Dr. Stephen W. Hawking, former Lucasian professor of mathematics at Cambridge University, today made explicit his rejection of God and suggested that the laws of physics do allow the universe to have created itself from nothing.
In his latest book, ironically titled The Grand Design, Hawking states (according to Reuters and the London Daily Telegraph): "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."
This declaration by Hawking and American co-author Leonard Mlodinow is a sharp departure from his earlier assessment of the possible secrets of the origin of the universe, A Brief History of Time (1988). In that work, he said, "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason — for then we should know the mind of God."
The Telegraph reported that Hawking had already, in a June 4 interview, rejected the notion of a personal God.
The Grand Design is scheduled for release on September 9 of this year, and excerpts, though apparently published in a supplement magazine of the London Times, were not available for review.
Hawking's statement, quoted also by Sky News, provides very little detail. Sky News says that Hawking cited the discovery, in 1992, of the first "exoplanets" as proof enough that our solar system is far less remarkable than originally supposed. Those "exoplanets" (which astronomers have never seen, but only inferred from their disturbances of the orbits of their stellar primaries) have generally been several multiples of the size of the planet Jupiter, though far closer to their primaries than is Jupiter to the Sun. The more recent inference of apparent rocky exoplanets might have influenced Hawking's alarmist predictions of an extraterrestrial invasion of the earth, though at the time he claimed only that the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations was a mathematical certainty given the sheer number of stars known to exist.
The phrase "spontaneous creation" is reminiscent of the "spontaneous generation" theory of Aristotle, so perhaps Hawking is acknowledging a philosophical debt to Aristotle. (The classic "School of Athens" portrait of the famous Greek philosophers depicts Aristotle in the center, gesturing with his palm downward, indicating his concern with the earth. Next to him stands Plato, who points upward, indicating his concern with heaven.)
Previous scientists, among them Einstein, ultimately rejected the notion that the universe could self-create. Einstein originally held the universe to be static, and inserted his "cosmological constant" as a mathematical fudge to make it so. He later abandoned that notion and even apologized to the scientific community for offering it as a thing to take seriously. Yet the debate on whether the universe was static, cyclic, or open continued. More recently, Moshe Carmeli and John Hartnett published their solutions to the mystery. Hartnett's solution in particular says not only that God must exist, but that after creating the universe He expanded it exactly as He described in Genesis chapter 1.
Oddly, Sky News quoted George Ellis, head of the International Society for Science and Religion, as being critical of Hawking for provoking a "battle" between science and religion. His worry: laypeople will choose religion and reject science. Ellis might wish to consider whether his own conduct, and that of his colleagues (especially John Polkinghorne, author of this essay), might be doing more to drive a wedge between science and religion than anything that Hawking is now saying. (For a more direct response, follow this series.)
Like this article? Want to be notified of more? Click Subscribe, above.
Comments
"Those "exoplanets" (which astronomers have never seen"
Wrong again We've been taking optical images of some exoplanets for a couple of years now. Images of planets orbiting Fomalhaut & and HR 8799 (2 planets!) were the first I believe.
It seems I was out of date, I knew HR 8799 had 3 known planets but thought the photo was for 2, but there is a newer photo with all 3 planets in it.
We are almost up to 500 known exoplanets now.
I should add that it amuses me greatly that religious people who do believe that nothing created God who created everything are getting so worked up over Hawking saying something similiar.
Hawking's original comment regarding the "mind of God" was a metaphor.
>>>"which astronomers have never seen, but only inferred from their disturbances of the orbits of their stellar primaries"
False. What's more, creationism didn't predict them in any scientific sense, unlike scientific cosmological models, though they may come up with some apologetics after the fact.
I’m not sure you understand how physics works. To assume that there’s something because “Somebody” created it makes far less sense than what Stephen Hawking said.
Where did God come from? What created God? And if you’re going to say that “He always was,” then I’m going to say, “Well maybe the Universe always was,” and therefore nothing was created. The Universe expanded of its own volition. Maybe Zuse was right when he claimed that the Universe is really a computer program.
From Isaac Newton until 1925, we saw the Universe as “mechanical—things in relationship to things.” In 1925, we started to recognize a quantum view of the Universe… in other words; we started to realize that the Universe thinks for itself. In other words, Hawking was right. The Universe consists of fields of energy which exist as probabilities. The Universe isn’t a system of “things (planets, stars, moons, comets, atoms),” it’s a system of “possibilities.”
Show me God, show me proof, and I’ll believe you. Until then, I’ll take the advice of Stephen Hawking. That being said, I find it interesting that those who claim to have such an intimate relationship with truth with go to such a degree to run from it when it contradicts their dogma.
If I may, truth is a powerful adversary, because all of nature supports it. Conversely, truth is a powerful ally, because all nature supports it. I would recommend embracing it as your ally, because as your enemy, it will mess you up.
"Stephen Hawking suggests universe created itself from nothing"
Ah, the Ray Comfort view of what Stephen Hawking said. Can we expect a video on how the banana is proof of intelligent design from you too?
:)
omg the big bang theory has been proven wrong so many times ever heard of the stanley miller experiment it proves that toxic gas was created when lighting was introduced to the atmosphere billions of years ago rather than the "slurry of nutrients" that fall in the sea to create the first complex carbohydrates that then evolved into the first single cell and even if you can create a cell from toxic gas how do you get all the organelles to work together thats like beliveing in franckenstein litteraly im have no proof that jesus is god but there is definitly a creator out there because there is more evidence of that than there is saying something came from nothing
Say WHAT????
Your marginal literacy obviously causes you to see black as white, as well.
Miller-Urey not only successfully produced amino acids, in 2008, a re-analysis of Miller's archived solutions from the original experiments showed that 22 amino acids rather than 5 were actually created in one of the apparatus used.
But since you are another who conflates Big Bang - universe creation - with abiogenesis - creation of life - i guess we cannot expect anything approaching a sixth graders understanding of science.
Of course it should come as no surprise that fundies can't even tell the difference between the Big Bang, abiogenesis and evolution or what each of those individual concepts mean. All they know is that they're all beyond the capability of their supposedly all-powerful universe-creating god.
The Big Bang proven wrong? Puh-Leeze. If you're going to make claims like that you had better be prepared to back them up. I could just say "Santa Clause is real because Stanly Miller said so." I need more than that.
yes - supernovas explode by themselves...... in buddhism the universe happens by itself...and occurs in a state of ongoing instability (quantum instability ???)
but - it remains unknown to science what actually happened ....
ok you FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i hope stephen hawkings can save you when your screaming in hell cause thats where your going 'oh except your leader mr hawkings 'who i might add keeps showing proof he is a lier and very confused 'he will be the 1st to go,,,,oh and by the way every athiest scientist befor they die has been recorded asking god for forgivness just like charles darwin who i might add wa's mentaly insane ''he heard voices,,,sounds like someone els we know 'ya hawkings ,,,,he has brain damage and you trust him,,,your idiots.
TORTOISE (Hinduism) and DRAGON (Taoism) are symbols for ENERGY or WAVE, both are analog with MAGEN DAVID (Judaism). "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" is the metaphor, also seven times circling around the Ka'ba and oscillating in the Sa'i during the Hajj.
"A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME - From the Big Bang to Black Hole" by Stephen W. Hawking is the best scientific interpretation of AL QUR'AN by a non believer. It is also a “genuine bridge stone” for comprehensive study of Theology. Surprise, this paradox is a miracle and blessing in disguise as well. So, it should be very wise and challenging for Moslem scholars to verify my discovery.
NeoSUFI visionary strategic thinking by an “ordinary people.”
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!