Please watch these three YOUTUBE videos featuring a discussion about modern astrophysics and the different opinions of these three presenters:
Video Part 1:Part 2:
Part 3:
Stephen Hawkins-
Father Robert Spitzer-
Deepak Chopra-
Please Answer these questions:
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions.
2. Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
3. How do you think these opinions affect our society?
1. I liked the discussion exploring exactly what the "nothingness" that Stephen Hawkins was talking about sources from. Something from nothing is an extremely mind-bending thing for humans to attempt to understand. It seems that the more "nothingness" is discussed, and how it pertains to God and science, the more intricate it becomes.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkins firmly believes that there is no scientific need for God, and that physics contains all the explanations needed for describing the nature of the universe. Father Spitzer believes that God is the only way that the gap in explaining the universe can be filled, and that science on its own fails. Deepak Chopra believes that God is more woven into the universe, and is essentially that nothingness that Hawkins is talking about.
3. These opinions, and this overall discussion is extremely important in how it affects people's viewpoints. The discussion is exploring some of humanity's most prevalent questions, and when such discussion is brought up, we have to make a choice: We either lean in with an open mind, and make an effort to understand opposing signs, or we stay stuck on our own, comfortable, imbedded beliefs. With such subject matters being so often explored in science, everyone is affected, and everyone should contribute.
1. It is very interesting to hear all the different ways people think the universe was started but it was very confusing too!
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawking believes "something" can come from "nothing" without God creating it. He also says that if you believe in God, you have to figure out who created God in the first place and that is not possible. Fr. Spitzer believes it is impossible for "something" to come out of "nothing". He also believes that humans ask questions like where do we come from in order to have a better understanding of God's power and creation. Finally, Deepak Chopra believes God didn't create the universe but BECAME the universe and can be found in nature/people all over the world. He also believes "nothing" is not actually nothing but is the mind of an infinite being (God).
3. These discussions are important because it helps us learn more about who made the planets and the universe and who made humans and why?
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions.
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting part of the discussion was to know the different views on the existence of life and the creation of the universe and the evidence to try to prove each opinion. To me the theory harder and more meaningless and that the universe and life simply appeared. (something appeared from nothing) because something as gret as the universe has been created by an eternal creator
2. Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
Stephen Hawking says there may be a creator of the universe to put science can explain the existence of life without a Creator. Thus he believes that something came from nothing
Fr Spitzer believe in a single creator who created all things and that eh impossible something appear out of nowhere, and that science can fail but God never fails
and Deepak Chopra believes God ' became the universe and the universe we can see it in people in naturesa and every living thing.
3. How do you think these opinions affect our society?
These views affect our society because basically this question is that the person baseA your life depending on the response of such person lived differently. If in our society most people have a view point and as Stephen Hawking they will think, act, talk, in a completely different if most people think as Fr Spitzer and ditto for the form of thought Deepak Chopra
1. I thought it was very interesting to hear about peoples perspectives on how the universe all came about. I thought it was interesting to hear about how nothing all the sudden became the whole universe. The universe couldn't have just poofed into existence it had to be created by a eternal creator.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkings had the theory the "something came from nothing" , this means that he thinks there is a creator but then again there isn't so something(the universe) came from nothing. Fr. Spitzer believed in a single eternal creator who created everything. He also said that science can fail but God can never ever fail. Deepak Chopra believed that God did create the universe and we can see "it in people".
3. I think these opinions affect society because it leads people to believe so many different things. So many different theories lead people to believe in so many different things when they should believe that God created the Universe and everything in it.
1. The most interesting part of the discussions was how Hawkings kept denying God and kept saying the same things about the universe. Although he did admit that there might be a God.I liked that he liked Galileo and how he was very dedicated to science in his life.
ReplyDelete2. Hawkings believed that something came from nothing and there was no God. Fr.Spitzer believed there is a God. Chopra believed that there was God that created all of the people and you could see it in them.
3. I think that these opinion affect society today. i think they do this by changing our perspective. You could believe that science does prove everything or you could believe that God is the only possible way. I believe that only God could explain how things were created, but someone else like Hawkings could have a completely different opinion.
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions?
ReplyDeleteI thought that the most interesting part of the discussion was hearing all the different explanations and their reasoning behind it. I especially liked hearing about the physicist point of view because I think it is interesting to learn about the scientific facts of how the universe was created. I thought that his explanation of the quantum theory was really cool to think about. I also liked hearing about how the Muslims believe the universe was created from Deepak Chopra perspective. I liked hearing his perspective because It was very different from the Catholic’s perspective but was still somewhat similar. It was different in the sense that they believe that God didn’t create the universe, but rather he became the Universe. Both Catholics and Muslims agree that the universe is so intricate and complex that it could not have come from nothing. Also if the universe came from nothing then that means we were all put here on earth by chance and would have no “real purpose” for being here.
2. Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
Stephan Hawking said that he believes that the creation of the universe can be explained without a need for a higher power. He also went on to say “It is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe but if the answer is God then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. In this view it is accepted that some entity exists that needs not a creator, and that entity is God. I claim however, that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, without invoking a divine being ” His coe-author Lenard Mlodinow stated that “according to quantum theory there is no such thing as actual nothingness, you can have nothingness but from that, things will arise into existence and out of existence.”, what he means by that is that there can be a nothingness but it is unstable. He went on to say there is no beginning of nothingness because If you were to go back in time, time wouldn’t have the same meaning that we think of it as having today. Fr. Spitzer stated that He believes that Stephan Hawking is a very intelligent Physist, but is certainly capable of oversights mainly about his statement about “nothingness giving rise to something in the absolute sense” He went on to say that there is a whole lot more to us then just physics. As human being we desire to know our meaning in this world and if you say that free will is an illusion then you are depriving mankind of meaning. Deepak Chopra claims that God did not create the universe but rather, he became the universe. He says that space-time is actually an activity of that nothingness and that nothingness is actually outside of space-time. And that the laws of physics are just mathematical equations, they don’t make the universe work, they just describe the actions of the universe. No mathematical model will ever offer a complete explanation of what is really going on.
3. How do these opinions affect our society?
I think that these opinions effect our society because this topic is very controversial. Even though there are many theories, no one really knows how the universe was created. We can only guess.
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions?
ReplyDeletea. Its amazing how different the speakers opinions are. Since I have my idea that god made the earth its weird to think people believe the world came from nothing.
2. Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
a. Stephen Hawkins-
i. He seems much closed minded, he believes that science created the world. And he believes the world came from nothing, he also thinks that the people in the world are not doing their job and the world is drying up. He reasoning’s of the creation had to do with the law of gravity and he claims that other planets have been made from nothing. He also says that If God created the universe then something created God.
b. Father Robert Spitzer- He believes that God made the earth from nothing. There is no possible way to have us then
c. Deepak Chopra- He talks about how the earth came together through dust. He says nature creates all this. He also states that God didn’t create the universe he came to the earth.
3. How do you think these opinions affect our society?
a. These opinions affect how people think and what they are going to think, I believe that our universe is created from God yet others may think differently.
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions?
ReplyDeleteFor me I enjoyed how similar the three of them were but how different their beliefs were. I enjoyed when Larry allowed them to talk freely among themselves and how they could have a legitimate argument using basic facts and since they were so knowledgeable they could back up their opinion with facts. I personally enjoyed the beginning the most when Stephen Hawkings was stating his opinions because he is such a brilliant man and rarely to you get to hear him.
2. Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
Stephen Hawkings didn't join in on the discussion but simply was there to state the origins of his book and how it came about. He shared his ideas on how he believes there isn't a need for a creating in regards of discussing the origins of the universe. The co-author of the book Lenard Mlodinow really just reaffirmed Stephen's statements but was there to back them up. He shared his ideas on how science is a study of what we know and of observations and deflecting the assaults of Deepak towards his claims of not having a creator. Fr. Spitzer agreed with the logic sense of Stephen's argument but believed that we are so finite and finely tuned that a random occurrence of us to just "happen" is impossible to believe. Deepak Chopra was focused mainly on the idea of consciousness and how it too can't be explained by physics. He thought that consciousness was also considered nothingness and it is an occurrence of something from nothing.
3.How do these opinions affect our society?
These opinions affect our society because these are some of the most innovational thinkers of our day. These are the ideas that will shape the future of science and these are questions that seem impossible today but in hundred years will seem primitive. These men are the ones who ask the tough questions and go through hell in order to find an answer even if there's not one to be found.