Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time has sold over 9 million copies worldwide. Now, in everyday language, Stephen Hawking's Universe reveals. Professor Hawking published many books tackling the fundamental questions about the universe and our existence. Stephen also published many scientific. former post-doc of mine) remarked: I have sold more books on file:///C|/ WINDOWS/Desktop/blahh/Stephen Hawking - A brief history of time/A.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Indonesian|
|Genre:||Children & Youth|
|ePub File Size:||23.75 MB|
|PDF File Size:||15.71 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
PDF | The continuing interest in the book of S. Hawking "A Brief History of Time" makes a philosophical evaluation of the content highly desirable. As will be. George's Secret Key to the Universe (with Lucy Hawking) Published in the United States by Bantam Books, an imprint of The Random House Publishing. Check out this -: A brief history of time. caite.info caite.info The theory of everything.
The issue is that God is not dependent on this world if the hypothesis of the first cause is to have even a hope of providing meaning, it cannot be dependent on its future effects. You sure you want to try that, spineless little troll? Please don't speak with such presumed authority without scientific research to back it up. Leigh Calvez. No, life is mortal.
Recommended for you. The discrete-time physics hiding inside our continuous-time world 17 hours ago. Apr 12, Study confirms the precise nature of fractional crystallization in hard sphere mixtures Apr 12, Apr 11, User comments.
Oct 15, However if he were to say somthing like "hot dogs taste better than hamburgers to almost everyone", I would doubt his expertise on the subject. In the same way I feel he had no business talking about God's existance except as his personal belief without proof either way. BTW But at this point I feel he could say for certain, in light of his newest experience.
Report Block. Answer to the question of God's existence should be similar to one of his other answers: The great pseudoscientist has his last word, and it's worth about the same as his first. Needless to say, the incoherent babblings of an infant isn't worth much to an adult. God exists for feeble minds.
God is a life support system for the ill person. Healthy people do not need such a system. Please don't speak with such presumed authority without scientific research to back it up. Or were you just babbling on without any true evidence?
That's an awfully brazen comment to make for someone who can't even properly conjugate a verb. Oct 16, The existence of god is a perfectly testable hypothesis, depending on your definition of god. Many versions of god can summarily be ruled out by science. If your version of god favors believers over non-believers. It would be trivial to show that believers have "better luck" than non-believers. It's not, so that version can be ruled out.
In fact any god that influences the world would be "visible". All effects have natural causes, except when a god interferes and an effect would have a unnatural cause. This does not happen. Why do people think gods exist then? Easily explained by evolutionary psychology. IOW human nature. A god that created the whole of all existence, did it without leaving a single fingerprint or having any effect on it since then?
It really is irrational to believe in it's existence. But seriously, in spite of Hawking's flagrant and fearless proclamation that in his opinion God doesn't exist, he must have, at one time or another, done some heavy wishing that God would do something about Hawking's disabilities - not realising that it wasn't that God had made him that way, which He hadn't - but his own personal body chemistry had run amok and did him in, physically.
Being made of Matter comes with its own inherent problems. As they say, it's the luck of the draw. One would think that Hawking in his wheelchair, with no hope of ever recovering his former physical health, would have drawn closer to his Creator for comfort and solace as a way of easing any distress that would have come with the knowledge that his body was mortal and would return to dust.
But the theoretical scientist desired unequivocal evidence that his Soul is immortal before he could bring himself to admit that there was a chance that he was wrong. There is an old saying that: Says SEU There is no mystery to that, it makes perfect sense. Which one would you rather have?
Oops, I know There is an old saying that: It's funny to see how Hawking's view on 'local vs.
Many It really is irrational to believe in it's existence. A blind man speaks of a universe he can't see. Eschew eristic. Some younger cosmologists advance time as real and space as emergent only, admitting infinite universes, one of which must everything that can happen must happen in an infinity admit the supernatural.
God endures to be with us in our Heaven Universe that does not allow the supernatural. Sola Fide. Sola Scriptura.
Sola Gratia. Stephen Hawking - Questions in Our Time and Space As Stephen has oft pondered the existence of life and the ultimate in its finality, the existence of existence, the very being of our existence as none so more is enabled to question as Stephen, confined to eternity until god in his wisdom took it on himself to release Stephen from this earthly eternity, to free his soul to eternal life so that Stephen will once again walk through the gardens of his youth as he oft walked those exclusive parks and gardens passed by the flowing gowns of his Fellows as they cycle to those excusive Cambridgeshire College's, as he now relishes his freedom of his youth, he awaits that day a newborn babe will god in his wisdom place Stephen's subconscious to return once more to this earthly paradise a newborn babe anew As we all await our time in the carousel of life, we will meet again Stephen!
That's a contradiction in terms. Just because something is thinkable does not make it possible - even in infinite universe. Well, if there are any such fabulism to screw up reality as deities? They have proven to be singularly inept and incompetent. See my Theory of Stupid Design.
A friend of mine had written a series of mystic fantasy novels and she was stumped for some grand explanation to pull the mythology together.
As one of her beta readers, I suggested that the fantasy creatures she describes were not actually of supernatural origin. Faerie, fae, vampires, werewolves, "wee" folk, and on and on. Each has a perfectly logical explanation for natural cause. Influenced with adaptation to their environment and evolutionary pressure from predators. This of course, displays the limits of logical analysis. Trapping one into irrational apologia and unreasonable belief systems.
But, hey! Her style of writing appeals to my sense of humor. The simplest explanation, the simplest explanation.. My me, the man is either not using the scientific method as intended, or does not understand the issue at hand. As per Aristotle, metaphysics comes 'after physics', or after a-posteriori examination. None - any hypothesis on the metaphysical must always remain a hypothesis, and anyone saying otherwise is then talking about the physical which is not Parmenides' One!
Now as the Buddha said a long time ago: The issue with permanent entities is that they are not evident - all phenomena are subject to birth dependent on conditions, subsistence dependent on conditions, and ending dependent on conditions.
From the observational, scientific side - removing the notion of Eisensteinian realism from QM as Rovelli's RQM does , gets rid of the paradoxes parsimoniously. The universe is continuously expanding and evolving.
The things that are created never evolve on its own. This means universe was not created by anyone, it evolves from infinity to infinity on its own. God is thus debunked. Oct 17, That's not true. How many religious people pray for things?
How many religious people believe morals come form god? How many believe god looks after them and protects them and their family and friends? Ojorf Lots of people - my mum is insanely Orthodox these days. The issue is that God is not dependent on this world if the hypothesis of the first cause is to have even a hope of providing meaning, it cannot be dependent on its future effects.
God is independent and unchanging, and we cannot influence him. That religious ones believe in a one way dependency relationship, is logically disproved in Nagarjuna's book above. It also does not sit with QM that an observer can observe without impacting that which they observe, if RQM is not your favourite, at least the quantum Zeno effect is enough to show this! The latter is not God, the former is unobservable and independent of the physical world at least if considering RQM.
Why value RQM? Copernicus' relativity: With every turning of an absolute, independent entity, into a relational one, scientific theory became more and more explicative.
For phenomena - conventional, conditioned, reality, dependent origination is accurate. Wow, since you have all the answers please explain what dark energy and dark matter are. Plus please explain all the other things we have not yet discovered like other dimensions, other universes and things we can not even imagine yet.
What kind of modern day person believes as you do, like the inquisition, that they and you know all that has been and ever will be. Archaic humans cannot avoid their use. It's a primary indicator of why they are obsolete.
Archaic humans are already imperiled which is why they need to be replaced. They're incompatible with the world they've created. But no, improved humans wont be killing them off. They'll continue to die as they always have, from accident, disease, violence, decrepitude. Meanwhile the initiative to reduce their reproduction has already begun with the destruction of the family and with the encouragement of drug, alcohol, and tobacco use, overeating and sedentarism, and of course the ONE BILLION ABORTIONS of unwanted and inconvenient babies, and the prevention of hundreds of millions more through contraception.
The transition will continue, gradually, over many gens. Archaics will have comfortable lives so long as they dont mate. As per Aristotle, metaphysics comes 'after physics', or after a-posteriori examination Archaic brains are rife with damage and defect. This reduces their appreciation of reality and gives rise to all sorts of idiot fantasy and illusion. As improved and augmented humans begin to predominate, commentors such as this sad, chemically-impaired nutter will begin to disappear, and the physorg website will finally become the pristine, unadulterated forum for intelligent discourse that it was initially intended to be.
This reduces their appreciation of reality and gives rise to all sorts of idiot fantasy and illusion When in the vacuous vacuum that is space did that ghost in the quantum of fluctuations archaic in earthly brain did mystify fantasy of illusion as to enter time and space when in times the quantum of fluctuation finally ceased in ethereal flutter did out of time the emergent of ghost in Otto form with archaic brain rife with damage and defect, while all around are natures pristine cellular brains of perfect thought and perfection in atomic construction non can surpass, as to what is this doom laden unearthly archaic existence of what we colloquially know as dear Otto sunk to in depths of doom laden despair as Otto, life is as doom laden as the archaic brain of cellular construction wish's it to be dear Otto!
Phyllis Harmonic. Ah, that dog-eared old "god of the gaps" argument. Thanks to science, the gaps are becoming fewer all the time. While I can't argue gaps are getting fewer all the time Quickly. I will say compared to all the universe s and possible dimensions we probably only know much less than. While people on here with even less than that amount of knowledge unequivocally try to say what does or does not exist.
Those people are clowns filled with their own self importance without a hint of the true reality. Otto says Archaic brains are rife with damage and defect and then some troll says When in the vacuous vacuum that is space did that ghost in the quantum of fluctuations archaic in earthly brain did mystify fantasy of illusion as to enter time and space when in times the quantum of fluctuation finally ceased in ethereal flutter did out of time the emergent of ghost in Otto form with archaic brain rife with damage and defect, while all around are natures pristine cellular brains of perfect thought and perfection in atomic construction non can surpass, as to what is this doom laden unearthly archaic existence of what we colloquially know as dear Otto sunk to in depths of doom laden despair as Otto, life is as doom laden as the archaic brain of cellular construction wish's it to be dear Otto!
Oct 18, That is not the argument. This is because; 1 near infinite somethings fall into that category, anything the imagination can conceive of, and if you accept one based on the reasoning you must accept them all. If there was any gain there would be evidence. All the squirrels who did that are extinct. Imagine all the unfortunate soldiers who charged the enemy thinking their god was protecting them, instead of using their head and using cover to advance.
This is how religion improves the quality of the human race, by weeding out martyrs. Beware people! There are pseudo-scientists here in this physics forum. No wonder Galileo was house-arrested and "god-men" chopped off his fingers for telling the truth, when fake physicists comment in this forum to tell us that earth is years old. I salute Galileo and Copernicus for enlightening us that earth is not the center, but the Sun is.
Million thanks to Darwin and Dawkins for ruling out the God hypothesis, the root of all evil, and purely anti-scientific. Thanks to Hawking for showing us the true path. We will have to stop the government for appointing fake professors in disguise here! Definition of "Prayer" - A special request to the 'authority' to make an exception and break all the laws of nature for the personal benefit of someone's own interest. That doesn't sound fair! Also this: A prayer is a wish wrapped in dogma.
Oct 19, The Creator isn't, so they can't see Him, Truth be told. They will even tell their human hosts that Satan doesn't exist, and that it's OK to do, say and think evil because if Satan doesn't exist, there won't be any retribution after they die. So with that thought in mind, all of the evil that these humans do, say, and think are done out of the feeling that they are completely innocent of any wrongdoing - even if society says otherwise.
Satan is on the internet to learn about science and humanity to see how he may destroy both humanity AND God, so that Satan can take possession of the Universe and all that is in it. Truly ambitious, that one. And humans are his willing accomplices. Satan is on the internet to learn about science and humanity You got a URL? Humans are only able to see that which is made of Matter.
Whether she's tall, short, or of medium height? Whether she's dark, fair, or ruddy-skinned? Do you know what village or town or city she's from?
I won't go into what scientists believe as a whole, mostly science has lost philosophy over the last century even if it is half of the method - the hypothesis But - for a theist believing in permanent entities including nihilists: Placing your hopes on permanence, is placing your hopes on the unobserved, the unexperienced. This can only lead to doubt and unsatisfactoriness. Buddhism is an empirical system faith at first, practice and experience later - but like the scientific method, it only accepts directly observed 'things' as truths , and it starts with the observation of impermanence.
Observing impermanence, and consequentially placing faith in the validity of not-Self in more modern words - not Einsteinian realism , is at the very least reasonable given what one sees, hears, and senses - because all those seen, heard, felt things are comprehended as ever changing.
Fixed thinking, with truth being defined not by what is immanent, evident, and individually observable, but by what is enforced by ritual. Sadly life is the process of objectification and God is objectification's summit , and objectification's abandonment is not easy to see! They need each other to complete the hypothesis.
Since there are so many experts here I'm going to drop the bombshell I am God , just ask me anything, I'm happy to answer all questions!. When is gods birthday, idjyit. A clue; its the same as your own birthday! If you think you can, it just proves my first statement. I don't know. Does that mean your a agnostic? If so, that at least is a intelligent response to someone who believes in God.
Oct 20, Yes it does. Yes it does idjyit, need I remind you that you were not answering me when you said "I don't know. Their you go again, idjyit. Which comment did bud post?
Perhaps bud had no commit he wished to post. Or is bud just a voice in your head, idjyit? Now you are just being rude. Constrain your bleeding emotions rderkis. You say nothing really well.
You say something very very badly. Your "Faith" is Your emotional response , emotions are a powerful tool if chosen with care. If brandished as a weapon Your Faith is simply an illogical wailing of a lost soul. Why are you wailing at people on a science board who are paying you the respect of trying to interact with you? It's not like you will ever be able to tell people what to think.
The burden is on you to prove that there is a god. And don't use an argument from ignorance to shift the burden. And no, you aren't smarter than any of us regardless of your age. Belief in gods doesn't require anything other than the desire to do so.
Age has nothing to do with IQ. I am smart enough to know, I can not prove the existance of God or even try. It's a shame your not smart enough to know you can't disprove God's existance.
Can you first exactly define God in terms of mathematics and physics? At the moment, we have no idea what you are talking about when you say God. In mathematics and physics and in whole of science, there is nothing called God. Galileo, Newton, Kepler, Einstein, Darwin, and many others have already given enough solid proofs of the non-existence of such a thing! Mind that this is a physics forum, not a religious one.
Here we reject the hypotheses that don't work. Talk like a scientist, if at all you are one. Oct 21, You people are so untenable in your logic. If I said God was a alien with technology and intelligence so far above you, you could not understand him. You would not be so closed minded to the possibility. You have set your minds so tight that no amount of proof would be acceptable to you.
I see that same mindset when it comes to president Trump. Elon Musk and several other of our wisest men have done a about face on their support of President Trump because they can truly be objective. I hated President Trump but I am not blind. Then it is only an alien with wonderful technology, cleverly using the laws of nature to achieve it's ends. God is per definition 'supernatural' and able to circumvent the laws of nature. I hear god is supposed to be omnipotent.
God is per definition 'supernatural' and able to circumvent the laws of nature.. And how would you know the difference? It has been said by our wisest people that advanced technology would look like magic to us. Using Advances technology death will be optional. And our greatest scientists now say time travel in both directions is probably possible with enough energy. In other words we would not know the difference between a super advanced civilization and God. Yet you can believe one is possible and not the other based on only semantics.
Da Schneib. Some younger cosmologists advance time as real and space as emergent only Never seen this. Got some links to credible references, or only blowing hard?
Take cause and effect. A miracle is an effect without a cause. Now matter how advanced technology gets it can't break that. What about instant FTL communications or travel? Isn't god supposed to know what's happening everywhere, all the time even faster than instantly, isn't he supposed to know everything that has happened and will still happen everywhere for all eternity?
Not only that, god can apparently be multiple places, or even everywhere at the same time, manipulating events. I bet aliens can't do that.
I'm not sure about aliens, maybe you can help. Care to direct us to a few of "our greatest scientists" saying that time travel into the past is possible? Do you have any links? That is for an at least a feasible way of time travel, without using infinitely heavy or infinitely long objects or masses. Santa Claus exists for kids of certain age. If kids believe it all their life, they will miss the opportunity to see the real beautiful world. They were born kid, and will die kid.
In other words, born asleep, and will die asleep. Santa is like a crutch that does help kids. In a room full of people fast asleep, only the awakened one can wake them up. A blind man's worldview is radically different from the man with both eyes. A bird that cannot break the eggshell will probably never fly thus missing the entire amazing life of flying.
We think we know that some things can be at more than one place at the same time. We think we know that instant communication is possible using quantum entanglement, As far as knowing what is going to happen, time travel takes care of that. All those things I am not speculating on. And I mean nothing. Kind of like quantum tunneling but different. Ojorf, this is another version of "if Gawd is omnipotent, can it make a rock so big it can't lift it?
If you wanna do politics instead of science feel free but everyone can smell it. Maybe I'll get some more 1s to make your smell nastier. May I mock you another time? I don't think Da Schneib is very smart. I told him I have ignore set for his comments because he is a troll. But everytime I post he follows up with some kind of comment I can't read and don't read.
Since he keeps repeating the same useless behavior he falls under the insane category or is just plane dumb. Yes he mutha-fuckin' can!! It's a shitty argument, but it depends on the question - can God disavow his own divinity? If 'no', then he is not omnipotent, if 'yes', he can create a rock he cannot move - but at the expense of his own divinity.
But then, again - he is not permanent and independent.. And I am tooo drunk to give a shit to think further down this silly path! Oct 22, He has no obligation to prove anything that has to do with his beliefs.
For rderkis to insist on that belief in a chatroom with this calibre of proponents for the nonexistence of God, is really a big waste of time and intellectual energy. Both rderkis and I have already established the fact that the Creator God exists, whether in here, or only amongst ourselves, so that being charged with the burden of proof is really irrelevant.
As one chooses to reject, another chooses to believe. And that is the important thing - to make the choice. Fibonacci numbers sequences are also found in Nature 2.
Evolution 4. Laws of Thermodynamics. OK, so then it can't lift the rock. So much for omnipotence. We done here? It's so amusing to watch the thumpers of the Babble about the super magic sky daddy by the drunken stone age sheep herders do a faceplant. God DOES exist! The fact that people ignore the proof, doesnt invalidate it. Perhaps even harder to swallow is that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom And yes you can prove a negative.
You can prove that something which claims to be perfect, is not perfect. And so you can conclude that that thing doesnt exist in it's perfect form. There may very well be some lying, cheating, book-writing god who promises to make you immortal, grant all your wishes, absolve you of your guilt, and punish your enemies with eternal torture. But what makes you think you can believe THAT rubbish when it all comes from a book about people who never existed and events which never happened?
You really THAT desperate for miracles?? For God to be omnipotent, it must have the choice to lose its omnipotence. But then God can suffer change - so would have to be conventional and physical, if satisfying logic. My favourite one is still that God is an Absolute, but its creation - as far as science seems to be pointing - is relational, and empty when thought experimentally 'summed' up into one whole. So, God the creater, has created no thing. It's not God's omnipotence, but its total lack of any visible potency that most stands out from observing the world!
A core of the scientifc method is the null hypothesis, which is always stated in the negative. Join Reader Rewards and earn points when you purchase this book from your favorite retailer. Read An Excerpt. Hardcover —. Buy the Audiobook Download: Apple Audible downpour eMusic audiobooks. Also by Stephen Hawking. See all books by Stephen Hawking. About Stephen Hawking Stephen Hawking was the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge for thirty years and the recipient of numerous awards and honors including the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Product Details. Inspired by Your Browsing History. Atlas of a Lost World. Craig Childs. No Immediate Danger. William T. The Performance Cortex. Zach Schonbrun. Marianne Taylor. How to Do Nothing. Jenny Odell. Jurassic World Adult Coloring Book. NBC Universal.
The Last Elephants. The Future of Humanity. As Long as Grass Grows.
Dina Gilio-Whitaker. Our Planet. The Ecology Book. Rodale Sustainability. Lisa Butterworth. Arctic Dreams. The Big Ones. The Sakura Obsession. Day Hike! North Cascades, 4th Edition. Mike McQuaide. Central Cascades, 4th Edition. Mount Rainier, 4th Edition. Olympic Peninsula, 4th Edition. Seabury Blair Jr. The Plant Messiah.
Carlos Magdalena. Howard Schneider and Andrew Fazekas. Surviving Global Warming. Roger A. The Invisible Killer. Gary Fuller. Anna Badkhen. I Love Birds! Jennifer Ward. The Skillful Forager.