Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God

[Hardcore Til I Die]

Didn't a theorist once say that the human mind will never be able to understand the complexity of how we were created? I'm sure I read that somewhere at neowin.

I firmly believe this.

How can a human comprehend the idea of something being infinite, when everything we know has a beginning and end? Every living organism is born and dies. Even naturally occurring materials from our planet eventually fade after hundreds/thousands of years.

How can something be born from nothing, and if that something wasn't "born," then how can it have always just existed? If somebody created it, then who created the creator, and who created the creator of the creator? And so forth.

I don't think we'll ever truly know how the universe began.

[argonite]

I firmly believe this.

How can a human comprehend the idea of something being infinite, when everything we know has a beginning and end? Every living organism is born and dies. Even naturally occurring materials from our planet eventually fade after hundreds/thousands of years.

How can something be born from nothing, and if that something wasn't "born," then how can it have always just existed? If somebody created it, then who created the creator, and who created the creator of the creator? And so forth.

I don't think we'll ever truly know how the universe began.

Humans are fine with infinity within mathematics and calculus. Which is all that string theory boils down to: math.

I don't see the problem.

If you want to talk about philosophical infinity (discussing "how is this possible" or "how does this make sense"), then we can have an interesting discussion.

I do know that, even if string theory could show how to create the particles of the universe out of thin air (or no air), and we could be pointed to what equation says that it can, we as humans still wouldn't intuitively "get it." But that the same time, we don't need to "get it", we just need to "know that it could've happened this way, somehow."

[Astra.Xtreme]

If nothing existed, how could gravity have existed when there was nothing. It was either one or the other. The idea that there was nothing (which itself is difficult to fathom) and then suddenly something makes absolutely no sense. I'm surprised Hawkings would write something like that.

You are taking that way too literally. Gravity isn't a physical object, and by "nothing", he's referring to physical things. His theory is that intangible forces are what created the universe as we know it today. I would say that's a pretty damn good theory.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

I wish you guys would realise how futile the Atheist vs. Theist debate is. Nobody is going to sway the other party, so just give it up and accept that people believe in different things.

If people feel better for believing in a Deity then that is their right and there's nothing wrong with that, whether there's evidence or not. Personally I live my life by science and don't believe in any deity because there is no evidence, but I don't preach my views on others; just let people get on with it.

Likewise, religious preachers who try to force their beliefs on people on the street should be ashamed of themselves.

Humans are fine with infinity within mathematics and calculus. Which is all that string theory boils down to: math.

I don't see the problem.

If you want to talk about philosophical infinity (discussing "how is this possible" or "how does this make sense"), then we can have an interesting discussion.

I do know that, even if string theory could show how to create the particles of the universe out of thin air (or no air), and we could be pointed to what equation says that it can, we as humans still wouldn't intuitively "get it." But that the same time, we don't need to "get it", we just need to "know that it could've happened this way, somehow."

I'm talking about the idea that something has been there forever. Something that wasn't born, it just always existed, and will always exist. That's the way I'm using the word infinite :)

[argonite]

I'm talking about the idea that something has been there forever. Something that wasn't born, it just always existed, and will always exist. That's the way I'm using the word infinite :)

To some extent, humans are capable of dealing with this.

I mean, you weren't born at the beginning of the universe, you are born into a world where things already existed as they are. You never asked "where did time come from" because you've understood that time has "always existed" at least as long as the words "always" and "exist" have meaning.

[Calum Veteran]

Hm, I'd like to see Hawking prove that some 'God' did not create the universe. Surely he can't make that claim unless he provides proof?

[brentaal]

Hm, I'd like to see Hawking prove that some 'God' did not create the universe. Surely he can't make that claim unless he provides proof?

Please don't start that discussion again.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/934746-stephen-hawking-says-universe-not-created-by-god/page__view__findpost__p__593103300

This is not the place for it.

[tiagosilva29]

Why should the burden of proof lie with the atheists? Why don't you or any other theist show evidence of the existence, or even the necessity of a deity?

Here's your proof.

[DrCheese]

Hm, I'd like to see Hawking prove that some 'God' did not create the universe. Surely he can't make that claim unless he provides proof?

I'd like to see you provide some, see how this just ends up in circles?

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

Hm, I'd like to see Hawking prove that some 'God' did not create the universe. Surely he can't make that claim unless he provides proof?

[LiquidSolstice]

Cool Story Bro.

That was totally intelligent.

Anyway, this shouldn't come as a surprise who knows or is familar with Hawking's stuff.

Hm, I'd like to see Hawking prove that some 'God' did not create the universe. Surely he can't make that claim unless he provides proof?

And it's ok for religious people to make the claim that god does exist and "is all around us"? That's totally not a double-standard.

Hm, I'd like to see Hawking prove that some 'God' did not create the universe. Surely he can't make that claim unless he provides proof?

And it's ok for religious people to make the claim that god does exist and "is all around us"? That's totally not a double-standard.

[what]

Hm, I'd like to see Hawking prove that some 'God' did not create the universe. Surely he can't make that claim unless he provides proof?

Science explains everything, my good sir.

[pezzonovante]

So, where did gravity or "M-theory" or "Theory of Everything" come from?

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

So, where did gravity or "M-theory" or "Theory of Everything" come from?

Scientific research.

[Astra.Xtreme]

So, where did gravity or "M-theory" or "Theory of Everything" come from?

Our physical observations...

[pezzonovante]

Our physical observations...

I meant how and why did this or these laws come into existence? Why should the Universe follow these laws?

[treemonster]

i have yet to see any proof one way or the other.

just because the religious can't prove god exists(which according to their relgion they should never even try to do anyway), doesn't mean the atheists can prove the opposite.

science has proved the existence of things we never knew existed or thought were impossible, yet dreamed of and imagined, so we shouldn't be too surprised if someday science actually proves there really is a god, or creator being who threw will alone ro some other mechanic influences every single force and piece of matter in the unirevse in ways we can't begin to imagine currently.

it's even possible such a being might care about humans, certain groups of humans over other groups of humans for some reason we can't begin to understand, or hand down laws on pieces of stone and speak through burning bushes or w/e.

then again someday we might be able to prove the opposite, that every thing attributed to some god being is pure imagination and makea road map of the beginning of the unieverse including what, if anything existed in it's place before that and what caused the big bang.

hell we still assume multiple universes to be the stuff of sci fi for the most part, but science has yet to prove either way.

even time travel may become possible.

and then there's the subject of aliens and if they could possibly have a role in teh whole god thing throughout human history. i mean what if we meet up with some vulcan from planet x in 500 years and they tell all about the times they talked to some human through a burning bush or instpired a pyramid and we have a good laugh about it over space coffee.

hawking is losing his edge imho. although i agree with his stance about talking to aliens. they could be hostile and try to kill us all or enslave us or steal our water.

[LiquidSolstice]

Something to think about. ?

Scenario #1

You claim to be holding an apple. You say that its in your hand. However, I can't see it. No one else can see it. We can't touch it, we can't feel it, we obviously can't hear it, and by extension of those, we cannot taste it. How will you prove to me (by the same standards of science where evidence dictates what is real and what is not) that you are holding an Apple? Saying that I must have "faith" that you really are holding an apple is avoiding the question. Telling me that x number of people believe that you are holding an apple makes no difference to me, because that just proves to me that other people believe the apple exists, it does not prove to me that the apple actually exists. You cannot show me a book that says teh apple exists, because that just tells me that a book exists which claims that you are holding the apple. You cannot use the excuse/question of "how else can I be holding an apple if the apple does nto exists" because that is still avoiding the question: how can you prove to me that I am holding an apple?

Scenario #2

I claim to be holding an Apple. I say that its in my hand. if I open my hand, you can see it. You can touch it. You can feel it. if I allowed you to, you can taste it. You do not need faith to assume that I am holding the apple, you understand that the apple exists and is currently residing in my hand because all five of your senses have confirmed it. The same five sense that you've been using all your life to confirm or debunk situations where the existence of something is questioned. You do not need the secondary source of a book to tell you that the apple is in my hand. You also don't need to care about how many other people think or believe I am holding the apple, because your observations can be reproduced. All hygiene aside, you too can see, touch, an taste the apple as well.

Why not keep this in mind before jumping down the throats of atheists demanding the same proof which you cannot give?

[thommcg]

... How can a human comprehend the idea of something being infinite...

We couldn't comprehend the world being anything other than flat some centuries ago...

[what]

I meant how and why did this or these laws come into existence? Why should the Universe follow these laws?

Because if they didn't, the universe wouldn't exist.

Let me guess, God conjured them up one night when he decided things were too simple?

[LiquidSolstice]

I meant how and why did this or these laws come into existence? Why should the Universe follow these laws?

We....don't?make the laws of physics. All the physical laws of the world are in existence. Whether or not we've found, defined, and documented them, that's a matter of time. Your argument is useless, and your idea of "the Universe" is poorly and vaguely defined (read: not at all)

[pezzonovante]

We....don't make the laws of physics. All the physical laws of the world are in existence. Whether or not we've found, defined, and documented them, that's a matter of time. Your argument is useless, and your idea of "the Universe" is poorly and vaguely defined (read: not at all)

You seem to have missed my point completely? I said nothing about human beings finding out these laws. My question was if God didn't create the laws of the universe, why and how were these laws (or the law) come into existence? Why should the Universe follow it?

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

You seem to have missed my point completely? I said nothing about human beings finding out these laws. My question was if God didn't create the laws of the universe, why and how were these laws (or the law) come into existence? Why should the Universe follow it?

They just exist. Why do those laws have to be created by a superior being? Is the concept of the universe as well as the laws of physics just existing that alien to you?

[LiquidSolstice]

You seem to have missed my point completely? I said nothing about human beings finding out these laws. My question was if God didn't create the laws of the universe, why and how were these laws (or the law) come into existence? Why should the Universe follow it?

? What "laws" are you talking about? An why is it that what we don't understand or have an answer for we instantly assume is the work of god? Didn't we once think to ourselves that god was the reason why the tides rose and the sun rose and set?

[pezzonovante]

They just exist. Why do those laws have to be created by a superior being? Is the concept of the universe as well as the laws of physics just existing that alien to you?

I find it much more logical to believe that a superior being, i.e, God, makes the universe exist, rather than believing (yes, you are also blindly believing) that everything just exists without any reason.