What do you think?
Rate this book
Stephen Hawking On Trial: Confronting the Big Bang
The wee Doctor behind the electronic voice on trial? Stephen Hawking's influence was significant. Nonetheless, renowned cosmologists have detected serious errors in his Grand Design theory of the universe. Stephen Hawking On Trial documents the flaws in the final theory of an elder physicist. Inconsistencies in Hawking’s • Hypotheses vital to his theory lack supportive data • Three major questions he glossed over deserve real answers • What we factually know, but more importantly, what Hawking's theory fails to explain Critical roadblocks in today's cosmology 1. "Theoretical physics is at a crossroads right now…In a sense we’ve entered a very deep crisis.” Neil Turok PhD – Director of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics 2. Cosmology doesn’t thrive on uncertainty. Hawking's Grand Design thesis increased the uncertainty factor. That's why independent investigators legitimately “Can we have a look at your data?” Verifying theories is the basis of the scientific method. No human is perfect, hence all theories and research must face exacting scrutiny. Evidence must be beyond reasonable doubt - the rationale jurors, scientists, and logical people use to settle an issue. 3. the Most Common Force in Nature. Stephen Hawking On Trial analyzes how Dr. Hawking misapplied gravity and utilized unproven hypotheses to support his Grand Design theory. It was scientifically unjustifiable because hypotheses are simply ideas, hopes, and aspirations. 4. Dark matter and dark energy are two unknown forces that govern 96% of the universe. Thus, every physicist concedes that science understands only 4% of the cosmos. Most physicists agree that our knowledge of the laws of physics are far from settled. Despite the evidence, Professor Hawking declared on a national TV “The scientific account is complete." Can a 4% understanding represent a complete account of the universe? "I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned." Richard Feynman PhD – eminent physicist acclaimed for his work in quantum electrodynamics and particle physics 5. Although Prof. Hawking portrayed his Grand Design theory as scientific (i.e. supported by data) most of his "evidence" turned out to be clouds of caveats and probabilities. Few of his ideas were supported by genuine data. “As a scientist and as an educator, I like the idea that we believe things because there’s evidence.” Richard Dawkins PhD – Oxford University Professor & Bestselling Author "Stephen Hawking On Trial is compelling reading for anyone with an interest in physics and cosmology. It may challenge your beliefs, or maybe not, but it's a fascinating read in either case." J. Chambers – Amazon Top 10 Reviewer Unfortunately, some Hawking followers are rudely attacking the author of this book. Of course, ad hominem defamation only reveals an inability to address logical arguments.
- GenresScience
146 pages, Kindle Edition
Published December 13, 2015
52 people are currently reading
66 people want to read
About the author
Pierre St. Clair
4 books4 followersBestselling author Pierre St. Clair focuses on anomalies between theory and practice.
He won the prestigious Sir J. C. Bose Award 2015 for Investigative Journalism in the field of Science and Technology for his book Cosmology on Trial.
Although born in London, at five years of age his family emigrated to Canada.
His mother was a cultured lady who sent him for violin and music theory lessons when he was only six.
As a teenager his interest in classical violin dwindled. He bought his first guitar, taught himself how to play, formed a band, and began performing locally. Within a few short years he was touring throughout Canada and the US.
Music was always his first love, and remains so.
His journalism career began as a result of a college girlfriend's mother predicting his success as a writer. The daughter of a missionary in Shanghai, she had grown up in China and pursued an interest in the occult sciences, including palmistry.
One Saturday afternoon she asked to see his hand.
After a few minutes study she predicted, "One day you'll become an accomplished writer."
QUOTES FROM THE AUTHOR
"I love digging behind the scenes to find out what is really happening beneath the headlines. That's why I became an investigative journalist."
"Current theories about the origin of the universe lack verifiable data. In spite of this, many ideas masquerade as relevant theories and compete for greater elegance just like beauty pageant contestants."
"COSMOLOGY ON TRIAL"
The book is an all-inclusive overview of cosmology that introduces the reader to unexplained and unsolved mysteries of the universe which are rarely discussed in Academia.
The author reveals that Newtonian physics, General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and String Theory have still not proven whether Gravity is a wave, a graviton particle, or even a fabric of spacetime.
Gravity, the most common force in nature, is not even included in the Standard Model of Physics.
NASA physicists admit that 96% of the matter and energy in the universe is a mystery.
Can today's cosmology be complete if science only understands 4% of the universe?
REVIEWS
"Scientific progress and complacency go ill together, and St Clair has done a superb job in actually advancing the cause of real science." M. Lyons - USA
"This book simply makes the very strong point that our cosmology of yesteryear was not based on solid evidence, and our cosmology of today isn't either." V. DiCara - Japan
He won the prestigious Sir J. C. Bose Award 2015 for Investigative Journalism in the field of Science and Technology for his book Cosmology on Trial.
Although born in London, at five years of age his family emigrated to Canada.
His mother was a cultured lady who sent him for violin and music theory lessons when he was only six.
As a teenager his interest in classical violin dwindled. He bought his first guitar, taught himself how to play, formed a band, and began performing locally. Within a few short years he was touring throughout Canada and the US.
Music was always his first love, and remains so.
His journalism career began as a result of a college girlfriend's mother predicting his success as a writer. The daughter of a missionary in Shanghai, she had grown up in China and pursued an interest in the occult sciences, including palmistry.
One Saturday afternoon she asked to see his hand.
After a few minutes study she predicted, "One day you'll become an accomplished writer."
QUOTES FROM THE AUTHOR
"I love digging behind the scenes to find out what is really happening beneath the headlines. That's why I became an investigative journalist."
"Current theories about the origin of the universe lack verifiable data. In spite of this, many ideas masquerade as relevant theories and compete for greater elegance just like beauty pageant contestants."
"COSMOLOGY ON TRIAL"
The book is an all-inclusive overview of cosmology that introduces the reader to unexplained and unsolved mysteries of the universe which are rarely discussed in Academia.
The author reveals that Newtonian physics, General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and String Theory have still not proven whether Gravity is a wave, a graviton particle, or even a fabric of spacetime.
Gravity, the most common force in nature, is not even included in the Standard Model of Physics.
NASA physicists admit that 96% of the matter and energy in the universe is a mystery.
Can today's cosmology be complete if science only understands 4% of the universe?
REVIEWS
"Scientific progress and complacency go ill together, and St Clair has done a superb job in actually advancing the cause of real science." M. Lyons - USA
"This book simply makes the very strong point that our cosmology of yesteryear was not based on solid evidence, and our cosmology of today isn't either." V. DiCara - Japan
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
January 17, 2016
A well thought out argument against the dangers of arrogant science. Mr. St. Clair takes one of the biggest names in modern science to task and puts the inconsistencies on trial. This book is an interesting read and reminds the reader that science should never be thought of as "settled."
St. Clair also illustrates how the big bang theory does more to prove the existence of God than disprove, and how yet some in the science community mock the idea of a grand design. It's a great reminder that, whenever you think you know it all, life is always full of surprises.
I recommend this book for readers who like deep, intellectual arguments. Also a bit of a courtroom flair to it which makes it more fun. Great job!
St. Clair also illustrates how the big bang theory does more to prove the existence of God than disprove, and how yet some in the science community mock the idea of a grand design. It's a great reminder that, whenever you think you know it all, life is always full of surprises.
I recommend this book for readers who like deep, intellectual arguments. Also a bit of a courtroom flair to it which makes it more fun. Great job!
January 18, 2016
If you're happy being lied to, this book is not for you. We have all been subjected to a masterful slight of hand, and Pierre St. Clair sets out to expose it. In just a few decades, one of the shakiest and least supportable scientific theories in history has quietly infiltrated academia, where it is offered as scientific fact. The Big Bang, as it has come to be called, is the snake oil of our generation, and the lies behind it are devious and shocking.
St. Clair makes his case through a courtroom setting, where prosecutor and defense attorney battle to make their case for and against a fictitious Hawking. The prosecutor begins his direct examination by questioning Hawking on M Theory, the theory on which Hawking built the Big Bang stronghold. As the argument proceeds, St. Clair laces the dialogue with references to scientific studies and major scientific works, and it is very quickly apparent that M Theory is scarcely considered credible outside of Hawking's Big Bang. What's more, Hawking has to virtually reverse the theory to come up with his Big Bang. Unfortunately, to the unknowing majority, we get lost in Hawking's shell game, where "science" and "law" and "fact" are used irresponsibly and even deceptively. It is very quickly apparent that there is no science behind Hawking's science.
Stephen Hawking on Trial goes on to expose Hawking's ideas, which are directly inspired and influenced by Zen Buddhism, yoga, and over time, even the movie The Matrix. ...and often by Hawking's own admission. (While yoga and The Matrix enjoy a degree of popularity, one can hardly proffer them as science!) St. Clair goes on to expose Hawking's many abuses, to include that of quantum mechanics to support a theory that cannot otherwise stand up to quantum physics.
Throughout this book, St. Clair shows makes a compelling case that Stephen Hawking has no respect for the layman, and this is made evident by demonstrating Hawking's willingness to deceive us through unsound mathematics and science. In simple terms, Hawking's theory is not supported by science, so Hawking makes his own.
There are a few points where the courtroom setting is lost in long explanations, but there is probably little alternative. The author is extraordinarily thorough, not content to leave unanswered questions or holes in the case against Hawking. As a result, the attorneys in this work are given quite a bit of leeway and flexibility that they would not likely have in the courtroom. Again though, there is not much alternative, given the detail and attention devoted to the cases made.
All-in-all, I am very happy to have read this book. If you have never questioned the conventional narrative of creation, you need to, and I highly recommend this book as a starting point.
St. Clair makes his case through a courtroom setting, where prosecutor and defense attorney battle to make their case for and against a fictitious Hawking. The prosecutor begins his direct examination by questioning Hawking on M Theory, the theory on which Hawking built the Big Bang stronghold. As the argument proceeds, St. Clair laces the dialogue with references to scientific studies and major scientific works, and it is very quickly apparent that M Theory is scarcely considered credible outside of Hawking's Big Bang. What's more, Hawking has to virtually reverse the theory to come up with his Big Bang. Unfortunately, to the unknowing majority, we get lost in Hawking's shell game, where "science" and "law" and "fact" are used irresponsibly and even deceptively. It is very quickly apparent that there is no science behind Hawking's science.
Stephen Hawking on Trial goes on to expose Hawking's ideas, which are directly inspired and influenced by Zen Buddhism, yoga, and over time, even the movie The Matrix. ...and often by Hawking's own admission. (While yoga and The Matrix enjoy a degree of popularity, one can hardly proffer them as science!) St. Clair goes on to expose Hawking's many abuses, to include that of quantum mechanics to support a theory that cannot otherwise stand up to quantum physics.
Throughout this book, St. Clair shows makes a compelling case that Stephen Hawking has no respect for the layman, and this is made evident by demonstrating Hawking's willingness to deceive us through unsound mathematics and science. In simple terms, Hawking's theory is not supported by science, so Hawking makes his own.
There are a few points where the courtroom setting is lost in long explanations, but there is probably little alternative. The author is extraordinarily thorough, not content to leave unanswered questions or holes in the case against Hawking. As a result, the attorneys in this work are given quite a bit of leeway and flexibility that they would not likely have in the courtroom. Again though, there is not much alternative, given the detail and attention devoted to the cases made.
All-in-all, I am very happy to have read this book. If you have never questioned the conventional narrative of creation, you need to, and I highly recommend this book as a starting point.
December 22, 2015
I stayed up reading the book until I started falling asleep in my chair. St. Clair did a great job of making his points impartial. I enjoyed it immensely because it was well-written and informative. The links to the experiments were delightful, fun, informative little detours). "Dr Quantum: Wave particle duality and the observer!" really got my curiosity stirred up. I have heard of many of the theories in this book but have never taken the time to study them, so the simple, short descriptions are very helpful.
St. Clair clearly appreciates true science and the scientific method. I, personally, have come to the belief that Hawking's book is more hypothesis than theory.
Stephen Hawking On Trial: Confronting The Big Bang seems well-suited to the interested layman.
St. Clair clearly appreciates true science and the scientific method. I, personally, have come to the belief that Hawking's book is more hypothesis than theory.
Stephen Hawking On Trial: Confronting The Big Bang seems well-suited to the interested layman.
January 12, 2018
This book is a critique of Stephen Hawking’s book The Grand Design and is written by an investigative journalist who was inspired to do some research on cosmology after reading Paul Davies’ book The Goldilocks Enigma (I am actively reading Davies’ book as I write this review.). Like a good investigative journalist, he spotted anomalies. This book and his other book, Cosmology on Trial, which I haven’t yet read but plan to, document these anomalies.
For the record, I am a creationist who has been reading books on cosmology to better understand and critique the claims and counter-claims of the controversy between creationists and what I will call the orthodox scientific community. I am choosing not to critique Mr. St. Clair’s scientific arguments; rather, I think it appropriate to deal with the big picture of his critique. A few months ago, I read The Grand Design and later read John Lennox’s book God and Stephen Hawking. In that book John Lennox, a math professor at Oxford, also critiqued The Grand Design. Compared to Dr. Lennox’s gentlemanly roughing up of Dr. Hawking, I found Mr. St. Clair’s critique more analogous to a street fighter in action. If anything, I detected not a little righteous indignation. Mr. St. Clair appears to be an atheist or agnostic and does not appear to be sympathetic to creationists such as myself. Based on some of his wording, he seems to consider any religion-based creation account to be mythological and unscientific due to lack of testability, etc. Why wouldn’t he? That is what the scientific community has been arguing for decades. However, as he has dug further and further into cosmology, inflation theory and multiverse theory, he has learned that much of what is passed off as scientific is no more testable than the religious creation accounts. As a result, he feels that he has fallen victim to a bait and switch scam, having accepted delivery of a modern creation myth after being promised something scientific.
I, too, have been experiencing similar feelings. My entire life, I have been hearing the message that my beliefs in special creation are unscientific because special creation by God cannot be reproduced in a lab. But, when I read Brian Greene’s book The Hidden Reality, which is very well written, by the way, I saw arguments in support of lowering the bar on testability. For a variety of technical reasons, string theory and its close cousin multiverse theory, cannot be verified experimentally or observationally. While Dr. Greene offered up some potential ways to get experimental observation, he also tried to justify not needing such validation. Not surprisingly, this didn’t sit well with me. Why should a cosmological theory of origins get a pass on testability while a religious theory of origins is denounced because it is not testable?! For the record, in my reading, I have also come across creationists making testability a criterion for their versions of cosmology.
While I would prefer to see a critique of cosmology from someone with inside knowledge of the field’s closet of skeletons, I am not troubled by the fact that an investigative journalist chose to turn his attention to such an arcane field. I am an engineer and am accustomed to being held accountable by people with less background than I do in my areas of expertise. It is a part of life. Specialists in highly technical fields are no less susceptible to biases, etc. than is the average joe. And if they fall into a pattern of group-think, they are not going to see that blind spot. It is up to non-experts to see such problems and call them on it. Non-experts must have the courage to speak up, and the experts must have the humility to listen. Mr. St. Clair has that courage but is a bit rough around the edges.
For the record, I am a creationist who has been reading books on cosmology to better understand and critique the claims and counter-claims of the controversy between creationists and what I will call the orthodox scientific community. I am choosing not to critique Mr. St. Clair’s scientific arguments; rather, I think it appropriate to deal with the big picture of his critique. A few months ago, I read The Grand Design and later read John Lennox’s book God and Stephen Hawking. In that book John Lennox, a math professor at Oxford, also critiqued The Grand Design. Compared to Dr. Lennox’s gentlemanly roughing up of Dr. Hawking, I found Mr. St. Clair’s critique more analogous to a street fighter in action. If anything, I detected not a little righteous indignation. Mr. St. Clair appears to be an atheist or agnostic and does not appear to be sympathetic to creationists such as myself. Based on some of his wording, he seems to consider any religion-based creation account to be mythological and unscientific due to lack of testability, etc. Why wouldn’t he? That is what the scientific community has been arguing for decades. However, as he has dug further and further into cosmology, inflation theory and multiverse theory, he has learned that much of what is passed off as scientific is no more testable than the religious creation accounts. As a result, he feels that he has fallen victim to a bait and switch scam, having accepted delivery of a modern creation myth after being promised something scientific.
I, too, have been experiencing similar feelings. My entire life, I have been hearing the message that my beliefs in special creation are unscientific because special creation by God cannot be reproduced in a lab. But, when I read Brian Greene’s book The Hidden Reality, which is very well written, by the way, I saw arguments in support of lowering the bar on testability. For a variety of technical reasons, string theory and its close cousin multiverse theory, cannot be verified experimentally or observationally. While Dr. Greene offered up some potential ways to get experimental observation, he also tried to justify not needing such validation. Not surprisingly, this didn’t sit well with me. Why should a cosmological theory of origins get a pass on testability while a religious theory of origins is denounced because it is not testable?! For the record, in my reading, I have also come across creationists making testability a criterion for their versions of cosmology.
While I would prefer to see a critique of cosmology from someone with inside knowledge of the field’s closet of skeletons, I am not troubled by the fact that an investigative journalist chose to turn his attention to such an arcane field. I am an engineer and am accustomed to being held accountable by people with less background than I do in my areas of expertise. It is a part of life. Specialists in highly technical fields are no less susceptible to biases, etc. than is the average joe. And if they fall into a pattern of group-think, they are not going to see that blind spot. It is up to non-experts to see such problems and call them on it. Non-experts must have the courage to speak up, and the experts must have the humility to listen. Mr. St. Clair has that courage but is a bit rough around the edges.
December 19, 2015
The book is a riveting courtroom drama based on factual events and speculative theories about the origin of the universe.
Stephen Hawking On Trial unleashes a critical expose of today’s crisis in astrophysics
• What we factually know and do not know about the cosmos
• The question that is never asked but must be answered
• The five biggest myths unsupported by observation or data
• The essential initiative in cosmology that is being neglected
• Hypotheses lacking data are presented as relevant theories
Considering the facts, an unbiased investigator may reasonably say: “Let’s have a look at the evidence.”
Author St Clair, an investigative journalist whose job is to inform the public, reveals what’s really happening behind the headlines.
His work provides an in-depth analysis of Stephen Hawking’s Grand Design Theory which concedes that the Big Bang model of the universe is dead.
Stephen Hawking On Trial unleashes a critical expose of today’s crisis in astrophysics
• What we factually know and do not know about the cosmos
• The question that is never asked but must be answered
• The five biggest myths unsupported by observation or data
• The essential initiative in cosmology that is being neglected
• Hypotheses lacking data are presented as relevant theories
Considering the facts, an unbiased investigator may reasonably say: “Let’s have a look at the evidence.”
Author St Clair, an investigative journalist whose job is to inform the public, reveals what’s really happening behind the headlines.
His work provides an in-depth analysis of Stephen Hawking’s Grand Design Theory which concedes that the Big Bang model of the universe is dead.
December 6, 2020
The book and the message it conveys is good, I personally got lost in the fashion in which it was written is why I gave only three stars.
January 15, 2016
It's important to read things you don't agree with.
There is an important conversation under here, but it is badly presented in the midst of numerous personal attacks, for example with frequent words like 'incoherent'.
This reminds me somewhat of Carl Sagan's confrontation of Velikovsky, as described in James P. Hogan's _Kicking the Sacred Cow_, which I recommend.
I'm glad I read this, but I wish it had been put together better.
There is an important conversation under here, but it is badly presented in the midst of numerous personal attacks, for example with frequent words like 'incoherent'.
This reminds me somewhat of Carl Sagan's confrontation of Velikovsky, as described in James P. Hogan's _Kicking the Sacred Cow_, which I recommend.
I'm glad I read this, but I wish it had been put together better.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews