Observations of Hawking Lecture

Please forgive the"-brecht" and not "-brot" flub, Mandelbrot totally rocks. This video is intended as fair use of materials displayed to reference ideas presented. Please see the entire 5-part 2007 Steven Hawking Lecture on gravitationalist. Hey, When do you get a chance to publicly poke a little fun at Aristotle? I don't go to many of those kinds of cocktail parties.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Observations
• of
• Hawking
• Lecture

[madbackyardscientist]

I'm not convinced the universe is in an unending expansion because the speed listed is only 1.8C that gives each point a speed of .9C or 90% the speed of light. and in a curved 4th dimensional space one could theoretically be observing light from our own galaxy 14 billion years ago. the speed of the expansion could be limited in its acceleration by relativity causing the universe to become more massive as it approaches 100%C

[utoob0nutoob]

@madbackyardscientist I know exactly what you are saying, I'm taking a break for a cocktail right now! Seriously - excellent comment.

[TheDarkSagan]

Thanks for the invite.

[wailinburnin]

Dem big eyes, dat "COLD HARD MATTER" - you crazy or you just doin' crazy? What if you was me? Who'd I be talkin' to?...is it brot or brecht?

[ieatbeeshowboutyou]

I like to see a sane response to logic every once in a while. Thank you.

[komitas1979]

All human actions have one or more of these seven causes: chance, nature, compulsion, habit, reason, passion, and desire.

Aristotle

[komitas1979]

The gods too are fond of a joke.

Aristotle

[oilotnoM]

When you ignore the ways in which many things can interact, and treat all matter as little billiard balls, then it doesn't make sense that complex structure like a caffeine molecule should even exist.

But when you allow them to react, well hey there, what do we get other than one of the perks of an already tasty beverage?

It's like the old argument of comparing a watch to a living organism. Just doesn't make sense, they aren't made out of the same stuff at all.

[oilotnoM]

^ types of atom such as oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen etc, which form the basis of so called organic molecules (the word organic is based on what is observed in life ... it's unimportant in and of itself).

We know that organic molecules react in much more complex manners than metals do (metals are very simple structurally due to the metallic bonding). This is just ... observation.

So why all the incredulity that it takes something organic to send "cold, hard matter" hurtling through space?

[oilotnoM]

Why is it that the whole ID thing seems to treat all collections of matter as essentially the same simplistic, inanimate stuff?

Carbon has vastly different chemical properties to, say, iron. It's one of the few atoms that is the right shape/electron configuration to form large chain molecules with itself due to it's covalent bonding style. Silicon/germanium etc also do this, but due to their increased size relative to carbon atoms, they play a little differently around other types of atom.