Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Hawking says that God is not needed

Expand Messages
  • Randy C
    Randy C: Well-known scientist Stephen Hawking is publishing a new book in the near future. He says in the book that there is no need for a God in the
    Message 1 of 1816 , Sep 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Randy C:
      Well-known scientist Stephen Hawking is publishing a new
      book in the near future. He says in the book that there
      is no need for a God in the universe.

      Here is a summary from
      http://richarddawkins.net/articles/509536-hawking-god-did-not-create-universe :

      "Modern physics leaves no place for God in the creation
      of the Universe, Stephen Hawking has concluded. Just as
      Darwinism removed the need for a creator in the sphere
      of biology, Britain's most eminent scientist argues that
      a new series of theories have rendered redundant the role
      of a creator for the Universe. In his forthcoming book,
      an extract from which is published exclusively in Eureka,
      published today with The Times, Professor Hawking sets
      out to answer the question: 'Did the Universe need a c
      reator?' The answer he gives is a resounding 'no'. Far
      from being a once-in-a-million event that could only be
      accounted for by extraordinary serendipity or a divine
      hand, the Big Bang was an inevitable consequence of the
      laws of physics, Hawking says. 'Because there is a law
      such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself
      from nothing.'"
    • newsentry
      ... Can you provide a reference for this to help me understand its implications? ... Yes - I should have said at the instant of the BB.
      Message 1816 of 1816 , Sep 4, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In creationism@yahoogroups.com, Dave Oldridge <doldridg@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > On 28/08/2011 3:37 PM, newsentry wrote:
        > > Dave,
        > >
        > > You sound like someone I can ask a question of:
        > >
        > > It seems to me that prior to the big bang it could be hypothesised (Paul Dirac original equation) that there was a sea of negative electron/positron energy and a positive sea of electron/positron energy. Could it be possible that due to probability and a negative well of energy formed and the positive sea of energy instantly tried to fill it.
        >
        > Uh, in pure GR, there is no 'prior to the big bang.' That is to say,
        > there is no defined time before t=0. Of course there may be some
        > entropic connection to a prior state, but that would entail some
        > exception to GR.
        > > That would cause an infinite amount of momentum energy at the point of the disturbance. Once the well is filled there is no "place" (for lack of a better word)to go this infinite electromagnetic momentum energy heated up at the point of the disurbance (singularity)and became our universe. I am not a phycisist so this just might be the craziest idea you have ever come across. But... Would it explain a singularity having infinite energy. The infinite energy would be the electromagnetic mommentum energy of empty space. The probability of this occuring would be next to nil but in a timeless virtual energy universe it might be possible???
        > >
        >
        > Actually, it might simply be that the amplitude of the shortest possible
        > wavelength of quantum fluctuation is cosmic!

        Can you provide a reference for this to help me understand its implications?
        >
        > While pure GR implies a singularity, that is probably wrong. However,
        > "before the big bang" in GR is about as meaningful as "north of the
        > north pole."

        Yes - I should have said 'at the instant' of the BB.
        >
        > --
        > Dave Oldridge
        > Skype: daveoldridge
        > Ham Radio: VA7CZ
        >
        > ----------
        >
        > Scanned with AntiVir MailGuard v10.0.1.42 AVE 8.2.6.54 VDF 7.11.14.92
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.