RIP Stephen Hawking

Stephen Hawking’s work has piqued my interest in space when I was growing up. He has done a lot for advancing space science as well as climate change. RIP to a smart man who never let his health or his condition get him down.

May he get to take a seat with all the other science greats .
 
Stephen Hawking
Desert Island Discs
Stephen Hawking, Desert Island Discs - BBC Radio 4

The castaway this week in a special extended edition of the programme is Stephen Hawking, author of the best-selling A Brief History of Time and Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University. He will be talking to Sue Lawley about his life and work, and the illness which has left him severely disabled for 25 years, as well as selecting the eight records he would choose to take to the mythical island.

[Taken from the original programme material for this archive edition of Desert Island Discs]

Favourite track: Requiem by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Book: Middlemarch by George Eliot
Luxury: Crème brûlée

 
I'll just toss this out. I have no strong opinions on his physics theories or the theories mentioned in the article below. But I despise him for using his notoriety in physics to promote crank political agendas, more so even than Keynes who at least admitted he was a crank.

It's a long article, so I'll just post the first 20% or so, and provide a link in the title. It's entertaining if nothing else.


The Black Hole in the Heart of Stephen Hawking
By Yvonne Lorenzo

March 20, 2018

John 1:5 – And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

For me, there is something about the night sky with its countless brilliant stars that evokes feelings of wonder, delight, astonishment, humility and worship. I cannot explain these feelings to anyone who does not have a sense of the numinous, as C.S. Lewis put it, to someone who is convinced there is nothing sacred and that there is no God; perhaps it would be like explaining music to someone who was born deaf or color to one who was born blind, someone too stubborn to believe that things he hasn’t experienced truly exist.

The recent death of a secular saint, the much praised physicist Stephen Hawking, has convinced me that perhaps now is an appropriate time to talk about the life and work of this much lauded man and to make people who have “ears to hear” aware that so much that he promulgated was false. For I understand the saying is not that it’s wrong to speak ill of the dead but instead to speak lies. And both as a scientist and as a human being Hawking was seriously flawed. More troubling than his personal failings is the unanswered question why the so-called elites promote his agenda driven science, a science that observation and reason proves to be fundamentally unsound. Just as the economics of Keynes have been refuted by Austrian theory, Big Bang cosmology and black holes are truly deceptions.

If he’s famous for anything, Hawking is admired and beloved for his work on black holes. I must say on a rational level, before the Internet existed, I didn’t have faith in their concept. We are to believe that stars collapse into a point of infinite density, and within the core of each galaxy, its foundation, what somehow binds hundreds of billions of stars is a supermassive, all-devouring abyss into infinity, a place where everything is destroyed and nothing exists and nothing can escape, “not even light”, perfect all-devouring darkness—in short, something dreadful and terrible, a cosmic Charybdis or the gate to Hades. So at the very center of each galaxy there is a monstrous thing born from a dead star that somehow can consume everything, cannot be observed, and yet also from time to time spews forth incredible amounts of energy. The contradictions abound. Yet I refused to accept that eternal star and world devouring darkness is central to the nature of our universe. I rebelled.

Perhaps by providence I found this book in a Barnes and Noble catalog: , which introduced me to the theories of http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/wiki.htm. (This is a link to the author’s archived page that was once the entry on Wikipedia and later heavily censored; Lerner although an expert was banned from the site.) I found that Eric Lerner’s work was based on the discipline of plasma cosmology whose father was Nobel laureate Hannes Alfvén. And there is now a parallel discipline called the Electric Universe whose proponents have also refuted the existence of black holes, both mathematically and by astronomical observation. In fact, there is an excellent overview on the Electric Universe posted years ago on LewRockwell.com, titled Electricity Powers the Universe by the late science fiction author James P. Hogan. One of the physicist theorists of the Electric Universe who has written extensively on alternatives to the black hole is Australian Wal Thornhill. He writes here on The Black Hole at the Heart of Astronomy:

In the face of discordant data, a scientist is required to check the original works and assumptions that lead to the theory under test. But there are very few such scientists in this modern age. As Sir Fred Hoyle put it, today the pressure is on to “do what aging gurus tell them to do, which is nothing” and simply build on the consensus those gurus have established. A fellow Australian, Stephen Crothers, has shown mathematical theorists to be remarkably unintelligent and sloppy in the application of their talent to physical problems. It seems that most of them don’t really follow the mathematical arguments anyway (which is not surprising) but are happy to extol the results of others, based on reputation, regardless of the principles of physics or commonsense. Crothers has done his historical and mathematical homework and delivered a paper, “The Schwarzschild solution and its implications for gravitational waves,” at the Conference of the German Physical Society, Munich, March 9-13, 2009. He concludes, inter alia, that:

  • “Schwarzschild’s solution” is not Schwarzschild’s solution. Schwarzschild’s actual solution does not predict black holes. The quantity ‘r’ appearing in the so-called “Schwarzschild solution” is not a distance of any kind. This simple fact completely subverts all claims for black holes.
  • Despite claims for discovery of black holes, nobody has ever found a black hole; no infinitely dense point-mass singularity and no event horizon have ever been found. There is no physical evidence for the existence of infinitely dense point-masses.
  • It takes an infinite amount of observer time to verify the presence of an event horizon, but nobody has been and nobody will be around for an infinite amount of time. No observer, no observing instruments, no photons, no matter can be present in a spacetime that by construction contains no matter.
  • The black hole is fictitious and so there are no black hole generated gravitational waves. The international search for black holes and their gravitational waves is ill-fated.
  • The Michell-Laplace dark body is not a black hole. Newton’s theory of gravitation does not predict black holes. General Relativity does not predict black holes. Black holes were spawned by (incorrect) theory, not by observation. The search for black holes is destined to find none.
  • No celestial body has ever been observed to undergo irresistible gravitational collapse. There is no laboratory evidence for irresistible gravitational collapse. Infinitely dense point-mass singularities howsoever formed cannot be reconciled with Special Relativity, i.e. they violate Special Relativity, and therefore violate General Relativity.
  • General Relativity cannot account for the simple experimental fact that two fixed bodies will approach one another upon release. There are no known solutions to Einstein’s field equations for two or more masses and there is no existence theorem by which it can even be asserted that his field equations contain latent solutions for such configurations of matter. All claims for black hole interactions are invalid.
  • Einstein’s gravitational waves are fictitious; Einstein’s gravitational energy cannot be localised; so the international search for Einstein’s gravitational waves is destined to detect nothing. No gravitational waves have been detected.
  • Einstein’s field equations violate the experimentally well-established usual conservation of energy and momentum, and therefore violate the experimental evidence.
In an audience of theoretical physicists there was stunned silence—and not a single question.

...

full article
 
That, it was...

Apparently, those theories have quite a following. Then again, so does Star Trek. I'm only really interested in the technologies that come from theories, so if someone comes up with a transporter that eliminates my commute, I won't mind if he's also a treky.

Hawking was pretty left wing, even for the UK. So, your hate for him really comes as no surprise to me.

So is my wife, and we get along just fine. It's crackpot assertions like, oh, this one that makes me doubt his integrity:

"AI could develop a will of its own, a will that is in conflict with ours and which could destroy us."

Had he said AI would be misused by evil governments and corporations to the detriment of humanity, he would have had a point.
 
"AI could develop a will of its own, a will that is in conflict with ours and which could destroy us."

Had he said AI would be misused by evil governments and corporations to the detriment of humanity, he would have had a point.

And yet, both points have merit. The latter, which sounds exactly like something you'd say lol, is small potatoes compared to the former really. I think your point is already more relevant because it's happening already to a certain extent... Both points are relevant.

Flat Earth has quite a following too... I can't imagine the ideas in the world of quantum physics. The name James Hogan sounded familiar, I had to check - he's a Holocaust denier. He also doesnt believe AIDS and HIV have anything to do with one another lol... Among other legitimate crackpot theories.
 
Last edited:
And yet, both points have merit.

On this we disagree. AI will never have self will, much less develop self will by itself. There would have to be some profound advances away from statistical and similar math models for that to happen. Humanity isn't even close to developing something with intelligence. What it IS close to is being scared into letting government regulate development and ownership of complex learning algorithms.
 
The name James Hogan sounded familiar, I had to check - he's a Holocaust denier.

I wondered why the ex-CEO of Etihad Airways would be posting on Lew Rockwell, lol. Their pics do look pretty similar.
 
On this we disagree. AI will never have self will, much less develop self will by itself. There would have to be some profound advances away from statistical and similar math models for that to happen. Humanity isn't even close to developing something with intelligence. What it IS close to is being scared into letting government regulate development and ownership of complex learning algorithms.

Never say never. I'll agree with you that your point has more merit though. Keep in mind, Hawking was often thinking in terms of 10's and 100's of thousands of years when he made these kinds of warnings... I don't think that makes him despicable or a crackpot political pundit - you say never now, but in 10k years I think it's safe to say things change.

His final warning was that humans need to venture onto and colonize other planets to save our species... he also tended to reverse course on his theories on a regular basis, again doesn't seem despicable but more par for the course in his field.
 
Never say never. I'll agree with you that your point has more merit though. Keep in mind, Hawking was often thinking in terms of 10's and 100's of thousands of years when he made these kinds of warnings... I don't think that makes him despicable or a crackpot political pundit - you say never now, but in 10k years I think it's safe to say things change.

"By the year 2600, the world's population would be standing shoulder to shoulder, and the electricity consumption would make the Earth glow red-hot." - Stephen Hawking, 2017

I would say that's exactly the time frame for benevolent government to intervene on humanity's behalf NOW to control population and save the world LATER. It's just like climate change.

His final warning was that humans need to venture onto and colonize other planets to save our species... he also tended to reverse course on his theories on a regular basis, again doesn't seem despicable but more par for the course in his field.

“..the human race only has one hundred years before we need to colonize another planet.” - Stephen Hawking, 2016

Granted that Elon Musk was/is hoping to profit from this statement, the reality is that a massive government push would be required, and NONE of the humans sacrificing (by force) their economies and maybe their lives would benefit in any way. All the climate change boondoggles combined would look like a shoplifter by comparison, and only a few hundred "elite" at best would ever make the journey.

These aren't crackpot ideas like flat earthers who might one day manage to pollute a grade school science book or two. These are crackpot ideas that destroy economies and lives if taken seriously. And note that such measures would have zero impact on his population control pitch. They are two completely separate boondoggles: one to forcefully limit procreation, and one to forcefully consume significant resources for a pointless government adventure.
 
"By the year 2600, the world's population would be standing shoulder to shoulder, and the electricity consumption would make the Earth glow red-hot." - Stephen Hawking, 2017

I would say that's exactly the time frame for benevolent government to intervene on humanity's behalf NOW to control population and save the world LATER. It's just like climate change.



“..the human race only has one hundred years before we need to colonize another planet.” - Stephen Hawking, 2016

Granted that Elon Musk was/is hoping to profit from this statement, the reality is that a massive government push would be required, and NONE of the humans sacrificing (by force) their economies and maybe their lives would benefit in any way. All the climate change boondoggles combined would look like a shoplifter by comparison, and only a few hundred "elite" at best would ever make the journey.

These aren't crackpot ideas like flat earthers who might one day manage to pollute a grade school science book or two. These are crackpot ideas that destroy economies and lives if taken seriously. And note that such measures would have zero impact on his population control pitch. They are two completely separate boondoggles: one to forcefully limit procreation, and one to forcefully consume significant resources for a pointless government adventure.

Lol I think we'll just have to agree to disagree then man... We're on two separate wavelengths, all of this is based entirely too much on the fringe for me to debate. It would make a great Netflix doc though.
 
Lol I think we'll just have to agree to disagree then man... We're on two separate wavelengths, all of this is based entirely too much on the fringe for me to debate. It would make a great Netflix doc though.

No worries, I can always find someone on the fringes who wants to debate me, just not on meso lately : )

BTW, I think he does have a documentary on Netflix that says pretty much what I said (without the sarcasm, of course). Discusses rocket motors, moon colonization, etc. It's WAY out there IMO.
 
I'll just toss this out. I have no strong opinions on his physics theories or the theories mentioned in the article below. But I despise him for using his notoriety in physics to promote crank political agendas, more so even than Keynes who at least admitted he was a crank.

It's a long article, so I'll just post the first 20% or so, and provide a link in the title. It's entertaining if nothing else.


The Black Hole in the Heart of Stephen Hawking
By Yvonne Lorenzo

March 20, 2018

John 1:5 – And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

For me, there is something about the night sky with its countless brilliant stars that evokes feelings of wonder, delight, astonishment, humility and worship. I cannot explain these feelings to anyone who does not have a sense of the numinous, as C.S. Lewis put it, to someone who is convinced there is nothing sacred and that there is no God; perhaps it would be like explaining music to someone who was born deaf or color to one who was born blind, someone too stubborn to believe that things he hasn’t experienced truly exist.

The recent death of a secular saint, the much praised physicist Stephen Hawking, has convinced me that perhaps now is an appropriate time to talk about the life and work of this much lauded man and to make people who have “ears to hear” aware that so much that he promulgated was false. For I understand the saying is not that it’s wrong to speak ill of the dead but instead to speak lies. And both as a scientist and as a human being Hawking was seriously flawed. More troubling than his personal failings is the unanswered question why the so-called elites promote his agenda driven science, a science that observation and reason proves to be fundamentally unsound. Just as the economics of Keynes have been refuted by Austrian theory, Big Bang cosmology and black holes are truly deceptions.

If he’s famous for anything, Hawking is admired and beloved for his work on black holes. I must say on a rational level, before the Internet existed, I didn’t have faith in their concept. We are to believe that stars collapse into a point of infinite density, and within the core of each galaxy, its foundation, what somehow binds hundreds of billions of stars is a supermassive, all-devouring abyss into infinity, a place where everything is destroyed and nothing exists and nothing can escape, “not even light”, perfect all-devouring darkness—in short, something dreadful and terrible, a cosmic Charybdis or the gate to Hades. So at the very center of each galaxy there is a monstrous thing born from a dead star that somehow can consume everything, cannot be observed, and yet also from time to time spews forth incredible amounts of energy. The contradictions abound. Yet I refused to accept that eternal star and world devouring darkness is central to the nature of our universe. I rebelled.

Perhaps by providence I found this book in a Barnes and Noble catalog: , which introduced me to the theories of http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/wiki.htm. (This is a link to the author’s archived page that was once the entry on Wikipedia and later heavily censored; Lerner although an expert was banned from the site.) I found that Eric Lerner’s work was based on the discipline of plasma cosmology whose father was Nobel laureate Hannes Alfvén. And there is now a parallel discipline called the Electric Universe whose proponents have also refuted the existence of black holes, both mathematically and by astronomical observation. In fact, there is an excellent overview on the Electric Universe posted years ago on LewRockwell.com, titled Electricity Powers the Universe by the late science fiction author James P. Hogan. One of the physicist theorists of the Electric Universe who has written extensively on alternatives to the black hole is Australian Wal Thornhill. He writes here on The Black Hole at the Heart of Astronomy:

In the face of discordant data, a scientist is required to check the original works and assumptions that lead to the theory under test. But there are very few such scientists in this modern age. As Sir Fred Hoyle put it, today the pressure is on to “do what aging gurus tell them to do, which is nothing” and simply build on the consensus those gurus have established. A fellow Australian, Stephen Crothers, has shown mathematical theorists to be remarkably unintelligent and sloppy in the application of their talent to physical problems. It seems that most of them don’t really follow the mathematical arguments anyway (which is not surprising) but are happy to extol the results of others, based on reputation, regardless of the principles of physics or commonsense. Crothers has done his historical and mathematical homework and delivered a paper, “The Schwarzschild solution and its implications for gravitational waves,” at the Conference of the German Physical Society, Munich, March 9-13, 2009. He concludes, inter alia, that:

  • “Schwarzschild’s solution” is not Schwarzschild’s solution. Schwarzschild’s actual solution does not predict black holes. The quantity ‘r’ appearing in the so-called “Schwarzschild solution” is not a distance of any kind. This simple fact completely subverts all claims for black holes.
  • Despite claims for discovery of black holes, nobody has ever found a black hole; no infinitely dense point-mass singularity and no event horizon have ever been found. There is no physical evidence for the existence of infinitely dense point-masses.
  • It takes an infinite amount of observer time to verify the presence of an event horizon, but nobody has been and nobody will be around for an infinite amount of time. No observer, no observing instruments, no photons, no matter can be present in a spacetime that by construction contains no matter.
  • The black hole is fictitious and so there are no black hole generated gravitational waves. The international search for black holes and their gravitational waves is ill-fated.
  • The Michell-Laplace dark body is not a black hole. Newton’s theory of gravitation does not predict black holes. General Relativity does not predict black holes. Black holes were spawned by (incorrect) theory, not by observation. The search for black holes is destined to find none.
  • No celestial body has ever been observed to undergo irresistible gravitational collapse. There is no laboratory evidence for irresistible gravitational collapse. Infinitely dense point-mass singularities howsoever formed cannot be reconciled with Special Relativity, i.e. they violate Special Relativity, and therefore violate General Relativity.
  • General Relativity cannot account for the simple experimental fact that two fixed bodies will approach one another upon release. There are no known solutions to Einstein’s field equations for two or more masses and there is no existence theorem by which it can even be asserted that his field equations contain latent solutions for such configurations of matter. All claims for black hole interactions are invalid.
  • Einstein’s gravitational waves are fictitious; Einstein’s gravitational energy cannot be localised; so the international search for Einstein’s gravitational waves is destined to detect nothing. No gravitational waves have been detected.
  • Einstein’s field equations violate the experimentally well-established usual conservation of energy and momentum, and therefore violate the experimental evidence.
In an audience of theoretical physicists there was stunned silence—and not a single question.

...

full article



Just lol at at trying to refute current cosmology with internet opinion pieces by a nobody.

Article pure opportunistic coping by an underachieving inferior mind just frauding and attention hoaring.
 
Just lol at at trying to refute current cosmology with internet opinion pieces by a nobody.

Article pure opportunistic coping by an underachieving inferior mind just frauding and attention hoaring.

Well, you missed the point completely. I guess I should expect that, but I didn't. It's all entertainment to me anyway.
 
Back
Top