Is Stephen Hawking right or not?

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by Saint, Jun 16, 2011.

  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,353
    Hmmm.... 7 people on your list. One is almost certifiably insane. One is self-deluded with an overblown ego. One has demonstrated some ability to spot a crank but little actual scientific ability of his own. One is, as far as I can tell, an interested amateur. One I haven't seen enough from to judge. One has a mind so open that his brains are likely to fall out.

    That leaves one who seems qualified to me to root out scientific truths.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Thank you!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,353
    Pincho:

    Hint: you're not the qualified one.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Of course I have grounds for saying that only two universes cannot exist. In fact, Fred Alan Wolf in his book on Parallel Universes even says that two universes would create an oxymoron, scientists just knew that two universes couldn't exist but rather there was an infinity of them.

    Secondly, I would have thought the use of the string theory landscape 10^500 would have made sense in the context I gave it, since Hawking is using the model.

    Thirdly, I don't care what you think about string theory. It is not a science.
     
  8. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    SorryI left you out James . . . . in order to conserve Sciforum cyberspace, I employed the use of "ETC!!" . . . et cetera . . . meaning "and so on". The 'etc' was supposed to embue the viewers with the impression that the list was not at all comprehensive and includes others . . . including you, by the way . . . . all the way 'up' through our most distiguished and accomplished past and current (and future) scientists. Again, take heart . . . YOU are on the the 'complete' list.
     
  9. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    James R:

    Hint: Your not qualified to know.
     
  10. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    None of you know what the heck is going on.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    Since Reiku and AN are discussing string theory . . . has anyone ever suggested that strings may present as twisted structures . . . not unlike DNA helices? . . . h-h-h-m-m - m-m-m . . . echoes of 'recapitulation theory' here . . .?? . . . . kinda off-topic . . .a referential thread would be helpful . . .
     
  12. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    The idea of infinite universes is analogous to the concept of heaven, but within physics. It is assumed to exist but nobody has ever seen it nor can it be proven. Yet, it is protected under the cloak of science even though in another breath they will preach that science demands proof. There is a dual standard. This belief in other universes requires faith, which of itself might be positive.
     
  13. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Previous wlminex post revisited (re: Recapitulation Theory) . . . . . might this structure be incorporated into string theory topology? . . . . or, perhaps how to agglomerate quarks via gluons? . . . or??? . . . slanting toward 'off-topic here . . . this might deserve a separate thread? . . . in pseuodscience or alternative theories . . .
     
  14. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    I am not sure if I believe in string theology. Is the god of string theology sort of like a puppet master that controls the universe? Has anyone ever seen his strings?
     
  15. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Nope. They are proposed to be so small, that even current technology could not test their existences.
     
  16. jaboo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    22
    That's not what I meant. What I meant is that science is still very young and can't provide all the answers. Hawking thinks that science already has all the answers while I think is that it clearly doesn't. At least not yet.

    It is quite possible that science will defeat religion eventually but it will take another millions of years from now before it will able to do so.
     
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,353
    Hint: you know nothing about my qualifications. On the other hand, I can tell you don't have any relevant ones.
     
  18. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Moderator

    Messages:
    6,697
    So other than your favourite Fred Wolfe in a pop science book can you provide any justification?

    It has nothing to do with a prediction/statement about the number of universes in a possible multiverse.

    You don't care what I think about GR or QED, given how much you ignore corrections on them. I'm not surprised you don't want to listen to even more advanced stuff.

    I find it ironic you say that when you don't even use you're properly.

    Do you deliberately just throw out words you don't know the meaning of or do you think you're actually forming coherent sentences?

    If you think people like Pincho and Farsight have anything to contribute then you only demonstrate how little you grasp how science is done. When someone, such as Pincho, is deliberately dishonest then it completely removes them from contributing to anything scientific. Even if he were to occasionally say something worth listening to (which hasn't happened yet) it would be lost in the noise. That's part of the problem with exaggerating claims to the point of being ridiculous, no one will listen to you after that even if you have something worthwhile to say.
     
  19. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    Well are you qualified in Pinchoism? Because that's what you would need to know to be qualified.
     
  20. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    More dishonest lies from AN. tut tut, he is the evil emperor. There is something evil about science when you look how defensive the priesthood is.
     
  21. keith1 Guest

    "One should not trust human conjecture any farther than one throw's dice."
    --keith1
     
  22. keith1 Guest

    If dice have the possibility to end up in such a timespace location that even a god could not see them, then the god could not be omni-present, omnipotent, nor be considered as valid.
    (Just take the gist from Hawking, and disregard my long form).
     
  23. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Moderator

    Messages:
    6,697
    If your behaviour and claims are demonstrations of someone qualified in 'Pinchoism' then I would imagine James is not qualified in it, he's rational.

    What did I lie about? I care about honesty and dislike people being deceptive, especially when they do it knowingly. You and Reiku have both shown such behaviour.

    For example, you like to claim how all your 'results' come from just 1+(-1)=0. I've repeatedly explained to you how you make vast amounts of assumptions if that's the case, because even the definition of a sphere involves considerably more mathematics than 1+(-1)=0. You have ignored this.

    I'm not defensive because to be defensive I would have to feel threatened. Not a single hack I have ever encountered online has made me feel in the slightest bit threatened. It says more about you than it does me that you presume I or any other physicist would feel threatened by people who are smarter than us. I work with a number of people smarter and more informed with me. I have a great many friends who I have no problems saying are smarter than me. Part of my job is to pitch new ideas and have them challenged, I really enjoy doing it. So even if I thought that you or Reiku or anyone else were onto something or smarter than me when it comes to physics and mathematics (I don't believe you nor Reiku are, if you must know) I wouldn't be defensive because I wouldn't find it threatening. For example, I think Guest is smarter than me in an number of areas I consider myself pretty decent at. I don't find him threatening, in fact what interactions we do have seem to go pretty well here.

    The reaction of people like Reiku or Farsight when they are shown to be wrong in something is considerably worse than the reaction people like myself, Prom or Rpenner give when we're mistaken about something. And none of us have to lie about our work, it can speak for itself. In the cases of you and Farsight you believe yourself more insightful/knowledgeable than literally the entire planet. In Reiku's case he's not making quite the same level of claims but he's still not being completely honest.
     

Share This Page