Ask A Genius 1442: Quantum Jesus, Tipler’s Omega Point, and the Quest to Fuse Science with Faith
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/07/03
Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner dissect the resurgence of pseudoscientific attempts to merge Christianity and physics, spotlighting a high-IQ fraud and Frank Tipler’s Omega Point theory. They contrast this trend with Isaac Newton’s theological pursuits and question the coherence of resurrective cosmology amid today’s compartmentalized scientific and religious communities.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Addendum to the last session on the same day. So, that previous session ended abruptly when you lost power, which was probably for the best—I was getting sick of myself on that topic.
Rick Rosner: To sum up, I’d say I’m involved in many aspects of performative masculinity. However, at least I’m not deluding myself into thinking I’m not an asshole. I am an asshole. Rotten tomatoes.
Let’s move on—what should we talk about next? I’ve got two other topics. The first is about a self-proclaimed high-IQ figure who, in my view, is one of the biggest frauds in that community right now.
He recently claimed that by combining his intelligence with quantum mechanics, he can prove that Jesus Christ is “the way, the truth, and the life.” He tweeted this, and MAGA-aligned social media users picked up the post. That tweet was reportedly viewed over 1.6 million times.
I believe he has been blocked or exposed in some of his previous schemes, but he keeps pressing forward. Seeing the massive attention from the MAGA sphere, I expect he’ll try to embed himself deeper in that world. There’s recognition, adulation, and financial rewards to be had. He’s a man looking for influence—and this is fertile ground for that kind of self-promotion.
That being said, the idea of merging religion and science is not a new concept. One of the most famous examples is Isaac Newton. Though he’s widely considered one of the greatest physicists and mathematicians of all time, Newton spent much of his later life on theology and biblical interpretation. He may have written more on religious topics than on physics or mathematics. He was obsessed with finding hidden codes in the Bible and believed he could uncover divine truths.
Newton lived a long life for his time—he died at 84 in 1727. He believed that in deciphering the natural world, one was uncovering God’s design. In that sense, scientific inquiry was a form of religious devotion.
That view is a far cry from the anti-science stance of many modern religious conservatives in the United States, who believe denying evolution or climate science somehow honours God or their political values. But if God exists, would He not want us to understand the universe He created?
So, credit to Newton for holding that perspective, even if his theological work was largely fringe.
Now, this is going to be a short topic because I only know of two people who have seriously tried to merge Christian theology with modern physics. The second is Frank J. Tipler, a mathematical physicist known for coauthoring The Anthropic Cosmological Principle and for writing The Physics of Immortality. He’s also known for promoting the “Omega Point” theory.
Tipler believes that in the far future, as the universe evolves, intelligent life will be able to control the universe’s collapse in a way that leads to infinite computational power at a single point—what he calls the Omega Point. He argues this will allow for the resurrection of every person who has ever lived through simulation. His theory is highly speculative and widely considered pseudoscientific by mainstream physicists.
Tipler’s earlier work was respected, but the scientific community has largely dismissed his later fusion of theology and physics. Still, he represents one of the few modern figures seriously attempting to unify Christian eschatology with cosmological physics.
As for the specific mechanics, Tipler initially based his idea on a closed universe model, where the universe would eventually stop expanding and collapse (a “Big Crunch”). In that model, all matter and energy would eventually reconverge. But the current scientific consensus suggests the universe will expand forever due to dark energy, making the Big Crunch—and Tipler’s theory—less likely under modern models.
Even if his Omega Point theory were correct, it is unclear how anyone resurrected would know they had lived before, or how such a resurrection would maintain continuity of identity.
We won’t have any awareness of living backward. So I don’t see how that would work—but maybe he has some workaround. Perhaps he believes the universe will grant us consciousness in reverse, giving us some agency as we, like Benjamin Button, ourselves through a contracting universe.
Does he believe the universe will then expand again, precisely the way it expanded the first time? And that we’re caught in an endless cycle of resurrection—but always living the same life, never knowing we’re repeating it?
I don’t know. However, I do know that’s how he tried to incorporate Christianity and the resurrection into the Big Bang.
Then again, there are plenty of scientists who are Christian or belong to some other religion. I’d say that the majority of religious scientists—as well as the majority of atheist or agnostic ones—don’t spend a lot of time trying to make their spiritual beliefs align with their scientific work, or vice versa.
I think most people do their work. They believe certain things about their field. Cops probably have a theory about human nature based on their experience. Accountants likely have a theory about how people behave regarding taxes. So, everyone probably has a theory about people and the world, shaped by their own professional and life experiences.
And I’d guess that most people don’t spend much time trying to reconcile what they believe about the world with, say, their religion—unless they’re extremely devout. Perhaps some devout Christians who attend church five nights a week strive to bring everything together. But most people? No. Most can compartmentalize. Yes.
And honestly, it’s a lot of work to build a whole worldview that integrates all your beliefs. Most people are too distracted—or too busy—to bother with that kind of consistency.
I’m not sure what percentage of scientists in the United States identify as Christian. It’s probably lower than the general population, but I bet it’s still higher than people expect.
If about 70% of Americans identify as Christian, I’d guess maybe 55% of STEM professionals do? That’s a ballpark figure—I don’t know the exact number.
Photo
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 