korrents

korrents · piece

Gödel and the End of Physics (lecture)

Stephen Hawking · c. 2002

The piece opens with

People seek a complete theory of the universe to understand it and not feel victims of dark and mysterious forces.

Their wordsThe real reason we are seeking a complete theory, is that we want to understand the universe and feel we are not just the victims of dark and mysterious forces.

Read the piece on hawking.org.uk ↗

4 korrents from this piece ↓

Stephen Hawking did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

  1. Our reading

    People seek a complete theory of the universe to understand it and not feel victims of dark and mysterious forces.

    Their wordsThe real reason we are seeking a complete theory, is that we want to understand the universe and feel we are not just the victims of dark and mysterious forces.

  2. Our reading

    The standard model of particle physics is unsatisfactory, being ugly and ad hoc.

    Their wordsThe standard model is clearly unsatisfactory in this respect. First of all, it is ugly and ad hoc.

  3. Our reading

    A fully consistent quantum theory of gravity is essential to understanding the universe.

    Their wordsIt is therefore essential to have a fully consistent quantum theory of gravity, if we are to understand the universe.

  4. Our reading

    It is good that the search for understanding will never end, since there will always be new discovery; without it we would stagnate.

    Their wordsI'm now glad that our search for understanding will never come to an end, and that we will always have the challenge of new discovery. Without it, we would stagnate.

Keep reading

The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.