The last thing I saw in the car explosion was my own a**.
Posted on 09/03/2010 8:52:40 PM PDT by Flavius
There is no place for God in theories on the creation of the Universe, the physicist and mathematician Professor Stephen Hawking has said.
report on link and below
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
>> There is no place for God in theories on the creation of the Universe
Well, they are Man’s theories. QED.
I have great respect for any man than can sit in the Issac Newton chair, but he will get a chance to do some original (for him) reasearch not long after his last breath.
/johnny
And who created the laws of physics??
The theory yields a lot, but it hardly brings us any closer to the secret of the Old One. In any case I am convinced that He does not throw dice.
—Einstein, writing to Max Born, 4 December 1926
The good doctor will have quite a scientific discovery the moment following his final breath.
Hawkings cannot account for the creation of information that controls all of life...all of the Universe!
Idiot. Next to Christianity, of which I wish I subscribed, the only reasonable position is agnosticism.
Opinions about an unprovable hypothesis are just that, unprovable. Would it surprise you to know that I am an agnostic?
Ain’t he in for a surprise.
And it matters what Hawking thinks for what reason?
“In any case I am convinced that He does not throw dice.”
It’s more like a chess game, with an immeasurable number of pieces, and an infinity of squares to move around in.
what makes you think they needed to be ‘created’?
Poor Stephen Hawking—doesn’t he want a new, flawless body given by the Almighty when this life ends? Hasn’t he suffered long enough in that crippled up flesh bag he lugs around every day? Prayers that he comes out of that black hole and into the Light of truth via faith in the Supreme Scientist of the whole universe.
The theory yields a lot, but it hardly brings us any closer to the secret of the Old One. In any case I am convinced that He does not throw dice.
—Einstein, writing to Max Born, 4 December 1926
I should have stated that this was Einstein’s response to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle
|
C. S. Lewis addressed Hawking’s kind of objection over half a century ago when he pointed out that the rules of accounting carried out to all eternity could never produce a dime (or as Lewis put it in his accustomed British currency, sixpence) in a bank account.
Hawking fall on his head recently?
"Ideally, our concepts of nature and god should adapt to this evolving scientific knowledge. What happened before the Big Bang? Or if god made the world, then who made god? According to biocentrism, these are ultimately irrational questions, because space and time are simply tools of our understanding and don’t exist in any absolute sense. Before and after are relative concepts tied to us, which includes the totality of existence in the multiverse. Imagine what might be possible, especially if we’re able to recreate information systems to generate any consciousness-based reality fathomable.
“One thing I have learned in a long life,” said Einstein, “[is] that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike — and yet it is the most precious thing we have.” Science, like religion, must work with simple concepts the human mind can comprehend. But if biocentrism is right, nature has much bigger plans for us than just this or that life — plans far beyond anything religion has ever projected to any god. And perhaps, if science is clever enough to see, it will realize that religion may not be too far off with its concrete imagery; and that relative to the supreme creator, we humans are much like the microorganisms we scrutinize under the microscope."
Ain’t he in for a surprise.
I am not sure Hawking is trying to say that there is no GOD.
He is trying to say that GOD is not used as an ‘answer’ to scientific questions.
He is right.
Faith is accepting GOD as creator, and accepting that there are things we may never understand.
Science is about understanding the rest.
OR have you ever seen a bomb blow up and the shrapnel form a motorized wheelchair with a computerized, voice simulator that can be operated by a quadraplegic who cannot talk on his own?
Seen this thread a bunch of times. People should read Brian Greene’s work. He explains 1 possible method of a quantum fluction in a vacuum that would produce our universe.
Then there’s M-theory. There’s beginning to be a lot of ideas that explain a single universe or a multiverse with no intention.
I look at a life like Mozart’s, how short it was. A chance of particles, Hawking? Sure, keep telling yourself that. The Divine raises men, women, nations, armies, dreams, prophets, music and art, science and engineering. I just have to consider that you choose not to live richly or with enough purpose to understand that through the mind we reach to God.
In fact it happens all the time. Ever seen a snowflake?
"Have you seen a bomb blow up and the schrapmetal form into a car?"
A question that reflects a lack of understanding, since nobody thinks anything like that happened.
He also seems to be saying IT Wasn’t created by a committee!
Not really. He's spent his life trying to understand the Cosmos and Physics. I think he know's he doesn't have all the answers, and there is much more to learn. It's what keeps him going.
He has had to revise one of his most important theories concerning black holes when he realized he had been wrong.
Kudos to him for doing so. Many 'scientists' wouldn't, unless confronted with direct proof. Black Holes are still in the same category as Dark Matter, and Dark Energy. Concepts made up to explain why the concepts we made up aren't working.
He should accept that this “theory” about the nonexistence of God could just as easily be wrong.
He may believe in God. I don't know. But that has nothing to do with not using GOD as some magical mathematical answer to the as yet unsolvable questions before us. If scientists were to use GOD as the 'answer', then they could just use it for EVERYTHING, and retire.
I thnk I mostly lack that ‘inspiratonal’ gene that most have. They did a study and found Apple computer fans’ brains act the same as hardcore religious brans, and I see both as flat out goofy.
There’s possibly a God, sure. There’s also possibly not. Everyone should think that way. At worst what will happen? God’s going to slam you to hell for doubt? I doubt that!
To me, we should think of an afterlife possibility as a hopefull guess. Even if there is a God to create everything, we may not ever deal with him after this life. We may just disappear like we did before we were born. Nothingness. It’s a distinct possibility that people kill and die over, but to me it’s just a possible outcome.
It is a theory and his opinion.
Makes for a headline and discussion.
Let’s pray for him so that he accepts God’s love and sacrifice on the Cross for his salvation.
Well then who did? AND WHY?
He undoubtedly would like to have all of those things. However, he doesn't allow his personal preferences to cloud his judgement in matters of pure science and logic.
Cudos to him for that!
When I ask an expert (e.g., a cosmologist studying the origins of the universe, a surgeon about to operate on my heart, or even only an autoshop repairman working on my car's brakes) for information, facts, or just the currently most-plausible theories, I appreciate his keeping his personal life problems out of the equation. Or would you want your brakes repaired by someone who said that he didn't actually examine the brake linings but "has faith" that they will function properly in an emergency?
Regards,
Laplace famously made the same remark over 200 years ago in reference to a Creator, “I have no need of this hypothesis.”
Because he understands more and has thought more about physics and the origins of the universe than you or I (or about 99.9999% of the world's populace) ever will.
Regards,
One of these things is not like the others ...
He is unique and very much to be respected, but he’s not, you know ... God.
It looks like Hawking jumped the intellectual shark.
He’s gone well beyond what he can prove - at all - one way or the other. Speculation is not evidence of anything. His ego has driven him to answer questions he simply cannot answer. And to do so with such certainty taints everything he says because he claims to know the unknowable.
Pure science and logic does not support his conclusion.
He’s taking a position on something he simply cannot know. Now he’s certainly entitled to believe whatever he wants. But he can’t make the claim under the banner of science.
He offers no proof. Just states that the universe came from nothing and no God was involved. Something he’s not capable of actually knowing.
He always had an agenda to disprove God. Unfortunately he took a scientific route instead of an “awakening” that Lewis was blessed with. May God have mercy on him.
God is dead. Nietzsche
Nietzsche is dead. God
Scientists say there is no God, then look to the heavens and say there’s life out there.
Dude? He was on the Simpsons!
to be so smart he’s a fukcing idiot
all this is random?
give me a break
he’s just mad at God for being crippled physically so he denies him
what do you subscribe to dear if you lament one who has not found God
The last thing I saw in the car explosion was my own a**.
Best proof I’ve seen yet for the existence of God.
God may be contemplating Zotting Stephen from this dimension.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.