Stephen Hawking at 70: still the brightest star in the scientific universe

As the author of A Brief History of Time approaches 70, eminent former students celebrate an awe-inspiring intellect still pushing at the frontiers of physics

Stephen Hawking portrait in wheelchair
'Scientific superstar' Stephen Hawking turns 70 on 8 January 2012. Photograph: Murdo Macleod

BERNARD CARR

Professor of mathematics and astronomy, Queen Mary, University of London. Stephen Hawking's PhD student 1972-75

Stephen's discovery in 1974 that black holes emit thermal radiation due to quantum effects was one of the most important results in 20th-century physics. This is because it unified three previously disparate areas of physics – quantum theory, general relativity and thermodynamics. Like all such unifying ideas, it is so beautiful that it almost has to be true, even though it has still not been experimentally confirmed. The renowned physicist John Wheeler once told me that just talking about it was like "rolling candy on the tongue".

At the time of the discovery, I was working with him as a PhD student in Cambridge and I count myself as very fortunate to have had a ringside seat during these developments. It also enabled me to be one of the first people to study the cosmological consequences of the effect and thereby make my own small contribution to the subject.

I was one of Stephen's first PhD students and people often ask me what it was like having him as a supervisor. He was not so famous in those days but his brilliance was already clear to his peers and I found it rather daunting when, on becoming his research student, I was informed by one of my tutors that he was the brightest person in the department. Students are probably always in awe of their supervisors but with Stephen the awe was even greater. Indeed, on matters of physics, I always regarded him as an oracle, just a few words from him yielding insights that would have taken weeks to work out on my own.

However, Stephen is only human and not all encounters led to illumination. Once, while sharing an office with him at Caltech [California Institute of Technology], I asked a question about something that was puzzling me. He thought about it silently for several minutes and I was quite impressed with myself for asking something that Stephen couldn't answer immediately. His eyes then closed and I was even more impressed with myself because he was clearly having to think about it very deeply. Only after some time did it become clear that he had fallen asleep! Nowadays I also sometimes fall asleep while talking to students, so I recall this incident with amusement.

The other human side of Stephen is that he does occasionally get annoyed. One of the myths put around is that he sometimes vents his frustration by running over the toes of students. This never happened to me – he didn't have a motorised wheelchair in those days – but I well recall one occasion when I made a remark in the maths common room at tea-time that showed that I had misunderstood what he'd been saying. Stephen screamed "No" so loudly that his wheelchair shot back halfway across the room under the recoil. I was most impressed that a single word from him could have such dramatic consequences.

My relationship with Stephen was not the usual type of supervisor-student relationship. In those days, before he had his entourage of nurses and assistants, students would necessarily have to help him in various ways on account of his disability. This was not an arduous task but it did mean that one's relationship with him became quite intimate. I shared an office with him, lived with his family for a year in California, and accompanied him as he travelled around the world, giving talks and collecting medals.

As an impressionable young student, it was a tremendous thrill to meet so many celebrities and renowned physicists. One of the great excitements of visiting Caltech, where Stephen was a Fairchild scholar in 1975, was meeting the brilliant physicist Richard Feynman, who was regarded almost like a god there. He used to visit our office quite often and, since Stephen's voice was already quite weak, I would act as interpreter.

I also travelled around China with him in 1985. During a long train journey, I recall reading the first draft of a popular book he was writing at the time. My initial impression that it would never sell proved inaccurate since it eventually turned into A Brief History of Time!

Shortly after his return from China he fell seriously ill with pneumonia and lost his voice. Ever since, he has had to communicate through his computer, which is painfully slow, so it's ironic that he has still managed to become one of the great science popularisers of our age. He has even written books for children with his daughter, Lucy, and it is sobering to reflect that a contribution I wrote for their most recent one has probably been read by more people than any of my scientific articles. His inspiration of public interest in some of the deepest questions of physics is certainly one reason why he has become such an iconic figure.

MARTIN REES

Astronomer royal and master of Trinity College, Cambridge. Like Hawking, he studied under Dennis Sciama in the 1960s

I first met Stephen in 1964. I was in my first week as a Cambridge graduate student. He was two years ahead of me in his studies – but already unsteady on his feet and speaking with difficulty. I learned that he might not live long enough even to finish his PhD.

Astronomers are used to large numbers. But few could be as huge as the odds I'd have given, back then, against him reaching his 70th birthday – after astonishing achievements that have made him the most famous living scientist.

In his first few years of research, he came up with a succession of insights into the nature of black holes (then a very new idea) and how our universe began. These earned him election to the Royal Society at the exceptionally early age of 32.

He was by then so frail that we guessed he could scale no further heights. But this was still just the beginning. He then worked, as I did, at the Institute of Astronomy in Cambridge. I would often push his wheelchair into his office. He would sit motionless for hours reading a book on quantum field theory – not a subject that he had hitherto engaged with. He couldn't even turn the pages without help. I wondered what was going through his mind, and if his powers were failing. But within a year he had his greatest "eureka moment" – encapsulated in an equation that he wants on his gravestone. He discovered a profound and unexpected link between gravity and quantum theory that has helped set the agenda for fundamental physics ever since.

He has probably done as much as anyone else since Einstein to extend our grasp of gravity, space and time. And he continues to write technical papers and attend premier conferences – doubly remarkable in a subject where few healthy researchers stay so long at the frontiers.

But the second half of Stephen's life has been a crescendo of fame and celebrity. When A Brief History of Time appeared, the printers made some errors (a picture was upside down), and the publishers tried to recall the stock. To their amazement, all copies had already been sold. This was the first inkling that the book was destined for runaway success. The concept of an imprisoned mind roaming the cosmos grabbed people's imagination. Had he achieved equal distinction in, say, genetics rather than cosmology, his triumph of intellect against adversity probably wouldn't have achieved such worldwide acclaim.

After his disease was diagnosed [amyotrophic lateral sclerosis] Stephen's expectations dropped to zero. He says that everything that happened since then was a bonus.

And what a triumph his life has been. His name will live in the annals of science; millions around the world have had their cosmic horizons widened by his books and TV appearances; and even more have been inspired by a unique human achievement against all the odds.

RAYMOND LAFLAMME

Executive director, Institute for Quantum Computing, University of Waterloo, Canada. In 1988 he earned his PhD at Cambridge under the direction of Hawking

I recently gave Stephen a boomerang. That might seem like a peculiar gift to give the world's most famous scientist but Stephen instantly understood its significance. He grinned when he saw it, as I hoped he would. He grinned the same wise, slightly mischievous grin that I frequently sought – and was occasionally rewarded with – when I was a nervous young doctoral student under his supervision at Cambridge 27 years earlier.

It was during that doctoral year that Stephen suggested I tackle an idea inspired by his "no-boundary proposal" about the origins of the universe. Specifically, he assigned me to mathematically confirm his theory that time would reverse in a contracting universe. I was 24 and ready for a challenge, so I got to work. But there was a problem: try as I might, I couldn't prove Stephen's theory. In fact, I could only prove it wrong.

My maths seemed airtight, but Stephen needed convincing. Many afternoons were spent with me at a blackboard, nervously writing out my equations for Stephen, who insisted I had oversimplified this or failed to consider that. Finally, after countless blackboard sessions, and with the help of postdoctoral fellow Don Page, I convinced Stephen that time indeed marches eternally forward, even when the universe itself does an about-face.

Little did I know this cosmological titbit would find its way into a book that would eventually sell 10m copies and make Stephen a scientific superstar, A Brief History of Time. Stephen personalised my copy of the book with a printed note (he was unable to write longhand by then) inside the front cover. It reads: "To Raymond, who showed me that the arrow of time is not a boomerang. Thank you for all your help. Stephen." I love that little dedication. It so nicely conveys the wit and warmth Stephen always exudes.

In 2010, Stephen spent a summer in Waterloo, Canada. I invited him to drop by the institute for a look around, and he happily obliged. He spent the day visiting labs, meeting researchers and, I think, learning some new things about quantum information science. That's when I gave him the boomerang.

It was an inside joke, but it was also something more. It was a way of saying that, although time is indeed an arrow, it does have a way of bringing our lives – and the people most important to us – full circle.

GEORGE ELLIS

Emeritus professor in the department of mathematics and applied mathematics at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. He co-authored The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time (1973) with Hawking

Stephen's life has been one of extraordinary achievement. His success has been because of the combination of huge technical ability and imagination, an inquiring mind always searching for answers to important issues, and extraordinary determination and focus.

I was one of his first collaborators, working with him on the issue of whether there had been a start to the universe or not. After some initial work we did together on special universe models, Stephen adapted the highly innovative work of Roger Penrose to prove a theorem able to show the universe did indeed have a start. We then jointly showed the conditions of this theorem are supported by astronomical observations: according to Einstein's theory of gravitation, there was a beginning to existence.

This technical tour de force was followed by his unique work showing black holes give off Hawking radiation. This result, based in a combination of quantum theory, gravity and thermodynamics, has been hugely influential, particularly because it was unexpected. This will always stand as a major achievement, uniquely his own.

He has made many other contributions to cosmology in his own inimitable style; like many others, I learned much from his penetrating method of analysis. And of course his scientific success has been achieved in the face of a hugely debilitating physical handicap, which would have destroyed the will of lesser people. I was able to help him with the issues of daily life at the early stages of this disease, pushing his wheelchair from the applied mathematics department to his home in Little St Mary's Lane and to the university centre for lunch. His broad grin and impish sense of humour were always present on these occasions. What a privilege it is to have been part of this epoch in his life.

THOMAS HERTOG

Professor of theoretical physics at the KU Leuven, Belgium. Co-authored a paper on "top down cosmology" while working with Hawking at Cern in 2006

Stephen was my mentor back in the 90s. I had come to Cambridge from Belgium to study theoretical cosmology, and I was delighted he took me on as his PhD student.

Cosmology is one of Stephen's favourite subjects. His goal, as he likes to put it, is to understand "why the universe is the way it is". At the deepest level this requires an understanding of the physical conditions at the time of the big bang.

To make progress on this Stephen, with his students and co-workers in the 80s, developed the subject of quantum cosmology. Roughly speaking, this involves Feynman's "multiple histories" formulation of quantum mechanics applied to the entire universe. In quantum cosmology the big bang is described in terms of a quantum mechanical state. During my years in Cambridge, Stephen introduced me to his programme and we worked together to make more explicit its predictions for the nature of the early universe.

Many years later, when I returned back to Europe after several postdoc years in the US, Stephen and I were drawn together again. We had both been thinking about the role of the observer – us – in quantum cosmology. Together with James Hartle we set out to study the implications of our existence for the predictions of quantum cosmology. This has led to a close collaboration which continues today.

It has been very exciting to work with Stephen. I have often felt that in the intense interaction of our collaboration, especially when different pieces of a puzzle fit together in a consistent picture, the chair and the difficulties with communication recede into insignificance.

I believe Stephen's genius lies in the clarity of his scientific vision. Guided by sharp intuition and insight, together with a consistent focus on the core problems and a certain boldness to discard old ideas he regards as an obstacle to progress, Stephen has produced ideas that have had a profound impact on theoretical cosmology. His quantum cosmology has brought the study of the universe's origin within the realm of the physical sciences, and with this the profound questions its study raises. Even at 70 he remains one of the world's foremost experts in this domain.

FAY DOWKER

Theoretical physicist at Imperial College London. She completed her PhD under Stephen Hawking in 1990

The epic breadth of Stephen's research makes it challenging to summarise. One concept, however, binds his entire oeuvre together: spacetime. Since the work of Einstein, we know that the stage on which the universe acts out its drama is not three-dimensional space but four-dimensional spacetime, and moreover that stage, spacetime itself, is dynamic and plays its own part in the evolving action. Stephen's achievements are such that the very form of our scientific questions about spacetime today has been framed by his discoveries. Stephen's work with Roger Penrose on the singularity theorems proves that general relativity, our current best theory of gravity and spacetime, must break down inside black holes and at the big bang, making it essential to look for a more unified theory of quantum gravity. Stephen's discovery that black holes are hot and emit thermal "Hawking radiation" unifies quantum matter and gravitational black-hole physics with thermodynamics, the science of heat. Since thermal systems are understood in terms of their microscopic constituents, Stephen's discovery immediately raised the question, "What is the microstructure of a black hole, and of spacetime itself?" We have, as yet, not agreed upon an answer, but there is a consensus that no understanding of quantum gravity will be complete without it.

The high regard in which Stephen is held globally and the widely felt appreciation of his contributions to science and society are demonstrated wherever in the world he gives a public lecture: the auditorium is always packed, the atmosphere electric and the applause thunderous. Stephen inspires people with the excitement and importance of pure scientific inquiry, and celebrating his 70th birthday with him gives us a chance to say how much we honour him for it. Happy birthday, Stephen!


Your IP address will be logged

Comments

91 comments, displaying oldest first

or to join the conversation

  • This symbol indicates that that person is The Guardian's staffStaff
  • This symbol indicates that that person is a contributorContributor
  • heyya99

    1 January 2012 12:30AM

    Imagine having a mind so astute that physically disability doesn't matter a jot. Inspiring. Wish I had of realised how cool physics was when I was young.

  • IGiveUp

    1 January 2012 1:52AM

    Sorry to rain on your parade, but he won't get knighted because he's not a jump on any bandwagon celebrity. He does stuff that matters that next to no-one understands and I'm afraid that just doesn't cut it anymore.

    Now, if he were to under perform on organising say, a worldwide sporting event on his doorstep, he'd be in.

  • Godzilloid

    1 January 2012 2:35AM

    Steve won't get a gong because he only studies the universe - not the 'big society' which is far more wide reaching and has more black holes. (If he wants one he'd better contribute funds to a political party.)

  • NigelRG

    1 January 2012 6:59AM

    Hawking collaborates with others for his major works, which is quite common pratcice. However, he seems to regard himself as the leader of any team, if it produces good results. His original ideas are few, which is probably why he hasn't got a Nobel yet,

  • Bobthedriver

    1 January 2012 7:29AM

    I wish him well and trust that he will continue to work with others to challenge and forward our understanding of the universe.

  • robi

    1 January 2012 7:36AM

    Although I don;t have anything against the man and enjoyed a Brief History of time none of these people are really going to slag him off are they? They're not going to say 'well I know he's disabled, but he's a bit of an arsehole really'... not that I am saying he is one, I don't know him, but you get my point.

  • Contributor
    gpwayne

    1 January 2012 7:40AM

    stonecoldandmad

    where is his knighthood. if anyone deserves one its him.

    Well said. Surely his bravery, commitment and achievements made despite his illness have set an example of enough merit to earn him the respect of the nation? Considering some of the dross and 'celebrity' types who the Queen honours, Hawking's exclusion is both mysterious and inappropriate.

    Let's hope the state doesn't wait until the bloke is dead before they wake up to how worthy a candidate he is.

  • Valten78

    1 January 2012 9:40AM

    The phrase 'national treasure' is overused. But if anyone qualifies as one, it's professor Hawkins.

  • GrahamRounce

    1 January 2012 10:11AM

    still the brightest star....

    That's the narrative the papers insist on, for some reason, like always accompanying a mention of Einstein with a picture of him at about 70, even though he did his great work in his twenties and early thirties. It's one of the many myths (scientists are all old with wild hair) the media lazily propagate, building up to the point of depicting virtually an alternative universe.

  • GrahamRounce

    1 January 2012 10:15AM

    (Hawking is terrifically impressive, but nobody at 70 is the "brightest star in the scientific universe".)

  • MrsTinkerbell

    1 January 2012 10:27AM

    Nobel prizes are given to researchers whose work has practical significance, and as Prof Hawking is purely a theoretical physicist, he will never get a Nobel prize. It's also quite possible that he has refused a knighthood, it's not the sort of thing people advertise much.

  • Halo572

    1 January 2012 10:28AM

    Maybe if he portrayed a member of the Royal family in what I understand is a successful recent British film he would be in with a chance of at least a CBE.

    And can't you get better if you pony up some funds for the Party coffers?

    If Stevie isn't going to play ball and get on Facebook or Linkedin then he isn't going to get very far.

    It is all very well unlocking the secrets of the Universe, when was the last time he bought dinner for an influential member of the Government?

    I understand you can get your tax bill waived if you buy the right person a Big Mac. Not really my way, but even I am tempted to try.

  • starwalker

    1 January 2012 11:15AM

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.

  • YourGeneticDestiny

    1 January 2012 12:13PM

    Sorry to rain on your parade, but he won't get knighted because he's not a jump on any bandwagon celebrity.

    Are you talking the piss? He's the very definition of a celebrity academic. He's been on everything from Star Trek to Pink Floyd albums to The Simpsons.

  • monders

    1 January 2012 12:26PM

    All the best, you fucking splendid bastard. Not many folk get to do The Simpsons twice.

  • everchanging

    1 January 2012 12:52PM

    There's an interesting volume here Universe or Multiverse? Editor, Bernard Carr, one of the above contributors.
    But also Stephen Hawking, George Ellis and Martin Rees (all above) contribute to this. The topic is the tension that exists in physics with the multiverse idea, currently thought to be "the only game in town". All authors come from a variety of religious/God belief backgrounds apart the usual stellar academic level.
    Clearly questions of meaning and meaning related to intelligent life in the cosmos are still up for grabs. Recommended reading.

  • OrigamiPenguin

    1 January 2012 1:07PM

    My copy of "A Brief History Of Time" has been sitting on the shelf for years and has never been touched. First New Year's resolution: read the damn thing. I feel it's the least I can do to honour this great man.

  • horemheb

    1 January 2012 1:36PM

    Hawking to me is a bit limited in his thinking. An example of this is his refusal to accept the principle of time travel citing his evidence that tourists from the future are not visiting us. However this could easily be explained by paradox. Also his thoughts on the multiverse.

  • wightpaint

    1 January 2012 2:04PM

    Thank you so much for that ('Hawking to me is a bit limited in his thinking.') I was quite depressed on this first day of the new year, and really needed the belly-laugh it gave me - you've cheered me up no end; you and the bloke above who 'went off' Hawking because of his views on aliens .... You've both - totally unintentionally, but never mind - brought a beam of sunshine into an old man's life on a wet, foggy afternoon.

    You'll alert us when your book or academic paper is coming out, won't you? (I know this is over-egging the sarcasm, but something tells me I probably needed to.)

  • thea1mighty

    1 January 2012 2:13PM

    At the heart of a singularity, you will find Stephen Hawking's brain, a huge, ever growing, pulsating brain, that rules from the centre of the ultraworld.

  • PlanetSheen

    1 January 2012 2:23PM

    I wish him well, but his ground breaking work with Penrose is long behind him, his recent popular science collaborations are best described as misguided and slightly bonkers, and Thoms Hertog description of "quantum cosmology" fits the same categories.

  • exraf64

    1 January 2012 2:49PM

    Absolutely right. To get a knighthood you need to start early and bang on about it year after year after year, not shouting from the rooftops, but just wearing away the objectors, quietly influencing those with the power. We can think of a knighthood recently awarded which has been said to have been gained that way, can we not? Or, alternatively, there is the direct route, with cash payments to the party in power. Do them a favour and they will do you a favour. Pure merit, such as shown by this great man, unfortuately does not always reap it's just reward, more is the pity.

  • bailliegillies

    1 January 2012 2:54PM

    Why put him in the same category as the likes for Sir Fred the Shred and other criminals of the City. He's unique and doesn't need some silly knighthood or title that can be brought for a few pounds (or dollars). Fred the Shred and others of that ilk will soon be forgotten but Stephen Hawking will long be remembered, referred too and written about.

  • exraf64

    1 January 2012 2:59PM

    And let's not forget the great man's appearances in Family Guy. I particularly like the wheelchair sex!

  • cactiform

    1 January 2012 3:12PM

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.

  • DuckDestructor

    1 January 2012 3:37PM

    After his bogus declaration on the end of philosophy the man has destroyed his legacy and history will forget him.

  • zerospam

    1 January 2012 5:29PM

    Unfortunatly the Queen holds the title 'Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England'.

    For this reason, it will be very controversial for her to award a knighthood to someone who has all but destroyed the theory of creationism.

  • DuckDestructor

    1 January 2012 6:12PM

    zerospam:"For this reason, it will be very controversial for her to award a knighthood to someone who has all but destroyed the theory of creationism."

    Except that he hasn't. His theory doesn't explain why any thing exists at all, including physical laws. Why isn't there absolute nothingness? It was ludicrous when he came out with his claim. It even had Guardian lefties scratching their heads with "er, hang on, but...."

  • insignificant50

    1 January 2012 6:21PM

    I thank him for demonstrating God to the world in that last tv program.

    He set out to demonstrate the difference between positive and negative energies by having a guy with a shovel digging a hole .
    The mound of earth represented positive energy and the hole that occurred the negative energy.
    OBVIOUSLY there is no way that can have happened by blind chance and so Mr Hawking had God (represented by man with shovel) doing the difficult bit!!

    Simples!

    He shoots, He scores. Own goal.

  • Gelion

    1 January 2012 6:31PM

    @gpwayne

    "1 January 2012 07:40AM
    stonecoldandmad

    where is his knighthood. if anyone deserves one its him.

    Well said. Surely his bravery, commitment and achievements made despite his illness have set an example of enough merit to earn him the respect of the nation? Considering some of the dross and 'celebrity' types who the Queen honours, Hawking's exclusion is both mysterious and inappropriate."

    Amen.

    "Considering some of the dross ... who the Queen honours". Amen again.

    Hawking is a great scientist in any one's terms and the fact he is so whilst living with his illness is really inspiring.

  • delphinia

    1 January 2012 7:39PM

    Yes. When you look at some of those who have been "honoured", who would want to join them?

    Happy birthday Stephen!

or to join the conversation

Guardian Bookshop

This week's bestsellers

  1. 1.  Quantum Universe

    £20.00

  2. 2.  Why Does E=mc2?

    by Brian Cox £8.99

  3. 3.  God Delusion

    by Richard Dawkins £8.99

  4. 4.  Short History of Nearly Everything

    by Bill Bryson £9.99

  5. 5.  Grand Design

    by Stephen Hawking £8.99

Bestsellers from the Guardian shop