Stephen Hawking's final scientific paper was just published


#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/10/12/stephen-hawkings-final-scien.html


#2

Well, duh.


#3

47a


#4

I want to know what product black holes are using that gets their hair so soft and manageable.


#5

#6

It’s weird to think that he’s gone, or is he? Hmmm


#7

Maybe instead of a Restaurant at the End of the Universe it should be a salon?


#8


#9

whynotboth.gif


#10


#11

The Hawking group’s final idea of black hole event horizon “hairs” is very wrong: [http://astronomy-links.net/BH.Paradox.pdf]
See page 9 for the needle that punctures his thought balloon.


#12

#13

handwavium looks much more intimidating when it’s written in the language of maths.


#14

Actually, he now exists in some higher dimensional quantum space-time realm.

I know because I’ve tried contacting him, and he hasn’t said shit.


#15

I can’t wait for them to use it in a Trek episode.

“Reverse the quantum phase inhibitors, and better kick the Wald-Zoupas up a notch.”


#16

We have been fascinated by Stephen Hawking’s black holes for over a third of a century based on Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, but eventually Hawking informed us they are not really black and there is no event horizon exactly. Everything from ‘black holes’ to dark energy and the accelerating universe is theorized using Einstein’s theory. Einstein claimed that the bending of light passing near the Sun, famously measured by Arthur Eddington during a solar eclipse, and also that the precession of the orbit of Mercury around the Sun were due to space-time deformation as characterized by his theory. In essence, he claimed that the explanation for the phenomena is that the geometry near massive objects is not Euclidean. Einstein said that “in the presence of a gravitational field, the geometry is not Euclidean.” But if that non-Euclidean geometry is self-contradicting, then Einstein’s explanation and his theory cannot be correct. How can it be correct if the title of the Facebook Note, “Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity Is Based on Self-contradicting Non-Euclidean Geometry,” is a true statement? Just check out the FB Note, at the link:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/reid-barnes/einsteins-general-theory-of-relativity-is-based-on-self-contradicting-non-euclid/1676238042428763/


#17

Among his other final papers, this:

… Hawking raised the prospect that breakthroughs in genetics will make it attractive for people to try to improve themselves, with implications for “unimproved humans”.

“Once such superhumans appear, there will be significant political problems with unimproved humans, who won’t be able to compete,” he wrote. “Presumably, they will die out, or become unimportant. Instead, there will be a race of self-designing beings who are improving at an ever-increasing rate.”

The comments refer to techniques such as Crispr-Cas9, a DNA-editing system that was invented six years ago, allowing scientists to modify harmful genes or add new ones. Great Ormond Street hospital for children in London has used gene editing to treat children with an otherwise incurable form of leukaemia. …

Eeeeek.


#18

Hawking warned that education and science are “in danger now more than ever before.” He cited the election of U.S. President Donald Trump and Britain’s 2016 vote to leave the European Union as part of “a global revolt against experts and that includes scientists.”


#19

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.