Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

High Table at Cambridge with Stephen Hawking

Posted by Hemos on from the talking-with-mc-hawking dept.

bughunter writes "Accomplished astrophysicist and SF author Gregory Benford shares a personal account of his recent conversation with Stephen Hawking at Reason Online. As usual, Benford's style is engaging and informal, and this doesn't read like a typical interview. Although the article is short on jargon, Benford and Hawking share insights on the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, as such minds are want to do. We even get a glimpse of Cambridge tunnel hacking. Of course, there's also a plug for Hawking's new book, The Universe in a Nutshell."

3 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Come on, he's a popularizer by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2, Troll
    Stephen Hawking will always be known as the guy in a wheelchair who wrote a betselling book teaching physics to the upper-middle class. Thats his legacy.

  2. JESUS CHRIST!!!! by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 1, Troll

    I pissed my pants. I'm not ashamed.

  3. The Priests of Science by Planesdragon · · Score: 1, Troll

    Stephen Hawking spends his life trying to come up with a history of everything that makes sense to his mind. He purports that other universes exist, but that there is no way to prove their existance--and he even admits that there is no scientific way to prove these theories.

    I say now that Hawking does not practice science, but rather the religion of science. Be he priest, prophet, or simple thelogian, he is no more a scientist than I am.

    Any imaginative author or deluded "holy man" can define the universe and then find details and create a history that is logically consistent, and can adapt such a theory to any and all data that might refute it. I say that Hawking and his theories are no more scientific than religion, and the fact that his work inspires true, falsifiable science is nothing more than a happy coincidence.

    If you do not agree with what I say, then please formulate a reply and refute me. Science--real science--is not bound by a chosen notion of God's existance or nonexistance and does not deal with things that cannot be tested in reality.

    I say that Science says nothing that is not proven fact, and that to brand one ascetic dream "science" and another "religion" is a disservice to both and an obstruction to the search of Reality that real Science seeks.

    All replies are welcome, and replies with answers are asked for.