Print 36 comment(s) - last by RoberTx.. on Dec 5 at 2:12 AM

Hawking will join the facility next year

Physicist Stephen Hawking is set to become the first distinguished research chair at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, a top Canadian scientific trust looking to expand its roster of brilliant scientists.

Hawking will go there to work and conduct research, but will also likely give at least one public lecture and one technical lecture each time he stays in Ontario.

The Waterloo, Ontario-based institute focuses on quantum theory and gravity, and received donations from Research in Motion co-founder Mike Lazaridis and others.  Theoretical physics will remain a top priority of the Perimeter Institute, which was created in 2000.

Other areas of research include cosmology, particle physics, quantum gravity, quantum information, and superstring theory.

Hawking will conduct his first stay as PI at the facility sometime in the summer of 2009, officials said.  The research facility will look for as many as 40 international scientists over the next five to 10 years willing to accept visiting chair positions.

Hawking is best known for his theories on black holes and time, and has published two books:  "A Brief History of Time" and "A Briefer History of Time."

"I am honored to accept the first Distinguished Research Chair at the Perimeter Institute," Hawkins said in a statement.  "The Institute's twin focus, on quantum theory and gravity, is very close to my heart and central to explaining the origin of the Universe. I look forward to building a growing partnership between PI and our Centre for Theoretical Cosmology, at Cambridge. Our research endeavor is global, and by combining forces I believe we will reap rich rewards."

Hawking will be able to remain the head of the Cambridge Center for Theoretical Cosmology, although Hawking may retire from the center sometime in 2009.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Baby steps...
By VaultDweller on 12/1/2008 7:55:11 AM , Rating: 1
OK, so we're now taking away England's top scientists. This brings us one step closer to wearing the pants in this relationship. Maybe soon we'll get the Queen's face off our goddamned money? Oh, I can dream.

RE: Baby steps...
By omnicronx on 12/1/2008 9:05:58 AM , Rating: 2
Move to the U.S then, we won't miss you..

RE: Baby steps...
By VaultDweller on 12/1/2008 10:16:50 AM , Rating: 2
Or you could move to England. We won't miss you.

Thinking that monarchies are useless anachronisms that should have been abolished with the rise of modern democracy does not automatically mean I would be happier in the US. Thinking that Canadian bank notes should have Canadian faces on them does not mean I would be happier in the US. Pretty flat worldview you've got there if you think otherwise.

I'm not leaving my country and abandoning all the ideals that distinguish it from our neighbours to the south over an irrelevant old woman who has nothing to do with us other than a few rare, expensive visits to the country... and a face on my twenties.

RE: Baby steps...
By Tsuwamono on 12/1/08, Rating: 0
RE: Baby steps...
By omnicronx on 12/1/2008 12:05:14 PM , Rating: 2
Take a history lesson:
Queen Elizabeth II gave royal assent to the Canada Act on March 29, 115 years to the day after Queen Victoria, her great-great-grandmother, had approved the federation act of 1867. Thus the last legal tie with Great Britain was severed, and Canada became a fully sovereign state.

Canada is not part of the British Empire, having the queen on our currency is symbolic and is a symbol of what our country was build upon.
irrelevant old woman who has nothing to do with us
You are right, other than her being on our bills, she no longer has anything to do with us other than being a symbolic figure. As such, why do you care?

You are pretty much making up a baseless claim that Canada is still under the influence of the British empire , when this is obviously not the case. What makes matters worse, is that Britain is no longer a real monarchy, the Queen has little to no impact on day to day decisions being made in England.

Once again, if you don't like our history, then move, most Canadians value all the aspects upon which their country was created.

RE: Baby steps...
By foolsgambit11 on 12/1/2008 8:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
But doesn't the Queen still have an official representative in Canada? The Governor General, Mme. Jean.

I think what you're confusing is Canadian sovereignty and independence from Great Britain with a lack of monarchy. Queen Elizabeth II is the Queen of Canada. To quote the Wikipedia article you cited,
The Constitution Act 1982 was signed into law by Elizabeth II as Queen of Canada on a rainy April 17, 1982 on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. Queen Elizabeth remains Queen and Head of State of Canada to this day. Her constitutional powers over Canada were not affected by the Act. Canada has full sovereignty over its realm and the Queen's role is separate from her role as the British monarch.

Queen Elizabeth II is both the British monarch and the Canadian monarch. So while Canada has no dependencies on the United Kingdom after the Canada Act, it is still a Commonwealth country under the jurisdiction of the Queen.

Just like the Queen does almost nothing in Britain, she does almost nothing in Canada. But they are both her dominions.

It's not just history - it's present. But don't worry, Wikipedia also says that only 5% of Canadians know that Elizabeth is their Queen. So you're not alone.

RE: Baby steps...
By Janooo on 12/1/2008 9:42:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the Queen costs Canada somewhere between $40M-$50M a year. There is no free lunch :-)

RE: Baby steps...
By matt0401 on 12/2/2008 11:38:35 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you! I hope some moderator gives you 5 stars, because you said what needed to be said! I don't consider Queen Elizabeth to be my queen but that doesn't make me any less of a Canadian than the other guy who does. Monarchy is an illogical system of government. One needs only look at your average family to realize that being born into the same family doesn't mean one person is just as intelligent or qualified to govern a country as the other. I can't wait until Canada finally completely abolishes its role in the Commonwealth.

It only took the US a few years. Why is our independence still a work in progress?

RE: Baby steps...
By matt0401 on 12/2/2008 11:39:48 PM , Rating: 2
Woops. I was actually replying to Yawgm0th below me re: patriotism.

RE: Baby steps...
By Yawgm0th on 12/2/2008 12:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
Take a civics lesson: Queen Elizabeth II is the de jure and de facto Canadian chief of state. She has no more executive power in the U.K. than in Canada, but she has the same legal role. How can you attempt to downplay her role as the representative of your country and your people?

Any form of monarchy is inherently flawed on moral basis as well as a practical one. Your countryman is right to criticize Canada for being tied to the British monarchy.

Once again, if you don't like our history, then move, most Canadians value all the aspects upon which their country was created.
That's blind nationalism. As an American, I could support slavery using your logic. There are lots of things about my country historically and currently that I don't value. It doesn't mean I'm not a patriot, or that I would be happier elsewhere.

To quote your American counterparts, "If you don't love America, then you just git out!"

Furthermore, failing to realize or admit that there are negative aspects to the history and current state of one's country is not a good sign. It's okay to criticize your country. It's your duty as a citizen of a country with a representative government. You can feel some shame that your country remains to this day, a constitutional monarchy. That doesn't make you anti-Canadian.

RE: Baby steps...
By phxfreddy on 12/2/2008 2:05:00 PM , Rating: 2
Geessus I think it is legitimate to want to have the Queens face off of the money. It is Canada after all. Would be nice to have your own national symbols huh? Like some French Canadian hockey player with his front teeth bashed out!

RE: Baby steps...
By Yawgm0th on 12/4/2008 1:03:15 PM , Rating: 2

So much for having nothing to do with you other than being symbolic. A figurehead selected by your monarch just made a major decision that completely circumvented the electorate.

RE: Baby steps...
By RoberTx on 12/5/2008 1:58:29 AM , Rating: 2
Didn't the Canadian Prime Minister have to ask the Queen for permission to dissolve the parliament, like today?

RE: Baby steps...
By RoberTx on 12/5/2008 2:12:18 AM , Rating: 2
...Governor General Michaelle Jean -- the representative of Queen Elizabeth, Canada's head of state -- agreed to Harper's request to shut down Parliament until Jan 26. Parliament was reconvened just weeks ago after the October 14 election.

It's a Reuters article so it may be a lie.

RE: Baby steps...
By phxfreddy on 12/2/2008 2:02:53 PM , Rating: 2
Is that the Queens face? Or Prince Charles in drag? ....

I have never seen the Queen and Prince Charles in the same place at the same time.

Just a coincidence? You be the judge.

Just Something to Ponder On...
By Chipper Smoltz DT on 12/1/2008 7:51:16 AM , Rating: 2
Isn't there infinite smallness as well in infinite largeness?

With the advent of nano-technology, will there come a time wherein something man-made could be made that is so small similar to the size of a photon which could travel at the speed of light then hopefully there will be a way to enlarge this thing or as they assemble "en masse" form part of some bigger thing, such would be beneficial so that at least this "particle" could travel at the speed of light as well using beamed light or RF waves as sort of a carrier for it to travel?

Sorry for these crazy ideas.

RE: Just Something to Ponder On...
By JS on 12/1/2008 9:23:53 PM , Rating: 2
That sure is one hard-to-penetrate sentence you've got there, Chipper.

RE: Just Something to Ponder On...
By Chipper Smoltz DT on 12/1/2008 10:02:21 PM , Rating: 2
Which sentence? Is it the "infinite smallness in infinite hugeness" thing? I believe I got that one from an old movie a long time ago - I don't know if you are old enough to remember it - "Revenge of the Nerds". Hehehe.

Here's something more - what if the quanta that we are trying to break-up using our particle accelerators are very small universes themselves ...???

I know that this seems like some crappy idea... but i dunno... I support quantum physics research though. Although if this is the case then maybe this universe is also just one quantum out there that has yet been untouched or unexperimented on. Hahaha.

Sorry for the crazy ideas again.

RE: Just Something to Ponder On...
By JS on 12/2/2008 6:36:41 AM , Rating: 2
Oh, I remember the film. I was thinking about sentence number two in your original post. It desperately needs punctuation and structure, if you want people to actually try to understand it.

By Chipper Smoltz DT on 12/2/2008 6:48:40 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, so you remember the film hahaha. Anyway, it's just a funny movie and there's no point in anything like revenge or vengeance in any form or means. It's just not right.

The second sentence is not well structured? I'm sorry but when I'm excited I just miss out on the punctuation, grammar and other stuff. But those are just my crazy ideas anyway. hahaha. Do you think it's possible? Or are they just really some crazy useless ideas?

RE: Just Something to Ponder On...
By RoberTx on 12/5/2008 2:08:28 AM , Rating: 2
There are an infinite number of points between 1 and 2. There are an infinite number of points between 1 and 3. Which set is larger? Reason would say that the set between 1 and 3 is twice as large as the set between 1 and 2. Don't go off on me, I'm simply typing what the blonde says to type (spell check is on for your safety and convenience).

As I was reading this...robot voice
By justinburton on 12/1/2008 3:22:21 AM , Rating: 2
Steven saying "I am honored to accept the first Distinguished Research Chair at the Perimeter Institute,"

...Was I the only one that was hearing his robot voice in my head while I read it?

RE: As I was reading this...robot voice
By PAPutzback on 12/1/2008 9:26:07 AM , Rating: 2
I also heard the voice.

By nstott on 12/1/2008 11:06:58 PM , Rating: 2
I did too, and then it told me to kill everybody. Damn voices in my head...

By Dreifort on 12/1/2008 10:07:12 AM , Rating: 3
unless you fell asleep last night with the TV on Univision.

then it was a hispanic robotic voice:

"Me siento honrada de aceptar la primera Cátedra de Investigación Distinguido en el Perimeter Institute"

damn you Univision!

By RoberTx on 12/5/2008 2:00:54 AM , Rating: 2
Yes I heard it too, but I was seeing him on the Simpsons.

So - are there ..
By Clauzii on 12/1/2008 12:35:35 AM , Rating: 5
.. any strings attached?

RE: So - are there ..
By Whedonic on 12/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: So - are there ..
By Samus on 12/1/2008 6:14:41 AM , Rating: 4
he just likes those mouthy canadian broads....

Does anybody know...
By BoogeyTent on 12/1/2008 10:49:11 AM , Rating: 2
why is he so ugly?

RE: Does anybody know...
By Dreifort on 12/1/2008 1:36:55 PM , Rating: 2
because he's your mom!

ohhhh snap!

sorry had to make a rediculious statement in reply to a rediculious statement.

RE: Does anybody know...
By JS on 12/1/2008 9:19:18 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry but I just had to make a ridiculous correction to your ridiculous spelling.

as PI?
By Lifted on 12/1/2008 6:52:52 AM , Rating: 2
Hawking will conduct his first stay as PI at the facility

As in Magnum PI?

RE: as PI?
By Rugar on 12/1/2008 11:11:39 AM , Rating: 2
As in Principal Investigator. It's a fairly common academic term.

By FPP on 12/3/2008 6:29:20 PM , Rating: 2
You gotta hand it to the guy: He's the energizer bunny! I saw him when he came to my town to lecture. This girl yelled out "I love you Steven!". There was a long pause and then, in that machine voice he said ..............."thank you!" He got an ovation.

By RoberTx on 12/5/2008 1:55:03 AM , Rating: 2
Years ago Hawking made the statement to a reporter that the immutable laws of physics left no room for God. The awestruck reporter never asked him how he new that. A few years later I heard Hawking say, " the wonders in God's universe." No place for God but it is God's universe? Rather confusing.

I seriously doubt if Hawking will spend any real time in Canada. He will probably drop in for an award or adulation or two then head back to Jolly Old you know where.

"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
Latest Headlines

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki