STEPHEN HAWKING: GOD DID NOT CREATE THE UNIVERSE

NEW YORK, NY – Stephen Hawking has proposed another new shocking theory!
“And on the seventh day God had finished his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.” – Genesis 2:2 – King James Bible
For as long as we can remember, we have been under the impression that Earth was created by God. Everything around us, was given to us by God – for us to flourish and evolve into the greatness that He saw. Challenging the theory of creation is a bold move and perhaps there is not better suited individual to challenge such a theory than Stephen Hawking.
According to the physicist, God did not create the universe and the “Big Bang” was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics.
In “The Grand Design,” co-authored with U.S. physicist Leonard Miodinow, 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 torch paper and set the universe going.”
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQvnQD9_l1c&feature=player_embedded]

(Visited 15 times, 1 visits today)

100 thoughts on “STEPHEN HAWKING: GOD DID NOT CREATE THE UNIVERSE”

  1. God may not have created the universe but I am certain that he created Barrack Obama. Well maybe Allah created him. I am also certain that he cast out the republican party when they went looking for weapons of mass creation.

    Reply
  2. If there is no matter (objects with mass)..can there be gravity (attraction between objects) that form the matter?
    I propose not as this is a circular argument.
    Therefore, the question still remains to those who are looking….where did the matter come from?
    To those who know, it came from God (The Creator).

    Reply
    • Where did GOD come from? This is all a Global scale Santa Clause…..not to mention the fact that all the God/resurrection nonsense was made up and written by of bunch of sand dune dwellers that had no clue about the functionality of the Universe whatsoever. "Hollywood" back then was people parading around claiming they were the Magical Messiah in order to get some sense of superiority in their world. What a crock of sh*t. Arguing over religion of any kind is ridiculous. I agree if one chooses to believe and it instills a sense of value and morals… great. Keep it to yourself. Outside of that, it's really a bunch of bologna. This just happens to be a subject the church deems Taboo to discuss, and people are too terrified to bring up. Watch and read literature on so many things science has physically found that PROVES several points of the Bible are bogus. With that said……………how do you know what to believe and not to believe? Time will tell. You only live once, so enjoy it and die of something while you can. You're only going to get this life on Earth. Your loss and waste to wait for "the reunion".

  3. If Stephen thougt about his theory before he came up with his answer. Would not the perfect thinker have thought about what he wanted to create before he came up with the answer? You have to think about it.

    Reply
  4. Finally, an intelligent person stands up out of the crowd and says what a lot of us are thinking and have been thinking for centuries, especially here in Europe.
    God doesn't exist and you what have to be certifiable to believe that.
    Protestantism was invented be King Henry VIII of England because he wasn't aloud certain laws through the Vatican. And when we colonised North America, they foolishly carried on believing in a false religion.
    Religion was a creation by humans a thousand years ago, because of reasons like this, because they didn't understand the universe.
    So I ask you, Do you REALLY think some bearded, white robed bloke snapped his fingers and created the universe. I don't think so.
    Religion is an excuse for war and will sadly never change..

    Reply
  5. Staphen Hawking must read and understand " Bhagwat Gita " , ( Hindu Religious Book ) , to understand what is God , He is absolute Idiot.

    Reply
  6. Ya, wow, Hawking said that because we the law of gravity, the universe created itself. Um… if gravity is a function of matter, how could it exist before the universe it allegedly created? How is there order, and a "law" of gravity at all? And how does a universe in which self-creation –the appearance of something from nothing– suddenly change into one in which there is no such thing as something from nothing, and no uncaused effect?

    Reply
  7. I beg to differ with Stephen Hawking's recent announcement that God did not have a hand in cration of the universe. This is substantiated by the fact that given any number of combinations of the basic building blocks of life viz., amino acids, nucleotides, sugar,and phosphate,etc., life has never been created in any of the laboratories the worldover. Science just remains clueless about how life first developed on our mother planet and elsewhere in the universe. Life has never resulted from non-life. This is suggestive of the evolution of life having bearing on the existence of some supernatural force, whom we rever as 'Almighty' or as 'God'.
    Moreover, Hawking wrongly refers to the 'Big Bang Model' as the viable explanation for origin of the universe.The said model is highly controversial with number of inconsistencies (the redshift controversy being the most hotly debated controversy) brought to the notice of the scientific community by the leading researchers in the field from time to time.It is ironic that the mainstream cosmologists have remained indifferent to accept the cosmological realities despite several loopholes with the said model.I have detailed the prominent shortcomings with the Big Bang model in my recent article titled "Big Bang Model? A Critical Review" posted on the internet for the international viewership at the website:
    http://vixra.org/pdf/1005.0051v8.pdf .
    Ashwini Kumar Lal, New Delhi

    Reply
  8. It is audaciously silly for Hawkings and Mlodinow to suggest that such a theory can solve the puzzle of life’s origin. Intellectual honesty (and humility) should lead one to admit the extreme improbability that high levels of complexity found in most life forms could have resulted from chance occurrences–no matter how much time or how many universes one allows.
    Hawkings and Mlodinow simply follow the expectations of philosophical naturalism. This is the view that the physical world is a self-contained system that works by impersonal, blind, unbroken natural laws. Naturalistic philosophy declares that nothing beyond nature could have any conceivable relevance to what happens in nature. But let’s be honest: There is not one shred of scientific evidence for this conclusion. Only faith could allow you to believe it (which changes the entire direction of the discussion). Stretching science into philosophy (or into religion) gives people the misleading impression that the science of evolution offers more than it is capable of rendering.
    Steve Cornell
    Senior pastor
    Millersville Bible Church
    58 West Frederick Street
    Millersville, PA. 17551

    Reply
  9. Strange that Hawking and Mlodinow appear to side-step an account of the origin of the physical law of gravity. Physical laws presuppose God as Law-Giver of a creation within which there is a strict correlation between laws and those entities subject to them. A consistent materialistic physicalism cannot even account for the existence of laws, because as conditions for what is material these laws are not material themselves (the conditions for being green are not green).
    Danie Strauss
    Deans' Office
    Faculty of the Humanities
    University of the Free State
    Bloemfontein, South Africa
    dfms@cknet.co.za

    Reply
  10. I find it interesting how those who have been tainted by man made "religion" seem to check their brain at the door as it relates to understanding the true origins of the universe and the possibility of a creator. Human beings are so crazily complex far beyond this iPhone I'm typing on, but no one in their right mind would question that someone created the iPhone
    ! So why do we question the notion that the
    universe was created in all it's crazy
    complexity??? Stubbornness, pride, man made
    religion, etc get in the way us us learning the truth. Matthew 7 vs 7&8 are a starting point if you want to know the answer to All your question.

    Reply
  11. Strange that Hawking and Mlodinow appear to side-step an account of the origin of the physical law of gravity. Physical laws presuppose God as Law-Giver of a creation within which there is a strict correlation between laws and those entities subject to them. A consistent materialistic physicalism cannot even account for the existence of laws, because as conditions for what is material these laws are not material themselves (the conditions for being green are not green).
    Danie Strauss
    Deans' Office
    Faculty of the Humanities
    University of the Free State
    Bloemfontein, South Africa
    dfms@cknet.co.za

    Reply
  12. Someone from Weekly World News needs to send Stephen Hawking a copy of Going Mutant because I bet you he has no idea how to explain Bat Boy

    Reply
  13. Readers may like to refer to the review article "Origin of Life" published in the European journal, 'Astrophysics & Space Science' (2008, Volume 317, Issue 3-4, pp. 267-278), and since archived at arXiv as http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0907/0907.3552…. (freely available on internet) for the current status of scientific research in the
    inter-disciplinary field of 'origin of life'.
    Ashwini Kumar Lal

    Reply
  14. In "The Grand Design" Hawking says that we are somewhat like goldfish in a curved fishbowl. Our perceptions are limited and warped by the kind of lenses we see through, “the interpretive structure of our human brains.” Albert Einstein rejected this subjective approach, common to much of quantum mechanics, but did admit that our view of reality is distorted.
    Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity has the surprising consequences that “the same event, when viewed from inertial systems in motion with respect to each other, will seem to occur at different times, bodies will measure out at different lengths, and clocks will run at different speeds.” Light does travel in a curve, due to the gravity of matter, thereby distorting views from each perspective in this Universe. Similarly, mystics’ experience in divine oneness, which might be considered the same eternal event, viewed from various historical, cultural and personal perspectives, have occurred with different frequencies, degrees of realization and durations. This might help to explain the diversity in the expressions or reports of that spiritual awareness. What is seen is the same; it is the seeing which differs.
    In some sciences, all existence is described as matter or energy. In some of mysticism, only consciousness exists. Dark matter is 25%, and dark energy about 70%, of the critical density of this Universe. Divine essence, also not visible, emanates and sustains universal matter (mass/energy: visible/dark) and cosmic consciousness (f(x) raised to its greatest power). During suprarational consciousness, and beyond, mystics share in that essence to varying extents.

    Reply
  15. Buddha said -The Universe (and all that is in it ) is ordered by impartial, unchanging laws. These laws have been operating throughout all time into the infinite past and will continue to operate into the infinite future. There never was a first beginning, and there never will be a final end. The Buddha further said that there are at least a billion other world-sun systems like our own, and as these grow old and die out new solar systems evolve and come into being. Yet unlike the laws of physics and chemistry, the course of events is not a blind matter of chance. Buddhism regards the Universe as a harmoniously functioning whole with a unity behind its diversity. Man was created by the laws of nature; the world was not created for man.

    Reply
  16. Oh my god, we have been "researching" truly for only 200 years. Still we dont understand mother nature. No wonder why we still cannot create life…..
    ….but we can fly to the moon, we can play with genes, we can….. Just wait and see…..

    Reply
  17. Now I give Radhasoami Faith view of Creation Theory. In Sar Bachan (Poetry) composed by His Holiness Soamiji Maharaj the August Founder of Radhasoami Faith the details of creation and dissolution has been described very scientifically. It is written in this Holy Book: Only He Himself (Supreme Father)and none else was there. There issued forth a great current of spirituality, love and grace (In scientific terminology we may call this current as gravitational wave). This is called His Mauj (Divine Ordainment). This was the first manifestation of Supreme Being. This Divine Ordainment brought into being three regions, viz., Agam, Alakh, and Satnam of eternal bliss. Then a current emerged with a powerful sound. It brought forth the creation of seven Surats or currents of various shades and colours (in scientific terminology we may call it electromagnetic waves). Here the true Jaman or coagulant was given (in scientific terminology this coagulant may be called as weak nuclear force and strong nuclear force). Surats, among themselves, brought the creation into being.
    These currents descended down further and brought the whole universe/multi verse into being i.e. black holes, galaxies etc. were born.

    Reply
  18. Dear Steve,
    Until you find out a cute little mathematical formula for love, I don't think you have this argument won. The laws of physics are not self-written. God is love. God is the universe. I am God. So are you. Deal with it.

    Reply
  19. “O Nanak, the True One is the Giver of all; He is to be identified through His All-powerful Creative Nature. ||8||”( Page 141, Adi Guru Granth Sahib)
    God exists and Identity of His existence is this entire Nature which produces brings up and destroys. Can Stephen Hawkins deny above identification? No doubt, he can not!
    This is the proof of God as described in the Sikh Philosophy. God being present in every form transcends beyond every form. We can only feel His consciousness which has provided the capacity, within the empty womb of nothingness, to produce the existence (Universe)
    On this issue, further dialogue may take place after ‘Grand Design’ of Stephen Hawkins and his ‘associate’ surfaces.

    Reply
  20. It seems to me its high time for Mr Hawking- seeing he uses his mind to think so much- to start using his mind in trying to figure out his own thoughts, and how HE MANAGES TO HAVE THOUGHTS, and never mind the thoughts- to ask himself the question- in whose presence are all these thoughts taking place? .. . .or maybe he hasn't thought that far yet!

    Reply
  21. If hawking said God did not create the universe? Then who created himself upto the first human being,animals,plants and many more? Nothing can comes from nothing without the creator. Because of his intellectual mind he forgot God from his heart. Look at him Is on tthe wheelchair It seems look like a desperate crazy man who trying to destroy the belief in God.Stephen Hawking will soon die Thats 100% accurate and his entire works will be forgotten too." The foolish man said to his hearts there is no god" This is the same like Stephen Hawking.

    Reply
  22. The current controversy regarding Hawking’s latest book, ‘The Grand Design’ results from the celebrated scientist’s limited vision about ‘origins’ (of life and the universe). Hawking is perhaps under false impression that the current knowledge of quantum physics and general theory of relativity alone is sufficient to unearth mystery surrounding ‘origin of life’, whereas fact of the matter is that study of ‘origin of life’is a muli-disciplinary pursuit involving sound understanding of diverse subjects such as genetics, astrobiology, and molecular biology besides astrophysics. Ironically, despite considerable advancement in the above cited fields in recent years, science just remains clueless about origin of life.
    Readers may like to refer to my review article "Origin of Life" published in the peer-reviewed European journal, 'Astrophysics & Space Science' (2008, Volume 317, Issue 3-4, pp. 267-278), e-print of which is freely available at the website: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0907/0907.3552…. for the current status of scientific research in the
    inter-disciplinary field of 'origin of life'.
    Ashwini Kumar Lal

    Reply
  23. The current controversy regarding Hawking’s latest book, ‘The Grand Design’ results from the celebrated scientist’s limited vision about ‘origins’ (of life and the universe). Hawking is perhaps under false impression that the current knowledge of quantum physics and general theory of relativity alone is sufficient to unearth mystery surrounding ‘origin of life’, whereas fact of the matter is that study of ‘origin of life’is a muli-disciplinary pursuit involving sound understanding of diverse subjects such as genetics, astrobiology, and molecular biology besides astrophysics. Ironically, despite considerable advancement in the above cited fields in recent years, science just remains clueless about origin of life.

    Reply
  24. The current controversy regarding Hawking’s latest book, ‘The Grand Design’ results from the celebrated scientist’s myopic vision about ‘origins’ (of life and universe). Hawking is perhaps under false impression that the current knowledge of quantum physics and general theory of relativity alone is sufficient to unearth mystery surrounding ‘origin of life’, whereas fact of the matter is that study of ‘origin of life’ is a muli-disciplinary pursuit involving sound understanding of diverse subjects such as genetics, astrobiology, and molecular biology besides astrophysics. Ironically, despite considerable advancement in the above cited fields in recent years, science just remains clueless about origin of life.

    Reply
  25. To all who replied to Stephen's thinking:
    Since none of you(us) really know, rather than attacking him or his ideas, sit down and think about what he has written. Stephen has without a doubt sat down and pondered the mystery of life and is doing his very best to discover ways to express what he "knows" therefore we ought to do the same. I would be surprised if we could sound as interesting unless of course we really "thought" before we spoke.
    Best Regards to all,
    Bill Storness-Bliss
    Natures Garden Organic Deli

    Reply
  26. The current controversy regarding Hawking’s latest book, ‘The Grand Design’ results from the celebrated scientist’s limited vision about ‘origins’ (of life and the universe). Hawking is perhaps under false impression that the current knowledge of quantum physics and general theory of relativity alone is sufficient to unearth mystery surrounding ‘origin of life’, whereas fact of the matter is that study of ‘origin of life’ is a muli-disciplinary pursuit involving sound understanding of diverse subjects such as genetics, organic chemistry, astrobiology, and molecular biology besides astrophysics. Ironically, despite considerable advancement in the above cited fields in recent years,science just remains clueless about origin of life.
    Ashwini Kumar Lal

    Reply
  27. Awarding the ‘2006 Physics Nobel’ to the advocates of the ‘Big Bang Theory’ appears to have been one of the biggest blunders committed by the Nobel Committee in the light of the prevailing inconsistencies(e.g. the unrersolved redshift controversy that has direct bearing on the expanse and the age of the universe, presence of fully developed mature galaxies with higher metallicity in the very early epoch of the universe, and the presence of superclusters of galaxies interspersed with supervoids in the cosmos) that remain inexplicable by the ‘Big Bang Model’.

    Reply
  28. if you dont belive in gravity that you can feel and enble the universe to be the way it is than what will you belive in ?ask yourself were did god get matter and even if god had matter gravity helped to put matter together?To me that POWER call it gravity ,call it god ,etc is what created every thing in the universe.

    Reply
  29. so funny ture it makes me what to laugh my head off when u talk like that lololololololololololololololololollolololololololololololololololololololololollolololololol and their i go oh wait i am not done yet lololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol now i think i am done oh wait here comes morelololololololololollollololololollolollolololol my head really hurts now

    Reply
  30. I am the author of "The First Scientific Proof of God." I also teach this proof at http://georgeshollenberger.blogspot.com/ with ontology. God is necessary being. God is necessary because all finite things can originate only in an infinite thing. Mathematics works only with finite things and their variables. Mathematics do not work with absolute things, such as God. Mathematics cannot develop knowledge about an infinite thing because a necessary God is the greatest thing or absolute. If one studies Galileo' work on bodies, the student will learn that all finite things have an infinite number of parts. So the parts of all finite things are not countable. Truncating mathematical series will not explain living things.
    George Shollenberger

    Reply
  31. I read an article about "God did not create the Universe." I believe Stephen Hawking, a known physicist saying the Universe created itself and by accident. Thousands of years ago no one did not know god exist until humans created a bible and religion, but not from god. It's man made religion. It is a false religion. Why did people believe there were monsters such as vampires, witches or werewolves for hundreds of years and now they don't believe in monsters? When people followed the bible and became religious, they didn't know or understand about the Universe….

    Reply
  32. People were relying on the bible because the bible was written long before there was no scientists or physicists back then. Religion is an excuse. People go to church doesn't understand about the Universe. We have great expert of researchers, scientists, chemists and physicists studying how Universe was created. People from all over the world created something in the lab successfully, even by accident it created itself. That's how they study. There is no way our Earth is less than 10,000 years old. Our Earth is over 4 billion years old… Why do pastors pretend to believe in god and go to church? So they can collect money from people. That's an excuse. The people wanted to be religious so they can go to heaven? Look around you, we evolve something new every year. We created and invented things. You have cell phone-that god didn't create them. We did. If god created cell phones, then why it wasn't here at the time before Jesus was born? God is not a creator. Who created god? The answer I believe it is… Unimaginable unknown.

    Reply
  33. Radhasoami Faith View of Modus Operandi of Creation of Universe
    Stephen Hawking writes in The Grand Design, “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.” Hawking said the Big Bang was merely the consequence of the law of gravity. In A Brief History of Time, Hawking had suggested that the idea of God or a divine being was not necessarily incompatible with a scientific understanding of the Universe.
    Although Hawking is very close to Truth yet he is not perfect in his views while discarding the role of divine being. I consider the role of eternal gravity uppermost but I strongly differ with Hawking on the role of divine being. I consider Divine Ordainment is the cause of Creation of Universe.
    Now I give Radhasoami Faith view of Creation Theory. In Sar Bachan (Poetry) composed by His Holiness Soamiji Maharaj the August Founder of Radhasoami Faith the details of creation and dissolution has been described very scientifically. It is written in Jeth Mahina (name of Hindi moth) in this Holy Book: Only He Himself (Supreme Father)and none else was there. There issued forth a great current of spirituality, love and grace (In scientific terminology we may call this current as gravitational wave). This is called His Mauj (Divine Ordainment). This was the first manifestation of Supreme Being. This Divine Ordainment brought into being three regions, viz., Agam, Alakh, and Satnam of eternal bliss. Then a current emerged with a powerful sound. It brought forth the creation of seven Surats or currents of various shades and colours (in scientific terminology we may call it electromagnetic waves). Here the true Jaman or coagulant was given (in scientific terminology this coagulant may be called as weak nuclear force and strong nuclear force). Surats, among themselves, brought the creation into being.
    These currents descended down further and brought the whole universe/multi verse into being i.e. black holes, galaxies etc. were born.
    I would like to add further that sound energy and gravitational force current are non polar entity and electromagnetic force is bi-polar. Hence spiritual polarization, if occurred, is occurred in the region of Sat Lok and region below to it only.

    Reply
  34. The ‘Big Bang Model’ has failed one of the crucial acid tests for its survival that relates to detection of remnant of gravity waves from the earliest epoch of the universe. Existence of gravitational – wave background, predicted by Einstein in 1916 in his general theory of relativity, is expected from the violent early moments of the Big Bang much like the cosmic microwave background that fills the sky with radio waves from the early universe. While the microwave background originated 380,000 years after the Big Bang, gravitational – wave background purportedly come directly from events in the first minute after the Big Bang. As per Einstein’s prediction, the cataclysmic Big Bang is believed to have created a flood of gravitational waves – ripples in the fabric of space-time that still fill the universe, albeit at a very feeble strength to be discernible by the conventional astronomical tools, and carry information about the universe as it was in the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang. Ironically, the much publicized LIGO experiments, undertaken at whopping sum of over $365 million, for probe of remnant of the gravity waves from the earliest epoch of the universe have so far yielded nothing.

    Reply
    • such ripples originate from the center of our universe, the exact location of the big bang. Well, considering the universe is expanding at FTL speeds, such ripples must've come a looooooong way before reaching earth, and perhaps the gravitational force these ripples have are so minute they cannot be detected in any way, being defeated by forces like static electricity.

  35. Notwithstanding the fact that diferent theories under the proposed M-theory in Hawking’s latest book titled ' The Grand Design' represent different facets of the same underlying theory i.e., ‘Theory of Everything’, its viability as ‘The Grand Design’ providing mathematical formulism for unification of fundamental forces in nature is highly speculative, with very remote possibility of its being verified expermentally.

    Reply
  36. There was nothing in the bible about the dinosaurs or how the dinosaurs died from…. Don't follow the bible. Follow your heart. If 300 people on the Lord Howe Island didn't know know god exist, then they don't know about god or the bible. People should not tell people to read the bible to believe in god (not God). Do you actually believe in the script or in writing? Not! Reading the bible and going to church isn't about god. It's about people to people being motivated with each other and giving out money to the needy, greedy pastors.

    Reply
  37. I have gone through three books titled, ‘ A Brief History of Time’, ‘The Theory of Everything’, and ‘The Grand Design’ – all authored by the celebrated scientist, Stephen Hawking. I find content of all his books to be more or less the same with minor variation here and there. I fail to comprehend why Hawking has been repeating the same thing again and again. Repeated mention of the Big Bang Model as viable explanation for the origin of the universe does not convince intelligent readers about its validity in the light of several unattended inconsistencies with the said model.

    Reply
  38. I think Hawking should stand up, walk outside and get some fresh air. Oops…..didn't mean to inpersonate Joe Biden. Only arrogant no-nothing scientists think they can explain everything they see in the universe. Dark matter makes up 80 percent of the universe and smarty pants' like Hawking know nothing about it !! ____"By faith we understand that the entire universe was formed at God’s command" –Hebrews 11:3

    Reply
    • We know almost nothing about dark matter because we only had a few years to research it. Your religion exists for 2000 years as christianity and another 2000 years or so as the jewish religion.
      I say we know pretty much about it considering the relative amount of time we had.
      Also, in case you didn't notice, Hawking has a decease that rendered him completely paralyzed. Meaning he cant walk and stuff.

  39. Stephen Hawking is not trying to be arrogant, just trying to explain theories that he has created. He doesn't put them as absolute fact. If the Dan below were a scientist, he'd understand that. Even gravity is based on a theory, but we accept it as a law.
    Perhaps Steve is wrong, and his theories aren't correct. That doesn't make them any less helpful in trying to learn the eventual truth. I personally have only the basic understanding of how computers work at a base level. Just because I don't know how they work in intricacy doesn't mean that it can't be explained.
    We are getting closer gradually to explaining the most complicated things in the universe; life and the universe. You can't expect life to be as simple as gravity, or the universe to be as simple as life. Religious people have nothing to lose. Life and the universe has already been explained to them. Weirdly enough, it was also explained in hundreds of other religions. But obviously your particular religion is the correct one. The scientific groups are trying to explain it so that everyone has one explanation, but apparently that would screw up religious beliefs. If faith is all that matters, than every religion is correct which is impossible.

    Reply
  40. Why did Professor Hawking wait for over 20 years before acknowledging Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem as ruling out a complete Theory of Everything (TOE)?
    An all-encompassing TOE would not only include a logical derivation of the fundamental laws from a set of root mathematical axioms but would extend this logical derivation to every possible phenomenon in the universe as a mathematical statement.
    This is the definition of the TOE used by Professor Hawking, as evidenced, for instance, by his including the Goldbach conjecture formulated as a physical problem – in terms of wooden blocks – as part of “the theory of the universe”, as he puts it in his website.
    Applying Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem to the root mathematical axioms shows that the mathematical system is either inconsistent, which we can rule out, or that it is incomplete, ie, there are some true statements of the mathematics – manifest as phenomena in our universe – which cannot be deduced from the root axioms and, therefore, which cannot be predicted from the TOE either, since it is, itself, derived from the root axioms.
    The fact that a TOE derived from the root axioms of the type envisaged by Professor Hawking is incapable of predicting all the phenomena in the universe surely deserved a comment!
    In The Grand Design, again, no mention is made of Gödel, although this is less surprising if M-theory is regarded as a “conventional” TOE, which does not attempt to explain all phenomena.
    However, there is a final twist to the tale. While Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem shows that an all-encompassing TOE, which predicts all phenomena, cannot be derived from the root axioms, it is nevertheless true that a TOE which does predict all phenomena could, in principle, be written down without deriving it. It would simply not be possible to prove, in this universe, that what had been written down was, indeed, the genuine TOE. This, and other aspects of the TOE, are discussed in my website, <a href="http://www.godel-universe.com” target=”_blank”>www.godel-universe.com.

    Reply
  41. the thinking of Stephen hawking was best but he has submitted and proved his assumptions but , the scientist was do created by god,( who reviles the secret behind the creation of the universe ).
    the scientist who let the world know about the laws of physics and its applicability in the creation of universe , but the Question is who created the laws that fails the laws of physics tooooo
    the law beyond the universe and the thinking of the best human brains ,its not as small as super human brain thinks but it as vast as gods blessing to it ,
    the one who gives air to breathe , water to drink and food and moreover life , all these amazing things are given by the only one the lord and god of Moses , Noah and Christ .

    Reply
    • the air we breathe is a combination of gasses, including oxygen and nitrogen. Both of which are simple monocules made out of atoms. these atoms created during nuclear fusion within stars, and then ejected when the star gone supernova.
      The water we drink consists of 2 hydrogen atoms and 1 oxygen atom, and is too created with the same progress as described above.
      The food we eat are complex organic monocules, once created by accident and later starting to reproduce themselves into the life we know today.
      Those weren't given by some people and a supernatural being, but by mother nature.

  42. Sign of this time:
    Drowning in speculations, calling it information if we are a little overenthusiastic but … starving in regards to knowledge.
    That is the primordial soup syndrome. Scientist reduce things to the assumed starting point and describe its characteristics. But they always stop there and cannot explain this situations origins. Darwinians are stuck to primordial soup are try to avoid it like Dawkings, assuming that humans were seeded on earth by aliens. So every solutions is welcome except one that involves god.
    Scientist try to explain the origins of the universe (or rather life) by reducing things to a certain minimal point. But they always fail to explain the first point they try to call "origin". Why was this origin? And even if Hawking finds gravity to be the cause, then why was there gravity? He will be coerced to write a book on the origins of gravity. He will explain the beginning of gravity and will then write a book on the origins of that situations and so on and so forth.
    Must be real frustrating.

    Reply
    • god of the gaps argument. Anytime our scientist get more and more information of the formation of the universe someone will just say…."but you can't explain that so it must be god"….since god needs and explanation why bother?? Stick with what we know.

    • Having been successful some what in some theories, some time, these scientists are harping as if they are the for fathers of everything mostly, When they are unable to explain and outside the purview of their physics or meta physics calculation they donot agree. They see through spectacles forgetting that the vision is limited to the area covered by the spectacles and outside the frame also is a scenario for which they donot want to deliberately see. Before electricity discovered, they know some power. They are unable to see the electricity even now, only they can see the effect through heat, light, ie. they are unable to see the cause but the effect. They can not decipher the ultra or infra things. when animals could sense many a thing, humans are unable to. The attraction and repulsion holds the universe together. Universe go on expanding- upto what limit ? Can this scientists explain? There is a limit o elasticity. Will it go on to explode or detach and where to ? Can this people explain? They are unable to give or extent life to a dead person. They are unable to explain as to create a life at least an unicellular organism from nothing. Well, let the bark, the caravan goes on and on. Others are not idiots to go on hearing their blah, blah. Yester–years the doctors advocated to cover the burning body with thick cloth / sac and abstain from water contact, now they insists to expose the burn body to running water. We shall not be surprised that these so called conossiers will one day come out with the idea to expose the burning body to be exposed to gasoline, There should be some laws to be made to make them desist from talking nonsense, without verifying…
      s.muralidhar@yahoo.com

    • you forget that advances in human quality of life is all thanks to scientific advancements. if not for these people we all would still be living in caves swinging stone axes. no one can deny that these people nowadays can explain more than their previous generations. this is called progress. maybe the concept of time do not exist within your belief, but scientific progress need time. there will be time for them to be able to explain what you say they cannot explain now, and by then you will be saying that they cannot explain another thing. those things you say are just an excuse, a diversion from what youre really saying, which is: no matter what anyone presents me with that proves, shows, or even hints that God does not exist, i will still believe in God. Believing in something is important, but so is keeping your eyes open.

    • Yet we as humans have limits too.
      We currently lack the knowledge and the technology to find out these missing gaps. Say yourself, does the bible have anything about the orgin of god? About his finaly destiny? Everything has a beginning and an end.
      What we do not know today we will know temorrow, it just takes time. Christianity had 2000 years to figure out stuff, people who believe in science rather than religion had a mere 500-400 years to do so, so I'd say it's damn well impressive that we got so for in such a short time. Relatively speaking.

  43. We would like to know if computer fans and Stephen hawking would help me out a man between yesterday and today has left 31 emails claiming he is speaking on behalf Jacques Villneueve. And saying bogas things, insults and degradation comments and foul. As so we need the genius not on paper to help but computer guys and girls out their, he is under steve@hubbaguru.com and linked to the 31 crazy emails are Royal Heirloom Ring, <a href="http://www.royalring.com” target=”_blank”>www.royalring.com
    This is silentwomen

    Reply
    • Are you trying to invoke a smear campaign or something? Best is to ignore such people, they get kicks from it if you respond.

  44. How do you define something that has the definitions of all, something that is the source of all? You can't define that, You can't define GOD nor the world that He creates. Because He is the definition of all.

    Reply
    • You can't define it yet people (probably like you) claim to know what this god is and wants from us…lol

    • well they can define God, but you people just call it absurd and walks away chanting bible verses. Guess what? why dont you define God and then well call it absurd and walk away playing our iPhone apps?

  45. If god didnt created this universe then how come life originated and its absurd to say that all gaseous state liquids and solids are the producer of life if so then why is the color of blood red in any form of species alive in this earth and lastly the so called stephen the fresh air that you breath is from the creator called god why is every living species has a life period expectancy of growth look at you you are still alive not by science but by fresh oxygen you breath every day science can be a solution not an answer to the holy god creation.

    Reply
    • you know what? people used to say that the world is flat, and they thought it was absurd if the world was any other shape.

    • I think its either you could not understand science during your schooling years or you hated your science teacher very much. LoL

    • 1. Try to use dots please, it makes it much easier to read.
      2. monocules can make extremely complex bonds, like organic monocules. That's how gasses, liquids and solids can create life. We don't completely understand the complex yet, but we are well on our way.
      3. Blood is red because of the hemoglobin monocules that transport oxygen. As it is basicly 4 iron atoms, it becomes red when it is oxidized. Like rust on an iron tool.
      4. Oxygen is a monocule made out of oxygen atoms, these oxygen atoms are matter. Matter, after the big bang and the process of annihilation started to bond to other matter, these particles eventually grew bigger to form the first atoms, hydrogen. As stars started to form they where using the hydrogen as fuel for the fusion process, by fusing hydrogen together you get heavier atoms like helium and oxygen. Once such star explodes into a supernova caused by the lack of fuel to sustain fusion (fusion with heavier atoms requires extreme amounts of energy which a star doesn't have), they will eject all their mass including oxygen. Using the leftover hydrogen other stars can form. Newborn stars, protostars, have a disk around them, made out of all sorts of matter. Hydrogen, oxygen, helium, you name it. Using all these heavy atoms earth was formed as the amounts of those materials where unimaginably much, and so the oxygen we breathe today is in our atmosphere. The gravity of rock and metals that make up our earth and the magnetic field created by the magnetic core keep the atmosphere around our world.

    • he doesnt stop at the law, you need to attain the knowledge and proficiency levels necessary to understand his work, and actually read his work.

  46. Trust me, god doesn't exist… Look around you… Do you see god??? Do you believe in the false man made bible? You better stop them from preaching you to believe in god. Just live on… You'll come back again in afterlife. Fear no god….

    Reply
    • God may or may not exist. Yet, the belief in God is crucial to some people. Without it, many would have been driven to suicide for lack of something to hold on to. Saying that people should stop believing in God is not a good thing to do, it is akin to saying they should just die.

    • Imagine yourself alone in the middle of the ocean in very stormy day, surrounded by large waves. While you are alone with nobody beneath you to give help.
      Trust me, the only one that you will beg for help is god.
      Imagine yourself alone in a grave (assuming that you berried by mistake or by kidnapers) with nobody near you. Trust me, the only one that you will beg for help is god.
      Imagine yourself were sentenced to death by a court, and while the rope was surrounding your neck, trust me, the only one that you will beg for help is god.

  47. Simply he is ruined by own boast!!!!!! A mathematician asked me, why are the basic postulates assumed for developing the geometrical theories? Mathematics is built on bounce-back theories of proving the natural phenomena with standing on some pre-fixed assumptions, and the most powerful scenario is that all pre-assumptions can be proved by going back with the descending theories. shortly "there could be nothing big or weighted matter or object that would be unbearable to GOD". THE GOD may be an entity or a kind of power or an enormous sump of energy. Nothing is spontaneous in the universe, everything must be initiated by the HOLY one and only WILL, while everything staged in the universe like within a covered bowl or plate. A being, within that covered plate how can imagine to be super-passed???????? If everything become self generated or self initiated, then why everything has it own destructing fate? That is the ultimate signature for being guided by some unique one, applicable for for all sorts of matter or inert. Initiation and destruction cycle itself depicts the inevitable accountability to Some ubiquitous power or ruler or GOD or basic creator. So, you may be the most genius and influential scientist in the present world, but still you and the entire living scientists could not yet explain the mechanism of the universe, constellation hanging mechanism, sixth or seventh sensitivity of human or other living creatures, the genuine mechanism inside the living cell replication, why and just when genetic freak will arise and many many more. You and the other scientists are carried and grown up in this stage by THAT HOLY power. You and other scientists are yet not capable to use the full power of your brain, rather a least portion, WHY??? WHO GIVE YOU THE BIG VOLUME OF BRAIN AND THE SAME TIME PUT YOU UNDER MAJOR LIMITATIONS UPON IT??? THE CREATOR OWN POSSESS THE MECHANISM OF SHOWING WHAT IS SEEN OR BE FELT OR BE USED OR THE LIMIT AND WHAT IS BEYOND THE LIMIT, WHERE ALL KINDS OF OUR LIMITS BEYOND IS A VERY TINY SPIT FOR THE ONLY LIMITLESS GOD.

    Reply
    • give the scientists some time dude. no use countering with "you cant explain this or that". easy for you to explain coz u just go "God did this and God did that".

  48. dear viewers.
    i challenge this scientist.coz have know alot more about this universe and this man is some making mistakes in evaluation of origon space and time and matter and its theory about the universe,matter,energy is some how convencing which attracts peoples but its not true as such.i want to challenge this man to debate with him but i dont know how?

    Reply
  49. Science and Faith are two paths of human pursuit that unfortunately do not exist in the same realm. _
    _Let the advocates of both camps pursue the truth, based on their own methodology. However due to the nature of their basic differences, it is likely that they will come out with different conclusions, such as to the issue of the origin of the universe.
    __I don’t think that our generation will be successsful in the attempt to unify the two paths, where centuries of efforts in the past have failed.
    __However I cannot help but notice that among different scientists, their conclusions vary only slightly._Whereas among different religions, their conclusions vary greatly, when in fact by the nature of the universality of the concept of God, there should only be one common religious belief.
    __Therefore to an objective dis-interested party, he will realize that the pronouncements coming from the camp of the scientists are more consistent. Whereas the pronouncements coming from the camp of the religious groups are disjointed, contradictory to each other, and therefore weak._

    Reply
  50. Whoever created MAN created EARTH..and we DID NOT come from APES or the BIG BANG!!!! When you figure out the human body and the universe in its entirely then you will have figured out..how great and unimaginable the earth and man was created. BLASPHEMY IS UNFORGIVEN !!!!!

    Reply
    • By your language it would seem you are either very mentally challenged or a random internet troll.
      The fact alone that our DNA is extremely smilliar to that of apes should say enough. We all have lungs, hearts, brains, etcetera. Archeological evidence also supports this. Skeletons of proto-humans appear to be extremely smilliar to modern day apes. We only evolved to humans because a few colonies of apes moved into the african steppe where we needed to stand tall to look over the grass, and be cunning in order to find and later cultivate food, and to fend of prededators.

    • that's because your mind is fitted in your skull. You can however, see someone elses mind if you open someones skull.
      Science 1, sacramento 0.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

https://weeklyworldnews.com/