Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Hawking: 'Big Bang did not need God'


  • Please log in to reply
125 replies to this topic

#16    Capt Amerika

Capt Amerika

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 574 posts
  • Joined:31 May 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Frozen Tundra of the USA

Posted 18 April 2013 - 03:23 PM

Why do people even bother discussing this anymore?
You cant prove either side definitively and therefore its a moot argument, a complete waste of time.
The fact that Hawking is even mentioning it saddens me because it just shows hes out of original material and is now just trying to stay in the news.
I believe in God.
Thats my choice, i cant prove a god exists, i just believe it makes more sense.  to me.
I have ZERO ill will towards anyone who doesnt believe in god.  I cant prove that they are wrong either.
Its why they call it faith.


#17    David Thomson

David Thomson

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 25 posts
  • Joined:13 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alma, IL

Posted 18 April 2013 - 03:33 PM

Hawking draws his conclusions about the Universe based upon his analysis of data and equations.  So we have to assume the data is accurate and the equations have a solid foundation.  What if the system of physics currently in use is flawed?  Sure, the physics works in many cases, but it does not work in all cases.  For example, the calculation of impedance and other values requires the invention of the non-existent square root of negative one, the imaginary number.  And even then, the calculation comes close only for a limited range of values.  

I have found a possible source for the imaginary number.  It is the result of choosing the wrong notation for charge in equations.  If charge is notated as a distributed quantity (squared) relative to a single dimension of mass, then it is easy to unify the fundamental forces using Newtonian type equations.  
[www,unified-force-theory.com]

Using a system of physics based upon distributed charge also gives rise to several new and important physical constants.  One such constant of interest to this discussion is the Gforce constant, which is a unit of reciprocal force.  All the fundamental forces share the Gforce as a common denominator.  The Gforce can be interpreted as a fingerprint of God on the Universe.  It is the heartbeat of the Universe that sets the metronome of time into action.  It gives us the speed limit of photons and it drives the creation of matter.  

People need to question Stephen Hawking and the flaws of the science he relies on before drawing conclusions about the nature of the Universe.  Such ignorant statements that he makes could become the basis of a new religion, which is just as destructive as any his statements might aim to replace.


#18    Dredimus

Dredimus

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 940 posts
  • Joined:21 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Huntsville, Al

Posted 18 April 2013 - 03:48 PM

View PostDavid Thomson, on 18 April 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

Hawking draws his conclusions about the Universe based upon his analysis of data and equations.  So we have to assume the data is accurate and the equations have a solid foundation.  What if the system of physics currently in use is flawed?  Sure, the physics works in many cases, but it does not work in all cases.  For example, the calculation of impedance and other values requires the invention of the non-existent square root of negative one, the imaginary number.  And even then, the calculation comes close only for a limited range of values.  

I have found a possible source for the imaginary number.  It is the result of choosing the wrong notation for charge in equations.  If charge is notated as a distributed quantity (squared) relative to a single dimension of mass, then it is easy to unify the fundamental forces using Newtonian type equations.  
[www,unified-force-theory.com]

Using a system of physics based upon distributed charge also gives rise to several new and important physical constants.  One such constant of interest to this discussion is the Gforce constant, which is a unit of reciprocal force.  All the fundamental forces share the Gforce as a common denominator.  The Gforce can be interpreted as a fingerprint of God on the Universe.  It is the heartbeat of the Universe that sets the metronome of time into action.  It gives us the speed limit of photons and it drives the creation of matter.  

People need to question Stephen Hawking and the flaws of the science he relies on before drawing conclusions about the nature of the Universe.  Such ignorant statements that he makes could become the basis of a new religion, which is just as destructive as any his statements might aim to replace.

This has to be one of the better post ive seen in a long time... well thought out and laid out... You sir, get a thumbs up! lol.


#19    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,967 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 18 April 2013 - 04:11 PM

View Posthighdesert50, on 18 April 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

Dare I suggest ... where probabilities near the infinite, therein you find the miraculous, God. Might we describe God as The mathematician. And, we should not forget, we also have Stephen Hawking the man. An individual who has had to cope with the enormous burden of ALS for over fifty years. The probability of survival with ALS beyond even ten years is but a few percent. Is he not a witness to the miraculous.
l
Yet he seems to scoff at it.  Oh well, his choice and welcome to it.  I wonder if he is grateful for the gifts he has though...

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#20    Martyn1967

Martyn1967

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 96 posts
  • Joined:28 Sep 2010

Posted 18 April 2013 - 05:04 PM

View PostCapt Amerika, on 18 April 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

Why do people even bother discussing this anymore?
You cant prove either side definitively and therefore its a moot argument, a complete waste of time.
The fact that Hawking is even mentioning it saddens me because it just shows hes out of original material and is now just trying to stay in the news.
I believe in God.
Thats my choice, i cant prove a god exists, i just believe it makes more sense.  to me.
I have ZERO ill will towards anyone who doesnt believe in god.  I cant prove that they are wrong either.
Its why they call it faith.


Its very interesting to discuss nonetheless, as long as it remains that, just a discussion. However, who knows what wonders the development of the human race and our understanding of the universe can show us in the future.

I follow no faith myself, but i do enjoy the history of religions, why they came to be, understanding the cultures that they originated in and the development they have went through from their early beginnings to modern day. There are many people on here who have a great amount of knowledge on the subject and are extremely interesting to learn from.

With regards to Hawking, thats just his opinion given his understanding. Just as you also have your opinion given your understanding. As do we all. Sure its something he has brought up before but the media latch onto things as we all know.

"It is to Scotland that we look for our idea of civilization." -- Voltaire.

#21    sepulchrave

sepulchrave

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,785 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:12 PM

View PostDavid Thomson, on 18 April 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

Hawking draws his conclusions about the Universe based upon his analysis of data and equations.  So we have to assume the data is accurate and the equations have a solid foundation.  What if the system of physics currently in use is flawed?  Sure, the physics works in many cases, but it does not work in all cases.  For example, the calculation of impedance and other values requires the invention of the non-existent square root of negative one, the imaginary number.  And even then, the calculation comes close only for a limited range of values.
Imaginary numbers are not really mysterious, and they come about very naturally from pure mathematics. They are not connected to any single physical degree of freedom (like charge).

View PostDavid Thomson, on 18 April 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

The Gforce can be interpreted as a fingerprint of God on the Universe.
It could, but it probably shouldn't; any more than the fine structure constant, the various Planck scales, the speed of light, etc. should be interpreted as a ``fingerprint of God''.


#22    FlyingAngel

FlyingAngel

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,399 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:46 PM

View PostWoIverine, on 18 April 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

The laws of physics just magically coalesced and wrote themselves into existence soon after the big bang I guess.
No. Law of physics have to exist before the big bang. It didn't just expanded by itself without a trigger.

Maybe the big bang didn't even happen at all. We're still inside the big bang...


#23    sepulchrave

sepulchrave

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,785 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:54 PM

View PostFlyingAngel, on 18 April 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

No. Law of physics have to exist before the big bang. It didn't just expanded by itself without a trigger.
Speaking as a physicist, I'm not sure that has to be true.

Do the laws of physics (and math, and logic, etc.) exist outside our Universe?

They could, but I'm not sure that they have to.


#24    Katzenking

Katzenking

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined:18 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Black Forest, Germany

Posted 18 April 2013 - 09:57 PM

Well, neither can prove if there is a god or even many gods, higher entities, demons, angels or whatever. I fully agree with 'Capt Amerika' on this.
But there is some kind of feeling..., a pattern if you will..., everywhere around,  and I can't believe that all this is just coincidence.
I think that someone (or something, or even more than one) have planned and written the programe of this (and maybe many more) universe(s).
I can't believe that all this is for nothing and senseless, it just cannot be.
All the world's a stage, everyone is an actor... and there are some who watch all this, may be directing it.
It may even be that all of us can climb the evolutionary ladder and become one of them ourselves (just an idea, don't want to be blasphemous).

But now to something more real. We should take Hawking serious when he urges mankind to travel into space. He is absolutely right!
I think this is what humans should do as quick as possible. Waiting another 1000 years is surely too late I'm afraid.
7bn souls roam this earth and continue to grow further. There is urgent need for a ventile, spreading ourselves to the stars.
That's the destiny for mankind. Either this or face extinction very soon.

The irrationality of a thing is no argument against its existence, rather a condition of it.
- Friedrich Nietzsche -

#25    juandegringo

juandegringo

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2009

Posted 18 April 2013 - 10:59 PM

The Big-Bang IS God, along with everything else that is and isn't (matter / anti-matter, dark energy / light energy, and all that stuff).  Let's keep it simple.  God is the Universe. There is only one God.  There is only one Universe.  Include all those Multiverses in the one Universe - by definition: UNI - verse.  Next!  So, the next question that follows is: Was the Big Bang the creation of our Sun, or the Universe (as we currently and physically perceive it, according to all generally accepted and established laws of human scientific endeavor, i.e. according to the current hierarchical structure of the High Priests of Earthly Science.), or both, i.e. do we live at the tunnel-ending of a black hole, thereby speeding up our conscious perceptions, very slowly at first, then, picking up speed?  And, finally (thank God - I can take just so much of this BS,) how does using the red shift as a standard for orientation work for the condition of space curved by black holes and dark matter, especially when those condensed charge clusters just come and go as they please, all "willy-nilly" (with all due respect to Mr. Rumsfeld?)  I mean, hit a few of those babies when they expand out in space and you got yourself a navigation issue if you're just trying to use the assumed straight lines and dead reckoning of red shift.  Not to worry. Google has it all worked out already.  juan miguel d'honkie-gringo miranda, Certified 9th Degree Wacko Philosopher-Charlatan

Edited by juandegringo, 18 April 2013 - 11:21 PM.


#26    FlyingAngel

FlyingAngel

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,399 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:36 PM

View Postsepulchrave, on 18 April 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

Speaking as a physicist, I'm not sure that has to be true.

Do the laws of physics (and math, and logic, etc.) exist outside our Universe?

They could, but I'm not sure that they have to.
Ok, I'm not a physicist, I don't assert that they have to exist inside or outside. All I'm saying is that whether it be law of universe or law of anything, there must be a trigger for the formation of the universe

View Postjuandegringo, on 18 April 2013 - 10:59 PM, said:

The Big-Bang IS God, along with everything else that is and isn't (matter / anti-matter, dark energy / light energy, and all that stuff).  Let's keep it simple.  God is the Universe. There is only one God.  There is only one Universe.  Include all those Multiverses in the one Universe - by definition: UNI - verse.  Next!  So, the next question that follows is: Was the Big Bang the creation of our Sun, or the Universe (as we currently and physically perceive it, according to all generally accepted and established laws of human scientific endeavor, i.e. according to the current hierarchical structure of the High Priests of Earthly Science.), or both, i.e. do we live at the tunnel-ending of a black hole, thereby speeding up our conscious perceptions, very slowly at first, then, picking up speed?  And, finally (thank God - I can take just so much of this BS,) how does using the red shift as a standard for orientation work for the condition of space curved by black holes and dark matter, especially when those condensed charge clusters just come and go as they please, all "willy-nilly" (with all due respect to Mr. Rumsfeld?)  I mean, hit a few of those babies when they expand out in space and you got yourself a navigation issue if you're just trying to use the assumed straight lines and dead reckoning of red shift.  Not to worry. Google has it all worked out already.  juan miguel d'honkie-gringo miranda, Certified 9th Degree Wacko Philosopher-Charlatan
Okay, but it still doesn't explain how God-BB came into existence. If you say it's always been there, I think no one could deny it nor approve it.

Edited by FlyingAngel, 18 April 2013 - 11:51 PM.


#27    Jaygatz

Jaygatz

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 100 posts
  • Joined:15 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own.

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:37 PM

It is possiable that the big bang was god.  Who knows.  Thats like what the first poster said.  You have to have faith to beleive in the GOD concept.  However Ive read a lot of Hawkings work and Ill tell you it makes a lot of sense.  There was a show on awhile back on DICS and it was something he said that caught my attention.  At the very beginning of the universe there was nothing not even time.  NOTHING could exist before time therefore neither could god.  Sooooo maybe the big bang was god coming into exisitance.... who really knows right?  God could have even been the very first life form in the universe.  However all that being said, I don't know if god exsists or not all I know is Ive read a lot and have come to my own conclusion :)
Great post tho


#28    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 4,115 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 19 April 2013 - 12:18 AM

What puzzles me is what god are we talking about?

Is the god who (possibly) created the universe a generic god, or is it one's opinion of what god it's supposed to be? If this god is not a god of any specific religion, then no one has any knowledge of it, except to believe it exists.

Looking at the history of life on earth and human behavior throughout history, what is our relationship to this god?

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
My credentials: http://www.unexplain...ic=87935&st=225

#29    King Ircher

King Ircher

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Male

  • ~Ultimately King Ircher

Posted 19 April 2013 - 01:06 AM

View Postsepulchrave, on 18 April 2013 - 06:12 PM, said:

Imaginary numbers are not really mysterious, and they come about very naturally from pure mathematics. They are not connected to any single physical degree of freedom (like charge).


It could, but it probably shouldn't; any more than the fine structure constant, the various Planck scales, the speed of light, etc. should be interpreted as a ``fingerprint of God''.
Yeah, whatever giberiish that is, here's my oppinion:P.
Big Bang Theory = Absolute Rubbish; Not a bit of evidence to Support
God = Somewhat Unrealistic; Enough evidence IS here however to support such an idea.

-- King Ircher
--3DS Friend Code is 3265-6203-3135

#30    shrooma

shrooma

    doesn't have one screw fully tightened.....

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 19 April 2013 - 01:23 AM

View PostKing Ircher, on 19 April 2013 - 01:06 AM, said:


Yeah, whatever giberiish that is, here's my oppinion:P.
Big Bang Theory = Absolute Rubbish; Not a bit of evidence to Support
God = Somewhat Unrealistic; Enough evidence IS here however to support such an idea.
.
pot.
kettle.
black.
.
i'd be interested to know if your ''evidence'' for the existence of god would stand up in any court where the judge & jury were over all over the age of seven?

- - - - -disclaimer- - - - -
all posts- without exception- are humourous.
if you fail to grasp the sublety, then don't whine on due to your lack of understanding.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users