God did not create the universe...

King Felix · 03-09-2010 07:39PM #1

...according to Stephen Hawking, in his latest book 'The Grand Design'.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100902/lf_nm_life/us_britain_hawking

– 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."

El Weirdo · 03-09-2010 07:40PM

Scientist in not-believing-in-God shocker!

Kimono-Girl · 03-09-2010 07:41PM

El Weirdo wrote: »

Scientist in not-believing-in-God shocker!

Damn right! Scientists know better!:)

Washington Irving · 03-09-2010 07:41PM

El Weirdo wrote: »

Scientist in not-believing-in-God shocker!

+1

recylingbin · 03-09-2010 07:43PM

So, the new 'theory' suggests there is no God.

There is no God, but theories prove nothing.

King Felix · 03-09-2010 07:46PM

recylingbin wrote: »

So, the new 'theory' suggests there is no God.

There is no God, but theories prove nothing.

It doesn't suggest there is no God. Just that he/she didn't design the universe.

The earth and those upon it are here by chance as opposed to design, he theorises.

johnmcdnl · 03-09-2010 07:46PM

Was watching this on the BBC news last night - some priest or reverand or bishop or whatever was on using the good old
"science can't prove there's no god so we all should have faith that there is one"
defense

- gonna be fun when someone manages to prove a made up fictional man that explained why everyone is here doesn't exist...

bleg · 03-09-2010 07:46PM

recylingbin wrote: »

So, the new 'theory' suggests there is no God.

There is no God, but theories prove nothing.

Ya, what's this theory of gravity I keep hearing about, if I want to fly I will!!

Donkey Oaty · 03-09-2010 07:49PM

Based on verifiable scientific data, Jakkass will arive soon.

OutlawPete · 03-09-2010 07:50PM

Okay, listen up everyone - join the circle if your t-shirt has any of the following slogans:

Science based medicine.
The plural of anecdote is not data.
Correlation does does not equal causation.

After life believers and toxic free vaccine wishers, in the middle :mad:

fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap
fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap
fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap
fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap
fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap
fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap fap

03-09-2010 07:53PM

I wonder what Hawking actually said.
Because
"God did not create the universe" is a far cry from "it is not necessary to invoke God"; the latter seems to be a quote and the former seems to be sensationalism.

laugh · 03-09-2010 07:54PM

Imagine how long it takes to write a book with your eyelash.

MistyCheese · 03-09-2010 07:54PM

Old Theory: There is a God
Current Theory: There is not a God
Future Theory: There is a dog.

Well, I hear God doesn't believe in Science either.

King Felix · 03-09-2010 07:55PM

bluewolf wrote: »

I wonder what Hawking actually said.
Because
"God did not create the universe" is a far cry from "it is not necessary to invoke God"; the latter seems to be a quote and the former seems to be sensationalism.

"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.

.

Kasabian · 03-09-2010 07:55PM

I am still waiting for science to disprove God.

laugh · 03-09-2010 07:57PM

Kasabian wrote: »

I am still waiting for science to disprove God.

Still waiting for any religion to prove a god . . . .

Ickle Magoo · 03-09-2010 07:57PM

Much as science awaits the proof of god/s....

03-09-2010 07:57PM

King Felix wrote: »

.

Yeah I saw that, and?
It's still not saying "god didn't create the universe", I doubt Hawking would make such an explicit claim

Kasabian · 03-09-2010 07:58PM

laugh wrote: »

Still waiting for any religion to prove a good . . . .

Stalemate

bleg · 03-09-2010 07:59PM

Atheism is the easiest religion to troll.

King Felix · 03-09-2010 07:59PM

bluewolf wrote: »

Yeah I saw that, and?
It's still not saying "god didn't create the universe", I doubt Hawking would make such an explicit claim

'Spontaneous creation is the reason...the universe exists.'

Is that not saying God didn't create the universe.?

Ickle Magoo · 03-09-2010 08:00PM

bluewolf wrote: »

Yeah I saw that, and?
It's still not saying "god didn't create the universe", I doubt Hawking would make such an explicit claim

Less of a headline grabbing article here:

Author Hawking Says God Not Needed for Creation

Ickle Magoo · 03-09-2010 08:01PM

bleg wrote: »

Atheism is the easiest religion to troll.

Almost as easy as those non-stamp collectors.

Wibbs · 03-09-2010 08:16PM

Hawking wrote:

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,

That line is so full of holes in another way though. Its like the old saw "if god created everything, what created god?" and so forth. Equally daft. Where and how did gravity itself arise? It's like he said a law(though even there...) but that law arose somehow. If the universe arose because gravity exists, he seems to be suggesting that gravity, or the parameters of the law of gravity existed "before" time. Therefore it had to spontaneously appear, along with every single quanta of information. Why should it exist? Why should that energy expand from a singularity, why should there be a singularity at all?

Those questions I suspect will forever be just out of reach, mostly because as children of the universe and the experience of it we bring too many preconceptions to bear. Even the simple notion of before the universe. There was no before. Time didnt exist yet. Time may not exist in the way we think anyway. In the sense that it is but a part of the universe as we perceive it.

If you could stand out side the universe and see it in all dimensions, it may just look like an impossibly dense singularity, containing all the information states(in time and movement) of every single quanta that exists. To the outside it may not have ever gone bang in the first place. It just appears to us to have and we're just movements on the surface of a infinitely unsteady state singularity. Maybe gravity is the "sound" of those movements?

Ah feckit my head hurts and I had some after work beers so I beg your indulgences

:D

changes · 03-09-2010 08:20PM

They still haven't got gravity or quantum mechanics fully nailed down.... how are they supposed to say with any conviction how or why the universe came into being.

The heisenberg uncertainty principle is one of the bedrocks quantum mechanics.... why are they uncertain about something so fundamental to our understanding of physics and the universe.

Anything scientists say about what might have been before the big bang i take with a pinch of salt.

Fart · 03-09-2010 08:21PM

Should be a good read.

Kasabian · 03-09-2010 08:23PM

Fart wrote: »

Should be a good read.

Is it fiction ?

enfant terrible · 03-09-2010 08:29PM

Wibbs wrote: »

That line is so full of holes in another way though. Its like the old saw "if god created everything, what created god?" and so forth. Equally daft. Where and how did gravity itself arise? It's like he said a law(though even there...) but that law arose somehow. If the universe arose because gravity exists, he seems to be suggesting that gravity, or the parameters of the law of gravity existed "before" time. Therefore it had to spontaneously appear, along with every single quanta of information. Why should it exist? Why should that energy expand from a singularity, why should there be a singularity at all?

Those questions I suspect will forever be just out of reach, mostly because as children of the universe and the experience of it we bring too many preconceptions to bear. Even the simple notion of before the universe. There was no before. Time didnt exist yet. Time may not exist in the way we think anyway. In the sense that it is but a part of the universe as we perceive it.

If you could stand out side the universe and see it in all dimensions, it may just look like an impossibly dense singularity, containing all the information states(in time and movement) of every single quanta that exists. To the outside it may not have ever gone bang in the first place. It just appears to us to have and we're just movements on the surface of a infinitely unsteady state singularity. Maybe gravity is the "sound" of those movements?

Ah feckit my head hurts and I had some after work beers so I beg your indulgences :D

Ya the concept of time not existing before the big bang is a hard one for me to grasp.

Although it does stop the endless loop of who created the creator and so on.

midlandsmissus · 03-09-2010 08:34PM

God (oooh!) I'm wrecked.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Think there's only so much deep discussion you can have before you need a break. I'm off to post in AH where no thought is required!

03-09-2010 08:35PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

God (oooh!) I'm wrecked.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Think there's only so much deep discussion you can have before you need a break. I'm off to post in AH where no thought is required!

Er...?

Ickle Magoo · 03-09-2010 08:35PM

I'm guessing his book has a little more substance than that one sentence...I'm going to defer judgement until I've read it.

God did not create the universe...

Comments