Hawkings Paradox revisited

45degreeN · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:24 am Post subject: Hawkings Paradox revisited

Last night I saw a rerun of the PBS program about Hawking's Paradox. While I am not dealing with the core issue of whether or not black holes actually exist, here I want to examine Hawking's reaction he had to the refuting of his idea by Dr. Susskind.

To remind those of us who dont remember, Hawking's thesis was that black holes will wink out and therefore the universe loses all the material/information that might have fallen into it. Violating the conservation of matter energy one of the most fundamental axioms of physics.

Susskind's refutation was that the image/information was preserved on the surface of the event horizon!

Well many years later Hawking after much physical illness came up with his own refutation of his earlier thesis. Telling us in the process that Susskind's was wrong also, that the real refutation was by accepting the idea of parallel universe! An idea that is non-falsifiable, since it is impossible to examine a different universe, if we could, then our ideas of what a universe is must be changed.

Even with his frail body and inability to speak except through his computer, his pride was still intact and this lame attempt to prove HIMSELF right, means that any truth about physics is really metaphysics.

FFT · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:54 pm Post subject: Re: Hawkings Paradox revisited

P1234567890 · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:02 am Post subject: Re: Hawkings Paradox revisited

45degreeN · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:54 am Post subject:

I have always admitted to not understanding the mathematics of it. But really none of the so called grand theories are really mathematics, they are principles E=MC2.

Hawking's theory is not really mathematics either although it is based upon math.

That particular documentary indicated that when physics students were surveyed Hawking wasn't even in the top 20 most influential physicists. He might be more popular with the general population than with physics students.

That quote you used from my post is a matter of psychology not physics and it is an observation that holds water.

P1234567890 · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:28 am Post subject:

45degreeN · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 9:26 am Post subject:

Don't you accept psychology as science either? It's not voodoo you know. Maybe it doesn't use great amounts of mathematics but it is still something worthy of calling science.

The number of scientists who let their pride get in the way of their science is enormous, and Hawking is hardly the only one. It takes a very rare person to set aside their own pride and truly engage the "frontiers of science"without their ego fully engaged. Yes in fact any career requires some ego, but when dealing with such profound issues and on an international scale such as Hawking it usually takes enormous egos.

Having the most prominent solution to the universe's ultimate issue for thirty years and being contradicted so publicly (and in front of his peers) must have been an enormous humiliation/frustration for him. You're telling me that ego had nothing whatsoever to do with it?

Paleontology is another of those areas of science that is full of enormous egos, one person contradicting the others for the purpose of having the greatest reputation, and especially those engaged in physical anthropology.

P1234567890 · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 9:44 am Post subject:

45degreeN · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:15 am Post subject:

Hawking's solution is to throw out into the fray parallel universes theory, not something which is dealt with in a particle accelerator. Parallel universes theory is non falsifiable, and frankly something that belongs in metaphysics, not hard core physics.

Susskind, the one who offered a mathematical refutation of Hawking's theory, was not only told that while Hawking had been proven his own theory wrong but that Susskind's rejection of it was also wrong.

Hawking used a great deal of mathematics to support his new theory, but it is still non-falsifiable. Mathematics is only as good as the basic assumptions that are used and Hawking has gone on a bender.

My observations of Hawking's behavior (and questioning of his motivations in the process) belong in the field of psychology. Obviously his mathematical theories are not under observation just his behavior.

We can get to the issue of the Leakeys and their discoveries in Africa later

P1234567890 · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:28 am Post subject:

45degreeN · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:01 pm Post subject:

Psycho-analysis is only one technique and not my favorite.

My favorite is the integrative therapy based upon Fritz Pearls work.

No, I haven't but so what. Hawking never went to a black hole either. He only thought about it for awhile.

P1234567890 · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject:

45degreeN · Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 11:01 am Post subject:

P1234567890 · Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 11:05 am Post subject:

45degreeN · Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:19 am Post subject:

P1234567890 · Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:37 am Post subject: