He certainly earned a medal for being such a character being a scientist to the end despite all the difficulties. I find this very inspiring.

@Declan-pg8cg

3 жыл бұрын

Very true, I think the author of the piece has problems understanding humour. Professor Hawking's audience clearly understood the remark for what it was, and the author is insulting their intelligence.

@yt.personal.identification

3 жыл бұрын

@@Declan-pg8cg You seem to be implying that humour completely negates the possibility of arrogance.

@Declan-pg8cg

3 жыл бұрын

@@yt.personal.identification Well no, it doesn't, and I'm not.

@yt.personal.identification

3 жыл бұрын

@@Declan-pg8cg Then why do you say they have a problem understanding humour? They recognised an arrogant remark, framed as a joke, and called it how they see it.

@annaclarafenyo8185

3 жыл бұрын

He made the greatest discovery in theoretical physics since Max Planck's time. Hawking's work is the only reason we understand quantum gravity today.

Best sentence: Hawking didn't need the Nobel Prize, he'll be remembered without it.

@pattheplanter

3 жыл бұрын

The decisions of the Nobel Prize Committee have had a history of political and other biases. The only reason they are respected is because of their self-promotion and the money, like the Oscars. The work of scientists is impossible to judge objectively. To make it a beauty contest where one group wins each year in several categories seems silly.

@nziom

3 жыл бұрын

@@pattheplanter true

@BaronFeydRautha

3 жыл бұрын

Doesn't change the fact he deserved to win

@BaronFeydRautha

3 жыл бұрын

@@pattheplanter *obama* COUGH COUGH

@frankdimeglio8216

3 жыл бұрын

@@pattheplanter Absolute proof that Mr. Frank DiMeglio is the greatest scientist/physicist who has ever lived: Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual (IN BALANCE). So, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Therefore, invisible AND visible SPACE in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium AND balance IS the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of space consistent WITH/AS what is fundamentally balanced GRAVITATIONAL/ELECTROMAGNETIC force/energy; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or balanced with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/energy; as this balances AND unifies ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy AND gravity; as this balances gravity AND inertia. (This explains F=ma AND E=mc2, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity.) ACCORDINGLY, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! A PHOTON may be placed at the center of the Sun (as a point, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) "Mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/AS what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL force/energy, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. So, time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/energy is gravity. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Touch AND feeling BLEND, as GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are linked AND balanced; as gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND balanced IN AND OUT of SPACE AND TIME, as gravity is electromagnetism/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. This is entirely proven by the mathematical unification of Maxwell's equations AND Einstein's equations (given the addition of a fourth spatial dimension). Indeed, this explains why Einstein's equations predict that SPACE is either expanding or contracting. Moreover, this is why Einstein's equations allow for (or predict) "black holes". Balance and completeness go hand in hand. Einstein's equations are NECESSARILY ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL. Notice the term c4. GREAT !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. I have provided top down, true, and overwhelming mathematical proof AS WELL that gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. So, It is now abundantly and quite clear that Einstein never nearly understood gravity AND physics/physical experience. (Obviously, E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma.) Sir Isaac Newton now ranks second. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. In fact, the ROTATION of the moon does MATCH it's REVOLUTION. ACCORDINGLY, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. SO, a given planet sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AND this is THEN consistent WITH F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Therefore, GRAVITATIONAL force/energy is proportional to (or balanced with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as gravity is electromagnetism/energy. So, "mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent WITH what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL force/energy; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=mc2 IS F=ma.) It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. By Frank DiMeglio

He wasn't arrogant, he had sense of humour.

@Garresh1

3 жыл бұрын

Even if wasn't joking, I don't think it's arrogant to acknowledge his contributions to physics. If he believed himself better than other physicists, then sure. But he also accepted the flaws with his theories and was logical about it. Humility is an admirable trait, but pride in a measured amount should be admirable as well.

@aniksamiurrahman6365

3 жыл бұрын

Yah, that title "Black hole explosion?" is a solid KZread clickbait. That shows that he had an excellent sense of humor.

@Red1Green2Blue3

3 жыл бұрын

yea...talk about overreaction, that was clearly a joke

@MonkeyspankO

3 жыл бұрын

both

@naotamf1588

3 жыл бұрын

exactly, try to express nuances with such a speech device! at least he didn't feel confined by it. RIP - a real hero!

Some people just don't understand humour. He played himself on the Simpsons for goodness sake.

@nunomaroco583

3 жыл бұрын

I total agree, Hawking have lots of humor.

@Retro_Rich

3 жыл бұрын

And “The Big Bang Theory” and Star Trek TNG.

@grokeffer6226

3 жыл бұрын

And Futurama.

@therealnotanerd_account2

3 жыл бұрын

And Homer called him Larry Flynt on that episode.

@subtleaggro

3 жыл бұрын

@@Retro_Rich He was in star trek? I've missed that one.

Whether or not you agree or disagree about hawking winning a Nobel prize, I feel like he was joking when he talked about deserving to win one.

@mrpedrobraga

3 жыл бұрын

I guess it's hard to make sarcasm with a robot voice

@mrpedrobraga

3 жыл бұрын

@@orangestapler8729 yeah

@mark9118

3 жыл бұрын

"I feel like he was joking when he talked about deserving to win one." I personally don't think he was joking, but that's just my opinion.

@mark9118

3 жыл бұрын

@@orangestapler8729 Just reading "A Brief History of Time" (which I purchased years ago), watching videos by and about him, etc, over a period of many years (I am a fairly old guy). He "may" have been correct on a few things, but more like when a broken clock is correct twice a day. Listening to Sabine is the exact opposite of listening to Hawking IMO, like a veil is lifted over the gobbledygook of theoretical physics, and the BS gets exposed for what is.

@fikretyet

3 жыл бұрын

@@mark9118 This is partly because of the fact that at Hawking's time people needed to hear some fringer opinions with intelligent confidence and same can be said about String Theory people or opinions like holographic principle. Attention was required and publicly known scientist were trying to grab that attention, inform about possibilities, broaden the view. Now, they have some attention on theoritical physics, ideas are floating, people started to understand the importance and began to get the concepts, had to chance to explore with the help of internet, partial freedom of knowledge and so forth. Dear Sabine (because I really like and respect her) and similar science communicators help on getting our feet on the ground. I would highly recommend to consider time and circumstances and not to compare apples with bananas.

He wasn’t arrogant. He had a tremendous sense of humor. Eric Idle once got him to pretend to run over Brian Cox in his wheelchair - a clear sign that he never took himself too seriously.

@obvioustruth

3 жыл бұрын

He was very arogant like every atheist.

@jimcarpenter965

3 жыл бұрын

@@obvioustruth - Following logic and reason to wherever they lead is bravery, not arrogance.

@bearcb

3 жыл бұрын

Also appeared in The Big Bang Theory

@isntitabeautifulday1648

3 жыл бұрын

@@obvioustruth Who hurt you buddy?

@DanielNistrean

3 жыл бұрын

@@obvioustruth Your daddy hurt you ?

Stephen Hawking had a sense of humor. The scientists complaining about him apparently didn't.

@ThePinkus

3 жыл бұрын

I was very critical of Philip Ball presentations on the Ri channel, and I find that he considers Hawking arrogant for stating the obvious beyond weird. :P If I was Sheldon, I would be exclaiming "Strike two!".

@mydogbrian4814

3 жыл бұрын

michael blacktree. -> Speaking of his humor; - Wasn't he originally a standup comedian but gave it up because he couldn't ? (think about it)...

@michaelblacktree

3 жыл бұрын

OOF!

@alistairbalistair9596

3 жыл бұрын

exactly!

Any Brit would immediately recognise this as self deprecating humour.

@nefariousyawn

3 жыл бұрын

It was even flagged by the audience's laughter.

@mollistuff

3 жыл бұрын

Hawking has great deadpan delivery (edit: spelling)

@nefariousyawn

3 жыл бұрын

@@mollistuff Indeed, I never saw him break while telling a joke.

@squoblat

3 жыл бұрын

@@rossjackson7352 like every other empire in history?

@SigEpBlue

3 жыл бұрын

Even more ironic then that Philip Ball _is_ a British science writer, and an editor for Nature.

What the great man had to deal with for a long period was inspirational to many. A far greater way to be remembered?

@elmersbalm5219

3 жыл бұрын

I doubt he wants to be remembered for that. He got irritated at people who tried to clumsily ‘help’ him. He used his condition mostly to defend the NHS and thus advocate for people with disabilities. It would be a disservice to his work and his character to give weight to his condition. He didn’t like pity parties.

@grokeffer6226

3 жыл бұрын

My father's mother had Lou Gehrig's Disease. It's a horrible disease to have to deal with.

@chrissinclair4442

3 жыл бұрын

Epstein's child abuse Island

@realzachfluke1

Жыл бұрын

@@elmersbalm5219 I understand where you're coming from, but ultimately I think you're missing Tuna Free Dolphin Meat's point. And I should say, only on KZread can you [at least reasonably] expect to have a serious, interesting, intellectual and philosophical discussion with someone presenting themselves to the world as "Tuna Free Dolphin Meat". But what we're talking about here isn't _pity,_ or anything close to it. What we're talking about is the effect he had (and will continue to have) on other people. There are a few different things I could say in response to your point, but I want to hone in on just one. And that is, I strongly believe that you're doing, ironically, exactly what (in my opinion, and it's just that) you misinterpreted others who wrote or engaged with this particular comment as doing, but not for a lack of good intentions, I sincerely believe you had the best of intentions. How Hawking felt about his condition from start to finish, and how he felt he was being perceived by, and _wanted to_ be perceived by others throughout his life in regards to the condition, was his battle to have, and his alone. The reality was, as is hidden right there within your answer, his progressive disabilities were never a burden on anyone else; people weren't ever seeing him as any less of a person, or any less of an intellect. It wasn't a bother for people, or a definition of his character to them, they wanted to do whatever they could to *lift him up,* because _people cared, man._ The best of humanity is how we care for, and build one another up. There was never an ounce of pity going around, and there certainly isn't today for the man in our memories. There's one distinction I ultimately think needs to be made, and it regards how millions of people then and now knew Stephen Hawking, and will remember Stephen Hawking. His physical condition never defined his character. It really didn't. But before long, it had damn well *demonstrated* his character. Specifically, it was how he responded, practically immediately to his diagnosis (and a god awful prognosis at that time), that demonstrated to the world _who Stephen Hawking REALLY was._ He could have succumbed to his worsening condition and passed away very shortly after that diagnosis, and nothing about how we will remember him would've changed. It was the displaying of his character in the face of the worst possible news a human being could get (which would've frankly completely ruined most people who got the same news, and to that point, it might very well have been why Stephen Hawking _didn't_ meet the short fate that appeared in the cards for him) that told people exactly the kind of person he was, and continues to inspire them to this day. The fact that he was THEN able to go on, REALLY get into his work, learn and absorb new concepts, and just _contribute to science_ for decades to come, is genuinely one of those miracles of life that we just get to be thankful for after the fact. And at the end of the day, or even the beginning of the day, who cares whether he got a Nobel Prize? Hawking will be remembered among all of humanity for who he was, and what he did. He might've felt like that had something to do with the fact that he developed that condition, or that people were only going to remember him out of pity, but he would've been dead wrong about it from the very beginning, and I hope he overcame feelings like that. That's what I meant when I said that was his battle alone to fight, because nobody else ever saw it that way.

Stphen Hawking is among a remarkably small group of scientists whose names are recognised by a very large number of people. There are not too many Nobel Laureates in this group.

@herbetrono4373

3 жыл бұрын

think of maxwell and tesla and you have it!!!

@jpe1

3 жыл бұрын

@@herbetrono4373 Einstein, Curie, Crick & Watson, and Pauling jump to my mind immediately, but probably those names are not recognized by a large number of people, even Einstein’s.

@irokosalei5133

3 жыл бұрын

@@jpe1 Wat? Einstein and Curie both received a nobel prize and they are both known from the general public.

@MrAlRats

3 жыл бұрын

Yes but that's because Stephen Hawking is the most overrated scientist in history whereas most Nobel Laureates are underrated among the general public. Stephen Hawking was a great scientist and he may well have deserved to win the Noble prize for his singularity theorems. Penrose and Hawking discovered a mathematical fact about the Einstein equations, which in turn had the consequence of making the idea of black holes more plausible among other scientists. It could be argued that once there was enough evidence for the existence of black holes, then those who made the most convincing argument for their existence should have won a Noble prize. Nonetheless, Stephen Hawking would not make it on a list of the top ten scientists of the past century. His popularity is due much more to his disease and his ability to sell books rather than his calibre as a scientist.

@campbellmackinnon3848

3 жыл бұрын

That's because your general peasantry don't care about or understand science. They like the weird guy in a wheelchair that talks like a robot.

He was a person. The public likes personalities and he communicated his work in a funny way. He played himself on shows and did funny skits and bits. I think this drew in people into physics for sure

I totally agree with that final statement. Hawking did not need a Nobel prize. The world has enough respect for his work already.

His nobel prize is he remain in our mind for ever.

@MyStarPeopleExperiences

3 жыл бұрын

At least until we die.

@clockworkdave9850

3 жыл бұрын

Nicely put..

@chrissinclair4442

3 жыл бұрын

Stephen Hawking was just another of the rich, powerful, literary that enjoyed the fruits on the island of Jeffrey Epstein. So I am going with, HELL NO!

I love it when Sabine throws shade on string theory..."blah...blah...blah"...LOL!

@CAThompson

3 жыл бұрын

I just love it when she throws shade. 💚

@hankrearden20

3 жыл бұрын

I starting to think she's not a fan of Brian Greene

@sfcablecar

3 жыл бұрын

@@CAThompson She uses her fierce intellect to go where she believes the best evidence leads, everything else be damned. That's why we love Sabine!

@CAThompson

3 жыл бұрын

@@sfcablecar If she ever were to tell me I'm wrong, that would be a blessing indeed.

@daarom3472

3 жыл бұрын

@@hankrearden20 whenever I hear him speak or host an event, it becomes instantly clear he's gotten to where he is through politics and networking (obviously he's also very smart, just not brilliant).

I miss Hawking, even though I don't understand much about physics - I imagine a lot of people miss him too, which is the best prize. Sabine is one of the few who has ever enabled me to at least scratch the surface on this stuff, which is kind of amazing too - and a cool feeling.

A Brief History of Time is his prize gifted to average Joes like me. Still on the bookshelf with other classics.

@vedantsridhar8378

3 жыл бұрын

I'm reading it right now at the age of 14. The best book ever

Keep in mind that the great Einstein himself won a Nobel not for his groundbreaking work on Special and General relativity but for the photoelectric effect. I don't really care for awards, I just want to understand.

@mydogbrian4814

3 жыл бұрын

feynstein 100. - Ever since AVITAR lost out in 2010 Best Picture to a mediocre film because of Hollywood politics I quit watching that circus as I did years earlier in the Miss America Contest. - Never gave much thought to Nobel prize since none was granted for Relativity. - Its funny but I read some where not too long ago that Einstein's explanation for the cause of Brownain motion was recently discredited in Lab tests. So go figure.

Einstein should have won for relativity after Eddington's confirmation...

Hawking's opinion on the England soccer team and World Cup penalty shootouts: 'As we say in science, England couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo'. Great sense of humour.

@clmasse

3 жыл бұрын

Invoking science for soccer… is a hint of mental imbalance.

@CAThompson

3 жыл бұрын

@@clmasse It says that Stephen Hawking was British with humour to match.

@irokosalei5133

3 жыл бұрын

@@clmasse It would be great to understand the joke.

@RubALamp

2 жыл бұрын

@@clmasse bla bla bla watching soccer is for plebes. Me!? A scientist!? Watching soccer!? Never!!!

I met Dennis Sciama, who was Hawking's supervisor, when I studied in Trieste. I remember him as a nice, English gentleman with a lot of humour. Seems to me that many English scientists are a bit eccentric, with great personalities. That of course includes Hawking.

Sabine.. You deserve a Nobel prize for dispensing, discussing, and questioning our "knowledge" of science. - Steve was a real trip. Amazing guy

That picture of Brian Greene talking about string theory (blah blah blah) is priceless... I guess Sabine is not very fond of him or his ideas.

@davidbrisbane7206

3 жыл бұрын

What is String Theory good for? Selling books. Making TV shows. Keeping academics employed etc, but not for advancing Physics 😂🤣😂🤣.

@chuckschillingvideos

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidbrisbane7206 Exactly right. The more outlandish, unprovable and speculative the proposed theory, the more likely a physicist is to receive lucrative grants and be lavished with attention.

@davidbrisbane7206

3 жыл бұрын

@@chuckschillingvideos If anything, String theory might advance mathematics, but if it called itself mathematical research, it would not get nearly as much funding as it currenly gets.

@Markle2k

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidbrisbane7206 Funding a theoretical physicist is a matter of a salary and a budget for paper and pencils. Times three or four and add a few chalkboards and a chalk budget and you have a “department”. They don’t need a ton of expensive equipment. You’re barking up the wrong tree if you’re looking for a good way to save money. Of course, the same goes for experimentalists on a national level.

@davidbrisbane7206

3 жыл бұрын

@@Markle2k Lots of string theorists who should be applying for jobs in the mathematics department 🤣😂🤣😂. The reason they are a waste of time is that theoretical physics attract lots of first class minds into a field that is going nowhere. I.e. a loss of human potential.

Dear Sabine, just discovered your channel by accident! Where have I been, right? Amazing presentation, great sense of fashion, funny and humores as hell, "smart" is an understatement, and love your accent. So glad to know they're humans like you! Congrats!

Just found this channel. Love how clearly you explain complex subjects. Love your voice as well.

Quite the tribute. Another excellent video , thank you much.

Sabine, I think you should get the Nobel Prize for courageously fighting the BS in physics and science! Best wishes. Uldis

@ThomasJr

2 жыл бұрын

By the uncertainty principle, all physicists have a bit of BS to them, even Sabine.

@uldissprogis5138

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThomasJr Yes, that's true but I like that Sabine has less BS than the majority of theoretical physicists so I value her courageousness in bucking the myopic and often mythical bureaucratic self perpetuating theoretical community of physicists to some extent.

@ThomasJr

2 жыл бұрын

@@uldissprogis5138 Yes, but again, she's fallible too, she makes mistakes. Even more when she goes against a team, because a lot of heads think exponentially better than one. However even when she chooses to go against established ideas, it's very useful for us to learn because it exposes her thought process, and it's usually very good. In the case of her criticism of the GW detector for example, she pointed out some of the problems with their experiment. A strong argument was the fact they had discarded 8 alerts out of 41. However, she perhaps forgot that glitches usually only occur in one of the detectors, not in both at the same time, which is possible but more unlikely, unless it's a GW. Perhaps she also failed to acknowledge the neutron star merger that was accompanied by visible light observation, though I am not sure. Time will tell if she was right.

@uldissprogis5138

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThomasJr Of course, human perfection is not possible and everyone makes some mistakes in an entire lifetime. It is really excellence that we are taking about and not human perfection where we all fall short of the mark or standard.

@ThomasJr

2 жыл бұрын

@@uldissprogis5138 At least with Zabina we get to learn a lot, which is not so easy with other channels

AMLS is one horrible disease & Hawking handled it well. Everyone with half a brain knows that he was kidding when he made that remark. His genius will always be remembered & speaks for itself, no Nobel Prize needed! Thanks for this video Sabine. 👍👍

@sapelesteve

3 жыл бұрын

@illuminOz I know all about the disease. So, what's your point? I think it best that you yourself apply some "critical thinking" rather made snide remarks to other commenters.

@chubtoad157

3 жыл бұрын

@illuminOz Your way of approaching a conversation is exactly what the world needs a bit less of at the moment.

@crabcrab2024

3 жыл бұрын

@illuminOz Make an explicit statement, please, so we don’t have to wander in the mist.

Thanks, your content is always engaging and well presented That said, I miss your content challenging/questioning/exploring the foundation of physics and the related series of quantuum mechanics. Also hoped for a series on how foundations of detectors how/why they work, how the data is collected, stored and analyzed -- sort of a sibling of the theoretical measurement problem.

Fantastic video, Sabine. I come away with just a little more cosmological understanding (and more string theory skepticism) with every one of your explanations. Thank you.

Great video! Loved the waterfall analogy. Hawking had a good sense of humor others obviously didn't...

You are so cool, Sabine! Your talk about the merits of Hawking’s work is fascinating, clear, and witty. If I ever met you in person I’d be enthralled by your conversation; fortunately for you, having your posts saves you from having to endure such a one sided conversation with my only contribution being a repeated exclamation of “Wow! That’s so amazing!!!” 😆

Einstein did not receive a Nobel price for the theory of general relativity. He received one for his work on the photoelectric effect but surely if the Nobel committee gives general relativity, which must be one of the crowning achievements of physics, a pass, it not recognising other work has little meaning.

@zetacrucis681

3 жыл бұрын

It was much to early too give a Nobel for GR at the time Einstein received his as the theory was only verified observationally in a couple of limited contexts (ie precession of Mercury's orbit and the solar eclipse data which was still a bit sketchy).

@MrAlRats

3 жыл бұрын

Stephen Hawking was a great scientist and he may well have deserved to win the Noble prize for his singularity theorems. Penrose and Hawking discovered a mathematical fact about the Einstein equations, which in turn had the consequence of making the idea of black holes more plausible among other scientists. It could be argued that once there was enough evidence for the existence of black holes, then those who made the most convincing argument for their existence should have won a Noble prize. Nonetheless, Stephen Hawking would not make it on a list of the top ten scientists of the past century. His popularity is due much more to his disease and his ability to sell books rather than his calibre as a scientist, so he is more deserving of an award for the most overrated scientist in history than the Nobel prize. If the existence of Hawking radiation due to black holes is ever experimentally confirmed then at that point he would certainly be deserving of both these awards.

@maxwell8758

2 жыл бұрын

@@zetacrucis681 That’s not why. They didn’t give it to him because they were anti Semitic. These are the people that tried to give hitler the Nobel peace prize.

If not a Nobel Prize in physics, a Nobel Prize of owning up and not letting life circumstances destroy you. He fought his disease head on, fought it with tooth and nail, and accomplished more in that wheel chair than most people ever do in their lives... he did it with wit, humor, and with a sense of wonderment that he captivated audiences into wanting to learn more about theoretical physics. A Brief History In Time changed my life. Prior to reading it I though the Big Bang, quantum theory, and a plethora of other sciences were ridiculous notions as a teenager. After reading it... it made so much sense I pursued a career in science.

@MountainFisher

3 жыл бұрын

Hawking did need a short course in critical philosophy though. Did you read his 2010 or 11 book The Grand Design? He started by asking a few philosophical questions like "Why are we here?" and "Why is there something instead of nothing?" his answer was uncomprehending of what science can do. He stated that these questions once were answered by philosophy, but philosophy hasn't kept up with physics and was dead. Philosophy is dead? He apparently did not know that was a philosophical and a self stultifying assertion, it counters itself, it is like saying I'm absolutely certain that there are no absolutes. At the end of the book he summarized what he was writing about by by stating, "Because there is a Law of Gravity the Universe can and will create itself." It contains 3 contradictions and is impossible. Firstly Gravity is not nothing, or not anything it is something. 2nd contradiction is assigning causal agency to the Law of Gravity, a description of gravity is just that a concept with no physical attribute and cannot do anything. The final contradiction is the Universe creating itself, means it would have to BE before it WAS. I was really disappointed with this book by Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow (a theoretical physicist) and I have no idea who wrote what, but if you're going to engage in philosophy at least have a cursory knowledge of it. It had a lot of good things in it, but was heavy into M Theory (string theory) which I think has some credence to it, but it is missing something and I am a biologist/engineer so I won't go deep into it. I have read A Brief History Of Time and enjoyed it for the most part, I thought some of his concepts a bit high for your average reader, but it has been 20 years since I last read it. Roger Penrose wrote a review of The Grand Design and he wasn't as sure about M Theory as Hawking was. Link to his review. www.ft.com/content/bdf3ae28-b6e9-11df-b3dd-00144feabdc0

His Nobel Prize in my mind is his episode on Dexters Laboratory

Hi Ms. Hossenfelder, thank you for your great KZread videos. Gold Standard! Greetings from one of your biggest fans in Africa (Morocco)

Great video. I really enjoyed watching it.

That comment honestly sounded like Hawking's sense of humor to me. I don't think it was arrogant at all.

Sabine you're amazing. Thank you for your book and for these videos.

I think your conclusion is a very reasonable and admirable one. The best person to hand out awards to is an *underrated* scientists. I feel that simply being smaller and less well known makes you *inherently* more deserving of anything that elevates your status - because status (and wealth) is non-linear. (This is why I'm subscribed to your patreon - you deserve the exposure and money far more than a channel that already has millions of subscribers!)

Sabine, thank you for your insightful and straightforward content and scientific commentary. I enjoy your perspectives. I am curious, and if a commenter replies that would be great, as to why or how we would expect to see extra spacial dimensions, since our sensing devices work in a framework of three dimensions. What necessitates the extra dimensions being curled up?

For every famous scientist there are at hundreds of scientists at least as smart that are not famous at all. Hawkings contribution to science I cannot judge, he certainly seems to be cited a lot. Hawkings contribution to the public is making scientific discourse seem fun, with bets and all, and showing us that the mind can overcome immense limitations of our bodies. I hope he will be remembered for generations.

@rakninja

3 жыл бұрын

every generation has good scientists who do a lot to popularize science. there's quite a lot now, as it's much easier to get mass exposure. sagan did a lot to popularize science, and is responsible for the bulk of our knowledge of mars before we actually put landers on the surface. einstein, who's look, accent, and mannerisms are ingrained on the entire world's popular culture as the epitome of "genius." you could write an entire novel of single sentences listing but a name and the mark the person left, and have enough left over for a sequel. hawking is immortal. he'll be remembered with honor so long as records persist. this is possibly the greatest achievement a single human could ever hope to accomplish.

@gumby2241

Жыл бұрын

Einstein, Maxwell, Newton... will be remembered, Hawking? not so much.

@Krmpfpks

Жыл бұрын

@@gumby2241 Hawking radiation is kind of a big thing and unless they rename it, he will be remembered.

I remember reading the Philip Ball's piece. Maybe he was too harsh with Hawking, but admiteddly, there was a lot of selfpromotion in their public acts, and their papers were more philosophical than Physics in the end. Respect the Nobel Prize, well, other scientists get peeved for not getting it("Losing the Nobel Prize"). Hawking at least got the Principe de Asturias from Spain as consolation prize!

Very nice! Thanks again!

Enjoyed! Thanks.

Hawking had a wicked sense of humour..a great Scientist too! Keep it up,Sabine,we love you,be safe,tgcx

About time someone spoke out that Professor Hawking deserved a Nobel Prize. But like you said, he didn't need it. I know that I will never forget him.

@ryanhaart

3 жыл бұрын

The rules and conventions of the Nobel foundation apply to everyone equally. Nobel prizes require experimental evidence and so far there is none for Hawking radiation. For the same reason there haven't been any Nobel prizes given for String theory. It wouldn't be right to hand out prizes for purely theoretical achievements, as this would also create a wrong incentive to come up with speculative theories just to angle for a prize.

Thanks Sabine, for another great, thought-provoking video!

This video never showed up in my feed.. stupid KZread.. glad I found you again!

His name and ideas will survive long after the names of these humorless scientists names that have been given a prize have long been forgotten forgotten....

I find it very plausible that Hawking actually won the nobel price during his lifetime. He was an important and well respected member of the science community, and made groundbreaking work despite his physical condition. It makes sense that he won the price. Now to make this plausible, I only need few extra dimensions here and here and here....

Very interesting, informative and worthwhile video.

I loved Prof H's line in The Big Bang Theory, when Sheldon said "But Professor you did not get a Nobel Prize". The Professor said "Ah, but I was on the Simpsons.

Imagine if the HC just destroyed the planet, that would be Hawkward.

@nikbivation

3 жыл бұрын

I bursted out laughing...

@FGj-xj7rd

3 жыл бұрын

Bruh... Lol

@colinbrash

3 жыл бұрын

Certainly would be a Large problem.

@quantumchill5237

3 жыл бұрын

That would be terrible for the economy

@mindabobis7601

3 жыл бұрын

Hawkward indeed! Hahahaha! 😂🤣

3:00 Brian Greene: "Blah blah blah... Extra dimensions..." 3:14 Brian Greene: "Blah Blah Blah" 😂

I once attended a public lecture by Hawking, and he certainly had a great sense of humor about himself. At that lecture, he didn't actually mention the Nobel. Maybe because it was attended by the general public, and not just other physicists, the accomplishment he wanted to promote was his Star Trek cameo. It turns out, he's the only person (so far) who has ever appeared on Star Trek as himself.

@clmasse

3 жыл бұрын

Having a great sense of humor about oneself is having self-mockery. We are not in this case.

While on the subject of black holes, any possibility of a video on entanglement entropy with respect to black holes and the Page curve? Quanta Magazine had an article about it on October 29, 2020.

Short answer: yes Long answer: y e s

Brilliant, Sabine

Sabine, you make me feel sane. I admit to being befuddled by all the deep math, but I can understand (most) of your lectures. Thanks. You keep me engaged.

More thoughts from the boundary: Witten got a Fields Medal. I don't know if Penrose has one for his maths of the the tribar; or his work on tiling [ aperiodic and self-similar ] and sheaf bundles on the manifold in cohomology and non-orientable spaces...which takes us into the 2-torus, the Mobius strip and HyperKlein bottle homology. In fact in-out geometry is fundamental in cell division [ after 4 divisions, I think. ] I resist the temptatation to come up with a GUT. I just look at biology...and see Santelli's Iso-Euclidian geometry in shells; honeycomb structure in nature, like the Giant's Causeway; and in the spongy mesophyll, organized according to simple allometric scaling rules at the cellular level, with an emergent topological motif of an irregular honeycomb that obeys Euler’s Law of space filling at the tissue level and minimizes cellular investment... THE PRINCIPLE OF LEAST ACTION, also called more correctly the STATIONARY action principle. Draw your own dots.

They hadn't invented the 'smiley face' nuance for computer generated voices at the time. Actually, they probably STILL haven't !

Thank you for the clear explanations, Sabine. I think that Steven should also be remembered for his example for everyone of us. Despite what he went through, he kept working and living.

"blah blah blah... extra dimensions" LOL!

I visited Cambridge once, one day while traveling to the UK. I was walking along a sidewalk and who goes rolling by the other way right past me but Stephen Hawking! What struck me was his face was bigger than I imagined. Couldn’t believe it.

@ryanwaege7251

3 жыл бұрын

I'm not much for celebrities but that would have been something else!

@parrogakaparadise9477

3 жыл бұрын

@IanFromCalifornia 🤣🤣🤣

Whenever I read “X should have been given the Nobel prize”, I never see who should not have got the prize so that X could receive it.

@quasarsupernova9643

3 жыл бұрын

I feel Roy Glauber should not have been given since ECG Sudarshan was denied

@Sanakudou

3 жыл бұрын

The one I hear the most is Obama, I haven’t fully looked into it but I’ve seen people say he got his based on promises of things he would do as president, which he ultimately didn’t fulfill. The massive civilian body count of his drone strikes in the Middle East kind of makes me agree a “peace” prize might not be something he’s deserving of.

@Markle2k

3 жыл бұрын

@@Sanakudou The Peace Prize is a political tool given out by a political body, a committee nominated by the Norwegian parliament. The body count of conventional airstrikes would be higher.

@MrAlRats

3 жыл бұрын

Stephen Hawking was a great scientist and he may well have deserved to win the Noble prize for his singularity theorems. Penrose and Hawking discovered a mathematical fact about the Einstein equations, which in turn had the consequence of making the idea of black holes more plausible among other scientists. It could be argued that once there was enough evidence for the existence of black holes, then those who made the most convincing argument for their existence should have won a Noble prize. Nonetheless, Stephen Hawking would not make it on a list of the top ten scientists of the past century. His popularity is due much more to his disease and his ability to sell books rather than his calibre as a scientist, so he is more deserving of an award for the most overrated scientist in history than the Nobel prize.

Absolutely I agree, thank you Sabine 👏

Wow. Reading through the comments, I didn't know that a video about Stephen Hawking's legacy could be so triggering for so many people.

'Or maybe the Nobel Prize committee just waited for Hawking to die, so they would not have to think about just how to disentangle Hawking's work from Penrose's work? We'll never know.' [Sabine shrugs] Woah, Sabine spits Hell Fire until your monitor cracks, your glasses break, and your clothes burn, while you scream 'mooore'

@alphalunamare

3 жыл бұрын

I thought the reference to de-entanglement was rather interesting 'wink' :-)

He won a higher price than a Nobel. There is hundred of Nobel Prices we don't know his name ... now ask anybody: who Stephen Hawking was?, that's the real Price

@eljcd

3 жыл бұрын

Camon,how can anybody not remember 76' Nobel, Chao Chung Ting???

@KlaudiusL

3 жыл бұрын

@@eljcd 🤦‍♂️

Definitely a superstar for science, while he didn't necessarily need it, it's one of those things you would just assume he already had if you didn't know.

“My Life is my Message” - Gandhi. I think that quote applies to Hawking well, who contributed so much while managing a severe disability.

@clmasse

3 жыл бұрын

British conceit, the greatest physicist of the 21st century so far is Russian. Leibniz is greater than Newton.

@Mandragara

3 жыл бұрын

@@clmasse I'm not saying he's the greatest physicist of the 21st century. I'd probably give that medal to Witten

"blah blah blah extra dimensions" That made me laugh for real.

@PanglossDr

3 жыл бұрын

That was typical of him. Basing a thesis on something from mathematics. It's like promoting String theory, mathematics. He was great for science in my opinion for all sorts of reasons, a great scientist, not so sure.

@TheGodlessGuitarist

3 жыл бұрын

@@PanglossDr Brian Greene?

... and you don’t get interrupted by advertisements of sponsor messages 😂😂

I did not know the man, just his public persona and his brief works and I liked him.

I love Steven as much as the next person...That being said, his "bet" some years ago told me much about his own fallacies. Losing this bet told me "others" are just as brilliant within Hawking's domain...

Hawking was an amazing human being, not only very smart but with a wonderful imagination... Penrose aswell.

@reinaldofavoreto7160

2 жыл бұрын

the person who thinks he is not very smart is really not very smart

He was and will always be my favorite modern day Scientist. An inspiration that still keeps me excited for physics.

Hello Sabin. Is the spin of a particle related to dimension? Spin 0 = dimension zero ? Thank you

@clmasse

3 жыл бұрын

No, spin is a reflection of dimensions, that is, how a state transform under a rotation.

Sabine, you have a nice voice. Please restrain from using red alerts.

Chien-Shiung Wu, is one of those people who has certainly been "cheated" out of a Nobel Prize. It is very sad that they do not give a Nobel Prize to people who died, because she really deserves one.

@johnstonewall917

3 жыл бұрын

Forget not Rosalind Franklin!

@mugin11223344

3 жыл бұрын

@@johnstonewall917 Yes, she is also a really good example. I hope the Nobel Committee one day realizes, that the way things are done now is wrong.

@GuruPrasad-qu4vg

3 жыл бұрын

Or Lise Meitner

@johnstonewall917

3 жыл бұрын

@@GuruPrasad-qu4vg Indeed!

@notlessgrossman163

3 жыл бұрын

Rosalind Franklin yes, Waston's account of her in his book showed her frustration. She is inextricably linked to the discovery of DNA structure and deserves the Nobel maybe more than Watson.

The career in particle physics. If if if, maybe maybe maybe, (insert more grant money here) if if if, maybe maybe maybe, perhaps could be, possibility, speculation, (insert more grant money here) we've got to keep our jobs, must publish something, Really don't have any idea, (insert more grant money here).

5:45 Oh! When I saw the title of this video I thought I really had to suggest Sabine to make a video on the articles about the experiments on the "phononic model of the event horizon"... turns out I was wrong in a satisfying way! PS: I have to find those articles, I'm very interested in seeing what translates between the fully relativistic situation and the pseudo-relativistic one of the phonons.

I keep muting the video to check if the crunching sound is here or in the video.

That was so poignant. Thank you for the tenderness with which you described Stephen Hawking and his achievements.

Who has ever heard of an arrogant scientist? Impossible!

*Just with Sabine's video can I get so many Eureka moments Lol. I just figured entirely on my own why large Blacks holes are so cold. The reason is cause in a Black hole molecules are kept from bouncing of each other and therefore exist in a very almost static state. The less agitated the particles of a solid, the colder it is. Also because of the uncertainty principle, motion of the particles can't be zero, so it has to have some thermal energy*

If the Hossen particle is found in the LHC the next nobel prize is due. The field calculcations for the Hossenfeld should start right now, because this field will explain everthing.

Love the Brain Greene meme. Love your dry humor. Love that you make videos.

@maxwellsequation4887

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for spoiling it...

@sylvainbougie7269

3 жыл бұрын

@@maxwellsequation4887 So nice that you give your attention to my post before Sandra's video. I appreciate it.

Hawking is the rol e model for guts to never give up

I have a question about black holes: as I understand it, from our perspective as external observers time slows down near the event horizon of black holes and even comes to a complete stop at the horizon from our point of view. How can a black hole (again from our perspective at least) ever actually feed on matter and get bigger?

Got my free trial. Thank You!

Such a big fan of yours Sabine. Please keep producing these videos. Btw, you're saved as a playlist name called 'Sabine doesn't give AF' :)

Brian Green: Blah, blah, blah...Extra dimensions Blah Blah Blah I really like your humor!

What about the idea of just condensing "energy"? I understood even with (enough) light at the same space a black hole would be created. How far is the idea to create one with photons or electrons or what ever we can produce or smash into eachother? I mean are we at least close?

Thank you for explaining not only black hole non-production but also superfluid simulations of black holes. Unlike some doomsayers I never worried our world will be swallowed up by an LHC black hole as it'd be too short-lived to do any damage, yet in the back of my mind I feel uneasy about the possibility of strange matter forming, its contagion converting surrounding matter causing the whole Earth to become a strangelet. It doesn't keep me up at night but there's still a part of me that worries. Any thoughts on that?

The fact that "Hawking Radiation" is named after Stephen Hawking is a MUCH bigger honor than receiving a Nobel Prize. He was an amazing honorable person for numerous reasons and he will never be forgotten.

He should've been awarded it posthumously. His mind/theories changed physics. I know everyone will remember him, but I think science's greatest honor should acknowledge this for the sake of history.

The theories that need extra dimensions are based on the concept time is a fundamental constant. Calculating relativaties based on that when at the same time understanding relativity is a thing creates obvious dichotomy. If one takes Van Flandern's speed of gravity as a possible upper speed limit for the universe ( because of transrelatavistic ( faster than light ) energy levels ) and investigate that when calculating the internal geometry of blackhole structures one might come to the conclusion that time is a dimension; the first dimension that delineates space time as we know it as opposed to space time inside a blackhole ( where conceivably, the different limits of times effect on space would merge so that 'extra' dimensions are not geometry based but time phased based and the black holes mass would act as a synchronizing point for all time streams. Meaning that even micro black holes might not decay they may just transfer energy into other time streams resonance ( with other time streams ( meaning; time allowing energy to flow at different speeds/energy levels ) effectively being other dimensions ) ) . What in the end did Hawking actually add to our collective knowledge, did he calculate time dilation into his black hole internal geometry theories? Did he actually explain the mathematical nature of what time is in his book ( a brief history of time ( which one could argue is an attempt to mathematically prove the existence of God ) ) ? Even though the nobel prize is a thin soup of what it once was, giving theoretical astrophysicists a Nobel should require more than Hawking left us with ( Frankly Thomas VanFlandern should get one postumously for his theories as his book "Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets: Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated" continues to be proven correct as more and more data comes in )

Hmmm. One might get the impression that Sabine is not a fan of Brian Greene’s work.

Lol she is salty about Greene 😂 love it

@FaxanaduJohn

3 жыл бұрын

Fucking LOL