Stephen Hawkins.........

[full back]

Doesnt look good

Scientist Professor Stephen Hawking is "very ill" in hospital, Cambridge University has said.

A spokesman said Prof Hawking was undergoing tests at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge.

The 67-year-old, who has motor neurone disease and is wheelchair bound, speaks with the help of a voice synthesiser.

He has worked at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University for more than 30 years.

[EC Unique]

Scientist Hawking ill in hospital 
 
Leading scientist Stephen Hawking is "very ill" in hospital, his employer Cambridge University has said.

A spokesman said Professor Hawking was undergoing tests at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge.

The spokesman said the 67-year-old, who has motor neurone disease, had "been unwell for a couple of weeks".

Prof Hawking has worked at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University for more than 30 years.

Prof Hawking, who speaks with the aid of a voice synthesiser, has three children and one grandchild.

He became a CBE in 1982 and a Companion of Honour in 1989.

Prof Peter Haynes, head of the University's Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, said: "Professor Hawking is a remarkable colleague.

"We all hope he will be amongst us again soon."

BBC.

[stew]

What this man has accomplished during his lifetime is amazing and I am sorry to see that he seems to be on the way out. He has given outstanding service to the scientific community with his contributions on black holes and the theory on the singularity.

He has been wrong about as much as he has been right which is rare in his field as a failure or two tends to ruin a career in his field, and what makes him all the more remarkable is that he hardly ever looked through a telescope in his career.

I love astronomy and have watched his career with interest. He is and always was an interesting man who had a great sense of humour, I hope he recovers.

[thejuice]

Yeah, I've read some of his books and researched his theories but I can barely get my head around it. I love science and theories of the workings of the universe and there just arent enough great minds like Stephen Hawkins around. Hope he recovers,

[Minder]

Is he ill or is he just recharging his batteries?

[nifan]

He has been wrong about as much as he has been right which is rare in his field as a failure or two tends to ruin a career in his field, and what makes him all the more remarkable is that he hardly ever looked through a telescope in his career.

Most of them have been wrong about plenty, such in the progressive nature of science.
Einstein had plenty that proved to be wrong - his views on quantam mechanics etc.
The thing about hawking is that he has barely even begun to be proved right - he works in a very theoretical area - hence he hasnt a nobel prize despite being the most famous, and one of the most respected scientist of his generation.

[J70]

Nothing bad about being wrong in science - it progresses by a process of elimination and ruling out hypotheses. The important thing is to come with intelligent questions to look at.

There is a programme on him which airs occasionally on either Discovery or National Geographic and after watching it you have to say the people around him must have the patience of Job! I know that it would be a massive boost to one's career prospects to do your doctorate under him, but the grad student they showed literally spent hours interpreting his eye movements to get one letter at a time as they tried to write a paper. In the same documentary, they featured the talk he gave at that conference in Dublin a few years back where he repudiated his theories of 30 years on information in black holes - various colleagues they interviewed for reactions were decidedly not too impressed with what he had to say. Made me wonder a bit how highly rated he is within his field. I mean, he must be damn good if he ascended to the position in Cambridge that he holds, but at the same time, he is perceived by the lay community to be the most preeminent physicist out there. Maybe a bit like Stephen Jay Gould was a huge media and popular science star in the states, but was decidedly less influential within the profession of evolutionary biologists.

[stew]

He has been wrong about as much as he has been right which is rare in his field as a failure or two tends to ruin a career in his field, and what makes him all the more remarkable is that he hardly ever looked through a telescope in his career.

Most of them have been wrong about plenty, such in the progressive nature of science.
Einstein had plenty that proved to be wrong - his views on quantam mechanics etc.
The thing about hawking is that he has barely even begun to be proved right - he works in a very theoretical area - hence he hasnt a nobel prize despite being the most famous, and one of the most respected scientist of his generation.

Famous certainly, respected? in some circles in his field, not in others, he tends to polarize opinion and there are people that are flat out jealous of his celebrity. Hawking was all over the theory of a singularity being at the bottom of black holes yet his theories can never be proven based on the fact no one will ever get to see the inside of a black hole based on the incredible gravitational forces at play.

[offtheground]

I reckon this guy has been dead for years and is now actually just a puppet remotely controlled by a team of scientists.... 

[thirteen03]

I never understood how he became so well known as there are people who have published as much and more as him who aren't known to the general public at all. I think people are intrigued by black holes and what we can't disprove might happen when you travel towards one. I'm a bit biased against him cause in a brief history of time he compares himself directly to Einstein, which there's no call for. Hope he gets better tho.

[the scenic route]

feck the science part surely his biggest achievment was making it into the simpsons.

[nifan]

I never understood how he became so well known as there are people who have published as much and more as him who aren't known to the general public at all.

2 things make him well known compared to many other top level physicists.
His condition has made him almost an iconic figure. A young scientist, told at 21 hed last 2 maybe 3 years to live and then going on to do what he has is one.
Also he has reached out to the popular science market in a way few others at that level do. Brief history of time etc are books available to anyone with a bit of an interest in science, rather than going into journals, conference etc where his output is dwarfed by the likes of ed witten.

[The Claw]

Can anyone give us a quick run through of what his theories are in layman's terms?