"Big Bang without God"--Stephen Hawking. What do you think?

something has reason because another thing has happen before it.

but if nothing happened before big bang,it doesn't require a reason.

so i agree with Stephen hawking.

many religious beliefs of yesterday are disbelieved today(such as earth being center of universe or stars are windows to heaven).

maybe someday people would stop believing in god.

already a considerable part of humans don't believe in god,and the number is increasing day by day.

what hawking says today may be criticized,but not for long.

For thousands of years, people have said that their gods were behind what they didn't understand -- life, morality, lightning, stars, earthquakes, the origin of life, the world or the universe, etc. Positing a god to supposedly answer a question solves nothing. It's just lazy thinking that adds an unwarranted level of complexity and stops you from asking more questions.

It used to be that science couldn't answer the question about the origin of the universe or of the Big Bang, but that didn't mean we should make up an answer (such as a god) and say that it was the cause. Within the last few decades scientists have discovered some good answers.

Quantum mechanics shows that "nothing," as a philosophical concept, does not exist. There are always quantized particle fields with random fluctuations. Quantum mechanics also shows that events can occur with no cause.

There are many well-respected physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, Lawrence Krauss, Sean M. Carroll, Victor Stenger, Michio Kaku, Alan Guth, Alex Vilenkin, Robert A.J. Matthews, and Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek, who have created scientific models where the Big Bang and thus the entire universe could arise from nothing but a random quantum vacuum fluctuation in a particle field -- via natural processes.

In relativity, gravity is negative energy, and matter and photons are positive energy. Because negative and positive energy seem to be equal in absolute total value, our observable universe appears balanced to the sum of zero. Our universe could thus have come into existence without violating conservation of mass and energy — with the matter of the universe condensing out of the positive energy as the universe cooled, and gravity created from the negative energy.

I know that this doesn't make sense in our Newtonian experience, but it does in the physics of quantum mechanics and relativity. As Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman wrote, "The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as she is — absurd."

For more about the Big Bang and its implications, watch the video at the 1st link - "A Universe From Nothing" by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss, read an interview with him (at the 2nd link), or get his new book (at the 3rd link). See the 4th link for "The Universe: Big Bang to Now in 10 Easy Steps." And, see the 5th link for "Quantum scientists make something out of nothing."

"The total energy of the universe is precisely zero, because gravity can have negative energy. The negative energy of gravity balances out the positive energy of matter. Only such a universe can begin from nothing. The laws of physics allow a universe to begin from nothing. You don't need a deity. Quantum fluctuations can produce a universe."

- Lawrence Krauss, physicist

Stephen Hawking is an Agnostic Theist. In his (largely layman's) book, "A Brief History of Time," he consistently discusses the possibility of divine intervention.

I wonder why Hawking is saying this now, rather than 30 years ago. it seems to me to be nothing to do with the state of the science, of course there have been advances, but it's not like we know SO much more now that we can suddenly rule out god (whatever Hawking takes that to mean). I conclude that it's a political statement, not a scientific one... seems to be Hawking's habit lately. not that that's necessarily a bad thing.

Stephen Hawking is a scientist, what has this got to do with religion?

Einstein believed in god, Hawking understands this is not the popularly mandated opinion of the extreme liberal academic circles in which he "exists". His decision to abandon God (he did believe at one time) is not based on an intellectual foundation but truly one of convenience, and sadly this only proves he's no Einstein. Faith requires both courage and conviction, a realm the self important rarely visit or can even remotley comprehend. Can you imagine how the "tolerance" crowd would vilify him if he actually said "there is a God", heaven forbid. He would quickly be shuffled off to oblivion, he knows this, hence his decision to abandon God.

Universe doesn't require a God to exist.

Aliens exist. We are aliens, and there are probably others out there in space. However, God is just fiction.

“God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

-If the Universe needs a creator, why doesn't god?

If god doesn't need a creator, why does the Universe ?-

-Someone had told Napoleon that the book contained no mention of the name of God; Napoleon, who was fond of putting embarrassing questions, received it with the remark, 'M. Laplace, they tell me you have written this large book on the system of the universe, and have never even mentioned its Creator.' Laplace, who, though the most supple of politicians, was as stiff as a martyr on every point of his philosophy, drew himself up and answered bluntly, Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là. ("I had no need of that hypothesis.")-

To science, this is not new news.

("Big Bang without God"--Stephen Hawking. What do you think?")

-----------------------------------------------

I'm not a physicist, astronomer, or cosmologist but here's what I believe:

See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/stephen-hawk...

See: How Critical Thinkers Lose Their Faith in God

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=h...

See: Do We Need God to be Moral? ... The seeds for moral behavior preceded the emergence of our species by millions of years.

http://news.yahoo.com/god-moral-093606607--abc-new...

See: Could Life Be Older Than Earth Itself?

http://www.technewsdaily.com/17766-could-life-be-o...

See: Astronomers anticipate 100 billion Earth-like planets

http://www.kurzweilai.net/astronomers-anticipate-1...

See: Wow! Ancient Mars Could Have Supported Primitive Life, NASA Says

http://news.yahoo.com/wow-ancient-mars-could-suppo...

See: Have astronomers found chemical precursor to life in gas clouds?

http://www.kurzweilai.net/have-astronomers-found-c...

See: Physics Study to create inorganic life

http://www.physnews.com/bio-medicine-news/cluster1...

See: Ancient creature mixed human, apelike traits

http://news.yahoo.com/ancient-creature-mixed-human...

Best regards

The man believes in aliens, but not God.

yet there is absolutely no physical proof of either.

Doesn't that say it all.

Cheers!

Edit:

In the light of the ongoing catalog of appallingly toxic planets discovered by the Kepler mission, and the increasingly obvious data that planetary systems are fundamentally unstable, one could offer the following statement:

“Aliens are an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance.”

The more data we collect, the more certain we are that they do not exist.

Cheers!