The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything

Dr. Tipler was actually a very promising researcher in the area of General Relativity. His early papers display a mastery of the field, a fertile and a creative mind. Reading his Causally Symmetric Spacetimes and his Causality Violation was an early learning experience for me.

What he lacks, in his later works, is intellectual integrity:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/co.../#.UV4HKoKKc7A

I suspect that Tipler retains an expertise in theoretical physics sufficient for guiding undergraduates and first or second year graduate students through the standard courses. Those courses are concerned with learning technical knowledge and not so much concerned with developing research skills and developing the intellectual honesty and self-criticism requisite for doing original research. Often the technical courses are taught by the “teaching” faculty while the more creative courses are taught by the research faculty and graduate faculty.

Perhaps for somewhat selfish reasons, I favor the protections provided by the tenure system. Short of firing a errant professor, there are measures that departments and universities can take to prevent quacks from doing damage to the education of students. They can be relegated to the teaching faculty (provided they are competent to teach the technical courses). They can also be denied the authority to advise students in their thesis research. Better yet, they can be promoted to non-teaching administrative positions :)

IMO Tipler shouldn’t be drawing tax-payer money from government sponsored grants for projects relating to his omega point theory. This latter may be a mute point. I do not know of any government grant money currently supporting any of Tipler’s more current projects.

Full marks for a subtle post Ms tenured professor

If you watch the discussion linked in Jamie's post 'Einstein vs Darwin', Tipler states categorically that he is a determinist when his interlocutor asks him if it is true that it was pre-determined that the two of them would sit down and have a discussion on that particular day, and Tipler energetically replies Yes! (And, of course, the 'force' that has made this possible is God). Gilbert Ryle criticised/demolished determinism in one his lectures (in Dilemmas), using an example such as: if it is true that I was going to rise at 6am and shave today and cut myself in the process, it was true 10,000 years ago. For Ryle, this is not just illogical, but an abuse of language.

It gets worse, not only does Tipler in the same video claim there are many facsimiles of 'us' in the 'multi-verse' but either here or in the power-point linked in Jamie's post states that we are creations of those super-computer beings of the future who have created/re-created every living thing since the Big Bang, which is why some link his theories to The Matrix, Blade Runner and so on.

Tipler and his apostle Jamie seem to suggest that all the problems of Physics and Cosmology have been solved by the Omega Point hypothesis -we are here to do God's work and acknowledge that Jesus is the Son of God and Our Salvation- even though in today's paper I read that we still don't know what 'dark matter' is although scientists are getting closer to an explanation of it.

I don't have a problem with anyone turning to religion for comfort, for community, for certainty, whatever, but I do think it is a waste of time to link hard science to religious belief, as people can, and do believe anything. I do not think it is harmful to students, as most students will not be impressed with any kind of preaching from the lectern, be it Omega Point Cosmology, Marxism, or Free Market Capitalism, although some will for a time be swayed by such things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Better yet, they can be promoted to non-teaching administrative positions :)

---

Start a petition. Frank Tipler, Dean of Tulane University?:)

I tend to agree with you Trish about the importance of tenure. There are good reasons to support its protections. If I understand them properly, they are to encourage free thought and research without there being too strong an imperative to conform to academic orthodoxy.

But then to harken back to Tipler's own analogy, is there a difference between Galileo and Frank Tipler? Galileo was mistreated because his theories challenged church orthodoxy. In other words it wasn't a matter of him saying things that were borderline incoherent or relying on sleight of hand.

Sometimes I think overbroad protections really reflect mistrust of man. We cannot tell the difference between someone who has no academic integrity and who is peddling junk science and someone who has challenged the status quo. I suppose given the fact that it sometimes takes years before a theory is recognized and supported, perhaps there's no way to distinguish Tipler from Galileo in the short term.

Some think tenure may be more important for the less mathematical sciences (e.g. economics, sociology, anthropology, history etc.) where interpretation is more nuanced and divergent.

I don’t know whether Padua had a tenure system in the time of Galileo or not, but it wasn’t academia that stiffled his freedom of expression, it was his Church. I’m not a historian of science but I’m given the impression that Galileo was rather well received by his peers in the academic field then known as natural philosophy. Even the Church recognized his work as significant. The Inquistion merely wanted Galileo to confess that the Copernican theory was merely a device that simplified calculations; that is was figuratively true but not literally true.

In comparison, Tipler’s Omega Theory was publish in 1995 (18 years ago) and it has yet to gain any significant support from other physicists. Remember that science moves much faster today than in Galileo’s time. Eighteen years with no takers is a long time. Tipler’s case is not at all analogous to Galileo (imo).

But not all disagreements in science are as easy to call, and so talented, creative thinkers should be afforded some protections. That’s why it doesn’t upset me that Tipler maintains his tenure and continues his work.

The real argument against tenure (I think) is that because of it certain departments tend to get lopsided. Suppose a majority of the tenured positions in a certain school of economics are held by supply side economists. Even if the supply side theory is exploded and falls into disgrace, unless the supply siders at that school change their tunes, they will continue to dominate economics as it’s practiced at their school. They will continue to hire supply siders and graduate supply siders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Tipler’s case is not at all analogous to Galileo (imo).

---

I was hoping you would say that. Whereas Galileo said things that were unpopular because they contradicted church dogma, Tipler says things that (though no scientist myself) I imagine are not valued because they are methodologically and descriptively questionable. Whereas Galileo's work was valued within the scientific community, Tipler's has not received much if any support. Even in the article you posted, his quotations posit things as starting assumptions that seem far from axiomatic.

I don't want to give examples because someone more familiar with this might say, "yeah didn't you know? It was established quite a while ago that life guides the universe and therefore is co-extensive with it. Therefore, life is omnipresent in the universe. Also, transcendent is spelled "transcendant". C'mon get with it."

But yes, thank you for your responses Trish. I agree with what you have said about the pros and cons of the tenure system. Very informative!

I'm not too confident they'll be giving Prof Tipler a New Book or Testament in the Bible, however, I'm positive that if I could pick the life of Jesus, or Mickey Mantle, or King Herod, or Martin Luther King, or Steven Spielberg, or Stephen King, I'd opt for the Life of Jesus.
My brother grew up with a guy named Ned Wright, he's a World Class Cosmologist now, they still keep in touch. My Mom used to substitute teach in Grammar School, she didn't like little Ned. He was a know-it-all who always corrected the teachers.

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/intro.html

Yep, that's him. He was on that team that won the Nobel Prize for their work on the Big Bang Theory, he'd email my brother juicy factoids, like the head guy was also the "Mom" of the group, he'd have to unruffle feathers and soothe hurt feelings and stuff.