September 10, 2010

Stephen Hawking: Now and Then

Posted: 06:02 AM ET

By Michael Watts
LKL Producer

I’ve been a producer on “Larry King Live” for almost 12 years, and I’m frequently asked, “what’s your coolest experience?” The stock answer: producing Stephen Hawking.

I journeyed to Cambridge when he was our guest in December 1999, and have been lucky enough to come back for his latest appearance on “Larry King Live.” This experience, while just as rewarding, has been a little different.

Hawking’s ALS has clearly progressed in the last decade. Even so, I continue to be amazed at how well he manages to communicate. The hand clicker he used in 1999 to command his communication system has been replaced by a sensor that monitors subtle cheek movements. But the software he uses looks very similar. It also says a great deal about Prof. Hawking that among the easiest words for him to pull up and speak is “thanks.”

Hawking is almost completely paralyzed. Unfortunately, his endearing smile is no longer possible, but his sense of humor is still very much in tact. Just read a few pages of “The Grand Design” if you doubt that.

I would also be remiss if I didn’t mention Hawking is aided by an incredibly capable and kind group of people. Judith Croasdell and Sam Blackburn were extraordinary. It is through their efforts, and those of our great London staff, we are able to bring you our interview.

But doing an interview with Hawking is more than putting him in front of the camera and cueing Larry. The questions have to be provided well in advance so he can prepare his answers. The answers themselves are sometimes very brief, which is understandable since he can only enter text at about 1 to 2 words a minute. Actually, some might find the brief answers a refreshing change.

Now about that book….

I have no intention of weighing in on the creation controversy, nor would anyone care what I had to say about it anyway. But I do find some things in “The Grand Design” worthy of comment.

First, I continue to be amazed at how Hawking can take such complex principles and questions, like “why do we exist?” and make them understandable. Not easy to understand mind you. I’ve been reading the book for several days and am only half way through it. It’s not that long, 181 pages to be exact, but to grasp the book you have to read, stop, think, think again, then sometimes reread. But I have found it well worth the effort. The theories he puts forth, whether you agree with them or not, are fascinating, and the most fascinating is M-theory.

When we talked to him in 1999, Hawking said he thought we were tantalizingly close to a unified theory, or “ultimate theory of everything” as he calls it in “The Grand Design.” He now believes we have one, and it’s M-theory. M-theory is actually not one theory, but a collection of overlapping ones, each complimenting the other. He compares it to layers of maps – you have street maps, topographical maps, even traffic maps. They all enhance the other while working on the same foundation.

The great controversy surrounding “The Grand Design” really boils down to this statement: “According to M-theory, ours is not the only universe. Instead, M-theory predicts that a great many universes were created out of nothing. Their creation does not require the intervention of some supernatural being or god. Rather, these multiple universes arise naturally from physical law.”

As stated earlier, I’m not touching that. But one thing the book spends a lot of time explaining is in science, you don’t have to observe something to know it’s true if the preponderance of evidence points to it being so. While reading the book, it struck me, can something similar not be said about religion. Maybe science and religion aren’t so different after all.

Filed under: Larry King Live • Stephen Hawking

Share this on:
Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 10th, 2010 6:12 am ET

Can't wrap my head around this one.........

PHIL HIPSHAW   September 10th, 2010 8:08 am ET

It is with a mixture of amazement and some considerable anger that I write to you concerning the outrageous appointment of an ex-tabloid Editor of a sleazy UK tabloid as the replacement for Larry King.
If ever the world needed confirmation of the huge drop in standards and integrity this is surely it.

Richard Gornitsky   September 10th, 2010 10:05 am ET

The problem with Hawking theories is that it never explains how you get something from nothing. They define matter/energy in different forms as the seed for creating the universe but they are still something. They are like an illusionist whose art is based on redirection. The wrap their theories in complexity will diverting your attention that their beginning premise is flawed.

Dave P   September 10th, 2010 10:21 am ET

I think your final sentence is right on the money, and that is Fr. Spitzer's ultimate point: Science and religion are not incompatible, and the constructs that pit one against the other are generally constructed because of someone's agenda.

I will watch tonight with great interest.

Joe G. (Illinois)   September 10th, 2010 3:16 pm ET

Some people never seem to learn! Stephen Hawking being one of them.
What in the world does Stephen Hawking know about life or creation?!

If Truth is Truth, and Truth cannot lie, than Truth is the Most of Most Power. For those who still have questions or still don’t know.. God is Truth.

Thank you and good day

Sandbur   September 10th, 2010 3:46 pm ET

Science flies you to the moon,
religion flies you into a building!

Lucy   September 10th, 2010 5:02 pm ET

I have tremendous admiration for Stephen Hawking.

I DO wonder about the universe and how/why we are here. I long ago stopped believing in God. I prefer science.

I still can't wrap my mind aboiut how it all began. At what point was there nothing??? At some point there must have been nothing. How did nothing turn into something???

Anthony Perry   September 10th, 2010 5:45 pm ET

Does Mr. Hawking believe in the UFO sightings?

LacrosseMom(the real one)   September 10th, 2010 7:44 pm ET

Mr. Hawkins, you are free to voice your opinion. Lately, with all the hate from Christians, they are giving the Loving, Merciful, Forgiving God, I know, a bad name.

God bless you, Mr.Hawkins.

Cajazz76:24:8   September 10th, 2010 8:21 pm ET

If you put Stephen Hawking's recent observations and conclusions in reverse order, would it read 'the primary function of the universe was to be the machine for the creation of Gods? If the g-spot of happiness and pleasure is found next door in an "alternate universe", let's get the hell out of here and go...even if it's for a few weeks, on cooled lava beaches...It is fascinating to speculate that the universe is more odd and unique than we vision, but it must be more odd and unique than we can envision...caj

Stephen, may your journey through life be as interesting and fulfilling as it has been. May your suffering be tolerable and diminished as you proceed in your future days, weeks, and years ahead. Compassionately...caj

cindy   September 10th, 2010 9:22 pm ET

Mr. Hawkings, Respectfully what if god is Science?? cindy modesto ca.

doncolecartoons   September 10th, 2010 9:27 pm ET

The panel might do well to discuss what is the true nature of God. Obviousley, God is not an old man in the sky. The Bible itself is very discriptive is discribing the nature of God, and are they aware of this and considering these attributes as being the nature of God –dc

ander   September 10th, 2010 9:32 pm ET

Science needs to explain religion. If science cannot explain one religion concept it is probably a misconcept. Allan Kardec

doncolecartoons   September 10th, 2010 9:36 pm ET

Considering the miraculous accuracy about science and nature, written beyond it's time, and contrary to what the people of that day believed, the Bible certainly appears to know what it is talking about. Also, consider the accuracy of foretelling the future. The Bible has checkability, where other holy books of men do not. –dc

Doug Arnett   September 10th, 2010 9:36 pm ET

Hi Larry. There is no time as we know it.

Rosemary Parsegian   September 10th, 2010 9:38 pm ET

In response to Sept. 10th show. None of these people can really explain how something can come from nothing. It is obvious that every thing comes from something. If the bible isn't the word of god then it wouldn't of been followed for so many centurys. I feel that this man is just expressing his own personal view. I would like him to explain how so many of my prayers have been answered for so long and made life so much better. Nature came from somewhere too! Obvious!

Marianne Robbins   September 10th, 2010 9:39 pm ET

Larry, the religion of the future will be of a cosmic nature, devoid of theology and a personal God...signed a Catholic friend in Canada
PS, this was a paraphrase of something read earlier

Doug Arnett   September 10th, 2010 9:40 pm ET

Hi Larry. There never was "nothing".

Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:40 pm ET

Wrong...Science has worked very hard to prove or disprove God.

Barbara L.   September 10th, 2010 9:41 pm ET

The question is raised, How can something arise from nothing?

Can not the same question be asked of God – How can God arise from nothing?

Adam   September 10th, 2010 9:41 pm ET

Could consciousness arise from the complex interactions of the immaterial objects within the universe, as ours arises from complex interactions of neurons? Would this kind of sentience be similar in form to God?

Susan Shutt   September 10th, 2010 9:41 pm ET

Before God there was nothingness, sin. God created all things and brought light. A need to overcome nothingness, sin.

doncolecartoons   September 10th, 2010 9:42 pm ET

So far, this is all about theory. How can Hawking be so absolute? Of course, I haven't read his book yet, so I will be looking... –dc

Adam   September 10th, 2010 9:42 pm ET

Can one consider God's existence as true without intrinsically blocking the potential of scientific research? Does considering God in the implications of scientific discovery inherit problems?

Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:44 pm ET

None of us know what is real or not real. We run around acting like we know. Hawkin's is not saying there is no God, he is saying we should be able to grow beyond it. We are morons beyond acting as if we are the only living creatures on this planet or any other.

neil carter   September 10th, 2010 9:44 pm ET

Does this nothingness and something created out of nothingness have anything to do with the Buddhist concept of emptiness?

rose sherrell   September 10th, 2010 9:44 pm ET

As an athiest,I always could see the Design in leaves,Flowers,animals I always knew there had to be a superior intellignce...even finger prints,our very ownOSE SHERRELL

Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:45 pm ET

and yes, there is a "God Formula"....I want to know if anyone on this show knows it...

barbarina Zwicky   September 10th, 2010 9:45 pm ET

My father, Swiss astrophysicist at Caltech, Fritz Zwicky, discovered Dark Matter, coining the term itself. The scientific intelligentsia has thus far failed to understand or even detect 99% of the universe, which is dark, has gravitational pull and keeps us from flying out into the universe. My father always believed that the universe was so unique, it could not have its genesis by chance but was by creative design. I believe that only God could entertain such power over creation and the Dark Matter is the Lord.

doncolecartoons   September 10th, 2010 9:45 pm ET

Faith is not blind. We learn about things invisible, from that which is visible. Once our learning has been founded, –we gain faith. If the source of our faith has been tested and tried, and has never let us down, –then we begin to have faith in the source itself. –dc

MS   September 10th, 2010 9:46 pm ET


Dawn   September 10th, 2010 9:47 pm ET

I believe in the One living God and that he created all of the universe without question. I cannot comprehend how something can be created with nothing. These two guests need to read the book, IN SIX DAYS> why fifty Scientists choose to believe in Creation edited by John F Ashton PhD.
"Why would any educated, self-respecting scientist with a PhD advocate a literal interpretaion of the six days of creation? Why? indeed, when only one in three Americans believes "the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word" according to a recent Gallup poll.
Science can neither prove nor disprove evolution anmore than it can creation. Certainly there are no human eyewitnesses accounts of either. However factors are present today which are capable of swaying one's beliefs one way or the other.
In the book are testimonies of fifty mena and women holding docorates in a wide range of scientific fields who have been convinced by the evidence to believe in a literal six-day creation.
All of these Scientists in this book, through faith and scientific fact, have come to the conclusion that God's Word is true and everything had its origin in the beginning, In Six Days.

Bromley Johnson   September 10th, 2010 9:48 pm ET

We Don't Know A millionth of one percent about anything,and in knowing that you know nothing that makes you the smallest of all.


Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:49 pm ET

I want a formula to S. Hawking's theros.

David Green   September 10th, 2010 9:49 pm ET

in the begining God created the heavens and the earth. The first thing God crated was time in order to set the boundaries for the existance of mortal men.

Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:49 pm ET

I think most humans are dumb

Joanne C.   September 10th, 2010 9:49 pm ET

Please be careful how you place your views about such a holy God that has your life in his hands. You were born to serve him and if you would let God come into your life he would speak to you and you would know it was a being from above. Science has nothing to do with our being that made you to serve him. He made a wonderful universe.

JMU   September 10th, 2010 9:51 pm ET

Not only did god not create the universe. If all the people on this planet put down their holy books and gave up their superstitions the world would be a better place.

Jennifer McCalllum   September 10th, 2010 9:51 pm ET

I may have mused something. But how do they explain the first human? Where do we come from.

Evan Efston   September 10th, 2010 9:51 pm ET

Question for the Theologians

In the book of Creation no where is been mentioned Who Created God??

Also how is possible Possible that Spirit can create matter??

frank braun   September 10th, 2010 9:53 pm ET

space – time created god and all that is in the universe!

doncolecartoons   September 10th, 2010 9:54 pm ET

The questions Hawkings just presented, are easily answered. The answer is GOD. We must understand and appreciate that we see things through our own eyes and place, which is not a whole picture of what is, but only through our own limited senses. The nature of God is not so limited. It would be good to make a list of what is written in the Bible about the nature of God. Most people are not aware of these attributes of the nature of God. All these things need to be considered and discussed. –dc

Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:57 pm ET

Personally, I can not lie. Yes, there is something that goes beyond us that created the universe.

There is a God. Nothing, balances even in our orbits of stars and planets.

However, give me the formula for the exsistance of God. Google it....

Then prove it wrong.... I have worked with such researches. Have you?

Lastly, I love Hawkins because he swims in everything good and bad in humanity. He claims the universe, yet he is open minded enough to work it.

Oh please

Move on Priest...God did not just come for us, HE came for everyone.

doncolecartoons   September 10th, 2010 9:57 pm ET

"We won't know the answer to that question, and never will..." I certainly do not buy into that kind of reasoning. "Seek, and ye shall find.." –dc

Jazmin Marmol   September 10th, 2010 9:58 pm ET

We are everything and everything is us. I dont necessarily believe in a God, simply a higher power.

Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:58 pm ET


Give me the formual

Dr. Holly Easton   September 10th, 2010 9:58 pm ET

Dear Larry,
Thank you and your guests for discussing these important, challenging questions on television. Substantial discussion brought into the homes
of American's via TV is a rarity these days!
Holly Easton, D.O.

Brandy   September 10th, 2010 9:58 pm ET

none of you know it

Deborah Collins   September 10th, 2010 10:00 pm ET

Before you can ask if there is a God, you have to define what/who God is, and that impossible to verify.

ANGEL   September 10th, 2010 10:01 pm ET

controversy over nothing made into complex for media to play with. time is existence something that don't move called stillness. time is a words of nothing made to everything called complex. time is now, and we always be now nomatter how we paint the picture of reality. time is the same has it been for thousands of year called now as stillness. plus creation is the words made in nothing to everything in self to believe and become to exist in this time called now in self.

laparishrushing-el   September 10th, 2010 10:04 pm ET

if we as a people examine the moorish science temple god and the union of man can be explained along with creation of the universe

doncolecartoons   September 10th, 2010 10:05 pm ET

The title of the book is very puzzeling to me, "The Grand Design."
That title seems to contradict what the book is saying.
Isn't Hawking now saying that there is no "Grand Design." So, I guess Hawking is saying there is a "Grand Design," but it is purely accidental without meaning? This sounds so strange coming from an expert mathematician. –dc

Jennifer   September 10th, 2010 10:09 pm ET

I'm sorry I have one more post! I am a Christian that believes strongly in God. Every religion has bad apples not just the Christian faith. Their are people that claim to be Christians who are not. That is no reason to pok down on the whole religion. I respect science. I just don't believe in the whole concept of it. But that is my right!

David Norcross   September 10th, 2010 10:11 pm ET

I understand in todays world it is easy to dismiss God. But for those who talk to him,hear him,feel him and are guided with him we know where he is. He is with us and we are with Him. Always and Forever.

viri   September 10th, 2010 10:13 pm ET

Each person desires what to believe what not, to whom believe or not...but who am I? "The Grand Design" ... One more answer for that question by somebody else. Mr Hawking what will happen with my person according your theory?. Because
I have one too, my neighbors has another one, which is interesting too. You made me think and think and sounds great what you say and amazing what you have research!!! but not enough to answer who am I? Who we are?... I'll take from your theory what works for me and I need to thanks God for this but the authority to lead my live I'll never put it in men hands. I'm the responsible for my short journey. The answer always arrive just attend that once it arrives.

Ellen   September 10th, 2010 10:34 pm ET

The great diversity of viewpoints backed by research that appeared this evening is overwhelming. It reminds us we each have a brain that is meant to be used. Whether our brains originate from observable explainable scientific phenomena or from Divine Intervention, we have them and this evening's show was a great way to stimulate thinking–that quality that so far is best exemplified in humans. Thanks to Larry for once again bringing an incredibly stimulating thinking panel into our homes to remind us of the great organ we all carry on our shoulders each day but often fail to use to the fullest extent–our brains, that most underexercised organ of them all.

Lomas,Torin   September 10th, 2010 10:35 pm ET

Science has clearly been in turmoil with religion, time and time again Science is proving and taking away from the core of religions...disproving it with evolution, Stephen Hawking is not trying to take away from religion, because though it causes death throughout history, religion brings something science cannot a spirit in a people and a reason for people to live a question everyone ponders and an answer for many of those people. I am not religious but i truly believe in the end science will conquer, their are so many people in this world that will fight Science vs. Religion, when really we will never prove if god exists or not, realistically religion is different to anybody in everyones mind, Realistically science takes leaps into the future everyday; Stephen King has a great book and will be a man science and society will study long after his time (like Galileo or Einstein), The man has made remarkable discoveries for us, if you think of some of the things and generalize them into thoughts.. He described and mathematically described a way to predict a rip in the fabric of time of the universe, A wormhole. What this one man has brought to the world and his theories will live on, and their for bring us as a society many new powerful scientists with new powerful theories and ideas, in a way he brings a new way of seeing life, a "Renaissance" of science, Religion brings a new life a change to many of people, as does science, but science will conquer because science is fact, science brings an idea, a reason to life and to people just as it stands now it has proof something we lack in god...My question for you is we base all theories and known information off of an idea preceding us, Why cant we find an edge to a circle and if we did would zero not be a skewed number of true zero...their for is everything we know and learned skewed as well? religion is losing its core ideas of how life was created and how earth was and so on and so forth, but science and math in turn could prove itself wrong with something as simple as solving Pi, science would all be in turn skewed or wrong, the cores to science would be split down the middle, Science may be proving religion wrong but eventually will science prove itself wrong...?
ps. on a side note i believe religion is good as is science i do not mean to offend but rather portray my view,

Doug Arnett   September 10th, 2010 10:43 pm ET

There never was nothing, and never will be.

roisoleil   September 10th, 2010 10:49 pm ET

I am truly surprised if Hawkings and the Cal Tech Physicist have concluded that we live in a deterministic universe. I have not yet read their book but I assume they must have rejected Heisenberg/Bohr Uncertainty Principle in favour of the Minimalist / Reductionist
"probability distribution" model of quantum physics. That being the case, they have, although he failed to take them up on it, given a strong card for the catholic preist to play.

As a catholic I'll play it for him. If we live in a pre-determined universe with no free will and every action we take is merely the outcome of the forces acting upon us from the immediate past then why should we feel any guilt or be held accountable for any of our actions no matter how heinous our crimes? We couldn't help ourselves we were predestined to take those actions and had no free will in the matter, no choice, no morality, why should there be any laws or punishments, why should we care? It's not like it would stop them from happening they were a matter of nature and were destined to happen.

No, I think they made a critical error, god must exist and there must be free will or else there is no basis for law and I should quit the Bar and stop practising altogether because there is no point anyway. There is no point to anything.

Ellen   September 10th, 2010 11:00 pm ET

Perhaps, science and religion can co-exist. Perhaps you can call religion, the science that transcends the 5 senses. Consider the mention that was made this evening of Consciousness. Nothing has really explained Consciousness because it is to some degree unique to the person experiencing that thing that s/he is conscious of.
Okay, so just maybe we take into our minds the observable world of science and we perceive them the way our own unique brain's organization allows us to make sense of what we see. The scientific facts when they are taken into a person's mental being become a part of that person's Consciousness. As people learn more facts, their consciousness increases. So perhaps science and religion work as partners to bring us closer to a fuller understanding of who we are, where we came from and what it is possible for us to achieve.

Katie   September 10th, 2010 11:09 pm ET

Larry your show with Stephen Hawking, Deepak Chopra, Leonard Mlodinow & Father Spitzer. Was too short. A very interesting and thought provoking subject, Universe, God, and then nothing.

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 11th, 2010 12:11 am ET

In the beginning there was the WORD!..........

Gary Morris   September 11th, 2010 12:15 am ET

Great! I have always felt and known that made me feel smart after all the years of have studied our world, past and present.

elmore brown   September 11th, 2010 12:23 am ET

neither one of these guys were present when God created the universe and science is always re=inventing it self ..what man has greater knowledge than God. their mind sets are small . and limits our God to their small thinking.

Cajazz76:24:8   September 11th, 2010 12:32 am ET

Jessie from Auckland, NZ

Was the word the bird..bird..bird..the bird was the word? It sure was a lengthy and arduous task for man to assimilate, and he did...try sand

gezahegn dinget   September 11th, 2010 12:34 am ET

What ! where cames samthing from ? nothing is nothing

Lovette   September 11th, 2010 12:36 am ET

What is this nothingness? Sounds like we may exist in the mind of God.

free2drm   September 11th, 2010 12:37 am ET

I believe God is the creator of all. I believe this without question.Nothing told 2 me by any man will change this.How can man tell me how the universe was created years ago when man can't even understand what is going on in the world today.

elmore brown   September 11th, 2010 12:37 am ET

i will agree that these gentllemen have one thing in common its all about making money .. selling a book or boasting of how smart. they are

David   September 11th, 2010 12:37 am ET

What always fascinates me about a religious person's perspective about the beginning of time is that they use the logical argument that something cannot come from nothing and therefore their logic would dictate that there has to be a creator?

If you use the same logic....then if god exists....then who created god?

Shaynaz Malleck, NY   September 11th, 2010 12:41 am ET

How do you explain the soul? Does this come out of nothing? How is this explained through science? What about our minds?

James   September 11th, 2010 12:43 am ET

There is a lot of deliberate confusion going on here. M-Theory is not really a theory is a 'promise of a theory', still unknown, based off an idea that some unarticulated unifying theory lies underneath a set of currently disconnected and disparate string theories. It comes from finding that some variations of the disconnected string theories can overlap, explaining partial aspects of the other – in different terms. If this sounds is.

Hawking, and many other theoretical physicists, have laid down a 'what if' geometric topology upon which they have built theories explaining quantum physics from a new angle. A lot of the work is quite fascinating, but 'it ain't necessarily so' and nothing has been done which can be checked experimentally – which is the big important deal. It is a common hazard of Physics that experimental physicists eat theoretical physicists for lunch. Until then it has no more reality than 19th/20th century musings on 'Ether Winds' prior to Special and General Relativity. In other words, it is dangerous, academically, to act as if these theories were already proven.

The idea of a god not being needed is more about 'taking god out of the gaps' in theory. This used to be called 'waving the magic wand'. It arises from theorizing via mathematics, a final 'smallest unit' which is a Plank unit of space/time. This takes the 'dependent consistent and homogenous Background' out of string theory – if they can unify this in M-Theory. If you have a 'background independent' space/time theory, then you might be able to hang a string theory (via the missing M-theory) on top of it and have an inevitability of creation which requires 'no decision' , hence no god is needed to make a command decision and say, 'Do this'. No choice is needed. That is what is meant by "No god is needed'. At no time does it really mean 'we have proved there is no Supreme Being.

It all makes great press (gets the 'fear and anger glands going in TV viewers), but really has nothing to do with reality (yet) or whether someone believes in a creator.

Personally, I think these people should be more careful about their dependence on a mathematically created topology, which has not been shown to exist experimentally. Mathematicians can (and have) create any number of different game topologies, but they do not necessarily have anything to do with reality. My personal bet is M-theory will be shown to be a bust... a theory too far.

Sacul   September 11th, 2010 12:44 am ET

there is a change that is going to happen in 2012 and its going to be very spiritual with the Human DNA it will all start with the pineal gland in our brain....its called the chakra effect where u will be able to leave your body and become one with the universe and this can only happen with the melanin in your blood.

James G.   September 11th, 2010 12:47 am ET

Dr. David R. Hawkins MD PhD who is also a mystic could have explained why Stephen Hawking is correct and incorrect at the same. Science is limited and is linear. Where as Spritiually is non limited and non linear.

This is expalined in the best seller "Power Vs Force" by Dr. Hawkins. Next time do your audience a big a favor and have him on as a guest.

Chuck   September 11th, 2010 12:47 am ET

Is it possible that the nothingness that you are refereing to is the absents or Divison of collective contiousness, and life itself is the death and rebirth of God (Meaning: The collasping and expanding of space), and that we as life are Gods lost collective thoughts taken on Elemental forms within a cycle of change and Rebirth???

Cajazz76:24:8   September 11th, 2010 12:48 am ET

Shanaz Mallek, NY

You're so very close..research the right temporal lobe of the brain..caj

paul   September 11th, 2010 12:49 am ET

i think what he means to look ahead in time , is to imagine how things will be , just like predistination the creator knew, but we did not know only as we live it out, to look ahead in time , possibley he imagines the universe haveing so multi millions of earths that we can all have our own, but lets go back in time a monent , we know at this particular time that this is the only planet with life as we know it, there are un numerable planets through out the universe, but each one is unique to it,s own, size speed , air, magnetic field, carbon, rotation, number of day,s in it,s journey of circumfernce, venus turns opposite from the earth or the planets in our system, our planets system is benificial to our life, scientists know that in 200 to 1000 years they can conform mars suitable enough that we could utilize the planet, but the cost would be more than we could bare, so lets look ahead in time , if we can by pass mars, saturn, moons and travel through out the universe and find a planet exactly like earth, it would be quicker, cheaper after all the universe is with out beginning or ending, all these therory,s have been tryed countless times before, lets ask ourselves how do we look ahead in time when all the images comeing from outter space has been comeing to us for countless millions of light years and we do not know if they still exist or they are going in opposite direction to the image we are recieveing, these are all interesting and great men and therory,s , but i will keep the explanation of creation, i do not want to give up my opportunity of eternal life, thanks

Bobby   September 11th, 2010 12:49 am ET

The Bible says worship the Creator not the Creation. The whole purpose behind such a distinction is the fact that the earth and universe for that matter are created perfect as living depictions of Gods perfect creation. As science progesses it shows more and more an unexplained occurance that began the universe. Ultimately its a faith based system that gives you an opportunity to chose. But God desires relationship with Larry King and every other human being and its completely indiviual with no other depiction of consciousness anywhere.

Derek Murtagh   September 11th, 2010 12:49 am ET

The concept of something out of nothingness is very old to me. God and science can exist together. Evolution is simple. Would it be not be easy to simply make a universe, and let it self evolve. Of course. Time would not mean a thing to God, and God would not waste its time in this dimention to watch it grow. If you were a God would you talk to ants, showing how amazing you are in ways that we would not comprehend.
This physical realm is very plan, and to have numberical values try to explain just a sliver of this, when it is connected to other dimentions, is pointless. Wasting time in applying science to this little slice of the overall existance is the trap intellects falls into. The meek...

Forgive spelling.

Jack Sarfatti Ph.D. physics from University of Calif   September 11th, 2010 12:51 am ET

I am surprised that Stephen cites M-Theory as the basis for his current book because M-Theory is not a real physics theory. Even M-Theorists admit it is merely a hope they have faith in. For the issues see Lee Smolin's "The Trouble With Physics." Lee is himself an M-Theorist. M-Theory is simply string non-theory with an extra dimension 11 instead of 10.

Stephen's co-author is seriously ignorant when he says there is no physics of consciousness.

Deepak and the Jesuit have won the debate as it were in my opinion.

I do agree with Stephen, however, on the politics and the need of space-exploration.

More details on how Grand Design is much too limited can be found at

Bobby   September 11th, 2010 12:52 am ET

Man ate from the tree of knowledge and knowledge is always driving man either further away from God by his arrogance or closer by his humilty.

sandra pizano   September 11th, 2010 12:53 am ET

Believe, God is real.

Ayyub Muhammad   September 11th, 2010 12:55 am ET

God was the Bang!! the universe is the debris.

Debbie,,   September 11th, 2010 12:59 am ET

I cannot believe that anyone could possibly think that there was not a Power that made everything,, all of the univeres , and all of the beings, I can not believe that anyone would actually think there was nothing that brought us here ,, what an awful thought ....

Lucas   September 11th, 2010 1:02 am ET

Physics is the mathematical expression of things. A numerical, and measured value to define, pretty well everything mechanically. "Applied math".
Fact: Religion has been an enemy of science for a long time. The Vatican used to hunt down radical thinkers and destroy or keep books and other important works. Galileo knew, even in his time, that planets revolved in elliptical paths. The Vatican put him on house arrest for his theories and made him change his model of the solar system to all perfect circular tracks to look as halos and be more holy or godly.
I do myself believe in God.
Einstein said that "energy cannot be created or destoryed"
But it can be fixed or concentrated.
Maybe the big bang IS god...
Maybe "God" expanded, becoming and being a little part of everything and in everything.
You always hear in religions that God is everywhere, maybe that's how. God had to start it all, to get the ball rolling and probably divinely intervenes every now and again when needed.
Religion and science are just 2 different path striving for the same goal. 2 different interpretations to explain the same thing.....

Debbie,,   September 11th, 2010 1:03 am ET

Like I said, I cannot even imagine oh my, that anyone could possibly thinkj that there was not a Power that has indeed made everything, all of univeres and more, I can not believe that anyone would actually think there was nothing that brought us here, what an awful being

Joe   September 11th, 2010 1:06 am ET

I'm rather disappointed on how the physicists attempted to sell the idea that the universe was created out of nothing. I think they'd have a better chance of selling time shares at Chernobyl. In my opinion, it takes away from their credibility and makes them look silly. That is a hard point to defend, from nothing to something, sounds to me like some Hollywood script that has been recycled over and over.

James   September 11th, 2010 1:12 am ET

This whole M-Theory experience, is a complex physics exercise which is quite similar to 'squaring the circle' in Euclidean Geometry. This is one of 3 "impossible construction' in Euclidean geometry – you simply cannot do them. Such constructions are tempting because they seems like they SHOULD be possible, so the hapless mathematician/physicist seeks to prove it and win eternal fame.

The problem is, every little part of the proof floor he nails down as 'absolutely true', pops up a nail in another part of the proof floor, earlier shown as 'absolutely true', but now shown – relative to his new proof – as 'no longer absolutely true' but instead is now 'undetermined'. It is like one of those old Walt Disney 'Goofy' cartoons about fixing a house.

This is very similar to what is happening in String Theory. Loop Gravity and the so-called M-Theory. The independent partial theories seem like they should be really good, but they keep getting 'something once nailed down in one theory, is a contradiction in another independent String theory (pound another nail down). M-Theory is supposed to be the unknown true underlying theory that, if Theoretical Physicists could figure out just what it is from the indications of the incomplete String Theories, all the nails would finally stay down. That is also the classic lure to the hapless math crank to continue to try and square the circle. It is THE classic sign of a false premise incapable of being proved true.

Watley   September 11th, 2010 3:44 am ET

This idea that science can explain everything using the laws of nature will, I think, render the supernatural to be wholly natural. Science will then redefine what is God. If human intellect can perceive the N A T U R E of God, then we will know the limits, making us gods...and was that not the goal of being in HIS IMAGE, having that capacity of knowing ourselves and then knowing HIM?

Vanessa   September 11th, 2010 3:47 am ET

We came from somewhere. so this nothingness came from something. this is where the point that god came in but like they said god had to come from somewhere. many peoples beliefs are that we were created from god but if you are going to change that then tell where we came and from what we are made of. stephen hawking is genius for figuring this out but now figure out the rest. where do we come from?

Scott Johnson   September 11th, 2010 3:56 am ET

I believe our world as we know it, is schooling we go through to prepare us for our ultimate existence. It might be somewhat of an illusion, or a differant reallity for everyone.

Chris Hargis   September 11th, 2010 4:04 am ET

People are going to believe what they want to believe all the scientist in the world couldn't come up with proof of were the universe came from at the end of the day most people are going to believe in what they were raised believing in some pray to God some pray to nothing there are thousands of believes in the world and we are all human so who knows exactly the truth there may be a man somewere praying to a door knob and if he believes that door knob created him then who's to say he is wrong there is no proof never will be I myself believe in God that is my faith faith is believing not seeing

Jose   September 11th, 2010 4:09 am ET

I believe that it is possible. God could be defined as pure energy. That energy which can be everywhere and feel everything humans do, it will have a physical impact on live.

The theory of Noetics centers around the idea that the human mind is capable of affecting work or events or even doing work in the physical world. It is suggested that thought and spirit are not, in fact, imaginary, but are Bose or photon based, meaning essentially that the mind can be quantified by formulae which describe quantum materials such as light. This is a radical conclusion, as many people consider thoughts to be weightless. Noetic theory claims that just as gravity affects all matter, thoughts do as well, although to a lesser degree.

Although if many people think the same at the same time, it would affect matter in a noticeable way.

So getting a hypothesis out of this, is, that the concentration of energy taht can create matter out of nowhere, could be called God. So when people create this thought about God at a high level in many places, energy gets manipulated by the effect that Noetic science stipulates and give a reason for a so called God to exist.

Abiodun   September 11th, 2010 5:42 am ET

Who gave the NAME God?

Daniel   September 11th, 2010 5:45 am ET

The concept of creation is beyond human comprehension. Science can speculate up to a ceratin point in time! This, I think, is why Christians believe the idea of creation by faith. And faith is that supernatural gift from God which enables us to believe without doubting whatever God has revealed!

B A Potgieter   September 11th, 2010 5:57 am ET

With great interest i watched the show with Stephen King concerning the Creator.
My comment: How can "nothing be nothing" if nothing is something we dont know.
Is outerspace nothing because it is a Vacume??
Something created or caused "nothing",therefore nothing is something.
The Human brain has not develped enough to know or comprehend nothing and if nothing exists,something created nothing.
What would Stephen King say about this.

Victim Majok   September 11th, 2010 5:58 am ET

My reaction to Stephen Hawking's Nothing theory is that;
God himself, or any devine being that people believe is in the nothingness as you put it.

Rumaiza   September 11th, 2010 6:02 am ET

No one can explain how/when humans presented But u should look @ the universe & it's clear that there must be one creator,, indeed I believe in one God & we were created to pray & thank him for giving us the chance to build this land the Earth,,& as there is God & death so there is a life after that we should prepare ourselves for.
Thanks & May God forgive us.

Audu   September 11th, 2010 6:07 am ET

Hawkings, who set in motion the ability of your "spontaneous reproduction"? When will another ape turn into another human being? Please try to research into live after death before you come to the final of the finals of your conclusion that "There is no God".

pudi pavan kumar   September 11th, 2010 6:44 am ET

yeah its absolutely true only for me , but until and unless it is practically made true one in this world accept the statement done by hawkings . i know it takes time , this may be possible to the the great renowed physicst stephen hawkings one or the other day ...

Kevin   September 11th, 2010 9:21 am ET

If Stephen Hawkings is lord of this domain, he should be able to cure his illness? Or at least create another world at least as complex as this one.

robert from Georgia   September 11th, 2010 10:18 am ET

Roman's 8:28-29
28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him,[a] who[b] have been called according to his purpose. 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

A fool says that there is no God.

I believe in the Most Holy God through His Son Jesus Christ, What do I have to loose, and everything to gain. Praise God in the Highest.

Kathy H   September 11th, 2010 10:52 am ET

I feel sorry for Mr. Hawking.
I know there is a creator of the universe, and if he would just make a study of the Bible, (and I mean the KJV, not translations that have left out verses), he may come to the same conclusion.
If he were to study it out, he would find many things that have been proghesied and have come true, and, I might add, are coming true even today, ie, in the books of Daniel and Revelation.
This would be a good study for the other 3 guests you had on your show as well.
I think I would rather be in my line of thinking,( that there is a Creator, who became my Saviour) when I die and live forever, than to take a chance on what he believes and spend an eternity in the alternative.

Rev. Paul Schafer   September 11th, 2010 11:05 am ET

I just wanted to thank the Larry King show for doing such an outstanding program with Stephen Hawking and the panel afterward last night! I particularly liked the Jesuit Priest on the panel, but I've forgotten his name – maybe someone could help me with that?
Too often in the past, I've been disappointed with religious/philosophical guests on Larry King – many have unfortunately been from the "religious right". Let's have less of that and more of what we got last evening, with perhaps some other legitimate theologians such as Jurgen Moltmann, Martin Marty, N.T. Wright, Marcus Borg, etc. joining in. Just my opinion – thanks again for last night's show! Rev. R. Paul Schafer

Karen   September 11th, 2010 11:05 am ET

We're very limited by our language/words ... and also our perspective. Science is observation, repeating, and describing/organizing what you observe. But people observe things from their own perspective. Then they need to describe it with their limited set of words in one select language.

Perspective: One says the glass is half full, the other says half empty.
Words: One observer calls it a glass (type of material), one person calls it a recepticle or liquid transportation device (refers to it by what it does).

What many scientists/observers may consider "nothing" ... someone else might view that "nothingness" and "nothing SPECIFIC" and see "ALL POTENTIAL" (or actually EVERYTHING) in the "vastness". Similarly, some could see "an empty glass" or "a glass filled with air, dust particles (break those down to add'l parts) and it's potential to be filled with anything because it is "free to receive" and not already filled. In the book Eat Pray Love there is a similar point made ... empty your mind of what occupies it and it becomes open to the new.

I believe God is endless space and endless time and endless possibility/creativity ... endless EVERYTHING ... yet that doesn't even do God justice ... because that is limiting God by language.

Karen F   September 11th, 2010 11:22 am ET

Leoarndo DaVinci said the QUESTION is more important than the answer. Asking the RIGHT question, not the topic specifically. He said if you really spend time on the RIGHT question, then the answer is quite easy.

For example topic: key storage ... you say to yourself "where should I put my keys" and you come up with "here is fine" ... or "purse is close" but if instead you ask it from a different perspective with the goal in mind, you say "where will I look for my keys when I need them?" Well, if you notice that you often check the hook first, there's your answer.

It seems to me that we are spinning wheels pondering "who created matter" or "who created nothing/endless POTENTIAL/everything" ... maybe we should be asking a different question.

Should we be asking a different question? What are the truly important questions for self, and the world?

Femi   September 11th, 2010 2:42 pm ET

Science will not find God in the material existence.God is a spirit.That Stephen Hawking is not able to construct God does not mean God is non existent.He will not postulate more than what has been given to him.Albert Einstein recognised a 'spirit in the affairs of men'.The scriptures say what is hidden belongs to God and what is revealed belongs to man.
God is love and love is giving.Stephen should give his life to Christ and find God.Theocracy is necessary to provide understanding into a realm outside scientific hypothesis and theory.Science can not become a religion because it lacks the faith element.Without faith no man can please God.Steven should introduce a 'G' constant in his theries and end his confusion.Sure God is enjoying a good laugh at Stephen.

Jack Sarfatti Ph.D. physics from University of Calif   September 11th, 2010 2:44 pm ET

The weakest part of Stephen's new book is his appeal to M/string theory.

Feynman said that the most beautiful mathematical theory is murdered by an ugly fact. M/string theory is pseudo-physics. It is interesting as pure mathematics of course. Perhaps some of M/string theory will survive. M/string theory makes no real predictions. It is unfalsifiable, therefore it is pseudo-physics. It's claim to unify gravity with the other forces is unjustified by the actual facts my opinion. As far as I am aware M/string theory does not have a clear limiting case to the battle-tested standard model of elementary particles of quarks, leptons, gauge bosons, with parity violation and the Higgs-Goldstone spontaneous breakdown of vacuum symmetries. Loop quantum gravity is just as bad in this regard. There are claims that the thermal properties of horizons in curved spacetime are tangled strings, so that is one potential contact with future experiments. This is in contrast to real physics i.e. quantum field theory and general relativity.

The quest to unify gravity with the electro-weak-strong forces is wrong headed because gravity is not a force in the same sense as the others are. Indeed, philosophically all the interactions are already unified by the local gauge invariance principle. The electro-weak-strong forces come from locally gauging compact internal symmetry groups U1, SU2, SU3. Einstein's curved spacetime comes from locally gauging the non-compact space-time translation group universally for all matter fields. Special relativity is simply the limit where the local gauging is global so that the Poincare group is the universal symmetry group. The electro-weak-strong symmetry groups are not universal – an essential difference with gravity.

Furthermore, gravity seems to be an emergent low energy effective macro-quantum coherent vacuum c-number field – a collective mode so to speak of the electro-weak-strong forces similar to the emergence of elastic sound waves in a crystal.

Pat M.   September 11th, 2010 6:27 pm ET

Thank you, Larry and staff, for bringing such distinguished guests and such an intelligent and thoughtful discussion to your viewers.

taotaotasi   September 11th, 2010 8:14 pm ET

The book is fascinating in that the overlapping M theory is where may of us thinkers have been moving in our discussions. 2D-3D-4D-5D? I have a lot of rereading to do. The interview was probably a moving experience as well.

Paul Hutchuns   September 11th, 2010 11:16 pm ET

Steven Hawking’s recent comment “God Has No Role in Universe” appears to mock both Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton who held the view that a Superior reasoning power was responsible for the universe.

Hawking evidently considers he is more intelligent than two of the brightest minds in science history.

Albert Einstein who was a theoretical physicist, philosopher and author is widely regarded as one of the most influential and best known scientists and intellectuals of all time. He is considered to be the father of modern physics, who was quoted as saying;

"That deep emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."

Sir Isaac Newton was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, and theologian who has been considered by many scholars and members of the general public to be one of the most influential people in human history, who was quoted as saying;

"This most beautiful system [The Universe] could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."

It is a known fact that the catalyst for all creative works by man is imagination and Hawking is denying his own creative imagination by stating the universe came about void of it.

For Hawking to make a statement that the universe made itself without a creative imaginative designer is paramount to saying that the Hubble telescope made itself without the creative genius of the intelligent people at NASA.

Perhaps Mr. Hawking and those that are quick to agree with him should consider this fact. Around the year 732 BCE an invitation recorded in the Bible to investigate the stars was extended to humanity to find an equal to the one responsible for all the stars. Twenty four hundred years before the invention of the telescope these words were recorded and give us greater reasons today than ever before to investigate their implications.

"To whom will you compare me? Who is my equal?" ask the Holy One. "Look up into the heavens. Who created all the stars? He brings them out like an army, one after another, calling each by its name. Because of his great power and incomparable strength, not a single one is missing."

__ Isaiah 40:25,26

This ancient text raises a very intriguing question; has man set out on this insatiable quest to the stars on his own or is he being drawn along by the one who created all the stars to show us His incomprehensible power, Supreme Imagination, and prove to all of humanity, including Steven Hawking, he has no equal?

This ancient passage confirmed thousands of years before the telescope was invented that there existed an incomprehensible power source behind the universe. Only in the last few decades has science obtained hard evidence of this fact about the universe via sophisticated flying space telescopes like NASA's Hubble and Spitzer. This is an undeniable truth that cannot be ignored!

One such example of this incomprehensible power is the Sombrero Galaxy photographed a few years ago by Hubble, where it is thought to be some 50,000 light-years across (about half the diameter of our Milky Way galaxy), yet containing some 800 billion stars.

Keep in mind this is only one of over 125 billion galaxies, (with each containing billions of stars) thought to be in the known universe. The all-inclusive incomprehensible energy that powers all the heavenly bodies in the Universe is a power (as Isaiah accurately stated) beyond man's ability to understand. The only word in our human vocabulary that comes close to describe such power is the word, Supernatural!

Yousif   September 12th, 2010 12:42 am ET

Prof. Stephen Hawkins new book “The Grand Design” is just theoretical physics.
Human were created by God to be limited and materialistic and as God is unlimited therefore his existence and the size of his creation
is beyond our human limited knowledge & materialistic thinking.
I am disappointed that a man of knowledge such Prof. Hawkins stray away from such simple facts and dispute the infinity of God.
I urge Prof. Hawkins and other scientists to study the Koran thoroughly before jumping to such laughable conclusions of ignorance. Ironically ignorance is not being illiterate but of being unable to apply your knowledge logically and approperiately.

Karen F   September 12th, 2010 2:11 am ET

I think Deepak stated it well when he said "mathematics is the LANGUAGE of God" .... perfect order, perfect timing ... to study physics is to study the "behavior" of God ... God may well NOT be so easily defined. I also agree with what Deepak said about God observing and learning through people ... perhaps it is related to the yin/yang principles of balance ... maybe when you are in the "balanced" state of earthly and etheral needs being met (not too tipped either way), then you feel contented, and peaceful (on earth).

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 12th, 2010 10:15 am ET

Maybe this a case of a mortal being, being or trying to be, more clever than his creator (Jehovah God).

We all need to humble ourselves before our great creator.

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 12th, 2010 10:22 am ET

With Jehovah God ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE! His wisdom is INFINITE!

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 12th, 2010 10:31 am ET

Jehovah is God's name.

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 12th, 2010 10:36 am ET

@Cajazz76:24:8 – September 11th, 2010 12:32 am ET

Hi – Bird is not a bad guess. Doing better than I am. Peace to you.

Naser Fahad Jinnah   September 12th, 2010 10:43 am ET

Stephen Hawkins is not only a great scientist but he is also a philosopher. We have to keep in mind that we must believe the established science but it is not necessary for us to believe the scientific theory which I call one kind of philosophy. What Hawkins is trying to say is nothing but a philosophy of a great scientist.

HOLLYROCK   September 12th, 2010 11:05 am ET


Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 12th, 2010 12:27 pm ET

JOHN 1:1-5
In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with God, and the WORD was God. He was with God in the beginning.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 12th, 2010 12:53 pm ET

The SOUL is a living creature – human or animal.
The SPIRIT is the breath of life.
The HOLY SPIRIT is the active force of God. (Also referred to as helper).

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 12th, 2010 1:32 pm ET

How can there be a God formula. Whoever came up with this must be God themself then.

"The word of God is ALIVE and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints and their marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart."

Cajazz76:24:8   September 13th, 2010 12:17 am ET


The IF isn't going happen to Stephen Hawking and the coulda, woulda, shoulda, if attainable to prevent his disease, if possible, is too late. If you think that a God is responsible for his condition or of any disease or anomaly in our lives and he, a God, thinks they were reasonable or appealing or desirable, he should have chosen them for himself..caj

Cajazz76:24:8   September 13th, 2010 12:23 am ET

Jessie, from Auckland, NZ.......home of the kiwi..the flyer and the

Hey Jessie, glad to see you up and running into the winds of constant change. Keep them at your back and take care. Always a pleasure..caj

A. Delabarbara   September 13th, 2010 12:42 am ET

Well, if the God created the Universes, than who created The God?
We created the god from Fear and to ease our own mortality.
We came from star dust and every atom of our being we'll go beck there, eventually..I believe all buildings consecrated to worship today will be regarded as houses of human ignorance In not so distant future.
Religions just can not survive, specially because there is no evidence of God at all and look what troubles they make.

Vicki   September 13th, 2010 7:49 am ET

For me the evidence of the existence of God is enlightenment, the merging of man with God, with distinguishable characteristics. God is not some entity, but an omnipotent energy force containg all there is, able to create anything, as it is in everything. Most importantly, this life energy force is Love.

jj   September 13th, 2010 6:09 pm ET

"The Law of the Universe is the Law of Belief"
Dr Joseph Murphy,

jj   September 13th, 2010 6:17 pm ET

p.s. there is no "He to the word God, It should be a she word"

Jessie from Auckland, NZ   September 14th, 2010 12:32 pm ET

@Cajazz76:24:8 – September 13th, 2010 12:23 am ET

Thanks for the comment. Beautiful! Take Care!

Roy   September 14th, 2010 9:40 pm ET

why is Bill so bitter towards christian people?

manuel lorenzo   September 16th, 2010 10:12 pm ET

Have anyone of us forgot the joy of discovering something out of the blue when we are yet a child. When I was young I was amazed why the Sun rise and give us light and the Sun sets to give us darkness but that darkness gave another amazing view and that is the twinklng of stars. The amazement is all that matters to me and wondered with satisfaction. The big difference now is that the more that I seek the origin, where my conciousnes begins, the more that I got confused.
I do believe and prefer the beauty of the child's innocence than arrogating unto myself that I know GOD because somebody tells me so and kill in His name. And again, knowing the theory of everything and once more lead to the creation of another WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

wordoftruth   September 19th, 2010 1:20 pm ET

The you that you think you are does not exist. You are only formation and substance. Truth desired to bring about a family to share itself with. Your in right now that true thought that Truth had. There is no universe, earth, or sky. This is an illusion. You dont know any of this because it has not been revealed to you because you wont accept it. Yet it is all the freedom there is. There is no god, devil or angels. You are nothing and when you deactivate you go to nothing.

J. Aldeen   September 26th, 2010 11:11 am ET

I believe that Prof. Hawking would start thinking or to appreciate God without the need for a mathematical proof, from my point of view only in some stressful moment. For example; suppose that Mr. Hawking is traveling by airplane and then for some unknown reason the plane went through some turbulence and broken due. What Prof. Hawking would say at that moment.....?!! Oh My God ....!! without the need for a mathematical proof. Don't you think so guys? ...It is so simple.

Comments have been closed for this article

Keep up to date with Larry

Follow him on Twitter

Become a fan on Facebook

Contact us
Go Behind The Scenes


LARRY KING LIVE'S Emmy-winning Senior Executive Producer Wendy Walker knows what it takes to make a great story.

With anecdotes, provocative emails, scandals, show transcripts and insights into Walker's long working relationship with Larry King, her new book PRODUCER issues readers an invitation to listen in on the most intriguing conversations on the planet.

Order from:
Barnes & Noble

King of Hearts

Larry King's King of Hearts

Saving a heart a day is the goal! Learn more about the Foundation and it's efforts to help the uninsured

Visit the Larry King Cardiac Foundation.

subscribe RSS Icon
Powered by VIP