Hawking is getting more and more weirder. This time a genius weirdo is explaining the origin of universe alone with his physical laws. In his latest book, The Grand Design, an extract of which is published in Eureka magazine in The Times, Hawking said: “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.” He added: “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.”
Okay, admitted! Admitted that Hawking is right then he need to explain everything around us as to why it exist at all? Hawking has already made a fuss of controversial statements.
This is the big bang which started from a explosion and symmetry breaking in ultimate supersymmetric singularity. It seems fairly likely that there was a Big Bang. The obvious question that could be asked to challenge or define the boundaries between physics and metaphysics is: what came before the Big Bang? Physicists define the boundaries of physics by trying to describe them theoretically and then testing that description against observation. Our observed expanding Universe is very well described by flat space, with critical density supplied mainly by dark matter and a cosmological constant, that should expand forever. If we follow this model backwards in time to when the Universe was very hot and dense, and dominated by radiation, then we have to understand the particle physics that happens at such high densities of energy. The experimental understanding of particle physics starts to poop out after the energy scale of electroweak unification, and theoretical physicists have to reach for models of particle physics beyond the Standard Model, to Grand Unified Theories, supersymmetry, string theory and quantum cosmology.
Theories can explain the characteristics but not ultimate fundamental origin. Even if we would have discovered the grand unified theory or say theory of everything, a fundamental question would still be unexplained for us perplexing our 1600cc mind for infinite light years in time dimension that is, from where such singularity came? Who created the space time itself? What is that upholding the whole quantum chunk of space time? Indeed, what is withing our scope that we could know how this universe was formed, what are the laws of universe, how to create extra dimensions of our own or even universe.!?
Consider a scenario to comprehend the controversial case with better intellect! What if we have created five dimensional universe of our own followed by programming laws of universe and intentionally creating a ultimate singularity made of compactified 10^78 electrons,protons and neutrons? Assume somehow we have completed this task by hook or crook. Since we already have TOE( Theory of Everything) so it is desired that we would explode it using our technology inasmuch it would be stupidity to wait for billions of years to see a big bang explosion happening(or we may accelerate the rate of change of time by vast amounts). Now consider the evolution of universe in a same way(it would be slightly different since this time we are dealing with a five dimensional universe not classical 4dimensional universe) as it has already happened. It is presumed that there are intelligent beings which have been evolved along the pace of time. Now if these five dimensional intelligent intellectual entities are smart enough to comprehend their five dimensional universe. Now consider they have discovered quantum theory of origin of universe and physical laws of extradimensions and parallel universes.
What if another five dimensional Hawking( this is not four dimensional Hawking) has acclaimed that we don’t need god since we could explain the origin of our five dimensional universe with the help of supergravity? Is he correct? Certainly not!!
Something can be explained without the need of anything doesn’t mean that anything don’t exist. This is where Hawking still stands for totally vague and satired leaning argument. Hey Hawking, stop this unnecessary controversies!!
(This link is also found at - http://weirdsciences.net/2010/09/03/poor-hawking-you-are-still-wrong/ )
Popular Posts
-
It is with a sad heart that I have to inform readers and discoverer's of The C Influence - of the passing of co-founder Bruce Duensing, ...
-
(phillips moderates) - Regan Lee explores the edge of Lon's post of `appearing entities' - but presenting below an excellent piece w...
-
Reports of a large, hairy hominid have circulated worldwide for centuries. The sightings and lore have become the basis for speculation as t...
-
Demanding the disclosure of what does not exist is, in itself, an interesting anomaly about an anomaly (i.e., the UFO phenomenon). The (il)l...
-
The necessity of plagues . I find this to be an interesting term. Are these natural plagues - disease, famine, insect swarms, etc? How about...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are always monitored before posting to prevent spam.