Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
somekat

Stephen Hawking says God did not create the universe

Recommended Posts

capt.photo_1283428122991-1-0.jpg?x=400&y=276&q=85&sig=hLDAfmhhmJhMehwkS4RQtg--

 

LONDON (Reuters) – God did not create the universe and the "Big Bang" was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics, the eminent British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a new book.

 

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.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100902/lf_nm_life/us_britain_hawking

 

 

DISCUSS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people believe in god so that once their life is done on earth they have somewhere else to go

 

shit is wackkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i came across this today. When you said God is in your head are you talking about the region in your brain responsible for spirituality/religion, or that people just want to believe in a God? Its a shame Hawking is almost completely parylized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this should piss off a lot of people that use bible quotes as their proof of gods existence.

why do you believe in god? "because in the book of james it says 'i am the light and the way and whoever follow me shall yadda yadda yadda"

OH YEAH???? I SAW ANOTHER BOOK THAT SAYS RUNNING DOWN THE STREET AND STABBING PEOPLE WITH SCISSORS WHILE SINGING WHITNEY HOUSTON IS GONNA GET ME INTO HEAVEN. BUT I NEVER MET THE GUY THAT WROTE IT. BUT IM GONNA BELIEVE IT AND ARGUE ABOUT IT EVEN THOUGH IT DOESNT MAKE ANY SENSE.

ok im done with that.

stephen hawking says he doesnt like science fiction.

carl sagan likes science fiction.

carl sagan > stephen hawking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this should piss off a lot of people that use bible quotes as their proof of gods existence.

why do you believe in god? "because in the book of james it says 'i am the light and the way and whoever follow me shall yadda yadda yadda"

OH YEAH???? I SAW ANOTHER BOOK THAT SAYS RUNNING DOWN THE STREET AND STABBING PEOPLE WITH SCISSORS WHILE SINGING WHITNEY HOUSTON IS GONNA GET ME INTO HEAVEN. BUT I NEVER MET THE GUY THAT WROTE IT. BUT IM GONNA BELIEVE IT AND ARGUE ABOUT IT EVEN THOUGH IT DOESNT MAKE ANY SENSE.

ok im done with that.

stephen hawking says he doesnt like science fiction.

carl sagan likes science fiction.

carl sagan > stephen hawking

 

 

That makes absolutely no sense.

 

Are you the type of idiot who yells at Christians and then defends Muslims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no i dont like either group.

they are both always right and they know they are right because the bible/koran/whatever says so.

 

 

So, it's obvious you know very little about either and yet you condemn them?

 

 

When you put people into groups, be it religious or whatever, they always feel

superior. The larger the group, the more the people are inclined to feel superior

to those who are not in the group.

 

Not all religious people feel this superiority, but it does come out at times. My point

being that you cannot lump religious people in together because not all feel the same.

 

Edit: Something else you might want to think about, in fact, all of you might want to think

about it. If you condemn anyone for being religious, grow the fuck up. What is wrong with

you? Seriously. People have a right to believe whatever they want to believe as long as they

don't infringe on any of your rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I barely post in here though i tend to read some, i hate mixing politics with lulz.

but why does this question even need to be answered? What is it going to change?

Most if not all people who believe in a god would not be reading steven hawking or even know who he is. i dont believe in a god or boogie men or anything, but i dont throw it at people and i cant prove it. its like telling guidos tanning is bad for your skin, or steroids are harmful.

why the contempt steve?

i feel like he might as well have a bible in his hand yelling "God did create the universe"

same principal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the man, and respect him a ton. Especially for writing a book

that I could not finish. It gave me a brain ache. I just don't know why

a man so gifted would want to even say that to press.

 

I read some statistics once that said 80% of scientists don't believe in

a higher power. I guess it's not surprising, what with the "I won't believe

it unless I can prove it" mindset most science types have. Which is as

annoying in its own special way because they have that holier than thou

attitude much too often.

 

People are funny.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I barely post in here though i tend to read some, i hate mixing politics with lulz.

but why does this question even need to be answered? What is it going to change?

Most if not all people who believe in a god would not be reading steven hawking or even know who he is. i dont believe in a god or boogie men or anything, but i dont throw it at people and i cant prove it. its like telling guidos tanning is bad for your skin, or steroids are harmful.

why the contempt steve?

i feel like he might as well have a bible in his hand yelling "God did create the universe"

same principal

 

I repeat, he did not say that God did not create the universe. He said that God is not necessary to bring the universe into existence, a point that could be proven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read this entire book even though I'm no physicist and it was mad boring.

The main thing I learned from it was a vague controversial statement will create headlines and sell more books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, it's obvious you know very little about either and yet you condemn them?

 

 

When you put people into groups, be it religious or whatever, they always feel

superior. The larger the group, the more the people are inclined to feel superior

to those who are not in the group.

 

Not all religious people feel this superiority, but it does come out at times. My point

being that you cannot lump religious people in together because not all feel the same.

 

Edit: Something else you might want to think about, in fact, all of you might want to think

about it. If you condemn anyone for being religious, grow the fuck up. What is wrong with

you? Seriously. People have a right to believe whatever they want to believe as long as they

don't infringe on any of your rights.

 

i think i know more about them than you think i know. but i also don't feel like arguing any more on the internet about this. its nice outside. goodbye lord casek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So prove it.

 

 

Lack of proof does not mean that it can't and won't be proven, and lack of proof is certainly not evidence for the existence of God. :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The general consensus among almost all astronomers is that the universe is expanding from a single point of origin.

From what I can remember it's the wavelengths of light measured from every known object in space that reveals their movement in a universal expansion.

Other than this clear sign of general expansion there is actually no proof everything came from an atom sized piece of matter that suddenly "banged".

It's all still a theory.

 

That said I'll restate my earlier point, he cleverly worded "god was not needed to create the big bang" in a way that would grab headlines.

There isn't any new research data revealed in his new book to support a scientific or spiritual theory at all.

Bottom line, Steven Hawkins want's to sell books and most likely had a good publicist suggest this controversial statement.

Not hating though because I actually enjoy the conversations this statement creates.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ginger Bread Man
I believe what he says...

Also here is a good article that supports his reason

 

The Big Bang Is Just Religion Disguised As Science

 

 

 

I actual read the entire article and wow it is flawed.

 

I'm gonna neg you for wasting my time.

Bullshit in point not limited to this statement.

 

But here is the problem. We are seeing that object 13 billion light-years distant not as it is today and where it is today but as it was and where it was, 13 billion years ago, 13 billion light-years distant from earth.

In other words, for this galaxy to lie 13 billion light-years away from Earth only 750 million years after the Big Bang, it would have had to travel 13 billion light years in just 750 million years’ time. That requires the galaxy in question to travel more than 17 times faster than the speed of light, a speed limit which according to the Big Bang supporters was in effect from the moment the universe was 3 seconds old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actual read the entire article and wow it is flawed.

 

I'm gonna neg you for wasting my time.

Bullshit in point not limited to this statement.

 

But here is the problem. We are seeing that object 13 billion light-years distant not as it is today and where it is today but as it was and where it was, 13 billion years ago, 13 billion light-years distant from earth.

In other words, for this galaxy to lie 13 billion light-years away from Earth only 750 million years after the Big Bang, it would have had to travel 13 billion light years in just 750 million years’ time. That requires the galaxy in question to travel more than 17 times faster than the speed of light, a speed limit which according to the Big Bang supporters was in effect from the moment the universe was 3 seconds old.

 

uggh... that's bad. He needs to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read some statistics once that said 80% of scientists don't believe in

a higher power. I guess it's not surprising, what with the "I won't believe

it unless I can prove it" mindset most science types have. Which is as

annoying in its own special way because they have that holier than thou

attitude much too often.

 

The "I won't believe it unless I can prove it" mindset you're talking about is not holier than thou, it's the scientific method, and it's what scientists do. It's what makes scientists different from alchemists and magicians, and it's also the reason we have modern medicine, chemistry, and technology. It's not elitist or condescending for scientists (or anyone else) to apply the same standards of empirical evidence to the hyphothesis that God exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religions were useful back in the day for keeping people in check and making them upstanding citizens.

 

I don't believe in it whatsoever but if a dude feels like giving up his time to help the needy all the more power to him.

 

I can't prove god doesn't exist but the big bang theory seems a shit tonne more logical than "god did it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The general consensus among almost all astronomers is that the universe is expanding from a single point of origin.

From what I can remember it's the wavelengths of light measured from every known object in space that reveals their movement in a universal expansion.

Other than this clear sign of general expansion there is actually no proof everything came from an atom sized piece of matter that suddenly "banged".

It's all still a theory.

 

That said I'll restate my earlier point, he cleverly worded "god was not needed to create the big bang" in a way that would grab headlines.

There isn't any new research data revealed in his new book to support a scientific or spiritual theory at all.

Bottom line, Steven Hawkins want's to sell books and most likely had a good publicist suggest this controversial statement.

Not hating though because I actually enjoy the conversations this statement creates.

 

 

some further evidence for the big bang or something like it is cosmic microwave background radiation, or the higgs field (sometimes called higgs ocean). from what we can tell it is the same everywhere. some of it accounts for the static on a tv (if you were still using bunny ears). astronomers/astrophysicists believe it is leftover from an enormous explosion, and its existence everywhere (evenly spread out too) supports that belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×