Stephen Hawking's Two Big Buckets Of Nothing

                       Image via Wikipedia

Stephen Hawking's Two Big Buckets Of Nothing:

You take a bucket of negatively charged energy, a bucket of positively charged energy, mix them together, and, oh, baby -- you've got yourself... one big bucket of nothing!

Then, you swirl this one big bucket of nothing around and... BANG!

Postscript. If the bucket is really, really, big, you get a BIG Bang.

Q&A.

Q. "Dr. Hawking, what if the buckets had been smaller?".

A. "We would have been tiny."

Someone remind me how this is an improvement on the big turtle creation myth?

Related articles

• Beyond the Big Bang (geopolicraticus.wordpress.com)
• "Curiosity" with Stephen Hawking (whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com)
• Stephen Hawking's curiosity (vault9.net)
• Curiosity Tv show with Stephen Hawking (vault9.net)
• It all adds up to Zero (trinbagodreamer.wordpress.com)
• Stephen Hawking to visit Canada in September (cbc.ca)
• The Laws of the Universe (via The Quantum Entanglement of the Soul) (thechristiangazette.wordpress.com)

More on Stephen Hawking's Shark-Jump

From a letter-writer to the National Post:

Image via Wikipedia

Stephen Hawking claims that the discovery of a planet orbiting another ‘sun’ makes Earth’s conditions for life less remarkable, and has helped to deconstruct Isaac Newton’s view that the universe must have been created by God. Newton, were he alive today, would most probably disagree. The faith difference between the two eminent scientists is not due to the amount of knowledge available to each, but to the attitude taken by each to the knowledge available. Isaac Newton’s genius discovered the law of universal gravitation and the laws of motion, the binomial theorem in math, calculus, the light spectrum and the reflecting telescope. Yet Isaac Newton claimed that his discoveries could only barely begin to appreciate God’s creation. He said he felt “…like a boy playing on the sea shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.” (cited in Westfall 1980, p.863)  It is unlikely that Newton would think that situation significantly altered by the macroscopic or microscopic discoveries made since his time.

-- Edward Field, Langley, B.C.

Well said, Edward. Belief in God is based far more on the predisposition of one's mind, heart, and will, than on any objective analysis of facts.

Perhaps we could even say that salvation is based on a form of supernatural selection -- where Nature God selects those whose hearts are inclined to him, those who have an inkling he exists and a longing to know him, while those whose hearts are disinclined towards him, or towards knowledge of the true God (and therefore unsuited to remain in his presence and fellowship for eternity -- they would be miserable) are destroyed.

Stephen and Jane Hawking: Both Sides Now

If you want to know more about Stephen Hawking, you might be interested in reading this article: "Stephen Hawking: the closed mind of a dogmatic atheist. A review of Music to Move the Stars" by Jane Hawking.

This book review talks about Stephen's wife Jane, their life together, his illness, and the care she provided, his rise to fame, his adultery, their divorce, his ardent atheism and her equally ardent Christianity. As usual, hubris tops the list of human sins.

I know little about Jane Hawking, but, based on this short article, it seems to me that she, and not Stephen, may well be the real hero in the Hawking house.

h/t Manawatu Christian Apologetics Society.

Related articles by Zemanta

• God, Stephen Hawking and M Theory (guardian.co.uk)
• Stephen Hawking and the supernatural (beliefnet.com)
• Stephen Hawking Says God Did Not Create the Universe (blippitt.com)

Much Ado About Nothing

Image via Wikipedia

Re: shark-jumping Stephen Hawking and the tempest-in-a-teapot-universe made of nothing.

Is it made of nothing, or... is... it... made... of... Nothing??!!

Bwahahaha!

I want to know all there is to know about nothing!

Plus, I want to know, if Stephen Hawking jumps a shark that doesn't exist, does it make a sound?!

Oh, man!

Related articles by Zemanta

• Stephen Hawking Says God Did Not Create the Universe (blippitt.com)
• "Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing...." (ihatethismess.tumblr.com)
• An empty debate (stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com)
• Beautiful words from Hawking (mojoey.blogspot.com)
• Stephen Hawking vs. God (wmbriggs.com)

The Kingdom Strikes Back

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday, Stephen Hawking gave God a death-blow: "because gravity exists, there is no God!" It's hard to refute an argument like this, I mean, this is a knock-out.

And the disciples thought the death of Christ was a setback!

But now, just when I thought it was time to dismantle the Blog and go fishing, the Kingdom of God strikes back!

John Lennox: As a scientist I'm certain Stephen Hawking is wrong. You can't explain the universe without God

The Archbish: Archbishop of Canterbury hits back after Stephen Hawking insists God did NOT create the universe

And, on the lighter side, this: Hawking Not Needed to Explain His New Book, Says Universe

To sum it up:

There was a man named S. Hawking

Who thought he heard a big knocking

KNOCK! KNOCK! "Who's there?"

"Why, nothing but air!"

An answer disturbing and shocking

Related articles by Zemanta

• Hawking and Archbishop 'could both be right' on Go (channel4.com)
• Stephen Hawking: religious leaders dismiss 'God not needed' comments (telegraph.co.uk)
• Stephen Hawking God Comment Sparks Controvery! (manolith.com)

Stephen Hawking Jumps The Shark

Image by nasa hq photo via Flickr

Stephen Hawking jumps the shark:

"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"  -- Stephen Hawking.

This is the best that one of the greatest minds on the planet has to offer?  Maybe it gets better if you read everything he said; but this is incoherent on about every possible level.

For starters:

* If there is really and truly nothing, then where does gravity come from?

* Why do natural laws exist at all, and why  are the natural laws what they are as opposed to some other thing?  Why, e.g., is there gravity in the first place, and why does it have the strength it has as opposed to some other strength?

* The terms spontaneous creation and reason are incoherent when used together. If creation was spontaneous, then there may be a cause for the universe but there is no reason for it;  reason becomes an incoherent concept and an absurd quest. Spontaneous generation of the universe may explain how we came to exist, but not why -- because there can be no why under this scenario.

Hawking's comment appears to be nothing more than atheist dogma -- "from nothing, by nothing, for nothing" -- in pseudo-scientific drag.

Stephen's wife, Jane, here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Hawking Picks Physics Over God For Big Bang (science.slashdot.org)
• Stephen Hawking: God was not needed to create the Universe (3quarksdaily.com)
• Somebody's Going To Hell! Stephen Hawking: "God Not Necessary For Universe To Exist" (geekologie.com)
• Stephen Hawking: God was not needed to create the Universe (politics.ie)