Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
ManusJustus said:
Hawking use to be more religious in the past, atleast that is what I got from some of his books and speeches. Like Albert Einstein before him, Hawking would use God in some of his explanations, but Einstein was privately an atheist who considered religion a silly child's myth while Hawkings private ideas about religion haven't really come out (atleast to my knowledge).
|
That's not even remotely true. About Einstein.
Einstein believed in a god. He just didn't believe in any specific god.
Einsteins beliefs were quite subtle, he appeared to believe in the universe as God. I don't think he ever implied a belief in a consciousness though.
Either way, the book should be interesting, though it appears to be built more on conjecture then fact at this point. For example the talk of multiple universes when there hasn't even been a shred of evidence pointing to that yet. It will be intersting if he has some new info on that.
There has been quite a lot of theoretical evidence for it. From what I understand (which when it comes to advanced physics, really isn't much) a multiverse comes up in the maths of things like string theory. Given he's a theoretical physicist it's his stamping ground.
Adittionally, you're thread is misleading... as Hawking's position is basically "How the universe is set up means god doesn't need to create the universe".
Which you know... the article you posted states... you never seem to read your own sources past like the first couple paragraphs in a rush to make a point.
"But some of Hawking's Cambridge colleagues said the physicist has missed the point.
"The 'god' that Stephen Hawking is trying to debunk is not the creator God of the Abrahamic faiths who really is the ultimate explanation for why there is something rather than nothing," said Denis Alexander."
|
|
Theoretical evidence is qualified as such because it isn't really evidence.
Theortectical evidence is the equivlent of my PSP being gone and my using that as proof that someone stole my PSP.
It just seems like the most likely explination to me. No real evidence... it's just... you know something is happening. That's the theoretical evidence, and your reasoning why is the theory. In this case multiple universes.
There has been lots of very strong theoretical evidence for all kinds of things that never really existed, things like Ether, global cooling (actual evidence there too even) etc.
You could use the same theoretical evidence used for different dimensions and instead apply that information as proof of many other different theories.
