I was shocked when I heard about this last night when playing magic the gathering with a few friends at the local game store. R.I.P

Just read the news; may he rest in peace, his contribution to science was a significant one.

The radiation that escapes a black hole isn't actually from inside the black hole but it is believed to happen just before the event horizon, but it is yet to be actually observed and verified by scientists. No need to explain the proposed mechanism here, but if you're interested in the subject you may want to search for "Hawking radiation". Also, this topic is explained in Hawking's excellent book "A brief history of time" if you prefer this way of learning.

He died on Pi Day .

It is always sad when someone dies without achieving their goals. Professor Hawking had a very ambitious goal that few could aspire to reach.
His departure leaves us poorer, but his mere passage gave us so much. Hawking was an inspiration to so many people.

Well, those Artificial Intelligence comments were a bit odd, but I suppose you may not be talking about them. Just remember that even the most intelligent people do and say dumb stuff. It is human nature.

Always loved this one:

https://www.theonion.com/stephen-hawking-builds-robotic-exoskeleton-1819564353

And now for something completely different - Stephen Hawking's cover of the Galaxy Song

Except it's not us, it's you who dismisses scientific explainations as "BS to you mind".

And for the record. You can think of any "alternative theory" you want, but it was Hawking's theories that were confirmed by astrophysics observations. Most galaxies (including our Milky Way) have Supermassive black holes in their center and their properties and behaviour are the same as Hawking (and other scientists) predicted.

When you say "most galaxies"... well, what do the other galaxies have in their center? And what exactly was the behaviour and properties that Hawking predicted? :)

Are you two seriously going to have a fight about this in here? :P

Not only that, also his contributions to bring something entirely abstract like theoretical physics to "normal" people can't be underestimated.

His books like "A Short History of Time" and "The Universe in a Nutshell" - while certainly disproven (that's progress folks!) or speculating in some parts, nevertheless achieved to make the topics accessible to anyone above squirrel-level intellect.

I can say that after reading Hawking, I had a new understanding of both Einstein and Heisenberg, something clicked... And I think that's a thing. Maybe his thoughts will help to bring along the "great unified theory" some day.

Warp Drive... we're coming...

That's actually something I've been trying to look up recently - to what extent are those books outdated? Like I said, I intend to re-read Short History, because I'm trying to improve my rather pathetic grasp on science. I've already read Astrophysics for People in a Hurry and Flatterland.

Marvellous. :D


Dunno about these two books you mention, but you may want to take a look at Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe. It's mainly about string and superstring theory, but the first introductory chapters deal with relativity (both special and general) as well as quantum physics in a very approachable way.

Probably to the same extent that Carl Sagan's Cosmos is. It's not so much outdated as much as it has been extended and further researched. A laid foundation isn't ripped apart unless it is critically flawed, after all.

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the Science Room!

RIP