BTW, you don't need God to create a Universe - Stephen Hawking

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by Drifterwood, Sep 3, 2010.

  1. Drifterwood

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    15,724
    Likes Received:
    386
    Location:
    Fingringhoe (GB)
  2. Calboner

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,026
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    Well, duh! But people are impressed to hear it come from the world's most famous living physicist.

    Father Dougal: It was like when you did that impression of Stephen Hawking.

    Father Ted: He was the last person you'd expect to turn up.​
     
  3. D_Tim McGnaw

    D_Tim McGnaw Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    7,317
    Likes Received:
    8
    God is dead, long live M-theory!
     
  4. Hoss

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    12,050
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Eastern town
    He's entitled to his opinion, even if it may be wrong. Who knows maybe his little keyboard has malfunctioned.

    Regarding those who will and will not read the book, who will be damning him (sounds peculiarly exciting, the being damned I mean, not the book), there will be equal numbers jumping up and down high-5ing each other with this news. His beliefs are his and unless he can provide real proof, I'll pay the little attention whore no attention.
     
  5. Joll

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    14,509
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    722
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wales (GB)
    I dunno - it seems interesting and he may be right, or not. Might be a good read (altho prolly incomprehensible), but I think I'll take a look at Tony Blair's autobiography first. :p

    I think his (Hawking's) comments - and the ripostes it's already provoked, show that science and religion aren't really directly comparable - their proponents are arguing about slightly different things. Looking at how things may have occurred doesn't always shed light on why they happened, or whether there's a purpose to it or not (which I'm undecided about).
     
  6. D_Tim McGnaw

    D_Tim McGnaw Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    7,317
    Likes Received:
    8

    Right because Hawkings is the only scientist proposing this theory. :rolleyes: Ignore him and all the other scientists who have done the research in to this if you want to though. I'm not saying they have to believed without question, just that ignoring this theory isn't the brightest thing in the world to do IMO.
     
  7. Hoss

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    12,050
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Eastern town
    Credit or don't credit God* or whatever you want, even if God* supposedly didn't create the universe as it is now, there was something which created the elements which eventually created the universe, therefore God* semicreated the universe. Argue all you want about laws of physics and the inevitable yet know that there was something(s) out there which made the particles/elements needed for a Big Bang to happen.

    In other words, if you or me, lets go a metal ball on a chain, hooked to a pole and it hits a glass sphere, the glass shatters. Technically, the metal ball created the shatter, not me or you.


    *the use of the word or name God does not indicate a belief that there is only 1 thing out there, there may be thousands.
     
    #7 Hoss, Sep 3, 2010
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2010
  8. luka82

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    somewhere
    Hawking is stalking me!!!! I just saw an episode of Star Trek TNG where he had a small part;):):) playing himself of course:)
    I believe it can be an interesting read...we shall see:)
     
  9. D_Tim McGnaw

    D_Tim McGnaw Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    7,317
    Likes Received:
    8


    Logical fallacies. Unfounded assertions. I wont indulge you by refuting them, I'll just recommend you take the time to properly investigate M-Theory.
     
  10. Hoss

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    12,050
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Eastern town
    A fallacy cannot be logical due to its very nature.

    We approach from different sides, sir, and there's nothing wrong with that, yet I will respect your right to your opinions and ask only that you do the same for me.

    For your own information, I've read more than enough on M-theory and its cohort String theory to know that while they have valid elements, that does not take away from there having been something prior to the topics which they seek to address. You see, not all college bailouts, who ended up working Sanitation are as dim as you'd make us out to be (I scored an 800 (perfect) on the math part of my SATs way back when).

    Considering that M is only a baby in the sequence of scientific theories, why grace it with so much power? In another 15-20 years, it may be nullified.

    Of course you won't 'indulge...by refuting' because you cannot!
     
  11. Mem

    Mem
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    FL
    A God can't create a Universe because there already has to be a Universe for him to exist.

    He should have written a book called: Water is Wet.
     
  12. D_Tim McGnaw

    D_Tim McGnaw Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    7,317
    Likes Received:
    8


    You've never heard of a logical fallacy? Fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    :rolleyes:
     
  13. helgaleena

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    5,663
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Wisconsin USA
    The chicken or the egg, the universe or the God(s)... we are, and there is a universe, and we believe there are gods or we believe there are not. Creation presupposes linear time, which is also iffy IMO...
     
  14. Calboner

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,026
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    :lol:
    That's like saying "There's no such thing as a factual error: if it's factual, it can't be an error!"
    Mmm . . . chicken!
     
  15. molotovmuffin

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    7,485
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Female
    ^ Hawking and his theories... proves we're a cosmic joke.
     
  16. perthjames

    perthjames Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sydney (NSW, AU)
    No matter if it's based on "science" it's still a "belief system". It might seem logical and "based on scientific evidence" (whatever that means), but a "belief" in "non belief" remains a "belief". There's a great quote about "believing is seeing" not "seeing is believing". Theories remain an issue of belief, not truth.
     
  17. Incocknito

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,567
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    La monde
    Science is based on evidence and proven, provable or at least plausible theories; those theories being based on scientific evidence and data themselves.

    So no, a belief in science is not the same as (blind) religious faith. A scientist has some evidence to support his view.

    The faithful have only their faith. Which is fine if you don't question it and ignore the evidence all around you. Although how anyone can believe (truly believe) in a 'God' when there have been millions of gods throughout history is a bit puzzling.

    Religion is a broken record that has been bootlegged and traded around the world for hundreds of thousands of years. Every religion is just a fairytale.

    If you think your religion isn't a fairytale then please explain why. No one can give me one unique reason that sets their religion/god above all others in history.

    Whatever reason you give will be replicated elsewhere in history. It's all been done before when it comes to religion and creation 'stories'.

    At least Hawking's theory is new and exciting. And it doesn't require you to have 'faith' in a fairytale.
     
  18. Calboner

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,026
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    Incocknito has already given a pretty thorough answer; I wish only to make a couple of observations from a different angle.

    First of all, science is not a belief system. It is primarily a mode of inquiry, and only in a derivative sense does the term "science" apply to the results of such inquiry. These results may be objects of belief or disbelief. But they are not science itself; they are merely the results--at a given moment in history--of the practice of science.

    Second, it is of no relevance to the practice of science whether you or I or anyone else "believes"--that is, accepts--some scientific finding. What makes it a finding is the fact that it has satisfied a process of evaluation and testing, not the fact that some scientists believe it. In fact, the relation is exactly the opposite: the scientists believe it, or rather accept it, because it has been established by scientific procedures.

    The doctrines of a religion, by contrast, can only be explained as beliefs: the personal relation of the individual to the doctrine is not an incidental matter, as in science, but is absolutely essential.

    Of course, people who are without scientific expertise may say, and often do say, that they believe or disbelieve this or that scientific finding (e.g., evangelical Christians who reject evolutionary biology). But they are not doing science: they are merely opining about science. Their beliefs about science are no more a part of science than the calculations that I make are a part of mathematics.
     
    #18 Calboner, Sep 3, 2010
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2010
  19. bigbull29

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    5,723
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,378
    Gender:
    Male
    Scientists can explain the origin of the universe as it were a fact, but yet they can't even cure late stage cancers, or get me live to forever.

    Here I am, in front of a computer, zillions of years later after the universe was created. It was just all an accident.:eek:

    To say that something come from nothing is absurd, if not more absurd, than saying that god always was, is and will be.

    I'm convinced of Stephen Hawking's idea about as much as I am by most religious folk.

    Atheists, you're more convincing than religious folks. I think you're all quacked in the head.:biggrin1:
     
  20. D_Tim McGnaw

    D_Tim McGnaw Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    7,317
    Likes Received:
    8
    That's the point really, M-theory explains that in fact something (the Universe) do not come from nothing.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted