Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Nobel Prize winners are not immune to crank thinking, usually outside of their area of speciality. There is Linus Pauling and vitamin C, and Penrose also writing about consciousness having quantum mechanisms.


It’s a little unclear why his theory about the universe being reborn can’t be a possibility.

It all just started 13.5 billion years ago?

We simply don’t know.


> It’s a little unclear why his theory about the universe being reborn can’t be a possibility.

Occam's Razor: what problem with simpler theories does this "possibility" solve?


It satisfies our believe there is nothing else but this universe, but if you think there is more than just our own universe, our universe could have been triggered by something else. It could wobble like that none the less because gravity eventually wins and everything pulls back to the center


> It satisfies our belief

What do you mean "our belief" ? Yours maybe, but it doesn't satisfy my belief, my belief is different. Or maybe, a whimsical "belief" is not enough, in itself, for theories to aspire to meet. Feelings aren't facts about the nature of the universe.


> It satisfies our believe there is nothing else but this universe

Belief? Isn't the universe everything, by definition?


No issue with considering this possibility, but unless it becomes clear that we can possibly squeeze some truth out of it on a human timescale, not really physics.


if it's actually "reborn", we can't know, so the question is invalid.

Penrose seems to be claiming that there is falsifiable evidence that this "incarnation" is not the only one. that's totally fringe (speculative).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: