(AUTOMATIC READING)
Astrophysicist Stephen W. Hawking wondered, in one circumstance, whether he was more famous for his wheelchair or his discoveries (That, however notable, they never earned him the Nobel, demonstrating how media fame is not always completely respectful of the reality of things).
Maybe now, reading the newspapers that celebrated him, he will smile to see that most of those who remembered him understood little about either.
Also for “guilt” on Hawking, it has to be said.
Because this great English physicist brought his own evil, as is natural, differently over time, and because he changed his philosophical ideas several times.
One day he said that life had become boring, and that she only smiled at him again after learning of his illness, that is, when he realized he could lose her. In other circumstances he hinted that he might have resorted to euthanasia, but not only has he never done it, but also thanked his wife who, In the 1985, he said his firm no to the doctors who thought they should perform it on him.
How is a man with his pain? What questions do you ask about the meaning of life?
E’ easy to imagine: so many.
Even more, Perhaps, if he has a Catholic wife around who talks to him about God, and if, by profession, deals with studying, as well as black holes, the Big Bang.

THE FIRST INSTANTS OF THE UNIVERSE
Oh yeah, Studying the Big Bang means going to the first moments of the Universe, to ask whether it was really born or not; e, if he was born, from Who.
Hawking was clear about it: albeit in his best seller, From the big bang to black holes you never mention it, he knew well that the Big Bang theory owes its existence to a Catholic priest, George Eduard Lemaitre who in the distant 1931 had raised a hornet's nest, relaunching the debate on God with his hypothesis: if the Universe was born, Why? By whom? With what purpose?
This is why the question always comes back in Hawking's books: “Because the universe exists? Because we exist?”.
It must be remembered that in 1970, together with Roger Penrose, a scientist no less than him, although less known to the general public, Hawking had proposed the “singularity theorem”, commented by him with these words: “We showed that […]any reasonable model of the universe had to start with a singularity. This meant that science could predict that the universe must have had a beginning, but that he could not predict how the universe should begin, since this task was God's responsibility” (S.Hawking, in Black Holes and Newborn Universes).
In other words, the theorem strengthened the idea of ​​many: the universe was born, therefore it is neither eternal nor self-sufficient, but it requires a Creator, which alone, in his Omnipotence, he knows the very nature of the universe to the core. Yes, because the singularity represents a situation that is unknowable to us, a condition of the cosmos impenetrable by the human mind, because the laws of nature known to us do not apply in it.
The universe therefore needs a Creator and man is incapable of understanding everything?
Things would seem to be exactly like this, and this is why Hawking remains, long, doubtful: in his cited best seller, a Creator sometimes seems undeniable, sometimes useless.
ON THE CHAIR OF THE CHRISTIAN ISAAC NEWTON
It must not be forgotten that Hawking occupied the chair that had been held by Isaac Newton, very convinced of the necessity, for the universe, of a Creator. Hawking cannot help but do the math, as well as with its existential questions, with his great inspirers: the devout Protestant Newton and the devout Catholic Lemaitre. Added to all this, we can guess it, a pressing personal question: Why, my pain? What sense, in my life?
The conclusion of the book From the Big Bang to Black Holes is famous: Hawking wonders if we can find one “complete theory” to help us solve the problem “of why we and the universe exist”. And he concludes: “If we can find the definitive answer to this question, we will decree the definitive triumph of human reason: for then we will know the mind of God”. Note the “with”: Hawking, it only proposes a bold hypothesis.
Further detailed later: denied his own singularity theorem, which opens too many spaces to God, Hawking puts forward a hypothesis that could allow him to get rid of it.
In the 2010, in his The Grand Design, proposes a universe without beginning. This is an unfounded hypothesis, ma, according to him, promising, so much so that Hawking writes on the same page: “We don't have a definitive answer, but today we have a candidate for the ultimate theory of everything: to M theory. If confirmed, will be… the triumph of human reason. As for a supposed Creator of the grand plan (word used by Newton precisely to indicate the universe as the work of a great Painter, ndr), science proves that the universe can be created from nothing based on the laws of physics. It is not necessary to appeal to God to light the fuse and set the process in motion”.
The concept, as you can see, It's not entirely logical: we are talking about hypotheses, to be confirmed, but then it is taken for granted that God is no longer necessary.
GOD DOES NOT SERVE; MAN WILL UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING
The two theses contained in these words (God is not needed; man will understand everything) they immediately arouse reactions: the Nobel Prize in Physics of 2006, precisely for studies on the Big Bang, George Smoot, he just wrote, in his Wrinkles in time, the exact opposite; friend Roger Penrose notes that M-theory “It's not even a theory, it is not science but a set of hopes, idea, aspirations”. Others, physicists, astrophysicists and philosophers, they point out to Hawking that he forgot to explain the fundamental thing: where do they come from? “laws of physics” which he himself places as a necessary condition for the existence of the universe?
The astrophysicist Piero Benvenuti, Secretary General of the World Astronomical Union, in an interview granted to the writer and contained in “Scientists faced with the mystery of the cosmos and man. Small dialogues on big themes” declares: “Mah, Hawking is a great scientist, not up to the giants, as one might believe from the media, but a big one. Yet in his latest book, The big picture, him or whoever wrote it for him, he talks enormous philosophical nonsense. We will never arrive at a theory of everything… we only know the 4 o 5 percent of what exists… they exist there’ “dark energy” and the “dark matter” which we call this because we really don't know what they are… In twenty years what might emerge? E’ the discovery of gravitational waves is very recent, which will bring us other elements. Luckily, science is a continuous adventure…”.
The Italian physicist Franco Saporetti, in his “Big bang: who lit the fuse?”, after having proven the unsustainability of absolute human knowledge (the uncertainty principle or chaos theories would be enough to prove the existence of realities that are intrinsically unknowable for man), remember an important fact: after the book of 2010, Hawking himself later repudiated his hypothesis that it is possible for man to truly know “the mind of God”.
I CHANGED MY MIND
In a conference entitled Gödel and the end of the universe, Indeed, Hawking said: “I changed my mind… Gödel's theorem ensures that there will always be work for mathematicians”, and that we will never manage to write the definitive mathematics book, physics etc…
So why do newspapers continue to present Hawking as the supporter?, always and anyway, of the theory of everything?
Maybe because to someone, as in the nineteenth century, we still like to think that the human mind will one day be able to solve every mystery?
But that this will never happen is not only demonstrated by Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorems; not only was it supported with very strong arguments, to stay only in the twentieth century, there Albert Einstein, Werner Heisenberg e Max Planck, the greatest physicists of the century, but it is evident from the fact that the limit of science is man himself, as the father of biochemist Erwin Chargaff noted.
It's Hawking's curiosity and insatiable thirst for knowledge, as well as his illness and death, to reveal to us both our greatness and our smallness as men.
I conclude with two authoritative thoughts. The first, formulated in 1930, it is from Max Planck, father of quantum physics, Nobel Prize for Physics, believer: “Before God all men, even the most perfect and the most brilliant… they are primitive creatures… and it would be reckless and absurd to attempt to imitate the divine eye and to completely rethink the thoughts of the divine mind. The common intellect of man would not be able to understand his profound thoughts even if they were communicated to him” (M. Planck, Knowledge of the physical world).
The second, of the 2017, it is by Carlo Rovelli, contemporary physicist, atheist: “The nature of time remains perhaps the deepest mystery. Strange threads tie it to the other great open mysteries: the nature of the mind, the origin of the universe, the fate of black holes, the functioning of life” (C. Rovelli, The order of time).
Note from BastaBugie: Marco Respinti in the article below entitled “The theory of everything scam, Hawking now knows everything” talks about the great scam that accompanied the thoughts of Stephen W. Hawking, the astrophysicist who passed away yesterday in 76 years. His trick is to have ousted the metaphysical God and then replace him with a surrogate, the self-generating Universe. A great drawing that also reveals terrible anguish.
Here is the complete article published on La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana on 15 March 2018:
Now the prophet of “theory of everything” he really knows everything. Stephen W. Hawking, died yesterday aged 76 in Cambridge, he knows very well how stupid the words were that in the middle of May 2011 he told The Guardian interviewer, Ian Sample: «I consider the brain like a computer that will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or life after death for broken computers; it's a fairy tale for those who are afraid of the dark". Let us remember him in our prayers.
Physicist and mathematician, has dominated the scenes of a science for decades, astrophysics, which would not exist if it were not for the Emilian Jesuit father Angelo Secchi (1818-1878), mocked during the Risorgimento for his faith and his loyalty to the Pope, who founded it being the first who, studying the chemical-physical composition of stars (and thus also founding astronomical spectrometry and stellar classification, as well as a plethora of other disciplines), he understands how much astronomy must consciously become physics of celestial bodies in order to probe, beyond simple observation, the properties of the stars and investigate their mechanics.
It's curious if nothing else, as Hawking was a deservedly famous sworn enemy of any teleological and theological perspective, of even the slightest possibility, Meaning what, that the physics of the Universe is compatible with a transcendent perspective and therefore a propagandist of one of the biggest fake news in Western history: the incompatibility between science and Christian faith, a lie invented on the drawing board for propaganda reasons by two 19th century Americans, physicist John William Draper (1811-1882), author, In the 1874, di History of the Conflict between Religion and Science, and diplomat Andrew Dickson White (1832-1918), author, In the 1896, dei due tomi di cui si compone History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. To personally demonstrate to him that it is not true and that faith is never afraid of the truth or of anti-Gods like him, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences elected Hawking a member in 1986.
Born in Oxford in 1942, a 17 years Hawking entered the University College of the same English town where he then graduated in Natural Sciences in 1962. He then enrolled in Cosmology at the University of Cambridge and in 1966 he obtained a doctorate in Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics. After having worked alongside the famous British mathematician Roger Penrose on the so-called “black holes” and have been, dal 1970, visiting professor al California Institute of Technology di Pasadena, In the 1979 is appointed holder of the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, where he teaches for 30 years until 2009. Since then and until yesterday he directed the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics.
In the 1988 publishes the first book that makes him famous, based on studies and hypotheses put forward between 1965 and the 1970: A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes, published in Italian in the same year by the Milanese Rizzoli as From the big bang to black holes. Brief history of time. It is the work with which the scholar seals the abandonment of the metaphysical concept of God to replace it with a panphysicalist surrogate: the hypothesis of grand unification. Si badi: everyone calls her “grand unification theory”, but it's a huge mistake. It's not one at all “theory”, but only a hypothesis, and it will remain so until, as prescribed by the scientific method universalized by Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), it will not be proven, tested and proven empirically. That hypothesis, so, tries to unify all the fundamental physical forces of nature in a single description, especially that of gravity. The proposed models are different and none is universally accepted today by the entire scientific community. Among them there is also the one who was called (initially as a joke) “theory of everything” of which Hawking was a convinced advocate.
For the astrophysicist, Indeed, the “theory of everything”, when demonstrated, it would be the definitive conquest of God's way of reasoning. For this very reason, At that time, an absolute triumph of the human mind, capable of exhausting the divine one entirely. Which therefore is not such at all, unless you understand “divine” like a metaphor. After all, the coincidence between the divine and the human mind would lead us to conclude that the only true God is man. Hawking, Indeed, if he does not first hypothetically exclude the idea of ​​God, after having meticulously demetaphysicalized it and reduced it to the supreme capacity of human reason, decrees its total superfluity. What is God needed to explain the Universe if the Universe can be explained with the “theory of everything” perfectly attainable by human reason?
The metaphysical God is dead, then the new panphysicalist God divinity enters the scene: a Universe that explains itself through its own laws. The round formulation of this vision is contained in another famous book of his, The Great Design, published in 2010 together with the American physicist Leonard Mlodinow and translated into Italian as The Big Picture (Mondadori, Milano 2011). God is useless and the Universe is created spontaneously as a result of the law of gravity: given that gravity is the first of the fundamental physical forces that “theory of everything” tries to unify, its mere existence would automatically produce being, that is, the Universe, instead of nothing. Secondo Hawking, and Mlodinow, God is just a trick: attributing that name to what is nothing other than the Universe itself. The creator and the creature, In short, they would coincide. But the opposite is true: the trick is to have ousted the metaphysical God and then replace him with a surrogate, the self-generating Universe. Hawking was answered well by the Northern Irish mathematician John C. Lennox, lecturer at the University of Oxford, with a golden booklet, God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design Is It Anyway? (Lion, Oxford 2011). As well as an atheist, Hawking has always professed to be a pantheist and The Big Picture – the sum of his thoughts – it shows it well. But The Big Picture also reveals a terrible anguish: Hawking's need for God. Determined not to give in to the metaphysical God, the scientist fought him by replacing him with a lookalike. Thirst for God taken to the point of fraud.
However, there is also another Hawking, in fact there are two others.
One is the authority regarding “black holes”. His discoveries in this field are numerous. In Einstein's general theory of relativity, a black hole is a region of space-time (the four-dimensional structure of the Universe, the stage on which all physical reality moves) where the enormous intensity of the gravitational field does not allow anything to escape to the outside, not even in the light, and which would be the result of the collapse on itself of a star of enormous mass. But come on “black holes” much is still at the stage of mere speculation, including what Hawking said. For some scientists i “black holes” maybe they don't even exist. Whatever it is, in January 2014 it was Hawking himself who brought confusion to his own certainties, even distorting the basic idea known even to the layman according to which the “black hole” it would be a frightening monster in the shape of a pit with neither bottom nor exit lurking in the sidereal spaces. Everything to do again. But if science, and Hawking first, he knows nothing for sure about these “holes” who are no coincidence that they are black, as science does, and Hawking first, to decree with certainty the uselessness of God?
The third and final Hawking is the man to whom in 1963 diagnosed a terrible degenerative disease of the motor neurons which some believed to identify with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and which for others was instead progressive muscular atrophy, less deadly. So to speak: because Hawking progressively shrank into a shapeless pile of bones, nerves and flesh, motionless over the years 1980, sentenced to wheelchair and later, due to a tracheotomy which was necessary after pneumonia which in 1985 it almost killed him, also incapable of uttering words except through a vocal synthesizer that even ended up in a Pink Floyd song. To have known it, someone like that, for the world we live in, he didn't even have to be born. And instead he was one of the sharpest minds of the second half of the twentieth century. Once the disease has been diagnosed, someone like that, for the world we live in, he should have ended it. The first refutation of these sophisms is Hawking himself, to which in 1963 they had given two years of life. He lived beyond, giving his best after that capital sentence. Evil proceeded in him in a way that no one could have ever imagined. Precisely. If Hawking had chosen euthanasia, the world would never know his genius. To tell the truth, Hawking thought about assisted suicide and euthanasia by campaigning in their favor, but he never chose them.
In the 2014 A feature film directed by James Marsch was released about his life, obviously titled The Theory of Everything. It is taken from the biography Traveling to Infinity: My Life With Stephen (trad. it. Towards infinity, Piemme, Monferrato farmhouse [Alexandria] 2015), published in 2007 by his ex-wife, Jane Wilde, mother of his three children. Jane and Stephen married after his illness, In the 1965, more or less when he was supposed to die. They divorced in 1995 and they both remarried (he also divorced his second wife in 2006). The film is the story of a man and a scientist who doesn't give up, which does not leave the final word to death. A witty and facetious man (He found the multiuniverse hypothesis interesting but problematic: if you don't remember where you parked your car…) different from euthanasistic musonism. The film also tells that when in 1985 pneumonia was about to kill him and the doctors wanted to remove the thorns that were keeping him alive Jane saved him. She is the one the world has to thank for Hawking's sassy genius. Sometimes even ex-wives save you. Ecco, from “theory of everything” and hunger for life Hawking ended up being a great reluctant testimonial for God.