Title: The Theory of Everything – The Origin and Fate of the Universe
Author: Stephen Hawking
Publisher: Jaico Publishing House 2007 (First published 1994)
ISBN: 81-7992-591-9
Pages: 124
Hawking is the unquestioned leader in popular science, helped in no small measure by the huge wave of public sympathy over his debilitating disease. If we follow an objective, impartial analysis of his contributions to science, we are still stuck at a few theorems of curious behaviour of blackholes, which themselves have not been established yet, unless through some very indirect methods. He has not won a Nobel (again, yet), particularly owing to the highly speculative, theoretical framework of his research. This book – based on seven lectures delivered by Hawking over the early 1990s – is a compendium of those early work, but not endorsed by the scientist. One feels no wonder for his reticence as the book turns out to be not well tuned to appeal to the tastes of a secular reader. God turns up in too many pages to engage a lay reader who has turned to such a book first of all to get a new perspective about the creation of universe other than presented through religious books. Even though on careful reading it turns out that Hawking does not endorse divine principles, such dillydallying serve to confuse the reader about the scientist’s true intentions.
Hawking delves into the history of the history of the universe as it unfolded from the ancient period to the present one. Theories from the time of Aristotle to Edwin Hubble are listed in the first lecture which provides a good framework of what is to follow. This is succeeded in the second lecture by an exposition on the origin of universe. Even though outlined as expanding in Newton’s theory, not until Edwin Hubble in the 1920s, everyone believed it to be static. Hubble established by careful measurement of redshifts of distant stars and galaxies that they were receding away from us and, as a corollary, the universe was expanding. Interest on the expansion soared after Alexander Friedman’s models predicted various scenarios founded on the General Theory of Relativity. The model was so successful that all further studies were based on some characteristics of the model and speculated on whether it would go on expanding, or reach a somewhat steady state after some time, or would begin contracting when a particular stage is reached. The contribution of the author to the scenario is his proof along with Roger Penrose that Big Bang is plausible if General Relativity is correct.
Blackholes is a favourite topic of Hawking. He seems to preserve the sense of awe and wonder of his student era while describing them. The concept of blackholes was first proposed in 1783 by John Michell in a theoretical perspective. Einstein’s relativity required them to exist. So far, none had been observed directly, but based on gravitational perturbations on nearby bodies, science has reached 95% certainty that they do exist. Discoveries of quasars by Maarten Schmidt in 1963, which suggested gravitational collapse (a mechanism of blackhole formation) and pulsars by Jocelyn Bell in 1967 which are rotating neutron stars (a variation of blackhole formation) helped to shore up the confidence of scientists. Hawking predicted that blackholes should radiate particles and energy as opposed to conventional thinking. The critics later fell in line when the proof was undeniable. As Hawking observes, observation of a blackhole is the only thing that separates him from the Nobel Prize.
Origin and development of universe finds enthusiastic flare in Hawking. There are four fundamental forces in nature – the strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetism and gravity. Efforts have been for unifying all the different forces under an overarching umbrella of a unified theory, which is fondly called Theory of Everything, justifying the title. On a general survey of the state of scientific learning, the author argues that it was possible for a person to grasp all fields of knowledge in Newton’s time, whereas even full-time professional scientists are able to scratch a small area of a wider field of science.
The book is not cohesive and lacking in structure. Factual errors are also present, though mercifully, only in the historical narrative. Hawking claims that Aristotle estimated the circumference of earth as 400,000 stadia length (p.3), though it was done by Eratosthenes. As another example of the author’s unwanted nexus with religion in a science book, he goes apologetic on St. Augustine’s date of creation of the world as 5000 BC, ”is interesting that this is not so far from the end of the last ice age, about 10,000 BC, which is when civilization really began” (p.9). Even if we accept for argument’s sake that Ice Age ended on the date proposed, St. Augustine was still off by a factor of 2, that is 100%. If we accept such arguments as authentic, the claim that water boils at 50 deg C also would have to be admitted. The error in the statement is the same as that of St. Augustine.
The book is compiled before Hawking’s masterpiece Brief History of Time was published and we see a lot of material recycled from the author’s various works. Hawking shocks readers with comments like “The initial state of the universe must have been very carefully chosen indeed if the hot bigbang model was correct right back to the beginning of time. It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us” (p.79-80). Thankfully, the next paragraph states that Alan Guth’s inflationary model obviates the need for a God. Also, in another lecture, it goes “God simply chose that the universe should be in a smooth and ordered state at the beginning of expansion phase” (p.102). Again, examples of such intellectual pauperism is seen at few other places too.
The book is recommended.
No comments:
Post a Comment