In the modern world of science, it's rarely a single person that arrives at new discoveries; or even a single team of scientists. Instead, innovation comes from the work of countless individuals across the entire world, all contributing bits and pieces of new ideas, eventually culminating in theories that can be easily quantified.
The only theory that is widely credited as being almost solely the work Stephen Hawking has to do with blackholes, first, that they emit radiation, and second, that the amount of entropy contained in them is proportional to thier surface area.
Both of these are very big ideas, and (though they were not solely -his- discoveries) they are remarkable achievements for a single career in physics. The issue of thier radiation has been debated for many years; it was proven theorietically by Hawking and his associates, and it was later confirmed experimentally.
The issue of thier entropy, though, is startling and unsettling. No one has yet to posit a serious theory as to -why- thier entropy is proportional to thier surface area, and it is a totally unexpected theoretical result (which, by the way, could be proven experimentallly by observing the change in the sie of its event horizon when it gains mass or when it decays due to radiation).
If this is confirmed experimentally, (it most likely will be) it will be thoroughly shocking and inexplicable. This would mean that the "information" that represents three-dimensional matter and energy is "encoded" in a two-dimensional surface.
Edit - I tend to have to say this very often, but E=mc^2 is not the theory of general or special relativity. It is not a "boiled down" version. The mathematics involved in these theories is very complex (Einstein himself needed help to resolve some mathematical problems). There is no way to "boil down" physics without losing predictive power in the process.
2006-07-18 08:17:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Argon 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
I think I'm no where near smart as him, mainly because he's had a lot longer at study, so to offer any intellectual analysis of his theories would be like an ant trying to figure out how to program the VCR.
2006-07-18 08:13:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Yeti 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, he doesn't scare me. Personally, I find quantum physics and the nature of space-time and all of that interesting, but not so interesting that I could pour my life into it like he has. I do admire him for being so passionate about it, though. :)
2006-07-18 08:09:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Julia L. 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Thought provoking and interesting to read, but certainly nothing to be scared about.
2006-07-18 08:08:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by jh 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No way. I can beat him up.
If he's so smart, how come he can't walk?
2006-07-18 08:07:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by edhollawood 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do not believe, I do not care.
2006-07-18 08:07:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
he sucks,
people who like him suck,
you probably like him.
2006-07-18 08:08:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by shove it 2
·
0⤊
0⤋