This entry was posted
on Tuesday, October 5th, 2010 at 6:37 pm and is filed under Webmaster's Ramblings.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
5 Responses to “Stephen Hawking’s co-scientist Roger Penrose debunks M-theory on Premier Christian Radio”
I watched the video clip twice and didn’t see much debunking going on.
Prof Penrose questioned the use of the description ‘theory’ and I’m sure many non-specialists like myself must have wondered at the term at some time. Certainly string theory and M theory are not strong theories in the way that the germ theory of disease, the theory of special relativity or the theory of evolution of species by natural selection are strong theories. Perhaps this is because we’re simply not in a position to test them yet, but this should surely not limit the creation of hypotheses.
In Popper’s classification, M theory could surely be classed as a ‘tentative theory’ anyway.
You must admit though Hawkings is verging on attributing god like status to gravity itself. That’s sure what came across in his programme recently on the universe.
I’m sure I’m not alone Webmaster in wincing with embarrassment at the Hawking TV programmes. It seems to me like a rather cynical dumbing down money making ploy. None of the material is new, and is covered far better in his earler books.
But I do think Hawking is genuinely in awe of such phenomena as gravity, as am I. It is one of the all powerful possibly eternal phenomena that transcends human understanding – so sort of God like?
October 12th. 2010
To whoever it may be of interest.
Cosmologh is held back because science is restricted, due to the exceptance of gravitation and big bang theories. Both are proven to be wrong in my work which explains the beginning of creation and the forces of control. Also why it’s impossible to have a god forse, and the reason part of us evolves beyound the death of our body.
To be published in the near future.
October 6th, 2010 at 10:38 am
I watched the video clip twice and didn’t see much debunking going on.
Prof Penrose questioned the use of the description ‘theory’ and I’m sure many non-specialists like myself must have wondered at the term at some time. Certainly string theory and M theory are not strong theories in the way that the germ theory of disease, the theory of special relativity or the theory of evolution of species by natural selection are strong theories. Perhaps this is because we’re simply not in a position to test them yet, but this should surely not limit the creation of hypotheses.
In Popper’s classification, M theory could surely be classed as a ‘tentative theory’ anyway.
October 6th, 2010 at 11:58 am
Yes. I thought so too. It’s more a case perhaps of wishful thinking…
October 6th, 2010 at 12:04 pm
OK guys fair enough.
You must admit though Hawkings is verging on attributing god like status to gravity itself. That’s sure what came across in his programme recently on the universe.
October 6th, 2010 at 4:13 pm
I’m sure I’m not alone Webmaster in wincing with embarrassment at the Hawking TV programmes. It seems to me like a rather cynical dumbing down money making ploy. None of the material is new, and is covered far better in his earler books.
But I do think Hawking is genuinely in awe of such phenomena as gravity, as am I. It is one of the all powerful possibly eternal phenomena that transcends human understanding – so sort of God like?
October 12th, 2010 at 5:02 pm
October 12th. 2010
To whoever it may be of interest.
Cosmologh is held back because science is restricted, due to the exceptance of gravitation and big bang theories. Both are proven to be wrong in my work which explains the beginning of creation and the forces of control. Also why it’s impossible to have a god forse, and the reason part of us evolves beyound the death of our body.
To be published in the near future.