Stephen Hawkings? Or Isaac Newton?
Stephen Hawkings and Isaac Newton. Two of the "greats" in the physics world; yet very different views on the afterlife. Without Isaac Newton's contributions, I do not believe we would have gotton as far is the destruction and devasation of our beautiful planet (I guess we call that "progress") as we have, but I have always thought that he was more of a physicist than an interpreter of semitic languages and Jewish tradition. He probably would have disagreed with me. The British take on the Eastern religion we call Christianity was very important to him.
Stephen Hawkings, on the other hand, will not enter anything into his "ledger of reality" (my term) unless it can be explained with an equation. Basically, I agree with Stephen Hawkings's line of reason; in our field, (dare I call it our "limited" field?) there is an equation to define, describe, and express every single chemical and physical reaction there is. Possibly excepting one thing..........my husband and I are still debating on whether or not sentience can be boiled down to physical and chemical reactions and defined using equations. My longsuffering husband............he is very Newtonian in his views on science, and I have a tendency to accept whatever Hawkings says as gospel and hang off of his every word. It makes for discussions that last all night!
I am still inclined to believe that there are a bazillion things we have not discovered or uncovered scientifically yet, and that other realms may somehow be invisible to us. That's just my opinion, though.
Stephen Hawkings and Isaac Newton. Two of the "greats" in the physics world; yet very different views on the afterlife. Without Isaac Newton's contributions, I do not believe we would have gotton as far is the destruction and devasation of our beautiful planet (I guess we call that "progress") as we have, but I have always thought that he was more of a physicist than an interpreter of semitic languages and Jewish tradition. He probably would have disagreed with me. The British take on the Eastern religion we call Christianity was very important to him.
Stephen Hawkings, on the other hand, will not enter anything into his "ledger of reality" (my term) unless it can be explained with an equation. Basically, I agree with Stephen Hawkings's line of reason; in our field, (dare I call it our "limited" field?) there is an equation to define, describe, and express every single chemical and physical reaction there is. Possibly excepting one thing..........my husband and I are still debating on whether or not sentience can be boiled down to physical and chemical reactions and defined using equations. My longsuffering husband............he is very Newtonian in his views on science, and I have a tendency to accept whatever Hawkings says as gospel and hang off of his every word. It makes for discussions that last all night!
I am still inclined to believe that there are a bazillion things we have not discovered or uncovered scientifically yet, and that other realms may somehow be invisible to us. That's just my opinion, though.
No comments:
Post a Comment