What exactly is Tipler’s Omega Point in terms that a non-scientist could understand? It seems like it is trying to validate heaven but I am not sure how.
The problem is that only a non-scientist could understand. To the scientists of the specialties that would seem to cover it, it abuses the language of science in countless ways to seem to say things in terms used by science without actually meeting the rigorous requirements of science. Imagine someone speaking german, with only a vague sense of the meaning of each word, and little or no German grammar.
Tipler knows -or knew- science, true, but his theory doesn’t follow it. Some say that he doesn’t believe what he wrote; others are less kind. I have no opinion on that issue. All I can say is that physicists can write poetry or fiction using scientific words, without ti being science, and from my readings, Tipler’s Omega point doesn’t satisfy the logical standards of theoretical science, much less the kind of data and falsifiability required of empirical experimental science.
Am I saying he’s wrong? No. But if he’s right, he’s shown little to demonstrate it. He hasn’t even fully specified what, exactly, he means to say with his major principles and terms. Instead he jumps around, skipping or ignoring the hard parts of his definitions.
“Tipler, a physicist at Tulane U, has proposed a theory called the Omega point, in which the entire universe is transformed into a single, all-powerful, all-knowing computer.”
…“The Omega point theory grew out of a collaboration between Tipler and John Barrow, a British physicist. In a 706-page book, 'the Anthropic cosmological principle, publish in 1986, Tipler and Barrow considered what might happen if intelligent machines converted the entire universe into a gigantic, information processing device…” - John Horgan, “The end of science”
(there’s a few pages devoted to that topic)