Is Stephen Hawkings overrated? In the sense that is he on the same level of scientist as Galileo, Newton, Einstein?
I don’t think that’s something quantifiable. All are in the “top level,” whatever that is. Most of us are in no position to truly evaluate the science of Hawking’s work or the complexities of any of those scientists either, let alone know much about the work of other less-celebrated scientists, but since Hawking’s work is highly respected by many other scientists, I think it’s safe to say he is not a hack in any sense.
Who is Stephen Hawkings? He can’t be overrated, as I’ve never heard of him.
I liked his first album but not so much since then.
I am assuming that the OP actually means Stephen Hawking.
Maybe not, though.
Time posed the same question about Stephen Hawking.
My own opinion? He’s very, very good. His immobility gives him more time to simply sit and think. A great asset for a theorist.
thanks
I have. I think he is that guy who was the first person to go Mars. Or that guy who worked for Planet Express. I forget which.
You’re thinking of Stephen Fry, one half of a British comedy duo.
Galileo, Newton, and Einstein were all revolutionary, in a way that few scientists are (or get the chance to be). If anyone’s equating Stephen Hawking with them, I do think they’re overrating him.
The question of whether he is overrated came up in this relatively recent thread, especially starting on Page 2, with posts like this one:
thanks
who would be the best then???
Who has put him on the same level as Galileo, Newton, Einstein?
Stephen’s just this guy, y’know.
There’s more than one metric at play here.
Hawking is exceedingly famous and well-esteemed for three reasons: he’s a top-notch scientist, he’s an excellent and engaging science communicator, and his personal story is remarkable and inspiring.
If you remove the latter two from his CV, he’s still a top-tier scientist and would almost certainly be well-regarded in scientific communities.
Would he be a household name? Probably not.
Agreed: no one has, and no one will.
I’m happy that he’s on a level with Alan Guth or Peter Higgs.
If either of those men had written best-sellers and/or had incredible drama in their private lives, they’d probably be as well-known as Hawking. But where it really counts, among people who keep up with the news of physics, they are very well-known.
I’ve heard physicists or physics students say he’s basically the 20th or 30th most valuable/productive/important physicist alive today. People are under the impression that he’s the smartest man in the world and/or the most valuable physicist, and he’s not, so yes, in that sense he’s definitely overrated.
What he’s accomplished with such a debilitating disease is not overrated, it’s an extreme impressive personal feat, but that doesn’t mean that he’s an intellectual giant on par with Einstein. If he didn’t have ALS, the public wouldn’t know about him at all, and physicists would know of him, and regard his work as valuable, but no more so than dozens of other people.
I think the public almost thinks of him in terms of superheroes - he has a massive weakness, so he must have almost magical mind powers to compensate.
As a point guard, yes.
I’m not some big science guy, but is it fair to compare him with scientists of the past as far as accomplishments? ISTM, the field was a little more wide open. There were others working on similar theories to the giants mentioned,is it beyond belief that had Hawking been around at the time he could have been part of their well known discoveries?
Of course, back then he would have died at an early age.
Where’s the poll option for “I still get confused by decimals, so I’m really not qualified to make this judgement”?
He’s a theoretical physicist with a cool robot voice. What’s to overrate with a combo like that? If I were a theoretical physicist, I’d seriously consider going with a cool robot voice as well. That and maybe lasers too.