http://news.yahoo....us_britain_hawking

God did not create the universe, says Hawking

By Michael Holden Michael Holden – Thu Sep 2, 9:08 am ET

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.

(Editing by Steve Addison)

Something from nothing just sounds crazy to me. I mean, how can nothing logically just turn into something?

Idk, Im not a scientist. Maybe it does make sense.

I was talking this over with my boyfriend now and I think I disproved his theory. Or at the very least came up with a new one. So basically people believe that whatever godform is more or less the ultimate creator, right? And some people, and physicists, believe that the universe is so profoundly perfect that it had to have been created, or at least driven to creation. If the universe did in fact create itself, it would have had to also create the parameters for it to exist and sustain itself - thus the perfection. So if God is the creator of ultimate perfection, and the universe can do that on it's own, then the universe is God.

Posted by Oryx I was talking this over with my boyfriend now and I think I disproved his theory. Or at the very least came up with a new one. So basically people believe that whatever godform is more or less the ultimate creator, right? And some people, and physicists, believe that the universe is so profoundly perfect that it had to have been created, or at least driven to creation. If the universe did in fact create itself, it would have had to also create the parameters for it to exist and sustain itself - thus the perfection. So if God is the creator of ultimate perfection, and the universe can do that on it's own, then the universe is God.

Its hard to fathom honestly. God or something from nothing are really neck and neck when it comes to belief in something. I believe that God has control over all the universe, so that kinda comes into my thoughts. It doesn't rule out other life forms, dinos, or some evolution.

Posted by Oryx And some people, and physicists, believe that the universe is so profoundly perfect that it had to have been created, or at least driven to creation.

What is "perfect?" The idea of perfection is a human conceit.

I have a feeling Hawking is grossly oversimplifying his ideas for public consumption. Here's a link to a series of blog posts about the Big Bang that explains it a little better: (warning: not for the math-impaired)

http://blog.case.e...or_beginners/index

Posted by splumer What is "perfect?" The idea of perfection is a human conceit.

Your inability to comprehend is an example of human conceit. No insult meant by that. What makes you think that everything is already perfect as it exists because it exists. Concepts. . .We classify, we judge. Based on ideas that are based in fallacy. If for a second, we decide to see the beauty in famine or nuclear holocaust as equal to a butterfly or two people making love, then we will see perfection.

Posted by jeepdave Its hard to fathom honestly. God or something from nothing are really neck and neck when it comes to belief in something. I believe that God has control over all the universe, so that kinda comes into my thoughts. It doesn't rule out other life forms, dinos, or some evolution.

You are missing her whole point. God creating and something from nothing are the same thing. The same thing is being said. God created everything because it is everything. Dave, you are the atheists that you disagree with, you create them because you are god. So is everyone else. So is a rock. You are not higher than a virus, nor are you lower than an angel.

WARNING-I have not read the new book.

That said, and with the little I have seen of the new book I'll guess he's implying that the precess is cyclical. Big bang scatters material all across the universe, some of which collects to form larger masses that exert gravitational force on other material, that over time collects into masses that exert force on other material, ect... So you end up with galaxies and solar systems radiating out from and slowly rotating around a central point. As the outward momentum of the Bang is slowly expended then the expansion will come to a stop. Then the combined gravitational forces of all the collective masses in the universe will, just as slowly as during expansion, collapse back toward the central point. Once everything has fallen back into the central mass (the Big Crunch) it will compact untill critical pressure is reached again. Big Bang II.

I mentioned I'm guessing, right?

As for creating something from nothing, that's not what he's talking about. The stuff to create everything is already there. Just every couple trillion years or so it gets redistributed randomly. This time around we got all the stuff we needed to end up with, well, what we have. Mars didn't. We ended up in the right place. Venus didn't. In a nearly infinite universe the odds of anything happening at least once are pretty fuckin' good. This time we got a win.

Painfully simplified, but does that make sense?

Posted by underdark WARNING-I have not read the new book. That said, and with the little I have seen of the new book I'll guess he's implying that the precess is cyclical. Big bang scatters material all across the universe, some of which collects to form larger masses that exert gravitational force on other material, that over time collects into masses that exert force on other material, ect... So you end up with galaxies and solar systems radiating out from and slowly rotating around a central point. As the outward momentum of the Bang is slowly expended then the expansion will come to a stop. Then the combined gravitational forces of all the collective masses in the universe will, just as slowly as during expansion, collapse back toward the central point. Once everything has fallen back into the central mass (the Big Crunch) it will compact untill critical pressure is reached again. Big Bang II.

You're on the right track. There are several hypotheses regarding how the Big Bang started and what will be the eventual fate of the universe. One of the more popular ones is that the universe will continue to expand forever, because, essentially, there's nothing to stop it. One of Newton's laws states that motion continues unless acted on by an outside force. My car stops rolling because of friction between the tires and the road, or between the air and the body, or because I ran into a tree. In space, there's nothing to run into. That's why the Voyager spacecraft will continue pretty much forever, unless they get trapped by the gravity of a large celestial body.

With the continually-expanding universe model, there is also another part of that hypothesis that says that since the universe is expanding, eventually all the stars and luminous objects we see in the night sky will get far enough away that their light will no longer reach us, and the sky will go dark.

Didja hear that the Pope is visiting England next week...as a head of state, rather than as a religious figure, so as to avoid, presumable, having to answer to the whole sex abuse thing (heads of state enjoy diplomatic immunity, whereas religious figures don't).

Hawking took the opportunity to stick his finger in the Pope's eye.

The epitome of human conceit. Hawking is off intellectually masturbating again, nothing new, he's said this eon's ago. Because big bang seems so plausible, what need for a "god". It's as if hawking expects to come across the lab where some old patriarch and his long flowing beard stuffed infinite potential into a point 1/16 the size of a proton and cast it out into some infinite void.

The extreme conceit lies in believing ones intellect could be wrapped around this infinite concept and come out w/ something close to understanding.

Isn't is possible there is a causative factor? and how would you go about finding Intention anyway.

For all his intelligence the guy is a bonehead on this one.

The Kabballah nailed big bang spot on--Kether and did it a long time ago, just sayin.

Bacon and Boyle are to blame for the divisive split that hides "God" from science.

Posted by Livingstone For all his intelligence the guy is a bonehead on this one.

Where's your brilliant ideas?

Isn't is possible there is a causative factor? and how would you go about finding Intention anyway.

Like I said, if the universe created itself and God is the ultimate creator, the universe is God. Does intention really matter?

I am amused that someone finally mentioned the Qabalah.

Posted by Oryx Where's your brilliant ideas? Like I said, if the universe created itself and God is the ultimate creator, the universe is God. Does intention really matter? I am amused that someone finally mentioned the Qabalah.

Don't you think it's a bit of a boneheaded statement(and most likely a publicity garnering one) to claim you've disproved "god" had a role in the big bang, if that is indeed how it went down? As egregious a claim as a bible or koran or torah thumping literalist eh?

Intention is what focused infinite potential into a point 1/16 the size of a proton, but it's been a long time since there was the ripple on the wave in a sea of negative existence that congealed over eons into the idiot that is livingstone, i don't recall for certain.

and the above was my brilliant idea, nobel prize forthcoming.

lolwut?

Posted by Livingstone Don't you think it's a bit of a boneheaded statement(and most likely a publicity garnering one) to claim you've disproved "god" had a role in the big bang, if that is indeed how it went down? As egregious a claim as a bible or koran or torah thumping literalist eh? Intention is what focused infinite potential into a point 1/16 the size of a proton, but it's been a long time since there was the ripple on the wave in a sea of negative existence that congealed over eons into the idiot that is livingstone, i don't recall for certain. and the above was my brilliant idea, nobel prize forthcoming.

That's really fukken small.

Posted by Livingstone Intention is what focused infinite potential into a point 1/16 the size of a proton, but it's been a long time since there was the ripple on the wave in a sea of negative existence that congealed over eons into the idiot that is livingstone, i don't recall for certain.

Intention? I want you to take a second and re read what you wrote.

If intention, who is the one intending?

By focusing, that would mean that the universe was already there.

I think the mechanism that kick started reality cannot be understood because it exists at a level far above the mind. That said, after the fact duality had a major hand in things. Beyond duality is zero equals infinity. And that is a over simplification.

Intention? I want you to take a second and re read what you wrote. If intention, who is the one intending? By focusing, that would mean that the universe was already there. I think the mechanism that kick started reality cannot be understood because it exists at a level far above the mind. That said, after the fact duality had a major hand in things. Beyond duality is zero equals infinity. And that is a over simplification.

Briefly: Intention=natural laws of the universe (are they unnatural before the materialization of them?) known, unkown. it only IS "no one" does it.

given some of your other posts I gather you'll get this, as short as i can make it sorry, time crunch:
Did you think before you posted, did you intend? Not yet reached actualization in the so called cyber space of a relatively shared reality right? Then you typed, no? quite a bit went on before it showed up here. my whole farcical(it is silly to speculate on this) postulate is based on As above so below.

Basically my point is your beliefs come from things that have been written a million times before. They have been spoon fed through text just like the bible has been fed to christians. Stephen Hawking came up with his belief from actually thinking.

Posted by Oryx Stephen Hawking came up with his belief from actually thinking.

Actually, it's because he dropped a lot of acid as an undergrad.

Posted by Oryx Basically my point is your beliefs come from things that have been written a million times before. They have been spoon fed through text just like the bible has been fed to christians. Stephen Hawking came up with his belief from actually thinking.

Is "god did not create the universe" a new idea??? I don't see the intelligence behind this statement, it can NEVER be proved and it can never be anything but a belief. But i should read the book, it may be stated in a less extreme fashion.

I've no doubt the man can think. I did read a brief history of time. The above is just a publicity grabbing nonsensical statement and full of conceit at that.

Posted by Livingstone Is "god did not create the universe" a new idea???

No. The scientific explanation/reason/theory is.

I've no doubt the man can think. I did read a brief history of time. The above is just a publicity grabbing nonsensical statement and full of conceit at that.

So from now on if one comes up with a radical theory about god they should keep it to themselves? What sense does that make?