News: Hawking on God (Again)

CraigS · #1 03-09-2010, 09:44 AM

In the newspapers today ...

"God did not create universe: Hawking"
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci...903-14rva.html

Sometimes, I wish he'd keep these statements to himself. I think his ego is getting 'feral'.

Cheers
PS: I hope this one doesn't go religious. Please try & stick to the Science, for everyone's sake ?
(Eg: Inflaton fields, entropy, negative energy, inflation, etc). Cheers

renormalised (Carl) · #2 03-09-2010, 09:55 AM

I thought Hawking was God

SkyViking (Rolf) · #3 03-09-2010, 09:59 AM

Quote:

In June this year Professor Hawking said on British television that he did not believe that a ''personal'' God existed.
''The question is: is the way the universe began chosen by God for reasons we can't understand, or was it determined by a law of science?'' he said.
''I believe the second. If you like, you can call the laws of science 'God', but it wouldn't be a personal God that you could meet, and ask questions.''

I think that's a perfectly valid point.
All personal beliefs aside - basically in 'A Brief History of Time' he concluded that everything back to BB naturally follows from the mathematical laws of nature and the values of constants such as G. But that he could not rule out that God (or whatever we choose to call him/her/it) had originally set the whole thing in motion.
Given that ABHoT was written some 20? years ago I find it entirely reasonable that he may now be convinced that there is actually no room left for a God, that even the BB itself follows naturally from the laws of nature. And why not say so then?

renormalised (Carl) · #4 03-09-2010, 10:01 AM

At least he's being self consistent.

bojan · #5 03-09-2010, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraigS

Sometimes, I wish he'd keep these statements to himself. I think his ego is getting 'feral'.

Why would that be?
He was saying those things before...
And, he has a much more reason for letting his own ego a bit more open than a bunch of others who will try to slam his ideas

CraigS · #6 03-09-2010, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bojan

Why would that be?
He was saying those things before...
And, he has a much more reason for letting his own ego a bit more open than a bunch of others who will try to slam his ideas

Because I'm not convinced that they are his ideas to start with (hence the 'Ego' comment). Fair enough he's famous so he can act as a spokesman but he never seems to credit others in his statements and they are the guys doing to 'hard yakka'.

There's heaps of other scientists in Science who have examined the initial instances of the BBT.

Cheers
PS: His statements are designed to create hype to sell his books. Others have made them in quieter and yet less inflamatory ways in media which can contribute to furthering mainstream science. Mass media hype does whip up the religious zealots. This may also however, result in public support of funding (by using politics), I suppose.

kingkong01 (James) · #7 03-09-2010, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renormalised

I thought Hawking was God

is he not?..

this would have to be one of the most talked about topics is the history of man... but if you look at how giant stars are made it seems possible that a universe could be made from as similar process...

avandonk · #8 03-09-2010, 10:19 AM

A 'God' has always been invoked when human understanding was found wanting. This is known as a god of the gaps in our knowledge.

All Hawking is saying is that we do not need a 'god' to kickstart the Universe.

I am an atheist only because I do not believe in any man made religion. To put it simply I just do not believe in one god less than the rest of the multitude of gods people believe in!

I personally think we are all linked forever to the Universe that spawned us. We are inexorably linked through space and time through the very particles that make up our being.

We are all children of the stars and that includes super novae.

Bert

SkyViking (Rolf) · #9 03-09-2010, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraigS

Because I'm not convinced that they are his ideas to start with (hence the 'Ego' comment). Fair enough he's famous so he can act as a spokesman but he never seems to credit others in his statements and they are the guys doing to 'hard yakka'.

His conclusion is from a new book he has published. Without having read the book I'm sure it contains all the proper acknowledgements required if he is drawing on the theories of others.
Have you read the book and know this not to be the case?

I wonder why can he not speak his mind? If others don't then that is just their problem. What does that have to do with ego?
There is enough PC already I'd say.

CraigS · #10 03-09-2010, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyViking

His conclusion is from a new book he has published. Without having read the book I'm sure it contains all the proper acknowledgements required if he is drawing on the theories of others.
Have you read the book and know this not to be the case?

I wonder why can he not speak his mind? If others don't then that is just their problem. What does that have to do with ego?
There is enough PC already I'd say.

No. I have not read his book.
His mass media statement appears to not contain credits to others.
He can speak his mind as he so chooses, and he does.
My opinion was also, my opinion.
Lets get on with the Science.

Cheers

Barrykgerdes · #11 03-09-2010, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avandonk

A 'God' has always been invoked when human understanding was found wanting. This is known as a god of the gaps in our knowledge.

All Hawking is saying is that we do not need a 'god' to kickstart the Universe.

I am an atheist only because I do not believe in any man made religion. To put it simply I just do not believe in one god less than the rest of the multitude of gods people believe in!

I personally think we are all linked forever to the Universe that spawned us. We are inexorably linked through space and time through the very particles that make up our being.

We are all children of the stars and that includes super novae.

Bert

I like this view best.

Many thousands of years ago when the conditions were right the extra strings to our Genetic model were added, probably from the stars. How, who knows. This gave us the power to think. We then searched for our origins. Since then superstitions and wars have shaped our destiny.

If you subscribe to infinity as without start or end the generation of the universe as been going on forever through "big bangs" and collapses "ad infinitum"

Who knows? It is what you believe that makes your world go round.

Barry

xelasnave · #12 03-09-2010, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avandonk

A 'God' has always been invoked when human understanding was found wanting. This is known as a god of the gaps in our knowledge.

All Hawking is saying is that we do not need a 'god' to kickstart the Universe.

I am an atheist only because I do not believe in any man made religion. To put it simply I just do not believe in one god less than the rest of the multitude of gods people believe in!

I personally think we are all linked forever to the Universe that spawned us. We are inexorably linked through space and time through the very particles that make up our being.

We are all children of the stars and that includes super novae.

Bert

Men create Gods ..Gods do not create men.

One thing that ticks me off is how folk call in God if they have no explanation... I can tolerate calling in aliens to make crop circles with greater ease ...er thats the second tick off..calling in aliens to explain the unexplainable...
Dam it why cant folk just say... I have no answer ..I dont know....why fall back to magic and superstition.

ANYWAYS Prof Hawking should be beyond criticism or judgment from or by mere mortals and his views given absolute respect even if he is rambling incoherently he deserves no less ...he is a great and wonderful human that I would promote to the Pope as a candidate for sainthood.

alex

GrampianStars (Rob) · #13 03-09-2010, 11:09 AM

I see nothing wrong with a "God" particle as long as we Humans take out the mis-guided "Personal" attachment of religion

CraigS · #14 03-09-2010, 11:19 AM

Its ok to go forward with beliefs.

Mine have no more value other than that which the reader associates with them. I value mine lowly in this Forum, - which is pretty cool !

Cheers

SkyViking (Rolf) · #15 03-09-2010, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraigS

No. I have not read his book.
His mass media statement appears to not contain credits to others.
He can speak his mind as he so chooses, and he does.
My opinion was also, my opinion.
Lets get on with the Science.

Cheers

My point was just that he has not made any mass media statement. He's a popular figure and the media has done a story on his new book, in which he makes this conclusion. Why criticise him for that?

Personally I completely agree with Bert's view, but that is really just the old theist/atheist discussion raising it's head again isn't it.

As for the science, I think there are very few in the world who are capable of seriously debating how the BB came about...?

avandonk · #16 03-09-2010, 11:36 AM

xelasnave how can anyone be submitted for sainthood to a religion started by ignorant goat herders and fishermen!

When the centuries of living in luxury by the so called men of god when all around were living in abject poverty can be explained by these opportunists. I will believe in the so called god they think they adore.
It has and always will be a simple con to control people with the very real fear of burning at the stake and many other atrocities in the name of a god!

Nothing has changed now our god is the "economy". Multitudes of priests/economists talk about 'growth' and 'profits'.

Nothing has changed. The criminals have only changed verbiage.

Have a nice day. If you can!

Bert

CraigS · #17 03-09-2010, 12:00 PM

'A Higgs field that has gotten caught on a plateau not only suffuses space and energy but, contributes to negative pressure.

As far as energy and pressure are concerned, a Higgs field that's caught on a plateau has the same properties as a cosmological constant. A supercooled Higgs field impacts on the expansion of space - like a cosmological constant. It exerts a repulsive force that drives space to expand.

Although a supercooled Higgs field shares certain features with a Cosmological constant, they are not identical. A super-cooled Higgs field need not be a constant, however.

The time varying value of the Higgs field is what gave rise to the bang in (BBT), at about 10e-35 seconds'.

Is the above correct ?

(Please respond on the new Higgs Field thread (if interested). The below discussion is welcome to continue on this thread).

Cheers

renormalised (Carl) · #18 03-09-2010, 02:22 PM

Have a gander at this...

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/p...php?f=3&t=3686

More "timeless wisdom" from the Land of Make Believe.

"Wallace Thornhill....physicist"....when can I laugh!!!

snas (Stuart) · #19 03-09-2010, 07:04 PM

Carl

The "thunderbolts" link you posted this afternoon now does not exist. Makes you wonder why it suddenly disappeared.

Stuart

ps: If anyone has seen my copy of A Brief History of Time, please let me know where it got to.....

CraigS · #20 03-09-2010, 07:44 PM

Ha !
Stuart: You're right !!!
I did read the page that link directed me to earlier on.
A mystery unfolds !!
Cheers