بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

نظریه ی داروین از این نظر که خلقت انسان و بلکه تمام موجودات را ناشی از پدیده ی تکامل می داند یک جورایی می خواهد خلقت انسان را تصادفی و حداکثر ناشی از پیروزی گونه ی توانگر و هوشمندتر بداند و پای خالق را وسط نکشد منظور من از اینکه می خواهند نظریه ی داروین را به کیهان شناسی بسط دهند این بود. اینجا نیز با مطرح کردن جهان های موازی هاوکینگ قصد دارد بگوید که جهان ها (و نه يك جهان) ي زيادي از افت و خيزهاي كوانتومي بوجود آمده اند كه در يكي از انها اتفاقا شرايط طوري پيش رفته كه زمينه براي پيدايش موجودي چون انسان فراهم بشود. و بنابراين هاوكينگ مي گويد اگر ديدگاهي ديني داشته باشيم خدا تاس ريخته است (موجوداتي چون ما بي هدف خلق شده اند) این دیدگاه شبیه به نظر داروین نیست؟ نگفتم داروینی است گفتم مثل داروین می خواهند خدا را به فراموشی بسپارند.
Over the centures many, including Aristotle, believed that the universe must have always existed in order to avoid the issue of how it was set up. Others believed the universe had a beginning, and used it as an argument for the existence of God. The realization that time behaves like space presents a new alternative. It removes the age-old objection to the universe having a beginning, but also means that the beginning of the universe was governed by the laws of science and doesn’t need to be set in motion by some god

If the origin of the universe was a quantum event, it should be accurately described by the Feynman sum over histories.
In this view, the universe appeared spontaneously, starting off in every possible way. Most of these correspond to other universes. While some of those universes are similar to ours, most are very different. They aren’t just different in details, such as whether Elvis really did die young or whether turnips are a dessert food, but rather they differ even in their apparent laws of nature. In fact, many universes exist with many different sets of physical laws. Some people make a great mystery of this idea, sometimes called the multiverse concept, but these are just different expressions of the Feynman sum over histories.
Our picture of the spontaneous quantum creation of the universe is then a bit like the formation of bubbles of steam in boiling water. Many tiny bubbles appear, and then disappear again. These represent mini-universes that expand but collapse again while still of microscopic size. They represent possible alternative universes, but they are not of much interest since they do not last long enough to develop galaxies and stars, let alone intelligent life. A few of the little bubbles, however, will grow large enough so that they will be safe from recollapse. They will continue to expand at an ever-increasing rate and will form the bubbles of steam we are able to see. These correspond to universes that start off expanding at an ever-increasing rate—in other words, universes in a state of inflation.

the expansion caused by inflation would not be completely uniform. In the sum over histories, there is only one completely uniform and regular history, and it will have the greatest probability, but many other histories that are very slightly irregular will have probabilities that are almost as high. That is why inflation predicts that the early universe is likely to be slightly nonuniform, corresponding to the small variations in the temperature that were observed in the CMBR. The irregularities in the early universe are lucky for us. Why? Homogeneity is good if you don’t want cream separating out from your milk, but a uniform universe is a boring universe. The irregularities in the early universe are important because if some regions had a slightly higher density than others, the gravitational attraction of the extra density would slow the expansion of that region compared with its surroundings. As the force of gravity slowly draws matter together, it can eventually cause it to collapse to form galaxies and stars, which can lead to planets and, on at least one occasion, people. So look carefully at the map of the microwave sky. It is the blueprint for all the structure in the universe. We are the product of quantum fluctuations in the very early universe. If one were religious, one could say that God really does play dice
According to quantum physics, no matter how much information we obtain or how powerful our computing abilities, the outcomes of physical processes cannot be predicted with certainty because they are not determined with certainty. Instead, given the initial state of a system, nature determines its future state through a process that is fundamentally uncertain. In other words, nature does not dictate the outcome of any process or experiment, even in the simplest of situations. Rather, it allows a number of different eventualities, each with a certain likelihood of being realized. It is, to paraphrase Einstein, as if God throws the dice before deciding the result of every physical process. That idea bothered Einstein, and so even though he was one of the fathers of quantum physics, he later became critical of it.
Quantum physics might seem to undermine the idea that nature is governed by laws, but that is not the case. Instead it leads us to accept a new form of determinism: Given the state of a system at some time, the laws of nature determine the probabilities of various futures and pasts rather than determining the future and past with certainty. Though that is distasteful to some, scientists must accept theories that agree with experiment, not their own preconceived notions.
What science does demand of a theory is that it be testable. If the probabilistic nature of the predictions of quantum physics meant it was impossible to confirm those predictions, then quantum theories would not qualify as valid theories. But despite the probabilistic nature of their predictions, we can still test quantum theories. For instance, we can repeat an experiment many times and confirm that the frequency of various outcomes conforms to the probabilities predicted.

Probabilities in quantum theories are different. They reflect a fundamental randomness in nature. The quantum model of nature encompasses principles that contradict not only our everyday experience but our intuitive concept of reality. Those who find those principles weird or difficult to believe are in good company, the company of great physicists such as Einstein and even Feynman, whose description of quantum theory we will soon present. In fact, Feynman once wrote, “I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.” But quantum physics agrees with observation. It has never failed a test, and it has been tested more than any other theory in science.
همانطور که می دانید کوانتوم تعابیر متفاوتی دارد اما هاوکینگ قصد دارد مال خودش را به کرسی بنشاند مثلا هایزنبرگ در کتاب جز’ و کل اش می گوید که شاید اون تصادف که در نظریه ی داروین نقش اساسی بازی می کند ریشه در قوانین کوانتوم داشته باشد و هایزنبرگ جایی می گوید در جواب به سوال پائولی که از او پرسید آیا به خدا اعتقاد دارد یا نه می گوید به یک نظم کانونی در طبیعت معتقد است. اما تعبیر هاوکینگ از کوانتوم بر مبنای انتگرال مسیر فاینمن در واقع منکر یک نظم بنیادی است او می گوید جهان راندم بوجود امده است و تصادفی ثابت ها طوری تنظیم شده اند تا موجودی مثل انسان بوجود آمده است و می گوید اگر به خدا معتقدباشید نتیجه این حرفا اینست که خدا تاس ریخته است (کنایه از بی هدفی بود)