8 Shocking Things We Learned from Stephen Hawking's Book (The Grand Design)

Mother Nature Network ^ | November 4, 2010 | Live Science

[MHGinTN]

Indeed, Hawking can account for so much, but he has yet to explain how the universe contains information derived from randomness. But then, even Stephen cannot explain the ridiculous.

[Oberon]

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

Aristotle once asserted that this was true of life... that eels grew from horsehairs that fell into water, and so forth. I'm surprised that we've come so far only to return to the same old drivel.

[JOAT]

one consequence of the theory of quantum mechanics is that events in the past that were not directly observed did not happen in a definite way. Instead they happened in all possible ways.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools

[Revolting cat!]

Who was it that went to a bookstore in DC and inserted notes in the stack of Hawking books, that everyone bought years ago out of, let’s face it, pity for the poor cripple, and to make themselves feel good, stuck the notes around page 25 or so, saying please reply to such and such address to receive $50. No one read that far, and no one replied.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Statement: "...“” one consequence of the theory of quantum mechanics is that events in the past that were not directly observed did not happen in a definite way.””

Response: Sounds a bit like Bishop Berkeley.

[jwalsh07]

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

Round and round we go, where we stop nobody knows. And that includes Hawking's circular arguments.

[re_nortex]

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...

Amen.

One of my favorite things, among many, about FR is that this is an unabashedly pro-God forum. Fools such as Stephen Hawking who are generally held in high regard by atheistic liberals (but I repeat myself) are exposed for what they really are here.

An array of advanced degrees from so-called elite institutions does not instill wisdom or common sense.

[IronJack]

So Hawking et al use the “fishbowl” metaphor to assert that there is no universally (!) valid perception ...

Does anyone else appreciate the paradox in asserting (absolutely) that there are no absolutes? And that, “judging from my perspective, there are no valid perspectives.”

It reminds me of a liberal who once told me “It’s always wrong to generalize.”

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

7. Quarks are never lonely Quarks, the adorably named building blocks of protons and neutrons, come only in groups, never alone... Protons and neutrons are both made of three quarks. (Protons contain two "up"-flavored quarks and one "down," while neutrons have two downs and one up.)



If I were a Quark, I'd take two down.

[Calvin Locke]

If it’s any consolation, he did lose The Black Hole War.

[sodpoodle]

Stephen has finally discovered his brain has no continuum.

End of research;)

[quickquiver]

bkmk

[Sudetenland]

Hawking claims:

"8. The universe is its own creator One of the most talked-about assertions in the whole book is that we don't need the idea of God to explain what sparked the creation of the universe. "It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going," Hawking and Mlodinow write. Instead, the laws of science alone can explain why the universe began. Our modern understanding of time suggests that it is just another dimension, like space. Thus it doesn't have a beginning. "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing," they write. "Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."

Yet to support his assertions, he invokes "LUCK" repeatedly . . . luck that following the "Big Bang" the balance of matter and anti-matter was skewed to the side of matter, luck that gravity exists, luck that matter was not distributed evenly following the "Big Bang," luck that stars generate the heavier elements, luck that Earth formed at precisely the right distance from the sun to support life, luck that precisely the right combination of proteins formed and grouped together to form life, etc., etc.

Hawking sees "luck," I see the hand of God.

When a scientist begins invoking "luck" to enable his model to function, he has left the realm of science.

Atheism is a religion, with faith, doctrin, assumptions and beliefs; they just aren't intellectually honest enough to admit it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[r9etb]

Hawking can account for so much, but he has yet to explain how the universe contains information derived from randomness.

Actually ... the logic of what's reported in this article, is that information didn't arise from randomness, but was, rather, spontaneously generated from nothing.

Which seems a rather different proposition altogether.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

7. Quarks are never lonely Quarks, the adorably named building blocks of protons and neutrons, come only in groups, never alone... Protons and neutrons are both made of three quarks. (Protons contain two "up"-flavored quarks and one "down," while neutrons have two downs and one up.)



If I were a Quark, I'd be up and take two down.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Something from nothing is a MIRACLE.

Since virtual particles come from nothing all the time, Hawking has proved that God is still at work in the universe!

[Calvin Locke]

I read that book.

At the time, I thought some of the stuff was pretty neat, like particles that have to spin twice to be seen once, and then I go back to the days of the turntable and strobe light...

[re_nortex]

I go back to the days of the turntable...

Does it play 78 RPM? That's more my speed! :-)

[Darth Reardon]

Uh, not every woman, every ONE (except me, of course).

You sure about that “awesome” stuff?

[MHGinTN]

When you figure out how DNA information has compiled from that process, let me know.