Slashdot Mirror


A Brief History of Stephen Hawking (newscientist.com)

New Scientist: The most recognisable scientist of our age, Hawking holds an iconic status. [...] He was routinely consulted for oracular pronouncements on everything from time travel and alien life to Middle Eastern politics and nefarious robots. He had an endearing sense of humour and a daredevil attitude -- relatable human traits that, combined with his seemingly superhuman mind, made Hawking eminently marketable.

But his cultural status -- amplified by his disability and the media storm it invoked -- often overshadowed his scientific legacy. That's a shame for the man who discovered what might prove to be the key clue to the theory of everything, advanced our understanding of space and time, helped shape the course of physics for the last four decades and whose insight continues to drive progress in fundamental physics today.
The New York Times: 1970 Dr. Hawking shows that the area of a black hole's event horizon -- a spherical surface marking the point of no return -- can only increase, never decrease, as stuff falls into a black hole or it collides and merges with other black holes.
1971 He suggests that mini black holes much smaller than stars created in the Big Bang could be peppering the universe.
1974 He shocks his colleagues and the world by showing that black holes will leak and explode when quantum effects -- the weird laws that describe subatomic behavior -- are taken into account.
1976 Dr. Hawking says exploding black holes add randomness and unpredictability to the universe, forever erasing information about what might have fallen into a black hole.

Quantum physicists object, saying the universe can't forget, initiating a 40-year argument about the fate of information. Dr. Hawking concedes in 2004, but does not say how information is preserved in a black hole, and the argument continues to this day.
1982 Using a mathematical conceit called imaginary time, Dr. Hawking and James Hartle, a theoretical physicist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, propose a model of a self-contained universe that has no boundary in space or time, and thus no place or time when the laws of physics break down. [...]
Further reading: Stephen Hawking is still underrated (The Atlantic); Science mourns Stephen Hawking's death (Nature); and How it all began: a colleague reflects on the remarkable life of Stephen Hawking (Smithsonian).

48 comments

  1. He should be censored by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Funny

    He should be censored... All that talk about naked singularities. In my Christian country singularities are always suitably clothed.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:He should be censored by thomst · · Score: 1

      Oswald McWeany remonstrated thusly:

      He should be censored... All that talk about naked singularities. In my Christian country singularities are always suitably clothed.

      Why, exactly, is this modded Troll?

      It's clearly a joke - and a funny one, at that.

      Someone with points, please mod it accordingly ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    2. Re:He should be censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1974... Yeah, wow... I can't begin to TELL you the problems *I* had with my black holes exploding until he called me one day and offhandedly asked me if I was accounting for the quantum effects. Hmph, good times.

    3. Re:He should be censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He should be censored... All that talk about naked singularities. In my Christian country singularities are always suitably clothed.

      That's nothing. In my Muslim country, naked singularities are always stoned to death and/or beheaded.

  2. Sounds like a bunch on unverifiable claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously none of that stuff can be proven with existing technology, so how can we know all of this is not random babbling.

    1. Re:Sounds like a bunch on unverifiable claims by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Informative

      Seriously none of that stuff can be proven with existing technology, so how can we know all of this is not random babbling.

      That's why it is called theoretical physics. A lot of his claims can't be proven or tested but there are a lot of mathematics in place to support his claims- he's not just randomly suggesting things.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:Sounds like a bunch on unverifiable claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BS.
      Math does not support claims. You can create a math to make anything look like it fits.

      *Data* is what must be used to support claims of the physical world.

      Physics is a disaster. They've spent nearly a century now and billions of tax payer dollars to play with numbers and equations in the abstract--and yet the mainstream still can't explain numerous basic data sets that are decades old. The only answer is "more exotic math" and "more money".

      Einstein's definition of insanity anyone?

    3. Re:Sounds like a bunch on unverifiable claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gravity Waves and the Higgs Boson don't impress you I see.

    4. Re:Sounds like a bunch on unverifiable claims by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But then other mathematicians and physicists come by and review the math for errors. If the math is wrong it's usually discovered in a relatively short time. Changing theories usually happens after the base assumptions are shown to have changed.

      But that's ok. These are all models of the universe, as we learn more about the universe then the models will change. That's not a bad thing. We still use Newton's model of gravity even though we know it's wrong, because it still a very good model for making predictions when the scope is large enough to discount quantum effects and small enough to discount relativistic effects. So someday Hawking's theories will likely be in the same boat; not precisely accurate but very close.

      The money for coming up with the theories is not a big deal. An office, a white board, a computer, etc. Experimental physics is where most of the money goes.

      And in the last century we have used indeed used quantum theory and relativity to improve technology, these are not just mind puzzles with no practical purpose. You need general relativity to build a good GPS system, and you need quantum theory to build better communications and electronic systems. The theory and applications of these do fall within the last century (the theory of general relativity being only slightly more than a century old).

    5. Re:Sounds like a bunch on unverifiable claims by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      We still use Newton's model of gravity even though we know it's wrong
      Why do americans always claim that Newtons model is wrong, it is beyond me.
      It is to simple. Perhaps. Wrong, no!

      For every purpose of our abilities to send space crafts into space and to other planets, Newtons models work just fine!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  3. Time traveller's party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    2009: Hawking holds a party for time travelers, but invitations were only sent out after the party happened. Nobody showed up.

    http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/stephen-hawkings-champagnefuelled-time-travel-party/news-story/3af5baf5f25d778b7f45a33f4998dc07

    1. Re:Time traveller's party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we'll know.

    2. Re:Time traveller's party by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      What if some people did go to the party in alternate timelines?
      Or what if the act of going to the party created alternate dimensions?

      We'll never know!

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:Time traveller's party by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Nobody showed up in this timeline you mean. Hopefully the multi world hypothesis is correct and hawking himself made his own party in some alternate timeline.

    4. Re:Time traveller's party by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      And they cured him of ALS!

    5. Re:Time traveller's party by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, I wanted to go but I had prior commitments.

  4. "Stephen Hawking is still Underrated" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've done some fairly impressive things myself, although I usually don't toot my horn about them.

    For example, I've consistently posted better than half of the down-modded posts on /.

    - AC

  5. Let me tell you the story of a man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He was born. He ate. He shat. He died.

    Covers the vast majority.

    1. Re:Let me tell you the story of a man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > He was born. He ate. He shat. He died.
      > Covers the vast majority.

      You're wrong on so many levels.

      But I'll just talk about one: he received so little, yet went further than the vast majority who can walk better and yet cannot see what made him great.

      Right at the same level of people like Helen Keller, Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder.

      Here's a man who worked hard even in the face of things which would render us useless. He certainly earned his Freedom. May he be walking now, or flying or whatever in the better place I hope he is now.

      And I thank him for the example of his life, which I hope will inspire us for a long time.

  6. A great man in more ways than one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    It's also important to remember that he was a great advocate for feminism and women's liberation:

    https://mashable.com/2017/03/20/stephen-hawking-piers-morgan-feminist-women-rights-gender-equality/

    I welcome these signs of women’s liberation. But there may still be a gap between those women achieving high public status and those in the private sector.

    Now that he's passed, the "skeptic" community (more like septic community) will try to erase this side of him to push male supremacy, don't let them.

  7. Stephen Hawking in popular culture by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1
    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  8. Nobel prize by burtosis · · Score: 1

    I really hope we find evidence, even if indirect, of Hawking radiation in my lifetime. I would love to see him get a nobel prize for his work.

    1. Re:Nobel prize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He won't. Nobel prizes are never awarded posthumously.

      besides, he already has this: https://www.geek.com/geek-cete...

      Chances are he will be better remembered than most Nobel Prize winners.

    2. Re:Nobel prize by duinsel · · Score: 1

      Sorry to say that Nobel prizes are not awarded posthumously..

    3. Re:Nobel prize by Ross+Finlayson · · Score: 1

      A Nobel prize is never awarded posthumously

    4. Re:Nobel prize by quenda · · Score: 1

      Not posthumously, BUT, if we do a wick rotation, he may be able to get an imaginary Nobel Prize before he dies.

  9. Maybe the invitations got lost in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the Black Hole, on their way to the party.

    Wouldn't it be funny if they had checked the invitations at the door and turned away all the time travellers for not having theirs with them? :)

  10. What if they were all rounded up and killed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To cover up the fact that time travel was real? Only in some timelines (or rather, permutations of the singular universe) they made it to the party and society collapsed when it became apparent time travel could happen and if the right people made it back they could save you/give you immortality/etc, or simply put the future doesn't matter and you can rewrite your past.

    The world would fall into complete and utter chaos as people tried to change the past and future for their own gain, or to control the lives of others.

    1. Re:What if they were all rounded up and killed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming this is not already happening.

  11. In 1988 ... by thomst · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My wife and I were lucky enough to get tickets to see Dr. Stephen Hawking "speak" at the Berkeley Community Theatre. They were free, if I recall correctly, but demand for them was understandably high, since he had recently released his best-selling book A Brief History of Time, which was still on the NYT bestseller list at the time.

    Great book, btw, if a tiny bit dated now. I recommend the illustrated, updated and revised edition to everyone with an interest in the work to which Hawking devoted his life.

    Hawking was in town to present a series of lectures on cosmology and the physics of black holes at the University of California, and he graciously agreed to also appear at the BCT for a much more general presentation to a capacity crowd of almost 3,500.

    ALS had, of course, long since claimed Hawking's ability to speak for himself - as well as almost all of his motor control - so, even then, the voice we heard was that of his voice synthesizer. Nonetheless, his personality came through in full force: by turns funny, professorial, wondering, and confiding. It was, no doubt, a canned presentation, but the man himself controlled the pace at which it unfolded - and his timing was absolutely masterful. He had the crowd hanging on his every word, and he received a standing ovation that lasted for a good five minutes or more at the end of his performance.

    We'd had to park several blocks away, so, because of downtown Berkeley's proliferation of one-way streets, we found ourselves on Shattuck Avenue, headed the opposite direction from home, and looking for a chance to get turned around, when we passed the intersection of Shattuck and Allston Way. And there, on the corner, sitting all alone in his wheelchair, obviously waiting for suitably-equipped transport to arrive and whisk him away to his hotel, was Dr. Stephen Hawking, Lucasion Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, eminent physicist, bestselling author, and pop-culture superstar.

    To this day, I still wish that we'd stopped, and offered to keep him company while he waited - but, sadly, we did not ...

    --
    Check out my novel.
    1. Re:In 1988 ... by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      the voice we heard was that of his voice synthesizer

      That synthesizer is several decades old - these days we have really good voice synthesizers, but Dr. Hawking felt that that one was his "voice" and demanded that it be kept, despite improvements to the computing equipment on his wheelchair. It was also the most finicky and most power hungry, being designed in an age where we didn't have CMOS.

      There was a team who did nothing but source parts and fixed it.

      I think it was the only thing of DEC that was still being used from when it was made to yesterday.

      I hope whoever takes care of his estate destroys the thing - if only to keep that voice silent out of respect. Seems wrong to use it.

    2. Re:In 1988 ... by Lanthanide · · Score: 1

      Er, why would they not put it in a museum somewhere? Sure, 'disable' it, but that's not what you said. Sounds like it'll do a good job of self-disabling within about 5 years if not maintained anyway.

    3. Re:In 1988 ... by antdude · · Score: 1

      No! "It belongs in a musuem!" --Indy

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    4. Re:In 1988 ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd hedge a bet there are still some DEC switches and DEC Alphas (not Compaq or HP branded) out there still in production environments - it was well made stuff and would probably function until the end of time so long as the electrolytic caps are periodically replaced.

  12. Who is going to take his place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The triumvirate leaders of American Science were Stephen Hawking, Bill Nye the Science Guy, and Neil Degrasse Tyson. We have just lost 1/3 of our scientific knowledge. These are the people we go to to ask any and all Scientific questions of Science. My feeling is that Bill Nye the Science Guy is not long for this world. When that happens our entire Scientific body of Scientific knowledge of Science will be contained in 1 person. We need to start an billion dollar Scientific program to create new Scientific Experts to whom we can bring all manner of as-sundry Scientific questions to in order to get and authoritative conclusions of Science. Without this people will start having to think for themselves, and we all know how dangerous that is. No Lets put our faith in Science.

    Who will it be. Who can take the place of Stephen Hawking? Should the media crown the new cadre of Scientific experts, or should we be progressive and let the community of Science believing redditors come forth with the new prince.

    Once think is for certain is that if we loose Tyson and Bill Bye the Science guy humanity will go crazy. We need to have guards guarding our Scientific experts round the clock.

    1. Re:Who is going to take his place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, this is really funny. +5

    2. Re:Who is going to take his place by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Stephen Hawking was British, so I'm not sure what he has to do with American science...

  13. Did He Plan Out His Own Death? by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    I can't help but wondering something.

    Considering he died on Albert Einstein's birthday, and in fact at the same age of 76 that Einstein died at, what is the likelihood that he actually planned that particular day to leave the universe?

    Highly probable or just a freaky coincidence?

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
    1. Re:Did He Plan Out His Own Death? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Let me guess: you are a huge Nikola Tesla fan.

    2. Re:Did He Plan Out His Own Death? by quenda · · Score: 1

      Highly probable or just a freaky coincidence?

      Neither. Just the sort of boring coincidence you expect to find if you throw enough variables on the table.
      Do you find horoscopes spookily accurate too?

    3. Re:Did He Plan Out His Own Death? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Highly probable or just a freaky coincidence?
      1 in 365.25 ... I'd fucking buy a lotto ticket with those odds... but I never do buy them.

    4. Re:Did He Plan Out His Own Death? by seoras · · Score: 1

      This is coming from a guy who thinks you can only get AIDS from anal sex and needles.

    5. Re:Did He Plan Out His Own Death? by seoras · · Score: 1

      This is coming from someone who thinks you can only get AIDS from anal sex and needles.
      Genius...

  14. My favorite character on Star Trek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Loved seeing him get the respect from the Nerd Space. I was always delighted to find him on yet another TV show!

  15. Blind observation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The black holes are not observable.

    How can a scientist observe black holes?