Stephen Hawking

by John Gribbin

  This, says the team, means that the present, in effect, specifies the past. The other universes which are allowed by M-theory are no longer seen as being physically real, but are ghosts of universes that might have been, like the ghost of Christmas yet to come in A Christmas Carol, in the same way that other possible trajectories for the ball are ghost trajectories. Only some of the possible cosmological histories have left an imprint on the world in which we are living. The Multiverse began in every possible way, but all but a few possibilities were soon eliminated. The Universe had many beginnings, but has only one ending—one “now.” This is at once the death of the Multiverse, in its usual form, and the triumph of anthropic cosmology, since we can eliminate all histories that do not allow our existence, such as those with four spatial dimensions or a large cosmological constant. And, combined with Hawking’s “no-boundary” condition (Chapter 11), it leads him to assert that there is no God. In The Grand Design, he concludes that “spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.”

  This assertion stirred a controversy which we discuss in the next chapter. But the G word also appeared in the context of another controversial assertion made by Hawking, one where, for once, he was proved wrong. We refer to his thoughts about the Higgs Boson, which to the irritation of most physicists is often referred to in the media as “the God particle.”8

  The best introduction to the Higgs story is in Frank Close’s book The Infinity Puzzle.9 In a nutshell, at the beginning of the twenty-first century what is known as the standard model of particle physics, which describes matter in terms of particles such as electrons and quarks (collectively known as fermions), and interactions between fermions in terms of a different kind of particle, such as photons (collectively known as bosons), had a missing link. One more particle was needed in order to explain how the other particles get mass.

  It works like this. Bosons are associated with fields; the photon, for example, is the particle associated with electromagnetism. When two electrically charged particles interact, they do so by exchanging photons. In the mid-1960s, half a dozen physicists came up with the idea of explaining mass in terms of a field. Peter Higgs was one of them, and partly through a historical accident his name alone got attached to the then-hypothetical field. The idea that he (and others) came up with is that what is now known as the Higgs field fills the Universe, and that particles have to plow through it. Some particles do not interact with the Higgs field and whizz through it unobstructed; these are particles like photons which have zero mass. Other particles find the Higgs field sticky, so that it impedes their progress to a greater or lesser extent; these particles, like electrons, therefore have mass. Like any field, the Higgs field has to have a particle, this one called the Higgs Boson, associated with it, and this is what the Large Hadron Collider at CERN began searching for at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century. The Higgs Boson itself interacts with the Higgs field, so it has mass, and the standard model predicted what sort of mass and other properties it ought to have.

  The search depended on accelerating beams of protons to nearly the speed of light, and then smashing them head-on into one another. The energy released in a few of the collisions would be enough, it was calculated, to make a few Higgs particles, in line with Einstein’s most famous equation, and these would then “decay” into other particles in a distinctive way. The LHC used 120 megawatts of energy while it was running, the same as the rest of the entire Canton of Geneva, which has a population of half a million people. Hundreds of millions of protons (fed into the main ring from smaller machines) circulate around the accelerator in each run of the experiment, but protons are so small that in an entire year of operation this adds up to about a microgram of material, roughly the same as the mass of the ink in the period at the end of this sentence.

  The search for the Higgs Boson was a massive undertaking. But would the effort be in vain? Not everyone was convinced by the idea, and one person who vigorously disagreed was Stephen Hawking. He engaged in what was by academic standards an acrimonious debate with Peter Higgs, arguing emphatically that the Higgs particle would not be found. Higgs, by nature a retiring type who avoids the limelight, was moved to say that Hawking’s “celebrity status gives him instant credibility that others do not have” (even, the implication being, when he is wrong).10 In July 2012, however, the CERN machine discovered the Higgs Boson, with exactly the mass predicted by the standard model, and Hawking had the grace to quickly acknowledge that he was wrong. The following year, Peter Higgs and François Englert shared the Nobel Prize for their contributions to the theory, perhaps a little prematurely since it was only in 2014 that further experiments at CERN confirmed that the particle they had found really was the Higgs, with a mass close to 125 GeV, roughly 125 times the mass of the proton.

  But Hawking has been unable to resist making another dramatic claim, which, inevitably in view of his celebrity status, has made headlines. Having previously insisted that the Higgs would not be found, in September 2014 he said that if physicists continue to experiment with it, doing so might bring about the end of the Universe. He bases his argument on the possibility that the Higgs field, in a variation on the cosmic-landscape idea, may not have rolled all the way down to the bottom of the valley we inhabit during the inflationary era. Instead, it may be stuck on a ledge partway up the side of the valley, in what is known as a “false vacuum” state. This is allowed by the standard model but is by no means certain to be the case. If it is, then tinkering with the Higgs field might dislodge it from this ledge and send it rolling down to the valley floor. If that happened, the Universe would undergo a phase transition, similar to the burst of inflation in which it started, switching into a different state, possibly (probably) with different laws of physics. It would happen so fast that we would never know what hit us.

  Perhaps, though, we should not lose any sleep over this. It could happen spontaneously—in trillions of years from now. Or it could happen “artificially”—if physicists build an accelerator capable of colliding particles with energies of above 100 billion GeV (100,000 TeV), similar to the energies that existed at the time the Higgs field rolled out of inflation. That’s roughly a hundred thousand times more energetic than the collisions that occur in the LHC, and would require an accelerator bigger than the Earth.

  Where next? Hawking turned 73 in January 2015, and it would surely be unrealistic to expect anything new of scientific importance from him now. But then that’s what people thought in 1963, 1992, and 2002. We wouldn’t bet against it.

  20

  THE TOPSY-TURVY

  UNIVERSE OF A

  GLOBAL ICON

  If we have demonstrated only one thing in this book, it is the fact that Stephen Hawking has led no ordinary life. Even by the standards of globally recognized figures such as famous actors or rock stars, he has—in part because of his illness, but also because he courts attention—experienced a roller-coaster ride of a life. And as he moved on to the eighth decade of that existence, the ride seems to have become faster and bumpier. Whether co-hosting with Sir Ian McKellen the introduction to the 2012 Paralympics in London or wowing an audience of thousands with his public science lectures, Hawking has become a figure as well known as the most media-savvy star. But it has not been all glamour and adoring acolytes.

  During 2003, some nasty rumors began to circulate around Cambridge that Hawking was the victim of physical abuse, and several of his nurses claimed that Stephen’s then-wife, Elaine Mason, was behind the ill treatment, neglect, and at times actual physical attacks. One particular nurse, Sue Masey, claimed that Elaine Mason was “a monster” and resigned, claiming she could no longer stand working for the family. “The injuries,” she claimed, “. . . only happened when Elaine and Stephen were left alone. What if I did see physical abuse? Hundreds of people have seen evidence of physical abuse on Stephen Hawking. . . . I have certainly seen umpteen times the results of what h
appened to him.” On one occasion, three slash marks appeared on the side of Hawking’s face. He claimed he had fallen forward in his wheelchair, hitting the attached computer screen. “But,” says Masey, “. . . this was totally impossible since the computer screen was on the opposite side of his wheelchair from his injuries.”1 Another nurse who wished to remain anonymous described how one evening Hawking left her a message on his screen that read I CANNOT BE LEFT ALONE WITH HER. PLEASE DON’T GO. GET SOMEONE TO COVER THE SHIFT .2

  A third nurse spoke to the Daily Mail and stated: “She [Elaine] gets angry and has thrown him on the bed where he kicks his limbs or hurts himself. She allowed him to slip down low in the bath so the water goes in the hole in his throat. She has left him in the garden without his computer mouse so he cannot talk and call for anyone. She gives him lots of verbal abuse and calls him a cripple and an invalid, which depresses him. She would withhold the bottle he used to go to the toilet so he wet himself, which he does not like because he is a very dignified person and a very private person. The verbal abuse is unbelievable. Her mouth is like a sewer.”3

  Some of these reports of domestic abuse actually dated back to the autumn of 1999, when, in mysterious circumstances, Hawking broke his wrist. The following year, a police investigation turned up no evidence to support the claims. Things came to a head in August 2003, when one of Hawking’s nurses phoned his daughter, Lucy, to tell her of a particularly serious incident. Her father had been left stranded in the garden on the hottest day of the year and suffered severe heatstroke and sunburn. Jane Hawking and the couple’s 24-year-old son, Tim, also waded in. Tim Hawking said that he felt certain his stepmother was behind a string of assaults. And described the alleged abuse as “. . . completely despicable and unacceptable. I believe quite strongly that it’s true, based on what I have been privy to in the past. It makes me feel sick, as I’m sure anyone would be in my position. I feel completely helpless. He denies it every time I speak to him and I would hope he would respect me enough to tell me the truth.” Jane Hawking commented: “The situation is far worse than any of us imagined.”4 Lucy has said, “I went to see a lawyer and discussed the matter with him. And as the law stood at the time, my father was the only person who could make a complaint. And he didn’t want to make a complaint. He asked me not to interfere in his relationship with Elaine.”5

  But then, at the insistence of Jane and her children, the Cambridgeshire Police Constabulary opened a second and more thorough investigation. They spoke to staff and students who worked closely with Hawking, including ten nurses, some of whom, like Sue Masey, were no longer in the employ of the family. Both Stephen and Elaine Hawking volunteered to talk to the police and spent several hours with their lawyer going over the claims with the investigating officers. The investigation found no concrete evidence and Stephen Hawking absolutely denied the claims against his wife. “I firmly and wholeheartedly reject the allegations,” he told the press in February 2004 from Addenbrookes Hospital, where he was being treated for pneumonia. “My wife and I love each other very much, and it is only because of her that I am alive today.”6 He told the BBC: “The report in yesterday’s Daily Mirror that I’m being attacked is news to me. I object strongly to my privacy being invaded. There is absolutely no substance to the reports and I would ask the media to dispense with this ‘non’ story.”7

  This terrible episode in Stephen Hawking’s life had far-reaching consequences. By this time, he and Jane spoke only rarely and he was estranged from his children. Many of course have claimed that by marrying Hawking in the first place, Elaine Mason was purely gold-digging and some, who understandably wish to remain anonymous, have even implied that from the first years of the new millennium, some six years into their marriage, Hawking’s second wife was trying to kill him.

  Although these claims have never been substantiated, whether true or false, they caused Hawking considerable distress. We will probably never know the truth about what happened during those few years in the Hawking home, but at the very least the strain and stress surrounding the matter was too much for Stephen and Elaine’s marriage. Soon the couple had separated, and they announced they were divorcing in 2006. Again, Hawking was tight-lipped about events. Asked whether he would be making any statement about his divorce, his secretary, Judith Croasdell, responded on his behalf: “He is far too busy. This is just a distraction, which is really annoying. We don’t have any time for any of this. We have no interest in any of the gossip that is going on.” Pressed for a comment, Tim Hawking said: “It’s not really my business to discuss. I’m not the one getting divorced.”8

  None of these troubles were mentioned in a new TV film about Stephen Hawking that was being filmed in Cambridge at the very time the police were delving into the Hawkings’ marriage. The film was simply called Hawking and starred the completely unknown young actor Benedict Cumberbach, who the critics agreed did a stunning job of portraying the film’s subject through the various stages of his physical degeneration. The producers were also congratulated on the accuracy of the scientific material in the film.

  The success of Hawking probably did little to relieve the emotional strain in Stephen’s life during this time, but at least it was a positive thing for the press to talk about rather than their seemingly limitless thirst for sordid stories documenting a marriage breakup and allegations of abuse. Around the same time, a little more much-needed light relief came when Hawking was voted the second most popular role model for teenage boys (in a poll produced by the magazine Good Housekeeping). He was only beaten by the England rugby captain Jonny Wilkinson and managed to nudge David Beckham into third place. It prompted Hawking to observe: “Over the years I’ve been voted the Second Most Intelligent Person in Britain (First was mathematician Sir Andre John Wiles) and was amused to be listed in the world’s ‘10 Sexiest Men.’ But I’m honored to be an inspiring role model. Thank you.”9

  It was as though Stephen Hawking had passed, through another trial by fire, another terrible trough in his life, and from 2006 one senses that he entered a new stage of personal stability and some light after the intense dark of the first half of the decade. The best example of this is the way in which, freed from an unhappy marriage to Elaine Mason, Stephen was reunited with his family and Jane’s husband of almost a decade, Jonathan Hellyer-Jones. It was the right time to start mending fences. In 2006, Hawking received the Royal Society Copley Medal, the world’s most prestigious mathematics award (and the equivalent to a Nobel Prize). Jane, Lucy, and Tim were there to escort Stephen and to pose for photographers. Happily, the process of reconciliation and renewing of close ties has continued, so that by the time of writing, Jane could announce that there were plans in the air for the whole family to spend a holiday together.

  The march of Stephen Hawking’s fame remains relentless. This biography brought his life into focus for many as it was translated into twenty-five languages, and it seemed that hardly a year has passed without one documentary film or another chronicling the incredible story of the man’s life. The press have had an insatiable desire to write about Stephen Hawking ever since he became a public figure with the release of the iconic A Brief History of Time in 1988; and, as we have said elsewhere, he loves and courts attention and has a great desire for publicity and acclaim. Celebrities, politicians, or even royals visiting Cambridge call in to meet Hawking. This list includes such diverse characters as Buzz Aldrin, Prince Charles, and the magician David Blaine. Hawking has now appeared on The Simpsons four times (so frequently in fact that some viewers have claimed they believe he is actually only a cartoon character made up by the program’s creators). More recently, Hollywood luminaries such as Jim Carrey have worked on well-crafted skits with Hawking on American chat shows, and he has appeared several times on the hit comedy The Big Bang Theory, in which he has amusing exchanges with one of the lead characters, Sheldon (played by Jim Parsons). Hawking’s best line came when he called Sheldon after beating him at chess played over the Internet and said:
“What do Sheldon Cooper and a black hole have in common? They both suck!”

  Increasingly, Hawking’s presence in the media has centered upon his diverse interests, his frequent and often controversial statements on all manner of subjects, his associations with the rich and famous, and his own willingness to have fun, to display a very healthy sense of humor and a degree of self-depreciation. It is a delight to see the young, cocksure, ebullient postgrad of his early Cambridge days occasionally peeking through in the facial expression of the immobile, increasingly decrepit elder statesman. His eyes still light up with merriment when he finds something funny.

  There can be no better example of Hawking’s joie de vivre than the way he was determined to undertake a zero-gravity flight—something very few physically fit people have experienced. He had dreamed of space travel since childhood, and although traveling through a series of parabolic ascents and descents in a converted Boeing 727 is not quite space travel, for everyone apart from professional astronauts, it remains the closest thing to it (although Hawking and Richard Branson have discussed the possibility of Stephen traveling into space aboard a Virgin Galactic vessel in the not-too-distant future, and he has a complimentary seat booked for the $200,000-per-passenger flight).

  The long-awaited adventure began early on the morning of April 26, 2007 at Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The company running the program, Zero Gravity Corp., covered the cost (almost $4,000), making Stephen the guest of honor with thirty-five fellow passengers. He was monitored constantly by a team of four doctors and two nurses. The plane traveled through eight separate parabolic maneuvers in which zero gravity is experienced for about 25 seconds during each “plunge.”