What Stephen Hawking’s Final Paper Really Means

Pocket ^ | 2021 | Max Genecov

[Bogle]

"To situate “A Smooth Exit from Eternal Inflation?” in the scientific world in which it was written, the practice of theoretical physics is often an exercise in fabulism: you propose something new and strange that appears to fit with established theory and observations and then — this is the hard part — follow the ever-branching consequences of your new idea to see if there are any contradictions that might arise. After justifying those contradictions, you make or someone else makes a prediction, however outlandish or futuristic, and you wait for the moment between tomorrow and one hundred years from now that it is proved or disproved."

[Bogle]

I've long been disquited by how such a smart guy could have strong, weird beliefs about global warming (i.e., it's not only a serious problem, but it's one that should drive us to colonize another planet!). Although this article never mentions global warming, it sheds light on Hawking's eccentrically misguided side. The article isn't from a great source, but I'm not sure it matters here. I am not a scientist, nor particularly smart, but I'd love to hear from other Freepers. Does the article shed light on Hawking's capacity for global-warming beliefs (and to some of us...maybe his atheistic beliefs as well)?

[gundog]

It’s turtles, all the way down....

[drSteve78]

It’s not a bad read (horrors, i read the article) but too early in my day to think this hard. Not enough caffeine.

Hawking may well have been brilliant, but he was still human, and like the rest of us, frequently wrong. Perhaps not in his field of expertise, but life in general.

He was funny on The Big Bang Theory. Street cred to a weird man not afraid to be part of the joke.

[rlmorel]

When I read this article, the thing that jumped out at me was the statement: "...On the whole, our most prominent science communicators (Neil deGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, Michio Kaku, etc.) do not actively produce science...

"Science Communicators". I had to chew on that. And he had Bill Nye by name in there, which to me, makes anyone associated in that group equally worthless.

Which is pretty worthless.

I wasn't going to read the linked paper, because I know those things are indigestible to people who aren't Stephen Hawking. It would be a waste of time, I know that in advance.

That said, this touches on a subject that came up the other day with respect to Covid and vaccinations.

There was a poster on this forum who was upset that I wouldn't simply accept the word of physicians that the vaccine for this virus was a good thing and we should unquestioningly accept it. After all, he reasoned...if you can't take the word of physicians about a vaccine, who can you trust? (He didn't word it quite so benignly, IRCC) He said three physicians he knew, a neurologist, a Internist, and a Pediatrician, all said people should get vaccinated.

My stance was that the medical field is highly specialized today, more so than it has ever been, and on the subject of vaccination, I am not inclined to blindly accept the opinions of a Neurologist, an Internist, or a Pediatrician.

If I have a glioblastoma, I will readily accept the opinion of a Neurologist or Neurosurgeon on how it will affect me, various treatments, and possibly how long I might live.

If I have a question about diet and general health, if I have a good internist, I can accept opinions on what I can do to improve my overall health or deal with a rash.

If I have a child who has a condition specific to children, a Pediatrician is a good place to start.

But in all of these, because they are specialists in neuro issues, overall health, or childhood conditions, that does not make them experts in the highly specialized field of immunology or virology. They may have knowledge, and it may be more focused than mine, but that doesn't mean I can unthinkingly swallow their views as those of an expert.

This is no disrespect to those people. It is a statement of fact.

And, because someone is an Immunologist (as Fauci ostensibly is) that is no guarantee that corruption, personal vice, financial factors, or even outright bad character or ignorance will not fatally taint any opinions or pronouncements. Because to me, in the case of Fauci, those things, all of them, do. And he is just one example.

As a matter of fact, I would be more inclined to pay attention to the views of an objective RN working as a Clinical Trial Coordinator in a comparable pharmaceutical company (not necessarily one actually working for the vaccine manufacturer in question, though I would give them greater weight) than I would to a political hack administrator who hasn't treated a real patient in years, which describes Fauci perfectly, IMO.

And this boils down to a general point that impacts a lot of areas ranging from Computer Science, to Global Warming: Being an expert in one field does not make you an expert in other fields.

Thomas Sowell, one of the smartest people alive today even at his advanced age, has written extensively in multiple books about this very subject, specifically in his great book "Intellectuals and Society". In that work, he discusses this at length. Hollywood stars may be adept at memorizing lines from a script to regurgitate in character on camera, but that in no way makes them an expert worth listening to on Cuban politics or Climate issues.

And it isn't just movie stars.

This happens all the way up to and including people like Stephen Hawking. He was unarguably one of the giants of physics. But when it came to theology and the existence of God, he was no expert. He was another person with an opinion. And that opinion would have been no better or worse than your opinion and my opinion. Might even be significantly worse, because people might accept his opinion as a fact, which is what many people regrettably do.

He may be a genius at physics, but I'll bet he never tried to snake a wire through a wall or replace the fuel control on a jet engine.

Politics (which includes the subject of global warming) is something in which people, very intelligent, smart, and capable people, seem to go off the rails.

• They should understand the pitfalls of socialism. Everyone who has ever looked at it in depth with an untainted eye can see it will not work in the same way a perpetual motion machine or a Ponzi scheme cannot work in the end.

• They should understand that spending far more money than you have will eventually bankrupt you.

• They should understand that people and governments who don't respect your rights as an individual will treat you as an expendable widget for the "greater good" (as they define it)

• They should understand that having open borders coupled with a welfare state is unsustainable and will eventually bankrupt you.

• They should understand that having no checks on who is voting is an open invitation to fraud. (well, maybe not a good example. I think they understand this quite well)

• They should understand that eliminating police forces is going to result in more crime, and more violent crime.

• They should understand that allowing another country to control a vital national resource (such as energy sources) places you at the mercy of those countries.

• They should understand that giving intellectual property to your enemies is a recipe for your own defeat.

There are, as I said, many intelligent, smart, and capable people whose talents and minds are twisted by their ideology, and even though they may be intelligent, smart, and capable, their blind adherence to...something...makes them blind.

It also makes them tools. Useful Idiots.

Stephen Hawking was one of those people.

[DesertRhino]

Well stated...

[Bogle]

Yes. Very well stated. I’m considering cutting out your list and pinning it to my office wall.

[bboise]

Excellent commentary on the post, including the summary below. It shows how our ideas can become warped due to compartmentalized thinking. thank you!

“There are, as I said, many intelligent, smart, and capable people whose talents and minds are twisted by their ideology, and even though they may be intelligent, smart, and capable, their blind adherence to...something...makes them blind.

It also makes them tools. Useful Idiots.

Stephen Hawking was one of those people.”

[rlmorel]

Thanks...I know it is long, but I have never been able to master one or two line postings. Which unfortunately means that realistically, many of my posts don’t get read.

Eh...I gots to be what I gots to be...

[rlmorel]

I work in the bluest of blue states, and I work with a lot of people with Doctorate degrees who I get along quite well with, but...I don’t discuss politics with them.

But if you listen to people, you can easily tell where they are coming from.

And these people are good and talented at what they do, which makes their blind spot all that more egregious and puzzling to me.

[rlmorel]

Thanks for starting the thread. It is something I dwell on. I have always greatly enjoyed these two graphics which are a bit of shorthand to me:

[aquila48]

“it’s not only a serious problem, but it’s one that should drive us to colonize another planet!”

That’s the part that always floors me. That a couple of degrees of temperature increases will suddenly make earth less habitable than a barren, frozen, oxygenless, waterless, lifeless planet like Mars.

[aquila48]

“on the subject of vaccination, I am not inclined to blindly accept the opinions of a Neurologist, an Internist, or a Pediatrician.”

Totally agree. Specialization has become so narrow that any advice by a specialist on a subject far removed from his expertise should be taken with a grain of salt.

[aquila48]

👍👍👍

[aquila48]

Bookmark

[x]

Probably that he was out of milk, bread, and eggs ...

[aquila48]

Bookmark

[x]

I've long been disquited by how such a smart guy could have strong, weird beliefs about global warming (i.e., it's not only a serious problem, but it's one that should drive us to colonize another planet!).

Scientists always want us to colonize other planets.

Any excuse will do.

The dying earth is a great SF scenario for any SF fan.

Plus, cosmologists think in terms of billions of years.

The sun will burn out someday, and we better start preparing for it now.

[sauropod]

.

[DesertRhino]

I know brevity is the soul of wit, but some deeper ideas need some fleshing out. That’s why books have more than one page.

[MHGinTN]

The Creator GOD has already anticipated that and made provision for it. HE will sweep away the present configuration and replace it with an eternal configuration.