Stephen Hawking says Pope told him not to study beginning of universe

[The Sushi Bandit]

http://devinekrap.blogspot.com/

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. So he simply studied the end of it..... there it goes

now!!!!

I'm not so sure tying these balloons to your vehicle would be taken well by the people who are supposedly protecting your country.

[Evoman]

2. The pope is an idiot.

Does anybody still listen to that moron. Lol...what is he so afraid of. If his faith is strong, then he should be confident that stephen hawkings research would find god at the beginning, right? Right?

I wish we could put him in a time machine and send him back to live withe the rest of the regressive religious idiots who tried to stifle science.

[PabloLego]

3. the same Steven Hawking...

that had the hubris to predict an end to physics 'cause we'd know it all some 20 years ago? haha!

[Random_Australian]

4. Nope, he never did, and I challenge you to find some credible source

otherwise.

In other words, I am calling you on him saying that, and that means it is time for you to back that statement up.

To make that kind of statement, he would have to either not perceive the world well, or not be thinking clearly, both of which would be out of character severely.

Edit: Spullin.

[WhollyHeretic]

5. Even if he did (which I'm pretty sure he didn't)

What on earth would it have to do with this? :crazy:

[charlie]

6. Not much

He did predict a unified theory before the turn of the century, not that we'd "know it all some 20 years ago." As far as I know, he's still bullish about the prospect of it happening soon. Still, it's an odd sort of ridicule when measured against institutions that have been predicting the imminent return of Christ for a couple thousand years. Ratzinger predicted 10 years ago that Buddhism would replace Marxism as the "main enemy" of the Church. Let's see how that one pans out.

[PabloLego]

7. I read it in a magazine...

in an article about physics and some philosopher IIRC. I'll see if I can dig it up. Stepped on a toe or two there , I did...

[Orrex]

8. Still, welcome to DU

:hi:

[cosmik debris]

9. no toes

You just dumped a pile of BS and it is stinking up the place. If you can't clean it up, the least you can do is apologize and refrain from doing it again.

[PabloLego]

10. here ya go...

http://darwin.nap.edu/books/0309084105/html/252.html

Stephen Hawking is fond of suggesting that the end may be in sight for theoretical physics. Hearing Hawking tell you that physics may be coming to an end became something of a cliche in the trade in the 1980s, as at the beginning of that decade he used his inaugural lecture as Lucasian Professor to pose that question. Ten years on, the end doesn’t look any closer than it did then, but he is still optimistically proclaiming it. But even if theoretical physics really did reach the “end” Hawking so eagerly predicts, there would still be plenty of work left for physicists to do.

In an interview in Newsweek in 1988, Hawking said that after discovering a theory of everything “there would still be lots to do,” but physics would then be “like mountaineering after Everest.”1 Other cosmologists, including Martin Rees, prefer a slightly different analogy. They point out that learning the rules of chess is only the first step on a long and fascinating path to becoming a grand master. The long-sought-after theory of everything, they say, would be no more than the physics equivalent of the rules of chess, with grand-master status still far away over the horizon.

[cosmik debris]

11. That doesn't agree

with what you said in post #3.

[PabloLego]

12. y'all wanted a source...

and I supplied one. What more do you want? I don't know what you mean by not agreeing, but it's all good.

[cosmik debris]

13. You did not provide a quote from Stephen Hawking

you provided a quote from an author who interpreted Mr. Hawking in a self-serving way. And you did not verify that business about how we would know everything. In fact the book you cited says "there would still be plenty of work left for physicists to do."

Your own source betrays your failure to prove the point.

[PabloLego]

14. ...interpreted in a self-serving way?

Haha! Attacking the source! Dude you have completely lost me. If I'm so flippin' wrong DO more than just point it out. Why don't you dig something up that DISprove my assertion. Outreach n'teach. Pwned!

[Evoman]

16. I'll DISPROVE your point by using your own freakin' source

"that had the hubris to predict an end to physics 'cause we'd know it all some 20 years ago? haha!"

My "disproof" lol.

"But even if theoretical physics really did reach the “end” Hawking so eagerly predicts, there would still be plenty of work left for physicists to do."

"Hawking said that after discovering a theory of everything “there would still be lots to do,” but physics would then be “like mountaineering after Everest.”"


Happy?

Nowhere does he say we have discovered everything, nor has he predicted it. He is simply saying that EVEN once we do find a theory of everything *which could be in 1000 years*, there would still be a lot to do.

[Random_Australian]

15. I'm sorry, that does not support your premise:

Here is the quote from your post:
" an end to physics 'cause we'd know it all some 20 years ago? "

Knowing the UFT is not the same, or even similar, to knowing it all.

You also said hubris.... let me tell you, saying that it looks like we are getting somewhere with some of the UFT's that have been proposed is not hubris.

[PabloLego]

17. Okay!

Sounds great! Y'all got the Q.E.D. Rock on!

[varkam]

18. Welcome to DU!

As I've said before, you can't swing a dead jesus around in here without offending someone :D

[PabloLego]

19. tell me about it!

I've had baklava with thicker skin than some of these folks have. But it s'all good! If I don't get my boxers in a bunch over something here 1x per day something is not bueno ;-)