Steven Hawkings M theory is defective..

[Oleg Bach]

Hawking insists that he has all the natural laws of the universe figured out..you would think he would find a way to find a better ill fitting suit for his ill suited body..and what's with those bottom teeth?

Hawkings finally figured out that it all started from the big nothing..that not even the vacume of outer space existed - that there was nothing and suddenly something suddenly and impossibly sprung out all on it's own...well that's fine and dandy..but if I was the BIG NOTHING ...and wanted to be the BIG SOMETHING...I would actually have to make a mindful decision to switch from nothing to something..

In plain langage...consciousness would have to exist in the big nothing to make a DECISION - too become a something ..so if God can be nothing - then God or IT the big nothing must be thinking..because if there were not universal devine consciousness...then..the big NOTHING WOULD HAVE STAYED NOTHING.

Hawkings did mention that there "might" be a God - well I suggest to mister drool who fathered children via a test tube..and please to not put the imagine of Steve jerking off into a vile on his own..he must have had some assistance in those regards and it was NOT God - I really don't think God likes Steve much...and he is probably a bit pissed of at God also...hence is on going war with the master of the universe which he is NOT.

[waldo]

Oleg, I watched this interview the other evening... with Hawking's co-author, physicist Leonard Mlodinow. Suggesting, "God is unnecessary" is not the same as denying the existence... in spite of the resulting raised fervor coming forward from religious leaders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KkZVxhkp2I

[Pliny]

Hawking insists that he has all the natural laws of the universe figured out..you would think he would find a way to find a better ill fitting suit for his ill suited body..and what's with those bottom teeth?

Hawkings finally figured out that it all started from the big nothing..that not even the vacume of outer space existed - that there was nothing and suddenly something suddenly and impossibly sprung out all on it's own...well that's fine and dandy..but if I was the BIG NOTHING ...and wanted to be the BIG SOMETHING...I would actually have to make a mindful decision to switch from nothing to something..

In plain langage...consciousness would have to exist in the big nothing to make a DECISION - too become a something ..so if God can be nothing - then God or IT the big nothing must be thinking..because if there were not universal devine consciousness...then..the big NOTHING WOULD HAVE STAYED NOTHING.

Hawkings did mention that there "might" be a God - well I suggest to mister drool who fathered children via a test tube..and please to not put the imagine of Steve jerking off into a vile on his own..he must have had some assistance in those regards and it was NOT God - I really don't think God likes Steve much...and he is probably a bit pissed of at God also...hence is on going war with the master of the universe which he is NOT.

Interesting Oleg.

I haven't heard that thesis from science before. It appears in Literature though.

"To be or not to be; that is the question! - Shakespeare

[Michael Hardner]

Hawking insists that he has all the natural laws of the universe figured out..you would think he would find a way to find a better ill fitting suit for his ill suited body..and what's with those bottom teeth?

Hawkings finally figured out that it all started from the big nothing..that not even the vacume of outer space existed - that there was nothing and suddenly something suddenly and impossibly sprung out all on it's own...well that's fine and dandy..but if I was the BIG NOTHING ...and wanted to be the BIG SOMETHING...I would actually have to make a mindful decision to switch from nothing to something..

In plain langage...consciousness would have to exist in the big nothing to make a DECISION - too become a something ..so if God can be nothing - then God or IT the big nothing must be thinking..because if there were not universal devine consciousness...then..the big NOTHING WOULD HAVE STAYED NOTHING.

Hawkings did mention that there "might" be a God - well I suggest to mister drool who fathered children via a test tube..and please to not put the imagine of Steve jerking off into a vile on his own..he must have had some assistance in those regards and it was NOT God - I really don't think God likes Steve much...and he is probably a bit pissed of at God also...hence is on going war with the master of the universe which he is NOT.

There didn't need to be a decision for the big bang to happen, just an imbalance of some kind. There is no decision that makes a volcano erupt, or that makes your drool bubbles tumble from your mouth onto your bib, for example.

I doubt that Hawking will respond to your assertions.

[bush_cheney2004]

....I doubt that Hawking will respond to your assertions.

Hawking will always be wrong at some level, as it is logically impossible given the literal definition of "nothing". "Gods" exist to fill in the gaps that blokes like Hawking pretend to have all figured out.

[Michael Hardner]

Hawking will always be wrong at some level, as it is logically impossible given the literal definition of "nothing". "Gods" exist to fill in the gaps that blokes like Hawking pretend to have all figured out.

Wow. Not sure why you're stepping up to bat for Oleg's foggy vision of how the world of science works.

Hawking doesn't pretend to have the world figured out, he just submits explanations for the physics of the universe, then defends them against people who disagree AND who have some idea of what they're talking about.

Oleg VS Hawking doesn't work, even on a comedic level.

[Michael Hardner]

This is the best response I could hope for to Oleg's street corner rant in the OP.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Hawking doesn't pretend to have the world figured out, he just submits explanations for the physics of the universe, then defends them against people who disagree AND who have some idea of what they're talking about.

I don't have any beef with Hawking, who obviously is brilliant, but who has also been wrong....which is OK. Common folk are quite satisfied to skip all the math and rely on gods instead. Even the math asks us to accept items on faith....like division by zero as being undefined. This is analogous to a universe spawned from absolutely nothing.

[Bonam]

Even the math asks us to accept items on faith....like division by zero as being undefined.

The result of division by zero is hardly a matter of faith, as anyone whose math education includes first year calculus should know.

[bush_cheney2004]

The result of division by zero is hardly a matter of faith, as anyone whose math education includes first year calculus should know.

No, we are expected to accept the faith long before that. The language of the high priests (e.g. The Calculus) is pretty good, but it is not perfect. This is where God steps in.

[Bonam]

No, we are expected to accept the faith long before that. The language of the high priests (e.g. The Calculus) is pretty good, but it is not perfect. This is where God steps in.

Nonsense and you know it. But whatever, if you've suddenly decided to become a religious wacko who can't even do some math without thinking about God then that's certainly your choice.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nonsense and you know it. But whatever, if you've suddenly decided to become a religious wacko who can't even do some math without thinking about God then that's certainly your choice.

Uh-oh...I have offended a follower of the High Priests with Slide Rules. Relax, I am a pagan and worship a thermonuclear process that is about 93,000,000 miles away (on average). It's all that really matters to our puny existence.

As you know, division by zero is a discontinuity (or Mathematical Singularity as defined by the High Priests).

[Michael Hardner]

I don't have any beef with Hawking, who obviously is brilliant, but who has also been wrong....which is OK. Common folk are quite satisfied to skip all the math and rely on gods instead. Even the math asks us to accept items on faith....like division by zero as being undefined. This is analogous to a universe spawned from absolutely nothing.

You DON'T think division by zero is undefined ? That's not faith. Offer any other answer to something divided by zero and the system doesn't work.

[Michael Hardner]

No, we are expected to accept the faith long before that. The language of the high priests (e.g. The Calculus) is pretty good, but it is not perfect. This is where God steps in.

Math is a sort of philosophy invented by humans. Gods can't help it with us because we made it.

[bush_cheney2004]

You DON'T think division by zero is undefined ? That's not faith. Offer any other answer to something divided by zero and the system doesn't work.

Ummm...yea...that's exactly my point. It is "defined" that way.

[Michael Hardner]

Ummm...yea...that's exactly my point. It is "defined" that way.

If it's defined that way, then faith has nothing to do with it. Do I have "faith" that you're known here as "bush_cheney" ? No, you define your name to be such and so it is.

[bush_cheney2004]

If it's defined that way, then faith has nothing to do with it. Do I have "faith" that you're known here as "bush_cheney" ? No, you define your name to be such and so it is.

I'm not sure what you are arguing about, as I maintained this from the start. Others can define what they wish as well...nothing special about mathematics in that regard.

[Michael Hardner]

Your quote:

Even the math asks us to accept items on faith....like division by zero as being undefined.

[bush_cheney2004]

Your quote:

Division by zero is a discontinuity and is offered up without supporting proof or theorem to a child in grade school. Only later do we get the tools and independence to challenge the High Priests.

[Michael Hardner]

Division by zero is a discontinuity and is offered up without supporting proof or theorem to a child in grade school. Only later do we get the tools and independence to challenge the High Priests.

If you don't understand math, then just say so. There's no reason to try to bring down math just because you don't understand it.

[bush_cheney2004]

If you don't understand math, then just say so. There's no reason to try to bring down math just because you don't understand it.

I love math, but I value abstract thought even more. You worship your gods...and I will worship mine... OK?

[Michael Hardner]

You worship your gods...and I will worship mine... OK?

It doesn't become you to denigrate entire bodies of study because you don't "get it". Mathematics is no more the domain of gods than engineering or poetry is. Saying so makes you look like one of those cave dwellers who is scared by fire.

[bush_cheney2004]

It doesn't become you to denigrate entire bodies of study because you don't "get it". Mathematics is no more the domain of gods than engineering or poetry is. Saying so makes you look like one of those cave dwellers who is scared by fire.

Oh....you just want to fight so we can have make-up sex. That's fine with me.

I make my living with mathematics and applied physics.

[Michael Hardner]

Oh....you just want to fight so we can have make-up sex. That's fine with me.

Eeeewwww....

I make my living with mathematics and applied physics.

I suppose we all do. Applied physics helps keeps us down... not in the same way "the man" does... but gravity-wise.

[Bonam]

Division by zero is a discontinuity and is offered up without supporting proof or theorem to a child in grade school. Only later do we get the tools and independence to challenge the High Priests.

So that's your argument? That useful applications of math such as arithmetic, algebra and geometry are taught in grade school without first developing a full background of axioms and theorems that most people don't care about and will never use? That makes it "faith"? Fact is, the information on why math definitions are set up the way they are is available to anyone who cares, there is no secret information guarded by high priests.