to prove god exists... I don't know - using imaginary numbers to prove god is real? ;)

Other Comments by charlesj

41. Comment #37759 by _J_ on May 5, 2007 at 4:09 pm

39. Comment #37734 by Beth on May 5, 2007 at 2:49 pm

Thanks for the link.

Wow! So Tipler has in fact written (badly) a science fiction novel and marketed it as a verification of religion.

Bet he's annoyed that L. Ron Hubbard got there first.

Other Comments by _J_

42. Comment #37764 by Jolly Wally on May 5, 2007 at 4:21 pm

If you watch closely, the last line reads "congruent to God" NOT "equal to God". This has devastating implications for his formula.

Other Comments by Jolly Wally

43. Comment #37770 by Fishpeddler on May 5, 2007 at 4:30 pm

The thing that is most shocking to me is not that this guy claims to have proven the existence of God, but that the news station didn't give us a good look at the proof and didn't have Tipler guide us through it, but for some reason decided to air the story anyway. If they believed he really had something there, wouldn't they have treated it more seriously? And if not, why are they wasting their viewers time on it? At least they could have directed us to a source to learn more about his theory. They didn't even give the title of the book! Garbage journalism, at its finest.

Other Comments by Fishpeddler

44. Comment #37775 by atheistself on May 5, 2007 at 4:40 pm

How embarrassing. That's my local station. I used to live right down the street from the transmitter. Sigh.

But as always with these things, when a scientist with a theory goes to a book, essay, or any sort of media before submitting to a peer-reviewed journal, you know they're bogus. This isn't far from the guy that supposedly showed that water in jars with 'nice' words labeled on them freeze in prettier patterns than jars labeled with hurtful words.

Just... back... away... slowly... (and don't make eye contact)

Other Comments by atheistself

45. Comment #37777 by Gaffer on May 5, 2007 at 4:42 pm

This is all very funny, except for the reporter's use of language. She says that Tipler is using "a formula of hardcore science", and that he is using concepts "that most of us, admittedly, might quite not get". All designed to make joe public close their minds and remember nothing except the headline.

Other Comments by Gaffer

46. Comment #37782 by maton100 on May 5, 2007 at 5:01 pm

God=tornado. Maybe *that* is the top quark? Bogus physics for cash money. The Omega point is gonna be "the total energy of the universe equals Channel 5 taking a pounding from a big ass tornado." Oops, guess God doesn't like ecumenical physics professors?!

Other Comments by maton100

47. Comment #37784 by ksskidude on May 5, 2007 at 5:12 pm

This is my freaking home town news station!! Argh!!!

I will write an op-ed in response this week to the KC Star.

Other Comments by ksskidude

48. Comment #37787 by MelM on May 5, 2007 at 5:24 pm

From Victor Stenger at Comment #37734 by Beth

Those that Omega-God deems deserving will get to live even better lives, including lots of sex with the most desirable partners we can imagine. Even this Tipler places on a mathematical basis, computing the relative "psychological impact" of meeting the most beautiful women whose existence is logically possible compared to simply the most beautiful woman in the world. He finds this to be [log1010^1,000,000]/[log1010^9] = 100,000 (p. 257).

Yet another reason to believe. We're finished folks; we can't beat this.

Other Comments by MelM

49. Comment #37788 by BaronOchs on May 5, 2007 at 5:35 pm

Hitler will live a life in which he is Jewish.
Bill Clinton will be President over and over again until he
finally gets it right.

Presumably this Omega point god will create versions of everyone to live both all the various possible desirable lives but also every possible life that is filled with suffering?

Does Tipler have an answer to this in the book I wonder?

Other Comments by BaronOchs

50. Comment #37791 by _J_ on May 5, 2007 at 5:46 pm

49. Comment #37787 by MelM on May 5, 2007 at 5:24 pm

---'Yet another reason to believe. We're finished folks; we can't beat this.'---

You're right, but I'm laughing so much I'm finding it hard to type agreement.

Other Comments by _J_