Stephen Hawking. Why? Questions of the Universe

Stephen Hawking- One of the most influential and well-known theoretical physicists of our time. He studied at Oxford, then at Cambridge, where he became a professor of mathematics. Studied the theory of the origin of the world as a result big bang, as well as the theory of black holes. Already in the early 1960s, Hawking began to show signs of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, which led to paralysis. Doctors then believed that he had two and a half years to live. In 1985, Stephen Hawking became seriously ill with pneumonia. After a series of operations, he underwent a tracheotomy and Hawking lost the ability to speak. Friends gave him a speech synthesizer, which was installed on his wheelchair. Only retained some mobility index finger on right hand Hawking. Subsequently, mobility remained only in the facial muscle of the cheek, opposite which the sensor was attached. With its help, the physicist controls a computer that allows him to communicate with others.

Why? Questions of the Universe. Is there a Creator? (Stephen Hawking)

Hello, I'm Stephen Hawking. I am a physicist, cosmologist and a bit of a dreamer. And although I cannot move and have to talk through a computer, I am free to think. I am free to seek answers to the most difficult questions about our Universe. The most mysterious of them is whether there is a God who created the Universe and controls it. Did He create the stars, the planets, me and you? To find out, we will have to turn to the laws of nature. In them, I am sure, lies the solution to this age-old mystery of the creation and structure of the Universe. Shall we check? My book was recently published, which raised the question of the creation of the Universe by God. She caused some excitement in society. People were offended by a scientist who decided to speak out about religion. I don't want to tell anyone what to believe. But for me the question of the existence of God has the right to be considered within the framework scientific research. And, in addition, the question of the creation and management of the Universe is fundamental.

Mere mortals like you and me can understand how the Universe works. And people came to this conclusion long before the Vikings appeared, back in Ancient Greece. Around 300 BC, Aristarchus was also fascinated by eclipses, especially lunar ones. And he dared to ask the question: were they really called by the Gods? Aristarchus was a true pioneer in science. He began studying the sky and came to a bold conclusion. He found out that an eclipse is actually the shadow of the Earth as it passes by the Moon, and not a divine phenomenon at all. After this discovery, he was able to study what was above his head and draw diagrams that reflected true relationship between the Sun, Earth and Moon. So he came to even more important conclusions. He established that the Earth is not the center of the Universe, as was believed at that time. On the contrary, it revolves around the Sun. Understanding this pattern explains all eclipses. When the Moon's shadow falls on Earth, it is a solar eclipse. And when the Earth covers the Moon, it lunar eclipse. But Aristarchus went even further and suggested that in fact the stars are not holes in the floor of the heavens, as his contemporaries believed, but other Suns. The same as ours, only very, very far away. It must have been a stunning discovery: the universe is a machine governed by laws that man can easily understand. I believe that the discovery of these laws is the greatest achievement of mankind. And these Laws of Nature, as we now call them, will tell us whether we need God to explain the structure of the Universe or not.

For centuries it was believed that people like me, that is, people with disabilities, cursed by God. I think that I will upset someone now, but personally I think that everything can be explained differently. Namely, the Laws of Nature. So what are the Laws of Nature, and are they so powerful? I'll show you using the example of tennis. There are two laws in tennis. The first is established by man - these are the rules of the game. They describe the size of the court, the height of the net and the conditions under which a ball counts or does not count. Perhaps these rules will someday change if the head of the Tennis Association wants it. But other laws that apply to the game of tennis are immutable and constant. They determine what happens to the ball after it is hit. The force and angle of the racket impact determine what happens next. The Laws of Nature describe the behavior of an object in the past, present and future. In tennis, the ball always goes where the law tells it to go. And there are many other laws at work here. They establish the order of everything that happens. From the energy produced in the player's muscles to the speed at which the grass grows under his feet. But the most important thing is that these laws of physics are not just immutable, they are universal. They apply not only to the flight of the ball, but also to the movement of the planet, and to everything else in the Universe.

Unlike human laws, the laws of physics cannot be broken. And that's why they are so powerful. And if you look at them from a religious point of view, they are also controversial. They can be brought up for discussion. For discussion. If you, like me, accept the immutability of the Laws of Nature, then you will immediately ask: what is the role of God in it? This is the biggest part of the confrontation between science and religion. And while my views have recently made headlines, this is actually a very ancient conflict.

In 1277, Pope John XXI was so frightened by the idea of the existence of Natural Laws that he declared them heresy. Unfortunately, there was nothing he could do to stop gravity. A few months later, the roof of the palace collapsed on the Pope's head. But religion soon found a solution to this problem. For the next few hundred years, it was believed that the Laws of Nature were nothing more than the work of God. And God could break them if he wanted. These views were reinforced by the belief that our beautiful blue planet was the center of the Universe, and the stars, the Sun and the planets revolved around it like a precise clockwork. Aristarchus' ideas were forgotten for a long time. But man is inquisitive by nature. And Galileo Galilei, for example, could not resist looking at the clock mechanism created by God again. This was in 1609. And then the results of his research changed everything.

Galileo is considered the founder modern science. He is one of my heroes. He, like me, believed that if you look closely at the Universe, you can see what is really happening. Galileo wanted this so badly that he invented lenses that, for the first time, could magnify the view starry sky 20 times. After some time, he made a telescope out of them. From his home in Pandua, using the Galileo telescope, he studied Jupiter night after night and made an amazing discovery. He saw three tiny dots next to the giant planet. At first he decided that the dots were very dim stars. But after watching them for several nights, he saw that they were moving. And then the fourth point appeared. Sometimes some points disappeared behind Jupiter and later appeared again. Galileo realized that they, like the moon, revolved around a giant planet. This was proof that at least some celestial bodies do not revolve around the Earth. Inspired by this discovery, Galileo decided to prove that the Earth actually revolves around the Sun, and that Aristarchus was right. Galileo's discoveries sparked revolutionary thoughts that subsequently weakened the power of religion over science. However, in the 17th century, Galileo received only serious problems with the church. He escaped execution by admitting his views were heresy, and was sentenced to house arrest for the remaining nine years of his life. According to legend, despite the fact that Galileo admitted his sin, after his renunciation he whispered: “And yet she turns.”

Over the next three centuries, many other Laws of Nature were discovered. And science began to explain the most various phenomena: from lightning, earthquakes, storms to why the stars glow. Each new discovery pushed the role of God further and further. Still, if you know that science explains a solar eclipse, then you are unlikely to believe in wolf gods living in the sky. Science does not deny religion, it simply offers an alternative. But mysteries still remain. Even if the earth is spinning, can God be the cause? And could God create the Universe?

In 1985 I attended a conference on cosmology in the Vatican. Pope John Paul II was present at the meeting of scientists. He stated that there is nothing wrong in studying the structure of the Universe, but we should not wonder about its origin, since it was the work of God. I'm glad I didn't take his advice. I can't just turn off my curiosity. I believe that it is the duty of a cosmologist to try to find out the origin of the Universe. And, fortunately, it is not as difficult as it seems. Despite the complexity of the device and the diversity of the Universe, it turns out that to get what you need, you only need three ingredients.

Imagine that we could list them in some kind of Cosmic cookbook. So, what are these three ingredients that can be used to make the Universe? To build the Universe, we need:

First, we need matter, some substance with mass. Matter surrounds us, it is under our feet. And in space. These are dust, stones, ice, liquid, gas vapors and constellations - billions of stars located at unimaginable distances from each other.

Secondly, you will need energy. Even though we never think about it, we all know what energy is. This is what we face every day. Look at the Sun and we will feel it on our face. This is the energy produced by a star located 150 million kilometers from us. Energy permeates the Universe. It controls the processes that make the Universe a dynamic, endlessly changing place. So we have matter and we have energy.

The third ingredient for creating the Universe is space. Lots of space. You can choose many epithets for the Universe: delightful, beautiful, cruel. But you can't call it cramped. Everywhere you look there is lots and lots and lots of space, in every direction. There's a lot to see. To build the Universe, you will need...

Where did matter, energy and space come from in this case? No one knew this before the 20th century. One person gave us the answer. Probably the most outstanding of all who have ever lived on Earth. His name was Albert Einstein. Unfortunately, I will never be able to meet him. Because I was 13 years old when he died. Einstein came to an amazing conclusion. He found out that the two main ingredients for cooking the Universe - matter and energy - are essentially the same thing. Two sides of the same coin, if you will. His famous equation "E=mc2" means that mass can be considered a form of energy and vice versa. Therefore, we can now say that the Universe consists not of three components, but of two: energy and space.

At the risk of getting yourself into trouble. I think we can learn a lot more about natural phenomenon, which so frightened the Vikings. We may understand even more about matter and energy than Einstein. We can use the Laws of Nature that governed the formation of the Universe and try to find out whether the existence of God is really the only way to explain the Big Bang.

I grew up in England in the post-war period, and it was a harsh period. We were taught that you can't get anything for nothing. But now, having spent my whole life studying this issue, I think that you can get the entire Universe just like that. Main mystery The Big Bang - how did an incredibly huge Universe, full of energy and space, materialize out of nothing? The answer lies in the strangest fact about our Cosmos. According to the laws of physics, there is so-called negative energy. To introduce you to this strange but critically important phenomenon, let me give you a simple analogy. Imagine that someone wants to build a hill on a flat landscape. Hill means the Universe. So, to build this hill, a person digs a hole and uses this earth. But he not only makes a hill, he also makes a hole. A hole is a negative version of a hill. What was in the hole has now become a hill, so the balance is completely preserved. Our Universe was built on this principle. When, as a result of the Big Bang, a huge amount of positive energy was formed, at the same time, absolutely the same amount of negative energy was formed. The amount of positive and negative energy is always equal, this is another law of physics. So where is all the negative energy today? It is in the third ingredient from our Cosmic Cookbook, that is, in space. This may sound unusual, but according to the laws of physics, taking into account gravity and movement, the oldest of known to man laws, space is a repository of negative energy. And there is enough space in it for this equation to come together.

I must note that even if mathematics is your strong point, it is difficult to comprehend. But, nevertheless, it is so. An endless web of billions and billions of galaxies that are attracted to each other thanks to universal gravity, this web functions as a giant storage facility. The universe is a battery in which negative energy accumulates. Positive side things - matter and energy that we see today - are like that hill. And the negative side, or the hole that corresponds to it, is space.

And what does this mean for our study of the question of God? And, if it turns out that the Universe came from nothing, then God could not have created it. The universe is the ultimate, ultimate and perfect free lunch. Why? So now we know that negative plus positive equals zero. All that remains for us to do is to dare to find out what started this process. What caused the sudden appearance of the Universe?

At first glance, this question seems very difficult. In our everyday life things don't just appear out of thin air. You can't snap your fingers and make a cup of coffee appear whenever you want, right? To make coffee you will need coffee beans, water, milk and sugar. But if you travel through that very cup of coffee, and go down through the particles of milk to the atomic level, and then to the subatomic level, then you will find yourself in a world where witchcraft is a very real thing. This is because at this level particles, such as protons, act according to the laws of physics known as quantum mechanics. They suddenly appear, exist for a while, and then disappear. And they appear again.

As far as we know, the Universe was originally very tiny, smaller than a proton. And this means that it is incredibly huge and complex universe it simply arose without violating the Laws of Nature known to us. And, starting from that moment, huge amounts of energy were released as space expanded. Places to store all negative energy and maintain balance. And again the same question arises: could God not have created the laws of quantum mechanics, according to which the Big Bang occurred? That is, was it really God? Did God really orchestrate everything in such a way that the Big Bang happened?

I don't want to offend anyone, but I believe that science has a more convincing explanation than stories about a divine Creator. This explanation is possible due to the strange fact of cause and effect relationships. We are convinced that everything that happens happens because of something that came before. Therefore, we accept the proposition that someone, perhaps God, created the universe. But when we talk about the Universe as a whole, this is not necessarily the case.

Let me explain to you. Imagine a river flowing down a huge slope. How did the river appear? Perhaps it was the rain that fell over the mountains. But where did the rain come from? The correct answer is from the Sun. The sun shone over the ocean, water vapor rose into the sky and formed clouds. Why does the Sun shine? The sun shines thanks to the so-called fusion process, as a result of which hydrogen atoms combine to form helium. And with this reaction, a huge amount of energy is released. Not bad. But where did hydrogen come from? The answer is as a result of the Big Bang. And this is the most important point. The Laws of Nature themselves tell us that not only the Universe appeared as a proton, out of nothing. But also that the Big Bang was caused by nothing. Nothing.

The explanation for this fact lies in Einstein's theories and his understanding of the interaction of time and space in the Universe. It was Albert Einstein who explained this fact. Something remarkable happened at the Big Bang: time began.

To understand this incredible idea, imagine a black hole in space. A black hole is a star so massive that it consumes itself. It is so massive that even light cannot escape it. That's why it's completely black. Its gravitational field is so strong that it absorbs and distorts not only light, but also time. To understand this, imagine a watch that has fallen into a black hole. As they approach it, they walk slower and slower, and time slows down. It practically stops. Imagine a watch falling into a black hole. Of course, if we assume that the clock can resist the monstrous gravity, its hands will stop. They will not stop because of a breakdown, they will stop because time does not exist inside the black hole. And so it was at the birth of the Universe.

I believe that the formation of time in the creation of the Universe is key point, to put aside the need for a Creator and reveal how the Universe created itself. If we travel back in time to the Big Bang, the Universe will get smaller and smaller. Until it reaches the final point, where it will be absolutely tiny, the only black hole. And just like in the case of modern black holes, the Laws of Nature dictate something extraordinary here. That here time, too, by itself, must stop. You can't go back in time to the Big Bang because it didn't happen.

We finally found something for which there was no reason, because there was no time to create this reason. For me this means the impossibility of the existence of the Creator, because there was no time for this. Since time began at the Big Bang, it was an event that could not have been created by anyone or anything.

Thus, science has given us an answer that took more than 3,000 years of enormous human effort to find. We learned how the Laws of Nature, controlling the mass and energy of the Universe, launched the process that created you and me. Those sitting on our planet and happy that they finally learned this. So when people ask me if God created the universe, I tell them that their question doesn't make any sense. There was no time before the Big Bang, so God did not have time to create the universe. It's like asking: in which direction is the edge of the Earth? The earth has the shape of a ball, it has no edge, it is useless to look for it. Of course, everyone is free to believe what they want. Everyone is free to believe what they want. But, in my opinion, the simplest explanation is that God does not exist. No one created the Universe, and no one controls our destiny. And this brings me to the realization that there is no Heaven and no life after death. We have only one life to appreciate the greatness and beauty of our world. And for that I am very grateful.

The famous British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking passed away at the age of 76. Was Professor Hawking an atheist or did he still admit the existence higher power- God?

In his scientific bestseller " Brief history time" the scientist talked about the origin of everything.

"If we discover a universal theory, it will be an absolute triumph of human thought, because then we will know what the mind of God is."

The reader will be surprised: did the great physicist really admit the existence of a Creator? In fact, Hawking always believed that the Universe arose according to objective physical laws. According to Roger Highfield, editor-in-chief of the popular science publication New Scientist, the astrophysicist perceived the idea of God in a figurative sense.

Like Hawking, Albert Einstein did not believe in a personal Creator.

“I believe in Spinoza’s God who manifests himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, rather than in a God who cares about the fate and activities of man.”

“I am not trying to imagine God as a person; the amazing structure of the universe is enough for me, as far as our imperfect senses can perceive it.”

However, these quotes characterize Einstein as an agnostic. Stephen Hawking was more categorical.

This is what he wrote in the book "The Grand Design" about the role of God in the creation of the Universe.

"According to the law of universal gravitation, the Universe could and should have appeared from nothing. Spontaneous creation is precisely the reason why something appears instead of emptiness. It is the reason for the existence of the Universe, the reason for our existence. In order to light the fuse and launch the Universe, it is not necessary God is needed."

He challenged the theory of Isaac Newton, who denied the possibility of creating the Universe from chaos without the intervention of a higher intelligence.

One piece of evidence was the discovery in 1992 of planets beyond solar system, orbiting other celestial bodies.

"A random combination of planetary conditions in our system: the presence of a single Sun and a fortunate combination solar mass with the distance from the Sun to the Earth - has now become much less remarkable. And it is no longer such strong evidence that the Earth was created solely for the pleasure of people."

One day, a scientist received an unequivocal remark from the head of the Catholic Church.

Pope John Paul II asked to stop research into the origin of the universe if this work contradicts the concept of theologians.

To which Stephen Hawking replied: "What did God do before the creation of the Universe? Prepare hell for people who ask such questions?"

And he shared his general impression of the memorable meeting: “I was so glad that I was not handed over to the Inquisition.”

Professor Hawking also made several other bold claims

1. The universe is expanding

The scientist refuted the theory that the Universe is static. He proved that galaxies shift towards the red part of the spectrum as they move away from us. This means that the Universe is expanding.

This process allowed the physicist to suggest that the Universe had a beginning. Its formation was preceded by that very big explosion.

The professor explained: "Dying Star, compressing under the influence of its own gravity, eventually turns into a singularity - a point of infinite density and zero size. If we reverse the course of time so that contraction becomes expansion, it will be possible to prove that the universe had a beginning."

2. Humanity has no chance

Hawking assumed that when the Universe stopped expanding and began to contract, a difficult time would come for humanity.

“It seemed to me that when the compression began, the Universe would return to an ordered state. In this case, with the beginning of the compression, time should have turned back. People at this stage would live their lives backwards and get younger as the Universe contracts.”

However, the scientist was unable to create mathematical model this theory, and he came to the conclusion that in the process of compression of the Universe, time will not turn back.

"In the real time in which we live, the Universe has two possible fates. It can continue to expand forever. Or it can begin to contract and cease to exist at the moment of the 'big flattening'. It will be like a big bang, but in reverse."

However, according to Hawking’s calculations, this catastrophe awaits us no earlier than in a couple of billion years.

3. Alien civilizations exist, but it’s better not to mess with them

This is what the great scientist said about this

“In a Universe with 100 billion galaxies, each containing hundreds of millions of stars, it is unlikely that Earth is the only place where life develops. From a purely mathematical point of view, the numbers alone make the idea of the existence of alien life completely reasonable.

The real problem is what aliens might look like and whether earthlings will like their appearance. After all, they could be microbes or single-celled animals, or worms that inhabited the Earth for millions of years."

4. Black holes evaporate

According to Hawking, black holes are not completely black. Nearby elementary particles may go beyond them. In this way, black holes are able to emit radiation and eventually disappear in a giant explosion.

From this hypothesis, the scientist deduced another, no less amazing. He admitted the following: when particles fall into a black hole, they leave it in a parallel Universe.

"Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics because of the element of randomness and uncertainty associated with it. He said, 'God doesn't play dice.'

It looks like Einstein was wrong twice. The quantum effect of a black hole suggests that God not only plays dice, but also sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen."- wrote the scientist.

It is amazing how amazing ideas the brilliant mind of the great scientist produced. Millions of people are still scratching their heads over the elementary puzzles of Stephen Hawking.

Stephen Hawking

“For centuries it was believed that people like me, that is, people with disabilities, were cursed by God. I think that I will upset someone now, but personally I believe that everything can be explained differently, namely by the laws of nature,” these are the words of the most famous scientist of our time, British astrophysicist Stephen Hawking. They reveal the essence of Hawking's relationship with the Almighty.

You don’t have to be a psychologist to understand: Hawking has been fighting God all his life for “punishing” him like that. But maybe it was the other way around - the creator “punished” the scientist because, while still a young man, before the onset of his illness, he decided to comprehend its secret? The irony of this paradox can only be compared with the irony of the Universe, closed on itself, which is finite in extent, but has no boundaries. Similar antinomies exist on the border of physics and philosophy. But from the point of view of the laws of nature, is there a creator? We will tell you what Stephen Hawking himself thinks about this.

Science and religion

These opposites have been fighting each other for about three thousand years. In 1277, Pope John XXI was so afraid that natural laws existed that he declared them heresy. But, alas, he could not ban even one of them - gravity. A few months later, the roof of the palace collapsed directly on the pope's head.

However, religion with its flexible logic immediately found a solution to all problems. She quickly declared the laws of nature to be the work of God, who will change these laws at any moment as soon as they “want.” And the fire - to those who think differently.

Later it turned out that everything was a little more complicated. The humble church was ready for this too. In 1985, at a conference on cosmology in the Vatican, Pope John Paul II said that there was nothing wrong with studying the structure of the Universe. “But we,” the pope emphasized, “should not wonder about its origin, since it was the work of the Creator.” But Stephen Hawking still wondered.

To answer this question, according to Hawking, it is necessary to understand the nature of just three ingredients that make up the “dish of the Universe”: matter, energy and space. But where did they come from in this “kitchen”? Einstein gave the answer to this. But he also “stood on the shoulders of giants,” so first things first.

Aristotle, Newton and Galileo

As is known, Newton based his laws of motion on Galileo’s measurements. Let us recall that in the experiments of the latter, the body rolled down an inclined plane under the influence of a constant force, which gave it constant acceleration. Thus, it was shown that the real effect of the force is a change in the speed of the body, and not setting it in motion, as was previously thought. It also followed from this that as long as the body is not subjected to any force, it moves in a straight line at a constant speed (Newton’s First Law).

In addition to the laws of motion, Newton's works also describe the determination of the magnitude of a specific type of force - gravity. According to the Law of Universal Gravitation, any two bodies are attracted to each other with a force directly proportional to the product of their masses.

The main difference between the views of Aristotle, on the one hand, and the ideas of Galileo and Newton, on the other, is that Aristotle considered rest to be the natural state of any body, to which it tends, if it does not experience the action of some force. Aristotle, for example, believed that the Earth was at rest. But from Newton's laws it follows: there is no rest. Everything is in motion. Both the Earth and the train traveling on it.

What of this? The absence of an absolute “standard of rest” for physics had the same consequences as admission to university for a student at a parochial school. It followed that it was impossible to determine whether the two events that took place in different times, in the same place. And this already means nothing more than the absence of absolute, fixed space. Newton was greatly discouraged by this because it did not agree with his idea of an absolute God. As a result, he actually abandoned this conclusion, which was a consequence of the laws he had discovered.

But both Aristotle and Newton found a common “calming”: belief in absolute time. They believed that it was possible to measure its interval between two events, and the resulting figure would be the same, no matter who measured it (using an accurate clock, of course). Unlike absolute space, absolute time was very consistent with Newton's laws, and most people today believe that this corresponds to common sense. But then Einstein appeared...

3 equals 2

The great Einstein, who called himself a “gypsy and a vagabond,” found out that the two components of the Universe - matter and energy - are, in fact, the same thing, like two sides of the same coin. His famous E = mc2 (where E is energy, m is the mass of a body, c is the speed of light in a vacuum) means that mass can be considered a type of energy, and vice versa. Thus, the Universe should be considered as a “pie” consisting of only two components: energy and space. But how did he come to this?

The same object - for example, a flying ping-pong ball - can be attributed different speed. It all depends on which reference system this speed is measured against. If a ball is thrown inside a moving train, its speed can be calculated relative to the train, or it can be calculated relative to the earth on which this train is traveling, and which, as is known, also moves around its axis and around the Sun, which itself moves... and so on further, endlessly.
If we believe Newton's laws, the same should apply to light. But thanks to Maxwell, science learned that the speed of light is constant, no matter where we measure it from. To reconcile Maxwell's theory with Newtonian mechanics, the hypothesis was accepted that everywhere, even in a vacuum, there is a certain medium called “ether”. According to the theory of the ether, light waves (and we know that light simultaneously has the properties of both waves and particles) propagate in it in the same way as sound waves in the air, and their speed must be measured relative to this ether. In this case, different observers would record different meanings the speed of light, but relative to the ether it would remain constant.

However, the famous Michelson-Morley experiment, which took place in 1887, forced scientists to abandon the idea of ether forever. To the great surprise of the experimenters themselves, they were able to prove that the speed of light never changes, no matter what it is measured against.

Einstein's principle of relativity states that the laws of physics must be the same for all freely moving systems, regardless of their speed. This was true for Newton's laws of motion, but now Einstein extended his hypothesis to Maxwell's theory.
This means that since the speed of light is constant, then any freely moving observer should record the same value, which will not depend on the speed with which he approaches or moves away from the light source. This simple conclusion explained the appearance of the speed of light in Maxwell's equations without involving the ether or any other privileged frame of reference. But a number of other incredible discoveries followed from the same conclusion. And, above all, a change in the concept of time.

For example, according to the Special Theory of Relativity, a person riding a train and someone standing on a platform will differ in their estimates of the distance traveled by light from the same source. And since speed is distance divided by time, the only way for observers to arrive at general conclusion regarding the speed of light - this also means diverging in the estimation of time. This is how the theory of relativity put an end to the idea of absolute time forever!

Another conclusion of STR is the inseparability of time and space, which constitute a certain community, space-time.

Developing the ideas of SRT in the General Theory of Relativity, Einstein showed that gravity is not at all some kind of attractive force, but a consequence of the fact that space-time is curved by the mass and energy that are in it.

In this regard, let us return to the illusion of absolute time, which has been destroyed to the ground. Einstein proved that around massive bodies, such as the Earth, the passage of time should also slow down (roughly speaking, this occurs due to the curvature of space, and therefore time - a certain “stretching” of them around a massive body). The greater the mass of the body, the slower time will flow in its vicinity, and vice versa.
As you know, time flows faster in Earth's orbit than on the planet, so astronauts return home a little younger than they could be if they chose a different profession and were always on Earth. However, such “youthfulness” of astronauts is almost impossible to observe. Firstly, due to the proximity of the earth's orbit to the Earth, and secondly, due to the short duration of astronauts' stay in orbit. But if any of them managed to go to space travel on a ship developing a speed close to the speed of light and return in a year, then he, of course, would not have found alive not only none of his loved ones, but also many generations of his grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Big bang

Let's return to the other two ingredients that make up the Universe: energy and space. Where did they come from? Today scientists answer: they appeared as a result of the Big Bang. But what is the Big Bang?

Approximately 13.7 billion years ago, the Universe was compressed into one unimaginably small point. This is evidenced not only by the well-known red shift effect, but also by all solutions of Einstein’s equations. At some time in the past, the distance between neighboring galaxies must have been zero. The universe had to be compressed into a point of zero size, into a sphere with zero radius. The density of the Universe and the curvature of space-time during these glorious times should have been endless. They ceased to be so only with the Big Bang.

Another infinite quantity in the era of the infancy of the universe should have been temperature. It is believed that at the moment of the Big Bang the Universe was infinitely hot. As the Universe expanded, so did the temperature. This is where what we call matter originates. The point is that with such high temperatures, which were in the Universe at the dawn of time, not only atoms, but also subatomic particles could not be formed. But as the energy decreased, they began to connect with each other. This is how the substance appeared.

About 100 seconds after the Big Bang, the Universe cooled to a billion degrees (this is the temperature of the interior of the hottest stars). Under such conditions, the energy of protons and neutrons is no longer enough to overcome the strong nuclear interaction. They begin to merge, forming deuterium (heavy hydrogen) nuclei, consisting of a proton and a neutron. And only then deuterium nuclei, adding protons and neutrons, could turn into helium nuclei. The remaining elements are born later, during thermonuclear fusion inside hydrogen-helium stars.

After all this truly “hot” commotion for about a million years, the Universe simply continued to expand, and nothing significant happened. But when the temperature dropped to several thousand degrees, kinetic energy electrons and nuclei became insufficient to overcome the force of electromagnetic attraction, and they began to unite into atoms. This is how matter appeared in our usual understanding of the word.

What about antimatter? What is it and where did it come from? According to the laws of physics, negative energy exists. In order to understand what this is, let's give an analogy. Imagine that someone wants to build a large hill on a flat landscape. The hill is our Universe. To create a hill, someone digs a large hole. The pit is the “negative version” of the hill. What was in the hole has now become a hill, so the balance is completely preserved. The same principle underlay the “construction” of our Universe. When the Big Bang created large number positive energy - at the same time, the same amount of negative energy was formed. But where is she? Answer: everywhere, in space. The “pit” is our space, and all the matter to which we are accustomed and which we can observe, that is, what the Universe consists of, is a “hill”.

Quantum mechanics

At the moment of the Big Bang, the Universe was compressed into an unimaginably small point. And it is at this subatomic level that the General Theory of Relativity fails, just as Newton’s laws failed when they tried to apply them to the movement of light.

At the subatomic level, completely different, truly fantastic laws operate, which have no analogues in our everyday life. This is why the science that studies these laws, dealing with phenomena that occur on very small scales - quantum mechanics - is so difficult to understand. The universe at the moment of the Big Bang is a place where the laws of quantum mechanics apply.

But, wanting to put all the puzzles of the universe together, Stephen Hawking pins his greatest hopes on the creation unified theory functioning of the Universe - the theory of quantum gravity. It must reconcile general relativity with quantum mechanics.

God plays dice

Quantum mechanics is based on the so-called uncertainty principle. It states: particles do not individually have precisely defined positions and velocities. But they have so-called quantum states, combinations of characteristics that are known only within the limits allowed by the uncertainty principle.

Quantum mechanics at one point dashed all hopes that the Universe and all the processes in it could be predicted. She introduced the worst thing into science - randomness. The laws of quantum mechanics offer only a set of possible outcomes for something, and tell us how likely each outcome is. This is why Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics until the end of his life. He expressed his attitude towards her famous phrase: “God doesn’t play dice.”

One of the most important consequences of the uncertainty principle is that in some respects particles behave like waves. They do not have a specific position, but are “smeared” across space, in accordance with the probability distribution. And also, in accordance with the laws of quantum mechanics, a particle does not have any specific “history”, that is, a trajectory of movement in space-time. Instead, the particle moves within certain limits along all possible trajectories, that is, it is, paradoxically, in several places at the same time.

You can understand this only with your brain, calculations and equations, feelings and logic; it is almost impossible. In our everyday life, a cup of coffee in the morning does not appear just like that. In order for a drink to appear on our table, we will need to take coffee beans, sugar, water and milk. But if you look deeper into a cup of coffee, at the subatomic level, you can witness real witchcraft. And all because at this level particles function according to the laws of quantum mechanics. They suddenly appear, exist for some time, disappear just as suddenly - and appear again.

Everything from nothing

But where did the unimaginably small point - our Universe - come from at the time of the Big Bang? From the same place as a cup of coffee: from nothing. Like protons disappearing and appearing in a coffee drink, the universe came from nothing, and the Big Bang was caused by... nothing!

Arthur Charles Clarke: Professor Hawking, in the very last paragraph of your book, you said that if we discover a complete theory of the Universe, then over time it should become accessible and understandable to everyone, and not just a handful of scientists. And when this happens, we can all begin to discuss not the question of “how”, but the question of “why”. And the quote: “If we find this answer, it will be the highest victory of the human mind, because then we will read the mind of God.” Do you think that God can interfere in the affairs of the universe as he pleases, or is he also bound by the laws of science?

Stephen Hawking: The question “is God bound by the laws of science” is reminiscent of the question “can God create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it.” I think it is inappropriate to speculate about what God can and cannot do. It is better to study what exactly it does to the Universe in which we live. All our observations indicate that he operates within the framework of clearly defined laws. Perhaps these laws are prescribed by God, but one way or another he does not interfere with the structure of the Universe in order to break them, at least since the existence of the Universe. However, until recently it was believed that at the point of the beginning of the Universe the laws would certainly be violated. This would mean that God had unlimited freedom in exactly how to create the universe.

For recent years we realized, however, that laws can be true even at the beginning of time. In that case, he had no freedom. Exactly how the universe began was predetermined by the laws of science.

Arthur Charles Clarke: Carl Sagan, you commented on this in the introduction to the book. You said that, among other things, this book is about God, or perhaps the absence of God, because Hawking left the creator without a job. Of course, God means very different things to different people. What kind of god are we talking about when we talk about reading God's thoughts?

Carl Sagan: I think this is a great question. And I'm very interested to hear Stephen Hawking's answer. But just to highlight the range of possibilities, imagine two options. The first is the concept, common in the West, that God is a huge old man with a long white beard, sitting on a throne in the sky and watching the flight of every swallow. Contrast this with the idea of God, according to the views of, say, Spinoza or Einstein, which in meaning is very close to the totality of all the laws of the Universe. It would be foolish to deny that there is a set of definite physical laws in the Universe. And if this is what you mean by God, then without a doubt he exists. But this is a god far from business, what the French call roi fagnond - a useless king. If we take the model where he intervenes every day, as Dr. Hawking said, there is no evidence for this.

In my personal opinion, it is better to show modesty in such matters. We must realize that we are dealing, by definition, with the most difficult things to understand because they are the furthest from human experience. And perhaps we can delve a little deeper into these mysteries.

Stephen Hawking: I use the concept of "god" in the same sense as Einstein, as the reason why the universe exists the way it does, and why the universe exists at all.

Arthur Charles Clarke: Because, as I understand it, at the dawn of civilization, the priests were precisely those whom we now call scientists. Those who knew astronomy and could predict the eclipse and everything else. Can scientists once again assume an almost sacred position, or am I exaggerating?

Carl Sagan: I hope you're exaggerating. In my opinion, the basis scientific method- this is the willingness to admit that you are wrong, the willingness to abandon an idea that does not work. But the basis of religion is not to change anything, that the so-called truths are communicated to you by some revered figure. And no one should make any progress, because the truth is already known. I believe that the scientific way of thinking and doubting is a subtle combination of supporting new ideas and the most careful and skeptical examination of old and new ideas. I think this is the way to the future, not only for science, but for all humanity. We must be willing to challenge because we are desperate for change.

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind” Albert Einstein.

Carl Sagan: We are desperate for change.

Arthur Charles Clarke: Politics and religion are outdated, the time has come for science and spirituality.

Stephen Hawking: I don't think physics teaches us how to treat others, but physics can determine who those people are and what planets they live on.

Articles and books with a look at myths and legends, rituals and traditions of religions through the prism of biology, medicine, physiology, anthropology, paleontology.

Why? Questions of the Universe.
Is there a Creator?

Stephen Hawking

Unfortunately, the video has been removed from the public domain.

Why? Questions of the Universe. Is there a Creator?

My book was recently published, which raised the question of the creation of the Universe by God. She caused some excitement in society. People were offended by a scientist who decided to speak out about religion. I don't want to tell anyone what to believe. But for me, the question of the existence of God has the right to be considered within the framework of scientific research. And, in addition, the question of the creation and management of the Universe is fundamental.

For many centuries there was always one answer to this question: God created everything. The world was a sacred place, and even harsh people like the Vikings believed in supernatural creatures. This is how they explained natural phenomena. For example, lightning and storms. The Vikings had many gods. Thor was the God of Lightning. Aegir could send a storm to the sea. But most of all they were afraid of Skol. He could cause such a terrifying natural phenomenon as a solar eclipse. Skol was a wolf god and lived in the sky. Sometimes he ate the Sun, and at this terrible moment the day became night.
Imagine how eerie it is to see the Sun disappear without a scientific explanation. The Vikings found an explanation that seemed reasonable to them. And they tried to scare and drive away the wolf. The Vikings believed that as a result of their actions the Sun was returning. We understand that the Vikings could not influence the eclipse in any way. The sun would have returned anyway. It turns out that the Universe is not as mysterious and supernatural as it seems. But to find out the truth, we will need even more courage than the Vikings had. Mere mortals like you and me can understand how the Universe works.
And people came to this conclusion long before the appearance of the Vikings, back in Ancient Greece. Around 300 BC, Aristarchus was also fascinated by eclipses, especially lunar ones. And he dared to ask the question: were they really called by the Gods?
Aristarchus was a true pioneer in science. He began studying the sky and came to a bold conclusion. He found out that an eclipse is actually the shadow of the Earth as it passes by the Moon, and not a divine phenomenon at all. After this discovery, he was able to study what was above his head and draw diagrams that reflected the true relationships between the Sun, Earth and Moon.
So he came to even more important conclusions. He established that the Earth is not the center of the Universe, as was believed at that time. On the contrary, it revolves around the Sun. Understanding this pattern explains all eclipses. When the Moon's shadow falls on Earth, it is a solar eclipse. And when the Earth covers the Moon, it is a lunar eclipse. But Aristarchus went even further and suggested that in fact the stars are not holes in the floor of the heavens, as his contemporaries believed, but other Suns. The same as ours, only very, very far away. It must have been a stunning discovery: the universe is a machine governed by laws that man can easily understand.
I believe that the discovery of these laws is the greatest achievement of mankind. And these Laws of Nature, as we now call them, will tell us whether we need God to explain the structure of the Universe or not.

Why? Questions of the Universe.

For centuries it was believed that people like me, that is, people with disabilities, were cursed by God. I think that I will upset someone now, but personally I think that everything can be explained differently. Namely, the Laws of Nature. So what are the Laws of Nature, and are they so powerful?
I'll show you using the example of tennis. There are two laws in tennis. The first is established by man - these are the rules of the game. They describe the size of the court, the height of the net and the conditions under which a ball counts or does not count. Perhaps these rules will someday change if the head of the Tennis Association wants it. But other laws that apply to the game of tennis are immutable and constant. They determine what happens to the ball after it is hit.
The force and angle of the racket impact determine what happens next. The Laws of Nature describe the behavior of an object in the past, present and future. In tennis, the ball always goes where the law tells it to go. And there are many other laws at work here. They establish the order of everything that happens. From the energy produced in the player's muscles to the speed at which the grass grows under his feet. But the most important thing is that these laws of physics are not just immutable, they are universal.
They apply not only to the flight of the ball, but also to the movement of the planet, and to everything else in the Universe. Unlike human laws, the laws of physics cannot be broken. And that's why they are so powerful. And if you look at them from a religious point of view, they are also controversial. They can be brought up for discussion. For discussion. If you, like me, accept the immutability of the Laws of Nature, then you will immediately ask: what is the role of God in it? This is the biggest part of the confrontation between science and religion. And while my views have recently made headlines, this is actually a very ancient conflict.

But religion soon found a solution to this problem. For the next few hundred years, it was believed that the Laws of Nature were nothing more than the work of God. And God could break them if he wanted. These views were reinforced by the belief that our beautiful blue planet was the center of the Universe, and the stars, the Sun and the planets revolved around it like a precise clockwork. Aristarchus' ideas were forgotten for a long time. But man is inquisitive by nature. And Galileo Galilei, for example, could not resist looking at the clock mechanism created by God again. This was in 1609. And then the results of his research changed everything.
Galileo is considered the founder of modern science. He is one of my heroes. He, like me, believed that if you look closely at the Universe, you can see what is really happening. Galileo wanted this so badly that he invented lenses that, for the first time, could magnify the view of the starry sky by 20 times. After some time, he made a telescope out of them.
From his home in Pandua, using the Galileo telescope, he studied Jupiter night after night and made an amazing discovery. He saw three tiny dots next to the giant planet. At first he decided that the dots were very dim stars. But after watching them for several nights, he saw that they were moving. And then the fourth point appeared. Sometimes some points disappeared behind Jupiter and later appeared again. Galileo realized that they, like the moon, revolved around a giant planet. This was proof that at least some celestial bodies do not orbit the Earth. Inspired by this discovery, Galileo decided to prove that the Earth actually revolves around the Sun, and that Aristarchus was right.
Galileo's discoveries sparked revolutionary thoughts that subsequently weakened the power of religion over science. However, in the 17th century, Galileo received only serious problems with the church. He escaped execution by admitting his views were heresy, and was sentenced to house arrest for the remaining nine years of his life.
According to legend, despite the fact that Galileo admitted his sin, after his renunciation he whispered: “And yet she turns.” Over the next three centuries, many other Laws of Nature were discovered. And science began to explain a variety of phenomena: from lightning, earthquakes, storms to why stars glow. Each new discovery pushed the role of God further and further. Still, if you know that science explains a solar eclipse, then you are unlikely to believe in wolf gods living in the sky. Science does not deny religion, it simply offers an alternative. But mysteries still remain. Even if the earth is spinning, can God be the cause? And could God create the Universe?

Why? Questions of the Universe.

In 1985 I attended a conference on cosmology in the Vatican. Pope John Paul II was present at the meeting of scientists. He stated that there is nothing wrong in studying the structure of the Universe, but we should not wonder about its origin, since it was the work of God.
I'm glad I didn't take his advice. I can't just turn off my curiosity. I believe that it is the duty of a cosmologist to try to find out the origin of the Universe. And, fortunately, it is not as difficult as it seems. Despite the complexity of the device and the diversity of the Universe, it turns out that to get what you need, you only need three ingredients. Imagine that we could list them in some kind of Cosmic cookbook. So, what are these three ingredients that can be used to make the Universe?

To build the Universe, we need:

So we have matter and we have energy. The third ingredient for creating the Universe is space. Lots of space. You can choose many epithets for the Universe: delightful, beautiful, cruel. But you can't call it cramped. Everywhere you look there is lots and lots and lots of space, in every direction. There's a lot to see.

To build the Universe, you will need...

Where did matter, energy and space come from in this case? No one knew this before the 20th century. One person gave us the answer. Probably the most outstanding of all who have ever lived on Earth. His name was Albert Einstein. Unfortunately, I will never be able to meet him. Because I was 13 years old when he died. Einstein came to an amazing conclusion. He found out that the two main ingredients for cooking the Universe - matter and energy - are essentially the same thing. Two sides of the same coin, if you will. His famous equation "E=mc 2" means that mass can be considered a form of energy and vice versa. Therefore, we can now say that the Universe consists not of three components, but of two: energy and space.

So, how were energy and space formed? After several decades of hard work, scientists found the answer to this question. Energy and space were created as a result of the so-called Big Bang. At the moment of the Big Bang, the Universe was formed, full of energy and space. But where did they come from? How could the Universe, free space, energy, and celestial bodies come out of nothing?
For some, God comes into play at this stage. People believe that it was God who created energy and space. The Big Bang was the moment of creation. But science tells a completely different story. At the risk of getting yourself into trouble. I think we can learn a lot more about the natural phenomenon that so frightened the Vikings. We may understand even more about matter and energy than Einstein. We can use the Laws of Nature that governed the formation of the Universe and try to find out whether the existence of God is really the only way to explain the Big Bang.

To introduce you to this strange but critically important phenomenon, let me give you a simple analogy. Imagine that someone wants to build a hill on a flat landscape. Hill means the Universe. So, to build this hill, a person digs a hole and uses this earth. But he not only makes a hill, he also makes a hole. A hole is a negative version of a hill. What was in the hole has now become a hill, so the balance is completely preserved. Our Universe was built on this principle. When, as a result of the Big Bang, a huge amount of positive energy was formed, at the same time, absolutely the same amount of negative energy was formed. The amount of positive and negative energy is always equal, this is another law of physics. So where is all the negative energy today? It is in the third ingredient from our Cosmic Cookbook, that is, in space. This may sound unusual, but according to the laws of physics, taking into account gravity and motion, the oldest laws known to man, space is a repository of negative energy. And there is enough space in it for this equation to come together.

I must note that even if mathematics is your strong point, it is difficult to comprehend. But, nevertheless, it is so. An endless web of billions and billions of galaxies that are attracted to each other by universal gravity, this web functions as a giant storage facility. The universe is a battery in which negative energy accumulates. The positive side of things - the matter and energy that we see today - is like that hill. And the negative side, or the hole that corresponds to it, is space.

Why? Questions of the Universe.

So now we know that negative plus positive equals zero. All that remains for us to do is to dare to find out what started this process. What caused the sudden appearance of the Universe? At first glance, this question seems very difficult. In our everyday life, things do not just appear out of thin air. You can't snap your fingers and make a cup of coffee appear whenever you want, right? To make coffee you will need coffee beans, water, milk and sugar. But if you travel through that very cup of coffee, and go down through the particles of milk to the atomic level, and then to the subatomic level, then you will find yourself in a world where witchcraft is a very real thing. This is because at this level particles, such as protons, act according to the laws of physics known as quantum mechanics. They suddenly appear, exist for a while, and then disappear. And they appear again.
As far as we know, the Universe was originally very tiny, smaller than a proton. And this means that the incredibly huge and complex Universe simply arose without violating the Laws of Nature known to us. And, starting from that moment, huge amounts of energy were released as space expanded. Places to store all negative energy and maintain balance. And again the same question arises: could God not have created the laws of quantum mechanics, according to which the Big Bang occurred?
That is, was it really God? Did God really orchestrate everything in such a way that the Big Bang happened? I don't want to offend anyone, but I believe that science has a more convincing explanation than stories about a divine Creator. This explanation is possible due to the strange fact of cause and effect relationships. We are convinced that everything that happens happens because of something that came before. Therefore, we accept the proposition that someone, perhaps God, created the universe. But when we talk about the Universe as a whole, this is not necessarily the case.
Let me explain to you. Imagine a river flowing down a huge slope. How did the river appear? Perhaps it was the rain that fell over the mountains. But where did the rain come from? The correct answer is from the Sun. The sun shone over the ocean, water vapor rose into the sky and formed clouds. Why does the Sun shine? The sun shines thanks to the so-called fusion process, as a result of which hydrogen atoms combine to form helium. And with this reaction, a huge amount of energy is released.
Not bad. But where did hydrogen come from? The answer is as a result of the Big Bang. And this is the most important point. The Laws of Nature themselves tell us that not only the Universe appeared as a proton, out of nothing. But also that the Big Bang was caused by nothing. Nothing. The explanation for this fact lies in Einstein's theories and his understanding of the interaction of time and space in the Universe.
It was Albert Einstein who explained this fact. Something remarkable happened at the Big Bang: time began. To understand this incredible idea, imagine a black hole in space. A black hole is a star so massive that it consumes itself. It is so massive that even light cannot escape it. That's why it's completely black. Its gravitational field is so strong that it absorbs and distorts not only light, but also time.
To understand this, imagine a watch that has fallen into a black hole. As they approach it, they walk slower and slower, and time slows down. It practically stops. Imagine a watch falling into a black hole. Of course, if we assume that the clock can resist the monstrous gravity, its hands will stop. They will not stop because of a breakdown, they will stop because time does not exist inside the black hole. And so it was at the birth of the Universe. I believe that the formation of time in the creation of the Universe is a key point in dispelling the need for a Creator and revealing how the Universe created itself.
If we travel back in time to the Big Bang, the Universe will get smaller and smaller. Until it reaches the final point, where it is absolutely tiny, a single black hole. And just like in the case of modern black holes, the Laws of Nature dictate something extraordinary here. That here time, too, by itself, must stop. You can't go back in time to the Big Bang because it didn't happen. We finally found something for which there was no reason, because there was no time to create this reason. For me this means the impossibility of the existence of the Creator, because there was no time for this.
Since time began at the Big Bang, it was an event that could not have been created by anyone or anything. Thus, science has given us an answer that took more than 3,000 years of enormous human effort to find. We learned how the Laws of Nature, controlling the mass and energy of the Universe, launched the process that created you and me. Those sitting on our planet and happy that they finally learned this.

So when people ask me if God created the universe, I tell them that their question doesn't make any sense. There was no time before the Big Bang, so God did not have time to create the universe. It's like asking: in which direction is the edge of the Earth? The earth has the shape of a ball, it has no edge, it is useless to look for it. Of course, everyone is free to believe what they want.
Everyone is free to believe what they want. But, in my opinion, the simplest explanation is that God does not exist. No one created the Universe, and no one controls our destiny. And this brings me to the realization that there is no Heaven and no life after death. We have only one life to appreciate the greatness and beauty of our world. And for that I am very grateful.