Hawking thinks Brexit vote threatens humanity

[biggunsbob]

Envy and isolationism.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-stephen-hawking-thinks-brexit-104803515.html

 

[Spartanmack]

proof that even smart people say really stupid things. and it wasn't envy and isolationism that drove UK voters to chose to leave the EU. It was sel-determination, national security and a repudiation of the EU and it's mission creep. These are just words used by people who favor the EU to scare people who don't think for themselves into supporting their position. It's utter nonsense.

 

[biggunsbob]

proof that even smart people say really stupid things. and it wasn't envy and isolationism that drove UK voters to chose to leave the EU. It was sel-determination, national security and a repudiation of the EU and it's mission creep. These are just words used by people who favor the EU to scare people who don't think for themselves into supporting their position. It's utter nonsense.

The vote was isolationism to its core drummed up by fear and you know it. Now envy well that I do no know but I guess that is just his opinion.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I disagree with his take on alien invaders.

To some degree, I think people that make progress on really tough problems have an advantage if they have somewhat unique perspectives. I've definitely known people like this. They say crazy things fairly regularly that everyone thinks is nuts. But once in the blue moon, they say something everyone thinks is nuts, but they'll be right - and look like some kind of genius.

 

[Gulo Blue]

The vote was isolationism to its core drummed up by fear and you know it. Now envy well that I do no know but I guess that is just his opinion.

It is. But there is value to breaking up large powerful groups too. We may do it for the wrong reason, but consolidated power has its own risks.

 

[Spartanmack]

The vote was isolationism to its core drummed up by fear and you know it. Now envy well that I do no know but I guess that is just his opinion.

actually, I know quite the opposite. the vote was about self determination, national security, control over their economic policy and resources as well as untying the anchor of the southern european welfare states. The first thing Nigel Farage mentioned at the EU after the vote was that he hoped the EU would negotiate a fair and honest trade deal with the UK. Only a sheep would believe this nonsense about isolationism. UKIP, like everyone else, knows the UK needs fair trade with other nations but they don't need to give up control of their borders and economic policy to achieve it.

 

[Spartanmack]

It is. But there is value to breaking up large powerful groups too. We may do it for the wrong reason, but consolidated power has its own risks.

It's definitely not.

 

[Gulo Blue]

It's definitely not.

2 possible meanings here (maybe more, but 2 that I see). If you mean it's not isolationism, then ok. Technically, that's not the right word for it. If you mean it's not driven by fear - I disagree, but I think both sides were pushing fear.

 

[jwlcosu]

The vote was isolationism to its core drummed up by fear and you know it. Now envy well that I do no know but I guess that is just his opinion.

The F word again, fear. You read it again and again. Trump playing to people's fears. The Brexit outcome being the result of a fear campaign. I hate to break it to the leftists on the board, it has nothing to do with fear. Instead, it has to do with seeing things clearly and for what they are, taking a stand and being willing to aggressively defend when push comes to shove, as it eventually will. It's the opposite of fear.

 

[biggunsbob]

The F word again, fear. You read it again and again. Trump playing to people's fears. The Brexit outcome being the result of a fear campaign. I hate to break it to the leftists on the board, it has nothing to do with fear. Instead, it has to do with seeing things clearly and for what they are, taking a stand and being willing to aggressively defend when push comes to shove, as it eventually will. It's the opposite of fear.

Not even close. But just like fox news fear works in elections.

 

[Spartanmack]

Not even close. But just like fox news fear works in elections.

this wasn't an election.

 

[Spartanmack]

The F word again, fear. You read it again and again. Trump playing to people's fears. The Brexit outcome being the result of a fear campaign. I hate to break it to the leftists on the board, it has nothing to do with fear. Instead, it has to do with seeing things clearly and for what they are, taking a stand and being willing to aggressively defend when push comes to shove, as it eventually will. It's the opposite of fear.

We are spitting in the wind here - we have to understand the audience. If a discredited physicist says an economic and political referendum was based on fear and it lines up with what he wants to hear, well then by God, it was based on fear. I'm sure he also agrees with Pelosi that working class white males only vote Republican out of love of God and guns and fear of gays. No amount of facts will dissuade him. I'm walking away from this one but I will probably continue to toy with him on the Trump/Putin thread because sometimes I enjoy watching his head explode.

 

[sggatecl]

If a discredited physicist says

I have next to no interest in the whole Brexit thing but if you could slightly derail this with one post and expound on this I would appreciate it. Legitimately interested in this.

 

[Spartanmack]

I have next to no interest in the whole Brexit thing but if you could slightly derail this with one post and expound on this I would appreciate it. Legitimately interested in this.

I don't pretend to know all about Hawking's theories but my understanding is Leonard Susskind disproved them, or at least the most critical part(s). Gulo can probably weigh in on this and tell whether the term "discredited" applies or if something like "disproved" would be more appropriate. But, even if it's wrong, it's merely hyperbole - not something I think needs to be set straight for the record. My point is the guy is a physicist not an economist or policy expert and his opinion on this matter should be weighted accordingly.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't pretend to know all about Hawking's theories but my understanding is Leonard Susskind disproved them, or at least the most critical part(s). Gulo can probably weigh in on this and tell whether the term "discredited" applies or if something like "disproved" would be more appropriate. But, even if it's wrong, it's merely hyperbole - not something I think needs to be set straight for the record. My point is the guy is a physicist not an economist or policy expert and his opinion on this matter should be weighted accordingly.

I don't think anyone would use the word discredited. I think he lost a bet about whether information would somehow be preserved within what is now called "Hawking radiation". He was gracious in paying up and the winner was gracious in winning, but we're still talking about Hawking radiation here, a phenomenon he predicted decades ago that we may have observed some related effect of in the last decade. Einstein didn't get every detail right either.

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't think anyone would use the word discredited. I think he lost a bet about whether information would somehow be preserved within what is now called "Hawking radiation". He was gracious in paying up and the winner was gracious in winning, but we're still talking about Hawking radiation here, a phenomenon he predicted decades ago that we may have observed some related effect of in the last decade. Einstein didn't get every detail right either.

This link made it sound like something bigger than that was settled - that if Hawking was right, then the laws of the universe would have to be re-written. It doesn't get into technical details, which wouldn't add a whole lot for me,

http://www.physics-astronomy.com/2015/09/meet-bad-boy-of-physics-man-who-proved.html#.V6Dk2_krIdU

again, for the record, regardless of whether he's been disproved or discredited in all or part, I'm not trying to say Hawking isn't brilliant - just that giving great weight to his word on Brexit is like asking your landscaper for advice on your taxes.

Also for the record, I don't have a landscaper, at least not yet - my son is only 6 - and I do my own taxes.

 

[sggatecl]

Also for the record, I don't have a landscaper, at least not yet - my son is only 6 - and I do my own taxes.

Shit. My oldest is 4 and I was ready to put him to work at 6. Too soon? When is it acceptable?

 

[Gulo Blue]

again, for the record, regardless of whether he's been disproved or discredited in all or part, I'm not trying to say Hawking isn't brilliant - just that giving great weight to his word on Brexit is like asking your landscaper for advice on your taxes.

Sure. I just think the words come on stronger than anyone would use. I doubt there's anyone making advances in the field that hasn't been or won't be "disproved or discredited in all or part". It sounds bad. But it's really so common, there's nobody of significance it wouldn't apply to.

But my 1st post in this thread is in agreement to your main point here. He's the world's primary authority on black holes, not politics or sociology.

 

[biggunsbob]

Pretty funny how all of you discount someone a million times smarter then all of us combined. Yup a guy who understands the Cosmo's should have no political Opinion about his own country. But the point has been made. It's his opinion and just like normal it riled up some of you on this board. Maybe he is wrong and all of you will be right but maybe he is right . I guess only time will tell .

 

[biggunsbob]

this wasn't an election.

It was vote and both sides used fear in campaigning for staying or leaving the EU. Leaving the EU won.