14th March 2018, seen the passing of one of the great scientific minds of the past 100 years, Stephen W Hawking aged 76. A man who despite his disability was able to bring the science of the universe to millions of ordinary people.

“Not since Albert Einstein has a scientist so captured the public imagination and endeared himself to tens of millions of people around the world,” Michio Kaku, a professor of theoretical physics at the City University of New York

RIP Stephen Hawking.

Died on March 14. In US usage March 14 is written as 3.14

Its called Pi day.

//Died on March 14.//

Coincidentally, Einstein's birthday.

Coincidence?

or the Matrix just messing with us?

'great scientificn mind'. Very debatable.

The IQ of our planet has now been greatly reduced.

He shall be greatly missed by not only his family members
but also by all those whose lives he touched.
He made a difference.

RIP.

So runner I take it that you think that you are able to tell who's good at physics and who isn't?

Personally, I'm having trouble believing that you would be a competent judge of someone's maths and physics skills. Do you have the requisite learning to make such determinations?

Perhaps you could demonstrate a little of your own skill and learning: maybe give us a run down summary of Schwarzschild's solution to Einstein's field equations? After all you should have no trouble doing so if you're a good judge of physics competence since is it one of the oldest and well known solutions to one of the simplest scenarios that the field equations apply to.

By-the-way: Hawking definitely understood this solution and could explain in a way that even non-physicists could appreciate. Let's see if you can do the same.

Thinkabit more Hawkins believed in fairytales. The fact that he was good at maths/physics does not nullify this fact. He denied the obvious (a Creator). Anyway feel free to worship your high priest. I will let His Maker judge whether he was good at science/pseudo science. The laws of physics obviously required a Lawmaker. Thinkabit more.

Piss off, runner.

The man is dead. Are you really so lacking in basic decency that you can't show a bit of respect?

What a disgusting little turd you are.

Thanks Toni, I did not want to respond to runner, thus giving his comments some worthiness, dignifying his contemptible rubbish. I think many of us would agree with what you just posted.

If you can leave this world, having given some small measure of happiness to just a few, then your life has been worthwhile. In Professor Hawking's case, he imparted both knowledge, and enjoyment to millions of others, a remarkable achievement. Well said Foxy.

And when did you start to value respect Toni. Amazing turn around.

runner,
Hawkins may have believed in fairy tales, but Hawking certainly didn't.

The need for a creator is far from obvious. As a Christian I believe there was, but it's not evidence for Christianity. All it's evidence of is your limited imagination, failing to comprehend that there could be any explanation other than "God did it!"

Denying the obvious is your game, not Hawking's. For example you deny global warming even though it's an observed phenomenon and the mechanism that causes it is well known. And apparently the reason you don't is that you believe in fairy tales - specifically the atheist neocons' fairy tale about belief in global warming being a religion.

Nasty little creep, aren't you runner? I can see you've been taking lessons from Yasmin Abdel-Magied in respecting the deceased. If you've nothing worthwhile to contribute, would it really pain you that much to keep your damn mouth shut for a change instead of dribbling sh!t all over this thread in your customary manner?

For those of us not so bereft of common decency as runner, I found these little sketches this morning on youtube. I find them quite charming... one of the things I admired greatly about Stephen Hawking, aside from his work in cosmology, was his sense of humour.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPOa72dsrGw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC65NkjhkPA

Dear Paul,

Stephen Hawking did fundamentally believe that the
universe and life had meaning:

"Remember to look at the stars and not down at your feet.
Try to make sense and wonder about what makes the
universe exist. Be curious and however difficult life may
seem, there is always something you can do and succeed at."

Did you know that He was offered a knighthood in the 1990s?
Hawking refused the knighthood in protest against the lack
of funding for the sciences.

However in 1989 he was made part of the Order of the
Companion of Honour (an honour that is given to people who
have made a lifetime contribution to the Arts, Sciences,
Medicine or Government).

Also in 1982 he received the CBE (Commander of the Most
Excellent Order of the British Empire) and is a Fellow
of the Royal Society. He's also received many other awards.

A truly remarkable human being.

Yes, Hawking was a monumentally great scientific mind.

Runner, with his grade ten education is not, nor is runner fit to comment as he has.

Be ashamed runner. The more you comment as you just have, the more you emphasise the unfitness of your views.

Just piss off.

Toni,
Nothing YAM said was disrespectful of the deceased.

Yeah Rusty we know truth does not fit your sick narratives. I am going nowhere.

The truth in this matter is that you as a specific representative of "christianity" are choosing to rubbish the opinions and achievements of an indisputably great scientist whose achievements you cannot begin to comprehend.

What's you next move? Kick a cripple?

You are most obviously going nowhere. Keep it up, very soon no-one will be able to hear you at all.

Rusty.

//Yes, Hawking was a monumentally great scientific mind.

Runner, with his grade ten education is not//

I think you're being far too generous in your assessment of runner's scientific education. My nephew has a deeper scientific understanding than runner, and he's only in kindergarten - but at least he's aware that dinosaurs existed before humans.

//Nothing YAM said was disrespectful of the deceased.//

Maybe, but I don't think runner knows that.

//we know truth does not fit your sick narratives.//

Sick narratives like being disrespectful to the deceased out of spite is a dick move? You really are determined to make as much of twat as yourself as possible, aren't you?

//I am going nowhere.//

No, you're just going to keep carrying on like some screaming toddler, making a racket and being annoying all the grown-ups. All the while congratulating yourself profusely for being so clever and wonderful and not narcisstic at all.

You're just a troll, runner. And what makes it particularly sad is that you lack the insight to realise you're just a sad little troll, and will hotly deny what is obvious to anybody that's read more than two of your posts.

Pathetic.

For these here to pay their respects to a great man and not just try to seek attention through trolling, here is Brian Cox discussing Hawking's life and work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UZX_mlFz2c

I have most of his books. His "a brief history of time" was fabulous.

That he lived to 76 after getting a prognosis of 3 years to live at 22 is a triumph of the human spirit.

I recently watched the film of Stephen Hawking's life,
"The Theory of Everything." It's available on DVD - and
I'd highly recommend getting hold of a copy either for
yourself or as a gift (Easter is just around the corner).
The actor who plays Hawking - Eddie Redmayne, received an
oscar for his role as Hawking. And Hawking approved of the
film. He stated that watching the actor was like watching
himself. An inspirational film about an inspirational man.
Well worth viewing.

I'll be giving it as a gift to my son (who studied science
at uni).

Hi there RUNNER; TONI LAVIS & FOXY...There's no doubt whatsoever the world will mourn the passing of Prof. Stephen W. HAWKING. Undoubtedly, he was an intellectual giant among men, but to ordinary blokes like me who look at things more fundamentally or pragmatically, he was a real 'gun' of a bloke to have the guts to keep going amid all his physical woes and attendant hardships, like emotional loneliness he must've felt down through the years.

Probably starved of; and longed for; legitimate female company, purely as a man? Never as who he taught himself to be, a veritable genius, for he'd be literally surrounded by these beautiful young things, all wishing to bask in the glare of his reflected fame. It's like these ultra-rich old men, they always seem to have a young, beautiful wife/lady on their arm.

I recall one of the Sydney's brothels I used to attend regularly, at least twice weekly, and they had two or three women there, who specialised only in taking male clients with deformities, some were extremely deformed. I 'think' they called themselves surrogates? Anyway, I gather you had to book them, and their 'charges' were based more on time, than otherwise.

Anyhow I decided to have a word with 'em , to see if she and her offsider were not putting in the old 'Julius Marlow' into their clients? And I found it to be quite the contrary in. Which changed my opinion of them greatly, viewing them as someone, who provided a real service to those who were less fortunate than us. Morally I suppose some folk might look down on them, I dunno? I do know it's a tough friggin' world for some, I reckon.

I purchased one of his 'little' paperback books, thinking I might be able to understand something of the Universe - at pp2-3, I was done! Couldn't make head nor tale of what he was saying. But looking at Steve the man, I reckon I might understand some of what he must have been feeling down through the years.

o sung wu

a guy called Nick Vujicic is one of my real heroes. He grew up in Australia and is absolutley amazing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOzsjEmjjHs

Hi there RUNNER...

Thanks for that my friend, I'll have a bit of a read of the citation you've sent me.

This post is off topic but for the personal benefit of runner's general education about science:
runner, you said "The laws of physics obviously required a Lawmaker. Thinkabit more."

Any given law of physics does have a Lawmaker but its not the god(s), it is the person/people who first enunciate the law. Eg: Einstein field equations where made by Einstein*.

It is a very common misconception/mistake (even among people with STEM backgrounds) to say that the universe is governed by the "Laws of Physics". The universe just is what it is and just does what is does, it doesn't need to consult the Laws of Physics to determine how it should act nor do the laws command it to act the way it does.

Instead, the laws of physics are mankind's best description, usually expressed in maths, of how some aspect of the universe will appear to be or to act when it is measured/observed. The laws are based on the accumulation of data gained from our previous observations and from logical/mathematical reasoning applied to the data. Certain fundamental philosophical assumptions are taken when making this descriptions: such as for example, 1) that the bit of the universe we observe is potentially understandable to us (ie: our intelligence can make sensible descriptions of what we see), 2) the laws are uniform throughout the universe, eg: the laws apply here on earth equally as on a planet in a distant galaxy, 3) The a laws are falsifiable- in that they are descriptions which could potentially be proven false by some direct or indirect observation (eg: Newton's law of gravity is falsifiable and indeed was proven false by observations such anomalous precession of the perihelion of Mercury). These are just some example assumptions, but there are others as well.

--continued below--

--from above--

To help ground the difference between how the universe just "is" and its behaviours just "are" in contrast to our excepted behaviour according to the man-made "Laws of Physics" I'll given an example:
When an electron gets "hit" by a photon the electron doesn't think to itself and say, "I've got to obey the laws of physics" so it whips out a calculator and solves the equations of quantum electrodynamics and moves accordingly. No, instead it just interacts with the photon just as it is in it nature to.
However, when a human observes this electron/photon interaction the best (most accurate) description of what will most likely happen and indeed what actually happens (to the limits of the precision our current measuring equipment) is given by a solution to the equations of quantum electrodynamics.

[*Actually it wasn't all just Einstein, he worked in constant communication with others who had and were developing the maths and general concepts- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_priority_dispute]

Did anyone read his book A Brief History of Time, and understand it. His last interview before he died said Humans should leave earth within 100 years, where Stephen? And that time was always there and No Big Bang.

I felt sorry for him, but if he didn't have this disability would he have got that famous. I do not in anyway diminish his thoughts on Astra Physics. But leaving Earth. We won't be able too, our natural Physics and Natural laws of the Universe is not conducive to us traveling even to Mars. The natural laws has saved us and that we are too far away for us to travel in one life time, considering light from far off stars takes thousands of years to reach us. Extraterrestrials, if they are around they are already here or already come and gone. Space is a very dangerous place and distance between planetary systems is so far, in away protects our world as it does others, we can not introduce unknown dangerous bacteria or virus'.

Slight correction to my post above:
The third example I give as a fundamental assumption, ie: "3) The laws are falsifiable- in that they are descriptions which could potentially be proven false by some direct or indirect observation", is more properly a requirement and not an assumption. If a proposed law is not-falsifiable then if can never be considered a law; we don't assume that it is falsifiable, it MUST be falsifiable.

Here are a few links that may be of some interest:

http://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/scientists_hawking.html

And -

http://techwelkin.com/life-and-achievements-of-stephen-hawking

And -

http://www.thenational.ae/uae/stephen-hawking-a-man-of-mind-boggling-achievements-and-defiance-1.713053