Scientist debunks Hawking’s ‘no God needed’ theory

Tags

Alister McGrath, beleifs, Big Bang, Cycles of Time, fine-tuned universe, God, Justin Brierley, M theory, Multi-verse, Physics, Quantum mechanics, quantum physics, Roger Penrose, scientific inquiry, single subatomic particle, Stephen Hawking, String theory, The Grand Design

.

Famed mathematical physicist Sir Roger Penrose, who worked alongside Stephen Hawking for many years on furthering the developing Big Bang theory, has debunked Hawking’s ‘no-God-needed’ theory of the universe as “hardly science” and “not even a theory” on Premier Christian Radio.

Speaking on the station’s weekly faith debate program Unbelievable? on Saturday 25 September, Penrose described Hawking’s new book The Grand Design as “misleading” adding that M-theory, which Hawking claims has made God redundant as a cause of the universe, was “not even a theory” and “hardly science” but instead “a collection of hopes, ideas and aspirations.”

Penrose was in dialogue on the program with Alister McGrath, professor of theology at Kings College London.  The two men joined host Justin Brierley to respond to the question of whether Hawking’s new theory had made God redundant as a potential explanation of the origin of the universe.

Criticizing M-theory, Penrose said: “It’s a collection of ideas, hopes, aspirations. The book is a bit misleading.  It gives you this impression of a theory that is going to explain everything; it’s nothing of the sort.  It’s not even a theory.”

Our Universe has not been shown to “create itself from nothing.”

.

.

Asked whether science shows that the universe could “create itself from nothing” as claimed in the book, Penrose was strong in his condemnation of the ‘string’ theory that lies behind Hawking’s statement: “It’s certainly not doing it yet. I think the book suffers rather more strongly than many.  It’s not an uncommon thing in popular descriptions of science to latch onto an idea, particularly things to do with string theory, which have absolutely no support from observation.  They are just nice ideas.”  He added that such ideas are “very far from any testability.  They are hardly science.”

As a former colleague who worked closely alongside Hawking in developing gravitational singularity theorems, Penrose is perhaps the most high profile scientist yet to dismiss Hawking’s views.

“Multi-verse” has not superseded God

He also responded to the so-called “multi-verse” hypothesis that Hawking’s theory also posits.  Christians, including Professor McGrath, have pointed towards the fact that our universe is incredibly “fine-tuned” for life to come into existence, thus providing evidence of a transcendent designer.  Hawking’s “multi-verse” hypothesis is a form of the ‘anthropic principle’: since ours is one in an array of universes, we inevitably only observe a universe with the correct ‘settings’ that support conscious life.

Responding to the ‘multi-verse’ hypothesis, Penrose, a Distinguished Supporter of the British Humanist Association who describes himself as having “no religious beliefs,” said:  “Its overused, and this is a place where its overused. It’s an excuse for not having a good theory.” [These ideas are not supportive of ‘no God is needed’ ideas either — although sometimes put forth in such a manner as to shed doubt on the God idea.]

Premier presenter Justin Brierley said: “What’s interesting is that Penrose’s criticisms of Hawking are not driven by any faith position.  Instead he simply recognizes that the science does not justify making statements about God’s non-existence, which is a much more honest position than other well-known scientists, such as Dawkins, who want to equate science with atheism.”

Penrose’s own alternative view of the universe is detailed in his new book “Cycles of Time” published by The Bodley Head. As for myself, I am convinced that matter is connected together — every single subatomic particle of it — with its source — by a directedness energy that the source is — some call it love; I do. 

source: http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=16815

More Big Bang Knowledge

.

.

Need help or want to collaborate with me?
Just e-mail me at thehunt4truth@yahoo.com

Thanks for visiting.

 Eric

.

Related articles

Hawking: ‘Heaven is a place for people afraid to die’
How the Universe Works (in 25 minutes)
Einstein’s nightmares… part one
Einstein’s nightmares… part two
Einstein’s nightmares… part three
jiggled – warping and curved space-time
are we living inside a black hole?
what is quantum uncertainty?
is consciousness physics?
is the brain spirituality wired?
perfect wisdom nestled in every cell
what is your heartfelt belief?
Religion for Atheists?

.

May 5, 2014.

.

Advertisement

Oompa-Loompas of Science… the big bang

Tags

Big Bang, Physics, The Big Bang bites the dust

.

.

The Big Bang Theory

.

Creation began perhaps 14 billion years ago. Most scientist believe that it was caused by an explosion or expansion of a condensed kernel of energy as it has been called; a condensed particle of sub-atomic substance that somehow managed to become the entire universe even though it was smaller than an atom. Actually, there is some evidence that originates from the premise of the Big Bang (Theory). The useful Big Bang evidence is based on red-shift evidence of light that the universe is expanding — evidence that is 13.7 or more billions of years old. The red-shift of light that we see indicates that light is speeding away from the center of the universe. In other words, space between objects giving off light is increasing. Okay for the speeding part by me… on average light travel is nearly 300 million kilometers per second (671,000,000 mph)… very speedy, indeed. Even galaxies are traveling very rapidly — roughly 400 kilometers per second (900,000 mph).

Mathematically, the density of matter (a singularity its called) at the heart of a black hole is infinitely massive in infinity-no-space… okay, here is where physics is bonkers and why I say the big bang is a theory as silly as the TV show. There is no way that every particle of matter can fit into nothing… nah. Even the mathematicians roll their eyes… physicists do as well. Its cr-Azy. Matter in source is not mater then. This means nothing to us in the universe but matter did not come from nothing. That is absurd as well to believe.

The light and speeds are observable and even though physics has problems with measuring positions and speeds at the same time, there is physical evidence that supports the mathematics. There are problems there too though. 

I’m betting that ancient wisdom eventually prevails…
there are so many articles, but here is one you probably
didn’t read yet:
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/another_creation_theory_bites_the_dust.htm 

Its probably no better than most; it just happened to fit.

.

I’m wondering if it all started with a theme song
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhTSfOZUNLo

 

.

Okay, I’m silly here… but really, a big bang – Nothing is everything ? ? ? ?

Did someone change the equations?

.

.

Note: this post is not intended to be seriously challenging any science.
Your personal big bang is occurring all the time is what I actually think… hmm

Thanks for visiting.

 Eric

..

more serious?
see also:

Let there be light
Scientist debunks Hawking’s ‘no God needed’ theory
Hawking: ‘Heaven is a place for people afraid to die’
How the Universe Works (in 25 minutes)
Einstein’s nightmares… part one
Einstein’s nightmares… part two
Einstein’s nightmares… part three
jiggled – warping and curved space-time
are we living inside a black hole?

.

.

Lee Smolin: A New Theory of Time

Tags

Big Bang, General relativity, Lee Smolin, Quantum mechanics, Theoretical physics

Just in time… I hadn’t seen this yet. Thanks! ~ Eric

Related articles

• Einstein’s Big Idea
• How Einstein Thinks
• Are we living inside a black hole?
• What is quantum uncertainty?
• The quantum of us…

.

we exchange energy – always

Tags

Abraham Hicks, Big Bang, consciousness, Energy, Ester Hicks, God, Gregg Braden, happiness, Large Hadron Collider, Larry L'Heureux, spirituality, Unconscious mind

.

Love never claims it always gives; love never suffers, never resents, and never revenges itself. Where there is love there is life; hatred leads to destruction.

 ~ Mahatma Gandhi

.

You may understand being unconsciously conscious but imagine now, if you will, being consciously aware of the unconscious. Stimulating us, perhaps we stimulating it, an energy exchange is occurring. We may begin to know about this. Some of you do.

The energy exchange occurs as waves of energy that flow through us and some sort of perhaps mechanism that establishes a coherence of energy particulars. I’m not going to develop that much further. Most scientist don’t know and science can’t exactly say what happens — and there is no need anyway for my purpose here. However, today, I want to share with you a program that describes energy exchanges between people and I’ll close with some thoughts on this.

For today, I have a video with the Reverend and Doctor Larry L’Heureux (say, LaRue). He’s studied, worked, and taught in the field of Human Development since 1972. After receiving his Ministerial Certificiation in August of 1975, he contintued his studies, earning a Doctorate in Human Development in 1980. He’s one amazing guy of the many that lecture on an emerging awareness of consciousness and energy exchanges.

Doctor L’Heureux’s been sharing for more than 35 years from his strength and depth of spiritual insights. He is currently working in collaboration with Reverend Jim Buchanan and with Reverend Lorina Pyle at the New Concepts In Human Development — and — you may learn more at the website pages that highlight some of this work (ncihd.org). He’s been utilizing video production to share lectures, spiritual teaching, events, and education. This is one of many.

.

.

Program Description
You’re already as spiritual as you are going to get — you simply have to consciously look past the illusion of separation. You can learn to access the you that is and always has been connected to consciousness and God.

.

Space-time (I separate them) is made of slices of a single moment; I think (see related: planck-time).

If considering the Big Bang, all energy (the pure energy) that is the source of matter — our universe — acted in a strange indescribable manner and then there was an instantaneous emergence of what I consider the zygote (of) universe. With this emergence, we apparently were seeded; and interestingly, the matter and anti-matter that perhaps ripped away from the unknown became the fetus; our living universe — the universe that we ‘participate‘ in as co-creators. I’ll have to hold off on more about that for a later post — you guys don’t like these to get too long.

The universe was manifesting from nothing but pure undetectable energy. Initially (but only inconclusively), it had been super-condensed somehow and then it emerged (perhaps explosively) at faster than light speed to be the size of an atom and then a golf ball and a tennis ball in only a fraction of a second and in moments it was huge and then quickly it was the size of our earth and so on. Slowing a bit as it expanded outwards it was the milky cloud seeded with the almost matter particulars that became the atoms of our universe.

Here: you can see how in plain language and with some images that the Big Bang came about. There are lots of good sources that you can look at that make it easy to understand — Google ‘big bang explained for kids‘ and see what I mean.

At some point between the atom sized universe and the earth sized universe, the manifest material universe was born and the umbilical was cast off by this time as well — so, we have no record [of mother God. So, this is referred to only as the Word or as a quantum singularity and other such impossible to understand descriptions].

The earliest that we can explore is after about 370 million years when the first stars began to form and then the first galaxies and then solar systems and in time, planets that would sustain life. In labs, with the Large Hadron Collider, experiments are under way that may bring us closer to what happened at the first moment — except, I think the source energy really is important too. So, let’s move on.

In closing, I want to share that if you will take time each morning to connect with the loving energy of the unseen universe — to the consciousness of our source, you will in short order know this — that energy is flowing through and all around us — it carries consciousness — and your feelings attune you with the energy. I just wanted to have that to say really. Here is Larry to demonstrate this point: 

. 

.

Program Description
Several levels of energy exchange that take place all around us countless times each and every day that we pay little or no attention to at all; however with the use of a little perception adjustment these energy exchanges can become an important enchantment to their communication skills.

.

Lots of people interact with energy — as described in the video — it is natural. Since they participate in loving exchanges of energy, they grow in ability to give more and more energy information and they have a higher-self sense about our shared reality. They enjoy greater influence in reality because they give what is needed. They are more and more fully truer to themselves as they give more and more loving energy. They can interact with others from authentic higher-self and they continuously receive more and more wisdom. They renew themselves often — knowing — this is essential. In mindfulness and prayer — they radiate love.

The energy flows all about us and our hearts are at our center, knowing the language of energy, in the field of energy that is our true reality. We are spiritual beings.

The Holiday Season is upon us and you’ll be too busy to read much in a day or two — so — that’s it. Thanks for reading ‘we exchange energy – always‘ and I hope you enjoyed the post. I have some things to do too, so, I’ll be here less and there more until after the New Year gets under way.

.

Need help or want to collaborate with me?
Just e-mail me at thehunt4truth@yahoo.com

.

A Course In Miracles (training and discussions)
Miracles study . . . Please join me on Skype <-> contact me to enroll.

Thanks for visiting.

 Eric

.

Related articles

• what is quantum thought? 
• Einstein’s nightmares… part one
• Einstein’s nightmares… part two 
• what is quantum touch? 
• the quantum of us… 
• your emotion matters 
• heart coherence?
• Spiritual Laws of Success – Giving 

.

.

12-10-13.

today in the matrix

Tags

Agent Smith, Anderson, Big Bang, Cosmic ray, Cypher, Matrix, Morpheus, Neo, philosophy, Simulated reality, Trinity

Bonus:

This is a reblog of
Physicists propose test for determining if we’re in the Matrix 
by Bryan Nelson
Wed, Nov 20 2013
Would you take the red pill or the blue pill?
Physicists now claim they can offer the choice.

When the sci-fi film “The Matrix” first hit theaters back in 1999, it inspired a whole new generation of amateur philosophers to ponder whether the world really is as it appears. In the film, sentient machines have subdued humanity by plugging everyone’s brains into a sophisticated computer network that convinces them to believe in a simulated reality.

 .

The film is a play on a philosophical conundrum as old as philosophy itself: How can we know whether the world really is how we perceive it to be?

 .

Now a group of physicists led by Silas Beane of the University of Washington think they have accomplished what centuries of philosophy could not, according to Discover. They believe they have discovered a solution to this age-old mystery. Or at least, they believe they have devised a test that can determine, once and for all, whether we live in a computer simulation like the one in “The Matrix” or not.

 .

           Photo: Patrick Hoesly/Flickr

 .

Their proposed experiment has been deemed the “cosmic ray test.” It assumes that any simulation of the universe would need to be constructed out of a lattice, or grid, much as television images are built from pixels. The researchers then calculated that such a simulation would require that the fastest particles — or cosmic rays — would always bombard the Earth with a maximum energy amount.

 .

Beane and colleagues surmise that if we do indeed observe a maximum energy amount for the cosmic rays that bombard the Earth, that this should provide confirmation that we really are living in a simulation. (In case you’re wondering, this is what has been observed: cosmic rays always arrive at Earth with a specific maximum energy of about 10²⁰ electron volts.)

 .

So does that decide it then? Is Beane’s experiment proof that we’re living in a simulated universe? Beane himself doesn’t think it matters one way or another: “Learning we live in a simulation would make no more difference to my life than believing that the universe was seeded at the Big Bang,” he suggested. To him, the issue is a mere scientific curiosity.

.

Philosophers aren’t likely to be so easily sated, however. Beane’s test makes a lot of unnecessary assumptions. For instance, it assumes that any simulation of the universe would need to be constructed from a lattice or grid. Perhaps our supergenius simulator overlords have discovered some more advanced way of constructing a simulation.

 .

Beane’s test also can’t rule out the possibility that the universe might actually happen to function like a latticed simulation. In other words, it’s possible that reality and simulated reality are simply perceptively indistinguishable. If such were the case, then no test would suffice. We’d be right back at square one — a place where the scientist must, incontrovertibly, give way to the philosopher.

.

Thanks for visiting.

 Eric

.

Related articles

• ISON cometh (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• Comet ISON on target for a really BIG show (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• here comes ISON and what else? (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• when is a comet not just a comet? (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• Einstein’s nightmares… part one (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• Einstein’s nightmares… part two (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• jiggled twisted warping and curved space-time confirmed (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• how the moon got there (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• momentary happiness please… TED talk (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• Do we live in the Matrix? Scientists believe they may have answered the question (telegraph.co.uk)

.

the earliest Galaxy ever (yet found)

Tags

Big Bang, Chronology of the universe, Cosmology, Galaxy, Galaxy formation and evolution, Hubble Space Telescope, NASA, particle, Physics, quantum, Quantum mechanics, University of Massachusetts Amherst, wave

Earliest Galaxy Ever Detected
Infant Universe More Active Than Thought?

Nov. 1, 2013 — In a major new survey of the early universe conducted from the NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, University of Massachusetts Amherst astronomer Mauro Giavalisco and colleagues at several other institutions identify the most distant, thus the earliest galaxy ever detected.

The surprise finding of a young galaxy from a survey that was not designed to find such bright early galaxies suggests that the infant universe may harbor a larger number of intense star-forming galaxies than astronomers believed possible.

This study moves science closer to answering a long-standing mystery about how cosmic re-ionization proceeds. If the theory of the Big Bang is correct, we must see the recombination of the ionized plasma into a neutral gas, or re-ionization.”

The story is based on materials provided by
University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

Come back often — there is more to be discovered.

Thanks for learning with me.

 Eric

Related articles

• Einstein’s Big Idea (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• jiggled
  twisted warping and curved
  space-time confirmed (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• Einstein’s nightmares… part one (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• are we living inside a black hole? (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• what is quantum uncertainty? (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• is consciousness physics? (hunt4truth.wordpress.com)
• Astronomers Identify Earliest Galaxy Ever Detected (spacefellowship.com)
• Ancient Galaxy Is Farthest Ever Seen (space.com)
• Astronomers discover most distant galaxy in universe (earthsky.org)
• Scientists confirm most distant galaxy ever discovered (yakimaherald.com)

religion vs. science

Tags

Big Bang, Christianity, Evolution, God, Relationship between religion and science, Science and Religion

Is science always the winner? Must religion denounce the Big Bang or evolution? I don’t think so.
I think one gives way to the other only when there is a perceived need to do so. I do not have such a need.

Thanks for visiting,

 Eric

Related articles

• Can the Theory of Evolution and Religion Coexist (geek-speak.com)
• Quotation: Michio Kaku on Galileo & Bruno (jerichobrisance.com)
• On the Importance of Defining Evolution (sandwalk.blogspot.com)
• Science, Religion, and the Big Bang (farnamstreetblog.com)
• Science is a religion (spiritualhoarder.wordpress.com)
• The joys of being a Christian scientist (adiplomatsdaughter.wordpress.com)