Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Reply To Thread

The Grand DesignFollow

#1 Sep 02 2010 at 11:03 PM Rating: Excellent
**
584 posts
Quote:
In "The Grand Design," co-authored with U.S. physicist Leonard Mlodinow, Hawking says a new series of theories made a creator of the universe redundant, according to the Times newspaper which published extracts on Thursday.

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist," Hawking writes.

"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

Hawking, 68, who won global recognition with his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time," an account of the origins of the universe, is renowned for his work on black holes, cosmology and quantum gravity.

Since 1974, the scientist has worked on marrying the two cornerstones of modern physics -- Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, which concerns gravity and large-scale phenomena, and quantum theory, which covers subatomic particles.

His latest comments suggest he has broken away from previous views he has expressed on religion. Previously, he wrote that the laws of physics meant it was simply not necessary to believe that God had intervened in the Big Bang.

He wrote in A Brief History ... "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason -- for then we should know the mind of God."

In his latest book, he said the 1992 discovery of a planet orbiting another star other than the Sun helped deconstruct the view of the father of physics Isaac Newton that the universe could not have arisen out of chaos but was created by God.

"That makes the coincidences of our planetary conditions -- the single Sun, the lucky combination of Earth-Sun distance and solar mass, far less remarkable, and far less compelling evidence that the Earth was carefully designed just to please us human beings," he writes.

Hawking, who is only able to speak through a computer-generated voice synthesizer, has a neuro muscular dystrophy that has progressed over the years and left him almost completely paralyzed.

He began suffering the disease in his early 20s but went on to establish himself as one of the world's leading scientific authorities, and has also made guest appearances in "Star Trek" and the cartoons "Futurama" and "The Simpsons."

Last year he announced he was stepping down as Cambridge University's Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, a position once held by Newton and one he had held since 1979.

"The Grand Design" is due to go on sale next week.


Source

Religious nuts, commence going crazy. The best part is the Comments.










#2 Sep 02 2010 at 11:24 PM Rating: Good
Being a science buff and a skeptic but yet an agnostic, I've always agreed with Hawking that physics and science explain the how of the universe, leaving it up to religion to speculate as to the why. Science doesn't care about why something is the way it is. It is that way because the rules of phsyics were set up in such a way to make it so.
#3 Sep 02 2010 at 11:28 PM Rating: Good
***
3,362 posts
catwho wrote:
Being a science buff and a skeptic but yet an agnostic, I've always agreed with Hawking that physics and science explain the how of the universe, leaving it up to religion to speculate as to the why. Science doesn't care about why something is the way it is. It is that way because the rules of phsyics were set up in such a way to make it so.
Well, what exactly tells you that "why" is anything more than a human concept? Why does there need to be a why? Perhaps what we really should be asking is why not.
#4 Sep 02 2010 at 11:50 PM Rating: Good
Quadkit wrote:
Perhaps what we really should be asking is why not.
Why?
#5 Sep 03 2010 at 2:48 AM Rating: Excellent
MDenham wrote:
Quadkit wrote:
Perhaps what we really should be asking is why not.
Why?


Why not?
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#6 Sep 03 2010 at 3:03 AM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Quadkit wrote:
Well, what exactly tells you that "why" is anything more than a human concept? Why does there need to be a why? Perhaps what we really should be asking is why not.


Normally I would agree that we should be asking why not. The problem with that is you want to ask why not with a subject that has no way to test if it is true or not. Hence the whole faith thing. We can speculate and debate on the existence of a higher power, but to prove or disprove its existence is impossible (at least at this time).

Heck even if one was able to come up with proof either way, people are so stuck in their ways that it would matter little. Life would go on and people will still believe in whatever they want to believe in.
#7 Sep 03 2010 at 3:48 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
It is that way because the rules of physics were set up in such a way to make it so.


But if we didn't care why physics were setup the way they were, we wouldn't have bothered trying to figure out how the four fundamental forces came to be!

(Big Bang, the Planck epoch, Supersymmetry, yadda yadda yadda)
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#8 Sep 03 2010 at 4:01 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Quote:
It is that way because the rules of physics were set up in such a way to make it so.


But if we didn't care why physics were setup the way they were, we wouldn't have bothered trying to figure out how the four fundamental forces came to be!

(Big Bang, the Planck epoch, Supersymmetry, yadda yadda yadda)

Could be true; I won't make any guesses as to any individual researchers' motives for work. But I bet there have been, and will always be, people interested in HOW things work, to keep the science of physics moving along.

"Let's poke it with a stick!"
#9 Sep 03 2010 at 4:33 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
we wouldn't have bothered trying to figure out how the four fundamental forces came to be


Edited, Sep 3rd 2010 6:33am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#10REDACTED, Posted: Sep 03 2010 at 5:17 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.
#11 Sep 03 2010 at 5:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Tailmon wrote:
Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.


I don't even know where to begin.
#12 Sep 03 2010 at 5:32 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
With the anti-marbles streaming off the event horizons of black holes, probably.


Come to think of it, anti-marbles are probably what Tailmon plays with!
#13 Sep 03 2010 at 6:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Nadenu wrote:
Tailmon wrote:
Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.


I don't even know where to begin.



Crazy String Theory.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#14 Sep 03 2010 at 7:49 AM Rating: Excellent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
The question is neither "why?" nor "why not?"

The question is "Why bother?"
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#15 Sep 03 2010 at 8:08 AM Rating: Decent
There is no question.
#16 Sep 03 2010 at 8:43 AM Rating: Good
Stephen Hawkings has evolved beyond marbles, instead he has ball bearings! (Skip to 7:40, or just watch the hole thing as it's fucking cool)
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#17 Sep 03 2010 at 1:35 PM Rating: Good
***
3,362 posts
Tailmon wrote:
Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.
What is it with the political right and science? Global warming, evolution, physics.... if it makes them feel uncomfortable, it's ********* Regardless of evidence, of course. You haven't even seen the evidence he's presented yet, and already you say he's ******* insane.
#18 Sep 03 2010 at 1:44 PM Rating: Excellent
**
584 posts
Quote:
Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.


He's probably the smartest person on the planet, maybe, I'm not totaly 100% sure on that, so he can probably afford to lose a few marbles and still be smarter than you, so he's covered.
#19 Sep 03 2010 at 2:03 PM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
Quadkit wrote:
Tailmon wrote:
Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.
What is it with the political right and science? Global warming, evolution, physics.... if it makes them feel uncomfortable, it's bullsh*t. Regardless of evidence, of course. You haven't even seen the evidence he's presented yet, and already you say he's batsh*t insane.
It is something different from what has been told to you for most of your life. That requires thinking on the matter and possibly even adjusting your current view on things, to avoid having to go through that you can just scream HE'S WRONG/EVIL/LYING!!* and be done with it.













*different wording can be used. Scream louder if it doesn't go away or if it seems to be threatening to the small world you live in.
#20REDACTED, Posted: Sep 03 2010 at 2:03 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Oh he is vastly smarter then I am. Vastly. But, on this point, likely to be wrong (at least on the basis of science) because generally science does not address the issues Hawking is raising. Generally, saying something like the universe will appear from nothing, spontaneously, is not a scientific hypothesis because it is not testable*. Obviously, I have not read his book. I can't really say more then that.
#21 Sep 03 2010 at 2:33 PM Rating: Good
yossarian wrote:
Sgriob wrote:
He's probably the smartest person on the planet, maybe, I'm not totaly 100% sure on that, so he can probably afford to lose a few marbles and still be smarter than you, so he's covered.


Oh he is vastly smarter then I am. Vastly. But, on this point, likely to be wrong (at least on the basis of science) because generally science does not address the issues Hawking is raising. Generally, saying something like the universe will appear from nothing, spontaneously, is not a scientific hypothesis because it is not testable*. Obviously, I have not read his book. I can't really say more then that.

It is likely that Physics Today will have a book review of it by someone with sufficient knowledge to comment on that area of physics (and hopefully enough skill to deliver it to a broader audience). None of you have any reason to take my word for it but I hope if the review there is generally negative that at least you folks would consider that as data. I just checked and there isn't one in the September issue. Whichever way the initial review goes, Physics Today has a lively comment section and I bet the forces on the other side will have a forceful reply - we shall see.
__
* Okay: so you might be worried about the big bang. Isn't that non-testable since we cannot make another big bang? True, however if we make a hypothesis that the big bang happened a certain way there are multiple independent means of investigating it, such as the red shifts of galaxies and the cosmic microwave background radiation. In some sense it is like plate tectonics which are not reproducible at scale in the lab but clearly a viable area for science to discuss.


And, equally, a scientific theory that explains a testable phenomenon might imply spontaneous creation.
#22 Sep 03 2010 at 3:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Sgriob wrote:
Quote:
Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.


He's probably the smartest person on the planet, maybe, I'm not totaly 100% sure on that, so he can probably afford to lose a few marbles and still be smarter than you, so he's covered.


Dude, an ashtray could lose a few marbles and be smarter than Tailmon. Set the bar higher.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#23 Sep 03 2010 at 5:46 PM Rating: Good
Aripyanfar wrote:
Come to think of it, anti-marbles are probably what Tailmon plays with!
I hope not, should he ever come out of fantasyland the collision of his crazy anti-marbles with normal marbles could end humanity as me know it! Smiley: eek
#24 Sep 03 2010 at 6:02 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Quadkit wrote:
Tailmon wrote:
Hawking needs to count his marbles. He's missing some and then some more.
What is it with the political right and science? Global warming, evolution, physics.... if it makes them feel uncomfortable, it's bullsh*t. Regardless of evidence, of course. You haven't even seen the evidence he's presented yet, and already you say he's batsh*t insane.


I could ask the same thing about the political left and science. It seems as though a fair number of people on the left go out of their way to make any scientific discovery into a condemnation of faith and religion. I'm pretty sure that people on the left didn't constantly insist that science disproves the existence of god and/or the value of faith, no one on the right would have a problem with it. But instead what we get is statements of the form: "Look at this science! It proves that you crazy religious people are wrong. Nyah nyah nyah!".

I've pointed this out before. Nothing in Darwin's work, for example, even remotely dismisses the broad aspects of creationism, yet many people equate Darwin and the Theory of Evolution as somehow in opposition with Creationism. At some point, atheists decided that science was a great tool to attack religion with, and they've been doing it ever since. Blaming religions people for responding to such attacks is just icing on the cake.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#25 Sep 03 2010 at 6:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Quote:
I'm pretty sure that people on the left didn't constantly insist that science disproves the existence of god and/or the value of faith, no one on the right would have a problem with it.
Do you have to drink the kool-aid daily or do you eventually drink enough to not need anymore again?


Maybe if Religion hadn't spent millenniums trying to discredit Science...
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#26 Sep 03 2010 at 6:31 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Maybe if Religion hadn't spent millenniums trying to discredit Science...


Well, maybe if Tog didn't go carving that rock round an rolling it down the hill rather than listening to his elders about the way the world really is...
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 377 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (377)