[marden]

Scientists may be within 20 years of knowing "the mind of God”

"...scientists may be within 20 years of reaching his prediction that mankind would one day "know the mind of God.”

Referring to a prediction by Professor Stephen Hawking

01 December 2006

Humans must leave Earth to survive, says Hawking

By Andrew Woodcock

MANKIND will need to leave planet Earth to ensure the long-term survival of the species, theoretical physicist Professor Stephen Hawking warned yesterday.

Prof Hawking said that space rockets propelled by the kind of matter/antimatter annihilation technology used in Star Trek would be needed to colonise hospitable planets orbiting other stars.

Prof Hawking was speaking ahead of the presentation to him yesterday of Britain’s highest scientific award, the Royal Society’s Copley Medal, previously granted to Charles Darwin, Michael Faraday and Captain James Cook.

He told BBC radio that scientists may be within 20 years of reaching his prediction that mankind would one day “know the mind of God” by understanding all the laws which govern the universe.

And he said that this knowledge may be vital to the human race’s continued existence.

“The long-term survival of the human race is at risk as long as it is confined to a single planet,” he said.

“Disasters such as an asteroid collision or nuclear war could wipe us all out. But once we spread out into space and establish independent colonies, our future should be safe.

“There isn’t anywhere like the Earth in the solar system, so we would have to go to another star.

“Science fiction has developed the idea of warp drive, which takes you instantly to your destination. Unfortunately, this would violate the scientific law which says that nothing can travel faster than light.

“We can still within the law, by using matter/antimatter annihilation, at least reach just below the speed of light. With that, it would be possible to reach the next star in about six years.”

The science fiction series Star Trek has used matter/antimatter annihilation as an explanation for the warp drive which powers spaceships through vast distances in short periods of time.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishex...635-qqqx=1.asp

There are multiple angles to this story. Each one is worthy of it's own thread.

Knowing the mind of God within 20 years!

Hawking advocates developing Star Trek technology.

Hawking believes it's necessary to colonize other planets!

Hawking fears asteroids or nuclear war could wipe out the human race!

Hawking says reaching the nearest habitable planet might take only 6 years travel time!

I think I'll go with the nuclear war angle, but you can choose the angle that most interests you.

See? Even the smartest man on Earth recognizes the threat!

The Nazi's never had this kind of ability.

[RAILhead]

I wish I had my own Jane in a jewel in my ear.

/obscure...maybe...

[Atomic Rooster]

"the mind of God”

Hmmmm...I wonder if it will run on a Mac.

[Kerrigan]

I'm sorry but he is a tad eccentric when it comes to these things. He's always going on about how humans will have to become cyborgs, he is (understandably) trapped in a totally unrealistic world. I don't know if he's like this because he's trapped motionless in a chair for his whole life, or if he just wants to say weird things to get publicity.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan 

I'm sorry but he is a tad eccentric when it comes to these things. He's always going on about how humans will have to become cyborgs, he is (understandably) trapped in a totally unrealistic world. I don't know if he's like this because he's trapped motionless in a chair for his whole life, or if he just wants to say weird things to get publicity.

Go ahead and scoff.

They all laugh at angry young men
They all laugh at edison
And also at einstein
So why should I feel sorry
If they just couldnt understand
The idiomatic logic
That went on in my head

Twisted
by Joni Mitchell

[ink]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

I wish I had my own Jane in a jewel in my ear.

/obscure...maybe...

But do you wish you'd wiped out the buggers?

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan 

I'm sorry but he is a tad eccentric when it comes to these things. He's always going on about how humans will have to become cyborgs, he is (understandably) trapped in a totally unrealistic world. I don't know if he's like this because he's trapped motionless in a chair for his whole life, or if he just wants to say weird things to get publicity.

God or Hawkings?

[Kerrigan]

Good one

[RAILhead]

I prefer to call them Formics, and I would have wiped them -- and The Piggies -- out, without hesitation.

[ink]

But then you'd feel really bad, and you'd have to become a speaker for the dead...

[Kerrigan]

a lot of lorfing goin on in this thread

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by marden

See? Even the smartest man on Earth recognizes the threat!

The Nazi's never had this kind of ability.

Only Marden could take a statement about advancing the human species into space and turn it into something about jihadist.

[macintologist]

“Science fiction has developed the idea of warp drive, which takes you instantly to your destination. Unfortunately, this would violate the scientific law which says that nothing can travel faster than light.

Actually it's possible to travel to any point in the universe instantly by means of a wormhole.

The shortest distance between A and B is zero.

[macintologist]

dupe

[marden]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Only Marden could take a statement about advancing the human species into space and turn it into something about jihadist.

Yes, I chose the most difficult angle to isolate so that you all could discuss the others as you wished.

You're welcome.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by marden 

Yes, I chose the most difficult angle to isolate so that you all could discuss the others as you wished.

You're welcome.

No, you choose the most irrelevant angle so that you could stir the pot and we could laugh about it.

[marden]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

Actually it's possible to travel to any point in the universe instantly by means of a wormhole.

The shortest distance between A and B is zero.

You think Hawking forgot about that?

[- - e r i k - -]

Ah, time to give the word to my creationist friends:

Some well-known physicists in recent times have used language which, to many Christians, sounds as if these men have some sort of Christian faith, or are leaning in that direction. Some Christian people have thus been encouraged. Some writers in Christian magazines have encouraged this belief that the physicists are getting 'closer to God', even claiming that what they say authenticates the Bible.1
Albert Einstein once said, in reference to the mathematical orderliness of the universe, 'God does not play dice'. This was taken by many to mean that Einstein had some sort of faith in God. More recently, physicist and philosopher Paul Davies titled his book The Mind of God. Leon Lederman, a Nobel Prize-winner, called his book about the Higgs boson fundamental atomic particle, The God Particle. George Smoot, the cosmologist, described finding fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background radiation as like 'seeing God'. Stephen Hawking, the well-known English cosmologist, seemingly echoing the sentiments of such Christian intellectual giants as Isaac Newton, tells us that the aim of science is to know the 'mind of God'.

Are these men being drawn towards faith in God through their physics/astronomy/cosmology? Not at all! Biographies of Einstein's life show that he had no personal faith in God. A quote from a book review published in Nature2 shows how we should not let statements such as those by Lederman, Smoot and Hawking mislead us:
'Such statements seriously mislead the average person, who believes that the scientists are finding the personal God of traditional theology. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lederman calls the Higgs boson the "God Particle" because it is the most important particle in particle physics today; Smoot means that, when contemplating the cosmic radiation, he experiences a feeling of awe analogous to that of religious believers; and Hawking's phrase is shorthand for the Theory of Everything. All three physicists — like most physicists of this century — describe themselves as agnostics or atheists. They do not believe in a Person who created the Universe.' Likewise, Professor Davies does not believe in a personal creator-God either.3

Physicists tend to use religious terminology because it graphically expresses the religious/philosophical nature of their thoughts and the sense of almost religious reverence they feel about their subject. Like the 'liberal' theologians, they use the language of orthodox Christianity, but in using the words they do not mean what we may think they mean.
Dr Geoffrey Burbidge, Professor of Physics at the University of California, San Diego, spoke flippantly of his colleagues rushing off to join 'the first church of Christ of the Big Bang' because of their 'evangelical fervour' for the 'big bang', not because he saw any genuine revival of Christianity in them.4

We should not be lulled into thinking the physicists are 'fellow travellers' just because they use our language. Indeed, much of the physicists' religious talk is tongue-in-cheek — and in this they ridicule true Christian faith. Even worse, they blaspheme in referring to 'God' as an atomic particle. Unfortunately for them, God will have the last word, for He says: '... I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent' (1 Corinthians 1:19).

Physicists' God-talk

[marden]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

No, you choose the most irrelevant angle so that you could stir the pot and we could laugh about it.

There are several reasons for my choosing this tack. Those two are among them. But more than stirring the pot, as you put it. I know there are people who may have no clue about the threat of violent jihad but who DO have an interest in scientists knowing the mind of God in 20 years who might have a chance to read a clue about the jihadist threat by way of this subject.

In advertising you advertise in different media and venues, programs and subjects in order to reach different demographic targets.

If a scientific type happens upon this thread it might be the one thing that grabs their attention and makes them think about the jihadist threat.

[marden]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Ah, time to give the word to my creationist friends:
Physicists' God-talk

And there are many scientists who say that the more they learn of science the more convinced they are of God's existence.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by marden 

And there are many scientists who say that the more they learn of science the more convinced they are of God's existence.

"Many" having the meaning here of "maybe 10 percent."

You'll notice that the page Erik linked is from a Christian creationist site. These are creationists acknowledging that most physicists use the word "God" in a rather non-traditional sense. If you believe that Stephen Hawking was literally talking about God, that means Stephen Hawking thinks that God literally plays dice and sometimes throws them where they can't be seen.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

"Many" having the meaning here of "maybe 10 percent."

You'll notice that the page Erik linked is from a Christian creationist site. These are creationists acknowledging that most physicists use the word "God" in a rather non-traditional sense. If you believe that Stephen Hawking was literally talking about God, that means Stephen Hawking thinks that God literally plays dice and sometimes throws them where they can't be seen.

Because I have no need to read more into his statement than what appears on the surface, I haven't pondered if he was literally talking about God or not.

Now, if he comes out and declares himself a 'dirty atheist' then that would change things, wouldn't it?

[Chuckit]

Hawking is not an atheist. He seems to want to believe in God, but he doesn't see any role in the universe for God to take — that's how it appears to me, anyway. He seems to be somewhere between a deist and an agnostic. Still, when he talks about God's mind and God playing dice and all that, he's not talking about a personal God — he's using "God" to mean essentially "the laws of the universe."

[- - e r i k - -]

I'd figure Hawkings to be a deist myself: Not ruling out the possibility, but not really caring either.

[Dakar²]

Sounds like a bit of an exaggeration, but Hawking has been prone to these the older he's gotten. Probably a side-effect of becoming less relevant in the field.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Sounds like a bit of an exaggeration, but Hawking has been prone to these the older he's gotten. Probably a side-effect of becoming less relevant in the field.

Hawking is also a great teacher, I'm sure his use of the god thing is just to get people thinking. How is he less relevant? If anything he is more famous and influential than ever. He is a superstar.

[Dakar²]

No, his fame definitely peaked by the late 90s.

And he's less relevant because he's not making huge discoveries anymore. Now he spends his time following whatever he fancies.

I'm not saying he's washed up by any means.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

No, his fame definitely peaked by the late 90s.

And he's less relevant because he's not making huge discoveries anymore. Now he spends his time following whatever he fancies.

I'm not saying he's washed up by any means.

Well, maybe after he did the cameo on Futurama he decided that he had completed all his life's goals and decided to take it easy.

[marden]

More on Hawking. Richard Branson is going to send him into space!

Cosmic Log : Stephen Hawking in space

Whether Hawking likes it or not!


Just kidding.

He wants to go.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Nicko 

Well, maybe after he did the cameo on Futurama he decided that he had completed all his life's goals and decided to take it easy.

I think enjoyed his cameo on TNG best.

[Dakar²]

Sir Richard Branson is awesome.

[quattrokid73]

i think there are major philisophical implications that arrise when God and high level science appear in the same spot. often times, we forget that these discoveries that have been made/will be made, are discoveries of a language. science, like chinese or arabic, is the language of matter/antimatter/etc. to say that science created science is a tautology. whether in partical or wave form, matter is still pixy dust. i think the issue is that we often percieve God in a human light, instead of that of something entirely mystical and strange. even with all the science in the world, the fact that anything exists at all is completely absurd.

when i was 5, i was sitting on the couch with my mom while she was reading and i said to her, 'mom, space goes on forever and even if God created it all, its still absurd that there is anything at all.' she kind of looked at me funny and i figured i was crazy until she told me how shocked she was that i said that then.

[MacNStein]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

I'd figure Hawkings to be a deist myself: Not ruling out the possibility, but not really caring either.

That's an agnostic, not a Deist.

[invisibleX]

Religion. Science. Jihad.


Oh yeah, this thread has a bright future.

[BRussell]

I have the audio book "A briefer history of time" by Hawking. Highly recommended as an audio sedative for when you have insomnia - I don't think I've ever gotten through more than 10 minutes. Anyway, he talks about the "mind of God" and he uses the phrase very metaphorically from what I can tell. He also goes to some length in talking about how the concept of God is useless as a construct in physics because it doesn't explain anything.

[ink]

Newton often spoke of knowing the mind of God. It isn't necessarily derogatory to deity.

[marden]

Seven Reasons Why a Scientist Believes in God

By

A. CRESSY MORRISON,
Former President of the New York Academy of Sciences

Seven Reasons Why a Scientist Believes in God

'Science cannot provide all the answers'

Why do so many scientists believe in God? Tim Radford reports

Thursday September 4, 2003
The Guardian

'Science cannot provide all the answers' | Life | Guardian Unlimited

Can a Scientist Believe in God?
By Brendan Miniter

Can a scientist believe in God? “Absolutely. And recent surveys indicate that about 40 percent do,” Francis Collins, co-director of the team to locate the gene for cystic fibrosis told tae. But for many scientists, answering that question can break a career. Take Dr. Dean Kenyon for example. He earned an S.B. in physics from the University of Chicago (Phi Beta Kappa) and a Ph.D. in biophysics from Stanford. He was a National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley; a visiting scholar at Oxford; and a postdoctoral fellow at nasa-Ames Research Center.

Since the publication of the book he co-wrote, Biochemical Predestination, he has been an authority in chemical evolutionary theory. But one semester at San Francisco State University, he included 3 lectures (out of 27) on the Bible and the origins of life, for which he was removed from teaching introductory lecture courses. Only under pressure from the university’s Academic Freedom Committee, the Academic Senate, and the American Association of University Professors was Kenyon reinstated.

He is not alone. “The standard assumption [in today’s academies] is that anyone who has faith has gone soft in the head,” said Collins. “I encountered plenty of people who were puzzled by my beliefs, and a few who were honest enough to say they thought such beliefs were the mark of sentimentality or superstitions,” he said.

The scientific community should recall that most of the founders of modern science believed in God, albeit often unconventionally. To Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Boyle, Bacon, Pasteur, and Einstein, science was not simply contradictory to religion.

http://www.taemag.com/issues/article...cle_detail.asp

[Dakar²]

What does all that have to do with 'knowing the mind of god'?

[- - e r i k - -]

Apparently he's trying to support an argument that no one disputed that were unrelated to his original post. "The mind of God" is a metaphor marden, get it now?

[ink]

Perhaps he thought my statement implied that Newton was an atheist...?

Or maybe he's having an internal debate, and this is an expression of his religious side in order to resolve the conflict.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

"the mind of God”

Hmmmm...I wonder if it will run on a Mac.

Sony will advertise the PS4 as being able to run "the mind of God".

[marden]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Sony will advertise the PS4 as being able to run "the mind of God".

They will be protested if they do.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by ink 

Perhaps he thought my statement implied that Newton was an atheist...?

Of course he wasn't; he was deeply religious. As were almost all great natural philosophers and "scientists" before the modern period.

He just didn't believe in the Trinity. Not a good scene at that particular point in England.

greg

[ink]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Of course he wasn't; he was deeply religious. As were almost all great natural philosophers and "scientists" before the modern period.

He just didn't believe in the Trinity. Not a good scene at that particular point in England.

greg

No, but it makes for fun reading.