L. Krauss' Review of Tipler's Book 'the Physics of Christianity'

Review  t Pyic f Ciiiy by Frank Tipler, Tipler, Doubleday, $27.50, ISBN 9780385514248 978038551424 8

More dangerous than nonsense I yi  pvi vic f Cii blif,  pcbl pyici  b cic  i bki pi, y Lawrence Krauss

Halfway through frnk

dngers o pushing science beond its domin o vidit nd the tbe o contents nd s using scientiic pproximtions disppointed to ind there oud s i the re compete vid in be no expntion o the recent  contexts. reported mircuous ppernce Indeed, hie he compins o Mother Teres’s imge on sever times tht other phsicists  cheese Dnish in Nshvie, et their phiosophic prejudices Tennessee. Tht s surprising, inuence their concusions, Tiper since Tiper goes out o his hi s  hs cer et his on desires to provide convouted phsics get the better o him. Bsed on justiictions or simir Christin person experience, I beieve mirces, incuding the imge o  tht frnk Tiper is n honourbe Jesus on the Turin shroud, ong mn nd I do not think tht he debunked s  orger b mn m n intended to pervert reit to experts. when convention serve his gos – but nevertheess phsics doesn’t provide  he hs.  Just tra  Just transm nsmute ute “ne “nearl arlyy imp impossi ossible” ble” into “nearly certain” and it all makes sense suicient expntion or Tiper, or exmpe, cims the reigious phenomenon in tht the stndrd mode o  question, Tiper reinvents it. prtice phsics is compete nd into neutrinos nd ntineutrinos, as  coection o h-truths exct. It isn’t. He cims tht e hich ter converted bck into nd exggertions, I m tempted hve  cer nd consistent theor toms to reconstitute him. Here to describe Tiper’s Tip er’s ne book s o quntum grvit. we don’t. Tiper invokes the ct tht ithin nonsense – but tht oud be He cims tht the universe must the stndrd mode o prtice unir to the concept o nonsense. recopse. It doesn’t do esn’t hve to, nd phsics the dec o protons nd It is r more dngerous thn  evidence thus r suggests neutrons is possibe, though he tht it on’t. He rgues tht e recognises tht such dec oud understnd the nture o drk ike tke 50 to 100 orders o  energ. we we don’t. He rgues  rgues mgnitude onger thn the tht e kno h there is more current ge o the universe: mtter thn ntimtter in the thus, the probbiit o such n universe. we don’t. I coud go occurrence is essenti zero. mere nonsense, becuse Tiper’s Tip er’s on, but ou get the point. Hoever, Hoev er, using  strnge resonbe descriptions o  when stretching the imits “Christin” version o the vrious spects o modern o knoedge beond the pe nthropic principe,  subject he phsics, combined ith his doesn’t suice, Tiper resorts to once co-uthored  book bout, respectbe reserch pedigree, some interesting  posteriori uses he then cims tht ithout give the persusive iusion tht o probbiit. for exmpe, he Jesus’ss resurrection, our universe Jesus’ he is describing ht the s o  rgues tht the resurrection o  coud not exist – thereore, hen phsics imp. He is not. This bo book ok Jesus occurred hen the toms in one convoves this requirement provides n object esson in the his bod spontneous deced ith the most, but not exct

■ Tiper’s ne book, I scnned

“I do not think that he intended to pervert reality – but he has”

www.newscientist.com

      y       r       a       r       b       i       l       t       r       a       N       a       M       e       g       d       i       r       b       e       h       t       /       N       e       d       S       e       r       d       N       e       g       N       u       l

      M       M       a       S       t       S       N       u       k       e       h       c       i       l       t       a       a       t       S

zero,  priori probbiit, the net resut is  ner certint. I hve rcked m brins to think o  more extreme exmpe o uncritic nd unsubstntited rguments put into print b n inteigent proession scientist, but I cnnot. Given some o the junk tht hs been pubished in the pst decde, tht’s sing  ot. I urge potenti reders red ers ho m ee the need to seek out some empiric justiiction or their ith to besto  kindness on Proessor Tiper nd turn to nother book ith either better science, or better theoog. ● Lawrence Krauss is Ambrose Swasey Professor of Physics and Astronomy and director of the Center for Education and Research in Cosmology and Astrophysics at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. His most recent book is Hiding in the Mirror (Penguin, 2006) 12 May 2007 | NewScientist | 53