God did not create the universe, says Stephen Hawking

[giovonni]

i wonder :confused: if all of this is just about selling his new book?


http://i.usatoday.net/communitymanager/_photos/faith-and-reason/2010/09/02/hawkingx.jpg

By 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)

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

[tone3jaguar]

Steven Hawking is trying to go from scientist to prophet with his statements like this one and the one about beware of evil aliens. That is not going to work out well for him in the long run.

[frank samuel]

Although Hawking has always posed some interesting theories in this instance he's biting more than he can chew.

[Ixopoborn]

Although Hawking has always posed some interesting theories in this instance he's biting more than he can chew.

I completely agree. Hawking should sit down, have a strong coffee and reconsider his position.

There was quite a good piece about this in today's Times written by an Oxford professor of Mathematics. The writer states that Hawking’s premise is that creation of the universe was an inevitable consequence given the prior existence of gravity!

This argument is facile and completely misses answering the question of whether creative force is or is not needed for gravity to exist.

[Dale]

I don't know what's gotten into Mr. Hawking as of lately. First, the "evil alien" stuff; then this "never present" God talk? I think he's been spending too much time with the likes of James Randi.

Most of you know by now that I'm employed by a college. Because of that, several of my closest friends are professors and researchers in varying fields. The "Neo-Darwinism" and "Hardcore Nihilism" that runs rampant in these circles certainly isn't based solely upon the data, but instead upon two, main factors:

Money- No scientist, with a properly working brain, is going to risk their career by pursuing feats such as telekinesis, remote viewing, or the UFO phenomena. There have been plenty of scientists who have, and were quickly made examples of. Most of my friends want to keep their jobs, social status, and sense of security. They're usually not going to pursue these things even if there's a spark of interest within a group.

Paradigms- I know of a few researchers who won't even consider the possibility of God or paranormal occurrences largely because they would then have to reformat their entire moral code and existential paradigm. Simply put; it would be too mind blowing to accept this stuff. Humans like to be in control of their minds and realities. Some kinds of paranormal phenomena simply freak people out and make them feel powerless.

So, with Mr. Hawking; who really knows what's going on with him anymore.

[Fredkc]

Hint 1: "Life is its own answer." - Ray Bradbury

[THIRDEYE]

i have some respect for hawkings, how ever there is some info that supports the big bang therory,however i think there is a prime creator of all living things....love light and abundance ....thirdeye....

[Beren]

I don't know what's gotten into Mr. Hawking as of lately. First, the "evil alien" stuff; then this "never present" God talk? I think he's been spending too much time with the likes of James Randi.

Most of you know by now that I'm employed by a college. Because of that, several of my closest friends are professors and researchers in varying fields. The "Neo-Darwinism" and "Hardcore Nihilism" that runs rampant in these circles certainly isn't based solely upon the data, but instead upon two, main factors:

Money- No scientist, with a properly working brain, is going to risk their career by pursuing feats such as telekinesis, remote viewing, or the UFO phenomena. There have been plenty of scientists who have, and were quickly made examples of. Most of my friends want to keep their jobs, social status, and sense of security. They're usually not going to pursue these things even if there's a spark of interest within a group.

Paradigms- I know of a few researchers who won't even consider the possibility of God or paranormal occurrences largely because they would then have to reformat their entire moral code and existential paradigm. Simply put; it would be too mind blowing to accept this stuff. Humans like to be in control of their minds and realities. Some kinds of paranormal phenomena simply freak people out and make them feel powerless.

So, with Mr. Hawking; who really knows what's going on with him anymore.

I think you rounded it up fairly.
The great lurking shadow behind all of them just shows fear. Fear of loss of money,job,or status... And now we think whom are those who are our "intellectuals" ??? Those poor afraid souls...
To state with full moral responsibility that there is no God is to shot your self in the foot.
It`s like a kid who put an arm over his eyes and because he doesn't see ,he say that something is not existing...

[Ross]

From what I saw on TV lastnight, he did not say GOD did not create the universe, he said it wasnt necessary for the creation to happen, I have no problems with his statement.

Ross

[giovonni]

:yes4:
i agree with all here~ this seems like an attempt (for Hawkins) to remain relevant during these very high lifting energy changes on this planet. There is no doubt he is a genius :rolleyes: but he seems to be trapped within his own surface mind (during this brief moment) upon this 3D plane > within his own egos-consciousness ;)

[Steven]

He is like many others "bishops of the scientific dogma" trying to contain the recent progressive mass of awakening. It's totally logical and consequential coming up from him. There is also a bit of misunderstanding a long the way anyway. Gods, Creator, Creation, Great Spirit, the Universe, words and concepts only tools that certainly doesn't encompass its target.

Namaste, Steven

[Fredkc]

Hint 2: Eternally perfect, which includes being 'fore-given'.

Fred

Sorry, for being cryptic, I just have limited access right now. So dropping hints when I can.

[MariaDine]

He 's in for a surprise....


http://murraycreek.net/higher/hgchp3pl9.jpg

[cloud9]

Could this be a case of avoiding the need to prove the existence of God? I mean, if a scientist says: God exists, how can he prove it? Mathematically? He would need a formula or equation to do so. Who can raise to the challenge?

[MariaDine]

Ahahahah ! I love it when the questions are difficult....
To belive in GOD, THE SOURCE, ...what ever it is .............. is a matter of Faith, inner experience, meditation, etc.........................We are never going to come to a conclusion that convinces other people.
It is a inner experience.
Are we mad ? YES ! .....so what ? DEAL with with it.

[Samson]

the universe can and will create itself from nothing.
Is Stephens qoute
Aint that even more unlikely then that god did create it in 6 days?

The universe can and will create itself from nothing.
So if i can turn myself into nothing... i can become the whole universe
interesting

[Fredkc]

Ok, what of the notion that Hawking is right, for the wrong reasons?

This universe, for all its flora and fauna is far from perfect. Neither does it appear to be 'eternal'. Tricky notions, really.

Does the Creator 'plant weeds in the garden just so they can be picked?"
this implies the Creator 'needs' something.

Did the creator bring us forth imperfect?
Entertainment? What?

"We are supposed to 'grow into' some perfect-er relationship with the Creator."
Was the Creator somehow incapable of doing so? I don't think so.
Why then not just create us that way, and be done? (I happen to believe that is what is)

The Creator is not dualistic in nature, as far as I can tell.
Neither is his creation (us) when not distracted.

So, why a universe at all?

Saturday's thoughts on the matter,
Fred

[truthseekerdan]

So, why a universe at all?

Saturday's thoughts on the matter,
Fred

Just popping in... Think of it as a holographic universe, Fred. ;)
Popping out...

[Agape]

There is Living and Non-living Universe........

[Beren]

God is all, a single atom in physical world could not exist if it isn`t a will of Creator...
from a tiny quark to galaxies , all is but an expression on Creator...

Very Hawking that says things like that is child of God... But with silly ideas :bounce:
:loco:
:nerd:
:suspicious:

[MariaDine]

Living and non -living Universe ???
Actually, there are currently seven Universes -ours is one of them . And I'm not even talking about the Supra -Universes. :)

[Fredkc]

Undaunted, I would go to the next step here.

Creator, and creation are eternal.

The universe exists in duality, and is therefore 'not creation', an agreement at best, and an illusion.

Fred

[Zook]

He is like many others "bishops of the scientific dogma" trying to contain the recent progressive mass of awakening. It's totally logical and consequential coming up from him. There is also a bit of misunderstanding a long the way anyway. Gods, Creator, Creation, Great Spirit, the Universe, words and concepts only tools that certainly doesn't encompass its target.

Namaste, Steven

Well said.

I would augment the toolbox with additional tools: Omniscience; Omnipotence, Supreme Benevolence, Source, etc. We have vocal cords; but if we didn't have them, I'm sure we would find other ways to communicate our belief in the existence of Creator.

As for Hawking, I feel sorry for him because I feel he is lost. How can he not be if he thinks that gravity, which is only minimally understood by man, is the source of all beauty, knowledge, complexity, spirituality, etc. ? I mean, that is the logical consequence of his assertion, no?


Cheers
Uncle Zook

[truthseekerdan]

As for Hawking, I feel sorry for him because I feel he is lost. How can he not be if he thinks that gravity, which is only minimally understood by man, is the source of all beauty, knowledge, complexity, spirituality, etc. ? I mean, that is the logical consequence of his assertion, no?


Cheers
Uncle Zook

Can anyone convince him to check out this website: Theory-of-God (http://www.theory-of-god.nl/)

[Studeo]

Religious leaders hit back at Hawking

London, England (CNN) -- Religious leaders in Britain on Friday hit back at claims by leading physicist Stephen Hawking that God had no role in the creation of the universe.
In his new book "The Grand Design," Britain's most famous scientist says that given the existence of gravity, "the universe can and will create itself from nothing," according to an excerpt published in The Times of London.
"Spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist," he wrote.
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper [fuse] and set the universe going."
But the head of the Church of England, the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams, told the Times that "physics on its own will not settle the question of why there is something rather than nothing."
He added: "Belief in God is not about plugging a gap in explaining how one thing relates to another within the Universe. It is the belief that there is an intelligent, living agent on whose activity everything ultimately depends for its existence."
Williams' comments were supported by leaders from across the religious spectrum in Britain. Writing in the Times, Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks said: "Science is about explanation. Religion is about interpretation ... The Bible simply isn't interested in how the Universe came into being."
The Archbishop of Westminster Vincent Nichols, leader of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, added: "I would totally endorse what the Chief Rabbi said so eloquently about the relationship between religion and science."
Ibrahim Mogra, an imam and committee chairman at the Muslim Council of Britain, was also quoted by the Times as saying: "If we look at the Universe and all that has been created, it indicates that somebody has been here to bring it into existence. That somebody is the almighty conqueror."
Hawking was also accused of "missing the point" by colleagues at the University of Cambridge in England.
"The 'god' that Stephen Hawking is trying to debunk is not the creator God of the Abrahamic faiths who really is the ultimate explanation for why there is something rather than nothing," said Denis Alexander, director of The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion.
"Hawking's god is a god-of-the-gaps used to plug present gaps in our scientific knowledge.
"Science provides us with a wonderful narrative as to how [existence] may happen, but theology addresses the meaning of the narrative," he added.
Read why Hawking says God didn't create the universe
Fraser Watts, an Anglican priest and Cambridge expert in the history of science, said that it's not the existence of the universe that proves the existence of God.
"A creator God provides a reasonable and credible explanation of why there is a universe, and ... it is somewhat more likely that there is a God than that there is not. That view is not undermined by what Hawking has said."
Hawking's book -- as the title suggests -- is an attempt to answer "the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything," he wrote, quoting Douglas Adams' cult science fiction romp, "The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy."
Read CNN's Belief Blog
His answer is "M-theory," which, he says, posits 11 space-time dimensions, "vibrating strings, ... point particles, two-dimensional membranes, three-dimensional blobs and other objects that are more difficult to picture and occupy even more dimensions of space."
He doesn't explain much of that in the excerpt, which is the introduction to the book.
But he says he understands the feeling of the great English scientist Isaac Newton that God did "create" and "conserve" order in the universe.
It was the discovery of other solar systems outside our own in 1992 that undercut a key idea of Newton's -- that our world was so uniquely designed to be comfortable for human life that some divine creator must have been responsible.
But, Hawking argues, if there are untold numbers of planets in the galaxy, it's less remarkable that there's one with conditions for human life. And, indeed, he argues, any form of intelligent life that evolves anywhere will automatically find that it lives somewhere suitable for it.

CNN's Richard Allen Greene contributed to this report.

Source: CNN
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/09/03/hawking.god.universe.criticisms/index.html?hpt=T2#fbid=3cBbbW35zXD&wom=true

[Daft Ada]

I find this all very interesting but from a completely different angle. I have seen threads like this one on many forums and compared to some this one is very mild and conducted in a pleasant and adult manner, which I have come to expect of this forum. Some of them are almost screaming and threatening.
Lets say the Aliens landed and the question of is there a God came up and the aliens said God? what are you talking about, this is the truth of how it all works, and then they proceeded to explain how it all worked and it did not include any kind of god. What we would see and indeed what I am seeing in a small way with the results of what Hawking has said, is the reason why it is very unlikely we will get disclosure from our leaders. The very religious people who have been totally brain washed since birth by their parents who were totally religious and all the people around them, all their lives, could not possibly entertain or even consider a world without their God and with some that would lead to accusation and violence because acceptance would be impossible.
I am not saying there is no God, who am I to say that. Do I believe in a God, not a God as such, but I have a feeling there is some incredible intelligence at the heart of all this, but I am prepared to be wrong, and I am prepared to listen to the views of others with an open mind because I refused to let anyone brainwash me in my childhood, although they tried and I had other peoples views of religion forced down my throat at school like everyone else, I listened, but for me all it did was raise questions in my mind, questions that the people trying to brainwash me did not want, or couldn't answer.
Whatever the outcome and whether there is a God or not, all I want is the truth and if the people who are more intelligent than I am try to give information and they just get insulted or shouted down or as could and probably would happen in this crap world, attacked, then the truth will never be out, nor disclosure. Is this another test to see if we are ready for it? well from what I have seen by the reactions of brainwashed, let's over react without thinking people so far in some of the forums, we haven't a cats hell chance of disclosure in this lifetime.
it's also very interesting to watch how the believers are trying to twist what Hawking has said to make it more pallatable for themselves. I think it will be a very very long time before Humans have evolved enough to be accepted in the interstellar community out there, we are far too rigid and set in our ways, we are far to reluctant to any kind of change, and we are far to buried in our own self importance and beliefs. just a reminder, we killed people for saying the world was round!!

[jackovesk]

I have absolutely NO RESPECT for Steven Hawking WHATSOVER and NEVER HAVE!

His theories have deteriorated over the years, just like the Nobel Peace Prize!

He's just another shill, funded by and pushing the NWO wheelbarrow!

He's now starting to sound like Al Gore!

After his recent statement on what aliens may look like, Sounds like Project Blue Beam is not too far away now.

My 2 cents worth...

[Fredkc]

So, it looks like God did create this garbage heap, to have somewhere to toss all his rejects, right?

It seems the consensus is:
All of creation is perfect, except the first thing created.
It gets worse.
The first thing created is not just imperfect, but unlike everything else, eternal. (God, what an amateur!)

"No wait! You've got it all wrong. We are perfect too! Then we screwed that up."
Uh huh....
So you're saying that we are more powerful as creators than the creator.
Or are we back to having been created as screw-ups on purpose, just for entertainment?

Before you take the easy road, no I am not saying that logic is God.
But God is logical. ;)
Fred

[giovonni]

More from the gifted one...

***********

Mon May 16, 11:07 am ET
Stephen Hawking says afterlife is a fairy story

http://mit.zenfs.com/102/2011/05/AP0606190791.jpg

Renowned physicist Stephen Hawking recently explained his belief that there is no God and that humans should therefore seek to live the most valuable lives they can while on Earth.

Guardian writer Ian Sample asked Hawking if he feared death in a story published yesterday. This was his response:

I have lived with the prospect of an early death for the last 49 years. I'm not afraid of death, but I'm in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first. I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.

Hawking's 1988 book "A Brief History of Time" sold 9 million copies, and in it Hawking referenced God metaphorically as the force that could fully explain the creation of the universe.

But in 2010, Hawking told Diane Sawyer that "science will win" in a battle with religion "because it works."

"What could define God [is a conception of divinity] as the embodiment of the laws of nature. However, this is not what most people would think of that God," Hawking told Sawyer. "They made a human-like being with whom one can have a personal relationship. When you look at the vast size of the universe and how insignificant an accidental human life is in it, that seems most impossible."

Hawking's latest book, "The Grand Design," challenged Isaac Newton's theory that the solar system could not have been created without God. "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. It is not necessary to invoke God to ... set the Universe going," he writes.

Hawking was diagnosed with the degenerative Lou Gehrig's disease at the age of 21. He lost his power of speech and for decades has talked through an electronic speech synthesizer. The device has allowed him to continue his research and attain a top Cambridge research post, which was previously held by Newton. His most famous theory explains how black holes emit radiation, according to The Guardian.

So if everyone is destined to power-down like computers at the end of their lives, what should humans do to lend meaning to their experience?

"We should seek the greatest value of our action," Hawking told the paper.

Source;
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110516/us_yblog_thelookout/stephen-hawking-says-afterlife-is-a-fairy-story

[DeDukshyn]

Depends on what you are calling "God", and what perspective you are looking at this from. In some sense WE created the universe, but in that same sense WE are also the conscious rays of individualizations of an incredible spiritual being that in some context can mean "God" or has been traditionally known as "God" -- again it depends on the vertical perspective you have at the time of trying to make that distinction.

[DeDukshyn]

Living and non -living Universe ???
Actually, there are currently seven Universes -ours is one of them . And I'm not even talking about the Supra -Universes. :)

I got the sense that Agape was speaking more in terms of "realms" or "states" then actual "universes" (dam semantics perhaps) --- "Life" and "Matter" (living / not living) in which I can easily see that distinction -- Life and Matter seem to be at opposite ends of a spectrum within a consciousness of creation, perhaps with a dividing line - it's conceptual not practical

... but if I'm wrong I'd like her insight to clarify what she meant ;-)

Edit: updated body above.

[observer]

Just an observation, but it seems ol'Steve must have been listening to George Carlin before he made that statement.

Of course we need a God. How else would the global elite keep our sorry-a**es in line?

Caution: some content intended for mature audiences only


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPOfurmrjxo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPOfurmrjxo

[Steven]

Time, Perfection, Salvation are all concepts that does not have foundation in Creation, but rather in our cultures and conventions. There is no time, there is only the moment. There is no imperfection, everything is made perfectly. There is no Salvation, we are our own Judge, compassion nest in the Source of All that Exist.

It does surprise me that Mr. Hawking have not seen the potential of the thoughts and emotions as manipulators of realities. He probably sees them as a byproducts of biochemical reactions. The Heart and Mind are, with space (at both extremes) the Agora of tomorrow's science. The leap might be too unknown for him to link the Spirit behind matter. My blessings to him.

Namaste, Steven

[Jeffrey]

When a scientist states there is no God, it is because their science has disputed their religious programming. The undercurrent of their thoughts on God directly correlates with the temperament of the environment in which their religious dispositions spawned (whew, that was a mouthful). What religious scripture relays a creation myth entailing scientific words like gravity, neutrinos, gamma rays, and deoxyribonucleic acid? What religious creation myth speaks about detailed scientific mathematical equations and physics? The answer is none. Religions all have their respective sources, and none were written by the hand of God. At best they were written by God indirectly, by the hands of divinely inspired men. The beautiful thing about religious scripture is that it fancies different cultures, climes, and times accordingly. It's meaning is mailable to suit the palates of those intended to receive it. Do you think God was standing at the top of a ladder scribbling in the last pieces of the scientific equation of creation on his chalkboard of Life so he could get back to smoking his pipe tobacco? Give me a break Hawking. You're trying to shove your square-peg pragmatics of scientific theory into the gaping circular hole that religion has left in your rationalities of purpose pertaining to Divine schematics (whew, another mouthful). Religion and science will never meet or merge. I do believe that once the dogmatic narrow-mindedness is dropped from popular science it will comfortably find it's place not in religion, but in a collaborative awareness of the spiritual essence of the universe. That excites me. People allocate their hearts and minds to specialties, and neglect other areas of Life. It is apparent that Mr. Hawking hasn't opened his eyes to the wider scope of what God is. In actuality, all of the science he writes about is describing God, he just doesn't know it. He is fulfilling his part. Told ya, I'm an implacable optimist. You do your thing Mr. Hawking, you follow your path, I'll see ya later on down the road friend! :p

Much Love and Thanks,

Vivek

[observer]

One extremely relevant observation to the context of this thread:

When the Spaniards first arrived to the shores of Mesoamerica, the native Americans were unable to 'see' the ships on the horizon - in the harbor. They were not able to 'see' these ships until the vessels were properly described to them - i.e., conditioning of the mind. This phenomenon is also referred to as, Inattentional Blindness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inattentional_blindness

The 'god concept' has been just such a 'conditioning of the mind' throughout humanity's (known) history. Every major religion, promoting the 'god concept', since the dawn of civilization (as it has been presented), has come to humanity through the process of 'telepathic communication'.

This telepathic communication phenomenon can be traced into antiquity - in the form of prophets and seers; through the development of civilization - in the form of oracles and priesthood cults; culminating in modern times - in the current incarnation of clairvoyants, channelers, and remote viewers. The evidence strongly suggests this telepathic communication phenomenon does not originate in a benign sector of some hyperdimensional cosmos.

For this very reason I referenced the George Carlin video in comment #32 as a sort of 'shock therapy' for those still asleep to the techniques used to control this particular paradigm:


[....snip]

The concept of a God (as portrayed by organized religion.... all organized religion - new age included) must be discarded for the observable evidence available to all. A completely new understanding of 'The Creator' is abundantly apparent to anyone doing the research.

God is not, and cannot be a separate entity. God is and always will be the culmination of every thing that exists in all forms of dimensional existence - from the two dimensional vacuum to the highest possible multi-dimensional level. It is all nothing more than the Ouroboros (the snake eating its tail)

Humanity, along with billions and billions of other life forms within all the possible universes, are all merely a part of the totality that is. In the past, this has been referred to as God. It's now time to move-on to a new understanding.


Religion puts a limit on what 'All That Is' can be.

Science puts a limit on the same concept.

Science and religion in all their myriad forms are a function of the control mechanism of the human species by an hyperdimensional life form. All of this having nothing to do with God or Science.