# Kirk Cameron schools Stephen Hawking in science **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 22, 2011, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818 "2011-05-22T21:45:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2011, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/361 "2011-06-03T15:02:25Z")
I didn’t care for Hawking’s book. Can people cite something else more substantive than that 90-page book that was stretched into 200? It’s like we’re arguing about European society using a _Let’s Go!_ travel guide as the source. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2011, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/362 "2011-06-03T15:04:46Z")
What are you asking to see a cite for? ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2011, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/363 "2011-06-03T15:27:09Z")
Well, for you, how about this: [QUOTE=Diogenes] All of those virtual particles create their own very limited spacetime. In fact, they are spacetime. Most of these particles (which can be analogized as “bubbles” in a “quantum foam” come and go in an instant (figuratively speaking) with (really as) tiny little spacetimes. Some of the bubbles blow up and expand into universes, with their own expanding spacetimes. [/quote] ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2011, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/364 "2011-06-03T15:41:44Z")
Would his paper of [Populating the Landscape: A Top Down Approach](http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf) from 2006 count? It seems to follow Hawking’s basic premise that given a string based framework a universe can spontaneously arise. Mind you I’ve only skimmed the paper. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2011, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/365 "2011-06-03T19:09:11Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Except that it is total fucking bullshit. Science never says “I don’t know.” > > (Well maybe some scientist sometime said that, but it’s damn rare.) I had to go look up this piece of idiocy, because I didn’t believe the quote was right. Never read a grant proposal, have you? Never read the Future Work section of a paper? Science actually never says it knows anything. It does say here is our best guess for many things, and here is the evidence for that guess. In grant proposals it says here is what we think, and here is how we’re going to find out if we’re right - or rather, here is how we’re going to find out if we are not wrong. BTW, coverage of M theory in The Grand Design seemed very superficial. Greene does it a lot better, but the difficulty of the writing is a lot higher. As for space and time, consider this - how do you define space in a universe with only one particle? ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2011, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/366 "2011-06-03T19:34:36Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > Exactly, belief is not rational. I doubt anyone ever said said otherwise. And therefore unworthy of serious consideration. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/367 "2011-06-06T02:46:20Z")
Depends. Do you think there is nothing outside of a western scientific rational construct? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/368 "2011-06-06T03:02:25Z")
What does that question even mean? ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/369 "2011-06-06T03:06:36Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > Depends. Do you think there is nothing outside of a western scientific rational construct? Yes, there are irrational, emotional, and superstition based constructs. I prefer science. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/370 "2011-06-06T13:03:32Z")
OK. Hope that works out for you. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/371 "2011-06-06T13:16:50Z")
Hope the superstitions work out for you. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/372 "2011-06-06T13:47:05Z")
So far, yes, it makes me happy and seems the simplest explanation. Give me a call when you find that dark matter stuff, OK? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/373 "2011-06-06T13:48:56Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > So far, yes, it makes me happy and seems the simplest explanation. Give me a call when you find that dark matter stuff, OK? An always-existing sentient being isn’t the simplest answer. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/374 "2011-06-06T13:53:44Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > So far, yes, it makes me happy and seems the simplest explanation. It’s actually NOT the simplest explanation. Magic not only add superfluous complexity, it’s not even really an explanation. It just regresses the question. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/375 "2011-06-06T13:56:51Z")
Science simply takes the question back step by step. It adds layer and layer of complexity to make its sums add up. As the proposed solution of big questions gets more complex, it gets less likely. A belief in the super-natural cuts through all that. “God.” “Ah ha! and who created God?” “Nobody, He exists outside of time, another of His creations.” “But!” ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/376 "2011-06-06T14:14:29Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > Science simply takes the question back step by step. It adds layer and layer of complexity to make its sums add up. As the proposed solution of big questions gets more complex, it gets less likely. A belief in the super-natural cuts through all that. > > “God.” > “Ah ha! and who created God?” > “Nobody, He exists outside of time, another of His creations.” > “But!” Congratulations on successfully arguing against yourself. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/377 "2011-06-06T14:28:01Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > OK. Hope that works out for you. Seeing as how I’m communicating with you almost instantaneously over thousands of miles, have been treated by doctors to cure maladies that would have killed someone a hundred years ago, and have had the opportunity to travel throughout the world at near the speed of sound on planes weighing nearly a million pounds, I’d say it’s working pretty well. Wouldn’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Double\_Foolscap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85e7bf/32.png) [@Double\_Foolscap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Double_Foolscap)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/378 "2011-06-06T14:38:18Z")
Pfft, that’s not _science_. That’s just… technology. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/379 "2011-06-06T14:46:46Z")
Which is a simpler answer to the question “How does a four-stroke internal combusion engine work?”: > [@](#): > > Operation of four stroke internal combustion engines have four basic steps that repeat with every two revolutions of the engine: > > (1) Intake stroke (2) Compression stroke (3) Power stroke and (4) Exhaust stroke > > 1. Intake stroke: The first stroke of the IC engine is also known as the suction stroke because the piston moves to the maximum volume position (downward direction in the cylinder). The inlet valve opens as a result of piston movement, and the vaporized fuel mixture enters the combustion chamber. The inlet valve closes at the end of this stroke. > > 2. Compression stroke: In this stroke, both valves are closed and the piston starts its movement to the minimum volume position (upward direction in the cylinder) and compress the fuel mixture. During the compression process, pressure, temperature and the density of the fuel mixture increases. > > 3. Power stroke: When the piston reaches the minimum volume position, the spark plug ignites the fuel mixture and burns. The fuel produces power that is transmitted to the crank shaft mechanism. > > 4. Exhaust stroke: In the end of the power stroke, the exhaust valve opens. During this stroke, the piston starts its movement in the minimum volume position. The open exhaust valve allows the exhaust gases to escape the cylinder. At the end of this stroke, the exhaust valve closes, the inlet valve opens, and the sequence repeats in the next cycle. Four stroke engines require two revolutions. > > Many engines overlap these steps in time; jet engines do all steps simultaneously at different parts of the engines. or > [@](#): > > Elves do it. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2011, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818/380 "2011-06-06T14:47:18Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > Depends. Do you think there is nothing outside of a western scientific rational construct? At the risk of going off on another tangent, there _is_ something outside of Aristotelian logic - is that what you mean? Aristotle’s framing of most things centered around something being true or not true, black or not black, an apple or not an apple, etc. The clear problem is that it excludes the gray areas - the ‘sort ofs.’ I don’t see how that contains an argument for god or gods, though. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-cameron-schools-stephen-hawking-in-science/582818.md?page=20)