Words, stories, books, have been my passion since I was five years old. I know this post is way, way too long, but my family has been ripped to shreds by its own religion. I look at the state America is in and every. Because why should any of this mean something? Jupiter keeps spinning the the asteroids spin in their orbits. The A. By Tom McKay. Science Physics. However, Hawking's atheist beliefs are nothing new.
He first revealed them in after publishing the book "The Grand Design" with co-author Leonard Mlodinow. More: Heaven 'is a fairy story': This is what Stephen Hawking says happens when people die. In an interview published in May by The Guardian, Hawking compared the brain to a computer, noting it stops working once all the components fail.
No one directs the universe," he writes in "Brief Answers to the Big Questions. Read More. Hawking suffered from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ALS , a neurodegenerative disorder also known as Lou Gehrig's Disease, for most of his adult life. The scientist died while still working on the book, which his family and colleagues finished with the help of his vast personal archives. While Hawking spoke of his lack of belief in God during his life, several of his other answers are more surprising.
And he leaves open the possibility of other phenomena. He also predicts that "within the next hundred years we will be able to travel to anywhere in the Solar System. I have found that there are certain facts, ironocally that exists within science that leads to the very existence of a God and it all starts with gravity, the first law of thermodynamics, a expanded version of Newton's first law and the very existence of our own conscious awareness, which in fact shows ultimately what had to have been before the Big Bang and what actually brought it about.
Thedecadentone: Scientists change their mind, so to speak, all the time. The whole scientific method is to use new evidence to get closer to the truth. I don't know if Hawking made the statements you attribute to him--perhaps I missed that when I did my research on Hawking--but, if he did, it is because he came across new evidence. This would show that Hawking had an open mind.
An open mind is a very good quality in a scientist. Perhaps the multiple-universe that Hawking posits is infinite, but our own universe has a definite age, whether it is 13 billion years, or 15 billion years, or some other number. You were quite snarky in your comment so let me respond in kind. Stephen Hawking was widely considered to be a genius. Has anyone ever called you a genius and not said it sarcasticly. Too bad all of these atheist scientists keep taking their crystal balls and time machines with them to the grave.
Maybe one of you fine living specimens will be so kind as to help this poor deluded moron understand existence the way you do? Please forgive my attitude, but I tend to get a little antsy when I run into atheists being smug and all knowing without the evidence to substantiate it.
All that intellect and it's wasted trying to prove a negative, which is impossible. Hawking couldn't make up his mind whether the universe was Science keeps changing, but God is supposed to be unchanging, so one won't be able to use science to even try proving the non-existence of God for a very, very, very long time, if ever.
I could go on a tangent about the scientific theories which have been altered in recent years, but I digress. Jojo john: It is hard to make a break with family. I wouldn't worry about the baptism. If you know that the Catholic religion is false, then obviously the baptism is false too.
I really appreciate your patience Catherine. I born and raised in a catholic family in India. Without knowing about Christianity I became christian by infant baptism. I would say i was forcefully became christian because my parents were.
Till now I didn't understand one thing Jesus Christ got baptised at the age of 32 then why catholic do infant baptism? I do agree with Hawkins. I saw many comments stating that there is God. My answer is prove it. My family and christian church think that I am devil worshipper. So funny. I don't believe God means I am Devil haha Ric Harris: I can't print your comment because of the "curse" words you used and your generally hateful language and tone, but I did want to address a very important misunderstanding about science vis a vis religion exemplified in your comment.
Science has not, and never will, disprove the existence of God. What science does is offer more valid alternative explanations for the universe--explanations that have a much higher probability of being correct because they explain all of the known facts better. Qadosh Gibbowr: First congrats on the "gotcha". You are correct that "most unique" is gramatically incorrect, but most people understand that "most" in this phrase is being used as an intensifier.
Second Hawking does an excellent job of explaining how there can be a grand design without a designer. I summarized his reasoning in this article. For more information, I refer you to his book, "The Grand Design. If you are trying to say that the "proof" for the existence of God is stronger than the proof found in science then you are the one demonstrating "undisciplined thinking. Before committing much time to essentially cleaning up after this elephant parade of an article, I want to see if there is any intellectual honesty on the other end the author to ensure that it will be worthwhile to myself and other readers.
Since we are confined to the internet for this discussion, I think we can agree that words chosen to communicate ideas, especially complex ideas, are of the utmost importance. Let's start with two easy examples. Firstly, you state in your opening paragraph that Hawking had "one of the most unique minds Either something is unique or it is not. We all have unique minds. Secondly, you quote Hawking as stating quite accurately that there is an obvious grand design to the universe.
Please explain if you believe it possible to have a design without a designer. Do not change the definition of design as I am familiar with the linguistic contortions others attempt. We already have plenty of examples of storytellers in lab coats that do just that to sway the gullible public and secure funding. This is a test of pride and intellectual honesty. I think we will find that his choice of words was just as careless as your own. Now this may put you off a bit, but if you can get through this, we can move to the more interesting and challenging notions behind theoretical physics and how Hawking, out of necessity, had to abandon the scientific method to advance his models many aspects do not even qualify as "theories".
This is not to say there is no value to be found here, but we are going to lose another generation to flawed and undisciplined thinking if we allow hyperbole, assumption and good storytelling to replace the solid application of the scientific method.
Brad Brown: If your concept of God is that He lives outside the laws of physics, maybe he doesn't need time to exist. When you invent a superhero, you can give him any super powers you want. For more detail, you should consult an actual theoretical physicist who may be able to explain to you how the universe works. Alan Borrow: You are restating Pascal's wager. It is a totally illogical proposition in so many ways. There was no time before the big bang, as the bang creates time as we know it It is still a non sequitur that there is no God.
What evidence did Hawking have that God needs what we perceive as time in order to exist? But if it is true, then I should prepare before I die because if I don't believe right now, and God is actually a true entity, when I want to start believing it, it is too late. Thanks for your feedback on your last question, and have a nice day. Alan Borrow; It sounds like you do not understand the Big Bang theory at all.
It has nothing to do with the collision of rocks. Please read a good book about astrophysics written for layman. And I agree with you. There can never be any conclusive proof about the existence of God. Therefore I go with the probabilities.
My research leads me to agree with Hawking: God does not exist. There is no need for any supernatural entity to set the universe in motion. There is a very high probability that God does not exist based on the evidence that is available to us. Akoch I just read a quote from Steohen Hawking. The Genesis story has no basis in fact. Hawking said somethng like "It is fairy tales for people who are afraid of the dark.
If time didn't exist before the big bang, then that means there is no way the big bang could have happened scientifically. Nobody will know if God really exists because we have never met him in real life before, until our lives end, and only after we die we can know the truth.
If you haven't experienced a miracle from God, and only heard from other people, there is only 2 choices, believe, or not believe. I am personally a Christian, I am not the smartest of all, but if there is a statement that counters the fact that God does not exist, there will be a answer to it, because Hawking only had Intelligence, and only science facts, but not wisdom so that made him say that God did not exist. I honestly think the universe can't just come together randomly like that.
I believe that God created Everything, but where do they think we come from? If a science wanted to learn more about the world and universe, I suggest reading the Bible. The first pages tells about how to world was created. Hunter Davidson: Please reread the article.
I give a summary of Stephen Hawking's reasoning in the article. You could also browse through some of my other articles on this website for further information on this.
Duffin Dave: Your comment is thoughtful and clearly presents your point of view. My reply: Stephen Hawking could be wrong about astrophysics and about his views on God, but at least he presents evidence to support his conclusions.
Your argument for "spirit" seems to boil down to "It's true because I believe it is true. I appreciate this intellectually stimulating article, the many comments, and the author's thoughtful and respectful replies.
It is refreshing to observe a civil conversation regarding a highly provocative topic. That is a rare find, especially on the internet. Having said that, personally, I believe in God, and I am confident in my own intellectual ability to make that determination. Stephen Hawking was an incredible human being, and gifted intellectually. Only a fool would argue otherwise.
I simply disagree with his interpretation of scientific data, and the suggestion that we are somehow on the verge of knowing everything there is to know about everything.
While the scientific method has revealed immense understanding, it is still in its infancy in infinite areas of study. We have only scratched the surface of limitless knowledge to be gained through science. And, I believe, science will never lead to an understanding of everything until it's practitioners are willing to consider every possibility, including serious experimentation on the existence of God.
My belief is that the planet earth, everything living on it, every similar planet in the universe with life, and everything in the universe including God, all existed spiritually before they existed physically, and the spirit continues to exist forever. And I also believe that the spiritual universe, including God, can only be discerned and understood with spiritual senses.
As far as I know, the scientific community has no theories or even interest in the existence of spirit matter, spirituality, or even the nature of God.
Perhaps that is because they claim no experience with spirit matter to justify the time, energy, and resources required to investigate. But I find that to be ironic when I consider the wealth of study around so many phenomena that we cannot see, feel, hear, smell, or taste Is it really so difficult to imagine that just because we don't have the technology right now to observe and measure it, spirit matter could be a reality? Are we so advanced that we have to deny the possibility of anything that cannot currently be observed by science?
Until the great thinkers like Stephen Hawking open their minds and honestly experiment with spirituality, God, and divine design, they cannot hope to understand it, let alone offer intelligent hypotheses, theories, or data to be supported, believed or disbelieved.
Michael Hoornstra: I don't know why the "probably" is in his statement. Maybe he was just being polite. Was Hawkins really sure there is no God or was he not so convinced himself when he said; "This leads me to a profound realization that there probably is no heaven and no afterlife either.
Hawkins was not so sure after all he said it in the comment above. I notice Hawkings indicates in his book that the laws of gravity can and will create everything out of Nothing [Nothing being quantum fluctuations in a vacuum]. The explanation leads me quite void since I am quite sure gravity is not Nothing and I am left with questions about the existence of gravity apart from the void. Care to explain? Critical Friend: I think Hawking supported his claim about God. I think many others have also done so and will continue to do so.
You said that Hawking's claims about the existence of God are much supported. I said that Hawking never provided support for the claim that "God isn't real. I would like the claim "God isn't real" to be supported, but unfortunately, Stephen Hawking passed. In my judgement, your issues were already addressed either in the article itself or in my replies to others who made similar comments.
I'll take this opportunity to remind people that comments should not be repetitive. No one wants to read 50 comments all saying the same thing. I am convinced that an NDE occurs in a living brain. Also, for every person who has an "almost died" occurrence and experiences visions, there are thousands who almost die and have nothing to report. Just imagine where a computer might be after millions of years. Computer are already "designing" themselves.
They can "learn. Stephen Hawking said "The Universe created itself". So that means the Universe created everything, including us. That's the definition of God. As for an afterlife, there are many who have had near death experiences.
So many that they cannot just be dismissed as the brain producing the experience. Look up Dr. Jeffery Long on NDE and make up your own mind. He has done more credible research on the topic than most. Is a leaf a more perfect design than the most complex computer or machine? Yes by a million miles it is. We cant duplicate photosynthesis. A single living cell is like a city, but perfect in operation and able to repair and replicate.
Hayden: I can never understand why some people have so much trouble just accepting that we are here because we are here. There is a Grand Design--the design is inherent in the laws of the universe, no creator god needed.
All gods and god are the creation of man's small mind trying to find security in an unsecured world where anything happens. Thanks, Don. You might change your mind about my patience if you saw that I am not allowing about two-thirds of the comments because they are over-the-top insulting, puerile, ungrammatical, and just plain boring.
Plus, they are repetitive, adding nothing new to the conversation. Krissy: YOu can define God however you want. And yes, science has a lot to say about love.
For one thing, it is based on hormones, but there are other scientific facts about love. I think the concept of God and religion is unique and personal to those of us that have faith. I think his statements are made about some traditional aspects of religion.
What if you believe that God is unconditional love? How can Stephen Hawking ever prove, with factual evidence, the fierce unconditional love that I have for my family? Would one say then that love does not exist?
Just like atheist question the existence of god and religion, science must also be questioned as to being the answer to everything. There are some aspects about life that can never be explained. The inner depths of ourselves are unique and personal and individual.
0コメント