A Beautiful Mind? 12-Year-Old Boy Genius Sets Out to Disprove Big Bang
- Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:46am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
At 12-years-old, Jacob Barnett is a genius. He’s already in college, his IQ is higher than Einstein’s, and for fun he‘s working on an expanded version of that man’s theory of relativity. So far, the signs are good. Professors are astounded. So what else does a boy genius with vast brilliance do in his free time? Disprove the big bang, of course.
For a minute, just a minute, try and follow his logic. He explained his thinking recently to the Indianapolis Star:
“There are two different types of when stars end. When the little stars die, it’s just like a small poof. They just turn into a planetary nebula. But the big ones, above 1.4 solar masses, blow up in one giant explosion, a supernova,” Jake said. “What it does, is, in larger stars there is a larger mass, and it can fuse higher elements because it’s more dense.”
OK . . . trying to follow you.
“So you get all the elements, all the different materials, from those bigger stars. The little stars, they just make hydrogen and helium, and when they blow up, all the carbon that remains in them is just in the white dwarf; it never really comes off.
“So, um, in the big-bang theory, what they do is, there is this big explosion and there is all this temperature going off and the temperature decreases really rapidly because it’s really big. The other day I calculated, they have this period where they suppose the hydrogen and helium were created, and, um, I don’t care about the hydrogen and helium, but I thought, wouldn’t there have to be some sort of carbon?”
He could go on and on.
And he did.
“Otherwise, the carbon would have to be coming out of the stars and hence the Earth, made mostly of carbon, we wouldn’t be here. So I calculated, the time it would take to create 2 percent of the carbon in the universe, it would actually have to be several micro-seconds. Or a couple of nano-seconds, or something like that. An extremely small period of time. Like faster than a snap. That isn’t gonna happen.”
“Because of that,” he continued, “that means that the world would have never been created because none of the carbon would have been given 7 billion years to fuse together. We’d have to be 21 billion years old . . . and that would just screw everything up.”
Young Jacob‘s journey to genius hasn’t been a fairy tale. He didn’t speak until he was two, and he’s been diagnosed with Aspergers Syndrome, a mild form of autism. His mother, Kristine, told the Star he has trouble sleeping because he constantly sees numbers in his head.
“A lot keeps me awake,” Jake said. “I scare people.”
But he also has so much promise, and that excites many more.
“In one two-week period, he sat on our front porch and learned all of his high school math,” Kristine told the Star. “He tested out of algebra 1 and 2, geometry, trigonometry and calculus.”
In a YouTube video he can be seen explaining calculus:
At eight, Jacob enrolled at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) and was taking advanced astrophysics classes. According to one of his professors there, he‘s the most brilliant student he’s seen.
“Is he a genius? Well, yeah,” IUPUI physics Professor John Ross told the paper. “Kids his age would normally have problems adding fractions, and he is helping out some of his fellow students.”
He could soon be helping out the university, too. “We have told him that after this semester . . . enough of the book work. You are here to do some science,” Ross, who’s committed to helping Jacob find some grant funding, said.
“If we can get all of those creative juices in a certain direction, we might be able to see some really amazing stuff down the road.”
And if the here-and-now is any indication, “down the road” will be mind boggling. See, Jacob has already begun working on an expanded theory of relativity — and he’s on to something.
“I’m impressed by his interest in physics and the amount that he has learned so far,” Prof. Scott Tremaine, one of the world’s leading scientists, wrote in an email to the family. “The theory that he’s working on involves several of the toughest problems in astrophysics and theoretical physics.”
He added: “Anyone who solves these will be in line for a Nobel Prize.”
Read the entire profile of Jacob from the Indianapolis Star.
(H/T: Daily Mail)
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 679 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 634 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 360 Comments
Have You Seen the Giant ‘Sand Obama’ Sculpture in Charlotte? 311 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 133 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 183 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 146 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 133 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (537)
Sinclare
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:37am“a mild form of autism” – Good thing his mom isn’t a liberal, he would have been aborted. Something for liberals to chew on when they want to kill more babies.
Report Post »Stu D. Baker-Hawk
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:12amWell said, Sinclare, well said indeed…
Report Post »ThoreauHD
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:56amAnd a bit sad, because it’s true.
Report Post »MongooseLg
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 4:29pmYou’re disgusting. The fact that you don’t understand the difficulty that women have to go through in deciding to get an abortion shows this. And its funny that you Right-Wingers are “Pro Life,” but you love the death penalty and are fine letting poor children starve by cutting welfare.
BloodyArtist22
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 7:23pmI’ll take rhetoric over misconceiving the Bible any day. Because it is said the the body is God’s temple–and we must respect it as we respect God. I hate it when someone says “women’s choice”. Does the woman magically have two brains, two hearts, four hands and feet now? The womb is the most dangerous place for anybody in their lifetime or pre-lifetime.
mill
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:44pmblookd artist 22
…please explain “misconceiving” the bible… i would just like to understand another point of view . How is it being “misconceived”?
Report Post »kickagrandma
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:36amJacob, how soon can you move into the WHITE HOUSE… as President? Is this weekend too soon?
Report Post »MikeinIdaho
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:33amWith morons, mental midgets and crooks like Obama and Algore getting Nobel Peace prizes, why would a real genius want one?
Report Post »tangonine
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 6:22pmIt would be the Nobel Prize in Physics. Not the Nobel Peace Prize.
There is a difference.
Report Post »Rashomon
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:30amImagine the ultimate black hole surrounded by nothing. and GOD said ” and here we go…”
Report Post »klevalt
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:29am“If we can get all of those creative juices in a certain direction, we might be able to see some really amazing stuff down the road.”
OH PLEASE don’t let this boy be led…. let hem lead! Don’t stifle him by trying to direct his creative juices.
Report Post »RN MOM
Posted on March 27, 2011 at 3:52pmExactly, don’t put our prejudices into his beautiful mind- let him come to conclusions independently and objectively, just stay out of his way. I love that he is so concerned with carbon since carbon is the basic unit of life in this universe. I love that he de-bunked the big bang theory, it just goes to show us how science is more like the “flavor of the day” rather than the rock solid knowledge they try to shove down our throats.
Report Post »Meyvn
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:26amRock On Jacob!
Report Post »Looner
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:17amSomebody tell the smart kid that the bill part of the hat goes in front.
Report Post »vermindust
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:14amSend him to college, give him a dollar and he still can’t wear a hat.
Report Post »CalvinandHobbes
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 3:58pm“…I’m an excellent driver………K-Mart sucks”
atechgeek
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:16am@shirtsbyeric
Report Post »You have just demonstrated an understandable level of ignorance in the fields of physics. The boy seems to have an understanding well beyond most people on this planet. Go for it kid !!
KUjayhawk
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:16amIs he good at coming up with proofs for math above Calculus? I may need to request his help…(I could make you a Nobel Prize, minus the money and the worldwide recognition).
Report Post »Gurgi
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:15amLove me some Doogie Houser stories. Let him have a wonderful life and help humanity discover the answers of the Universe.
Is Aspbergers the same thing that Temple Grandin has?
Lets just pray he doesnt become a Progressive.
Report Post »TEE-PAR-TEE
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:52amHe’s way too smart to become a progessive.
Report Post »twotowner
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:26amTemple Grandin has Autism. This disorder has a wide spectrum, with Aspbergers being on the very mild end of it. From what I have seen, Grandin does not fit in the mild portion of the spectrum.
Wish I had more time. I’d love to take on his carbon argument.
Report Post »Charles
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:13amNo Nobel prize for him unless he is a leftist tilting society into the depths of world Marxism. If he disproves the big bang he is totally disqualified as some already have in a sarcastic way pointed out.
Report Post »Tickdog
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:06amNobel Prize is a joke in my eyes now that they gave it to obama…
Report Post »weeblewacker1
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:48amummm,you people do realize than there are several different categories of the Noble Prize,like physics,ligature,mathematics,ect,ect.its not like the kid would get a Noble in the same field as Obama.as for disproving the big-bang theory,good luck with that kid!
Report Post »Squ33
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:06amLet him work with the Navier-Stokes Equations of fluid motion, or probability distributions (<–had to use simplified versions of both, lol).
Report Post »WAR PIGS CRAWLING
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:06amWell yeah….I mean duh…I was just about thinking the same thing when I was twelve…..ya know…..mass equals density plus nano squared is pi or something….o.k….you got me….I was thinking about riding bike and girls.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:15amLol!
Report Post »swigs
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:05amTo solve the riddle of the Universe is very simple.
It took an infinite Creator to create an infinite Universe.
Progressive Marxists Socialists left-wing nut jobs will have us believe the Unverse began from a big bang out of nothingness and will expand into nothingness are the same folks who will have us believe there is no God.
Report Post »ratingsdown_onethird
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:23amNonsense. Things can be created without an entity or a being. The more we discover about everything through science, the more the concept of a “creator” fades. Myth and legend handed down orally is not a reliable representation of reality and the facts.
Report Post »Mr Spock
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:31amProgressive Marxists Socialists left-wing nut jobs will have us believe the Unverse began from a big bang out of nothingness.
Report Post »Yes and so do many Christians – “and God said let there be light and there was light”. What’s your problem?
swigs
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:55pm@ratingsdown_onethird
“Nonsense. Things can be created without an entity or a being….”
Oh really? I guess the next thing you would have us believe is you created yourself.
LOL.
@Mr Spock
“…Yes and so do many Christians – “and God said let there be light and there was light”. What’s your problem?”
I don’t have a problem. I’m perfectly content knowing the Universe always was and always will be.
The book of Genisis was written at a time when the concept of “zero” (nothing) didn’t exist.
Visible light is only a part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
God always was and always will be. To say the Universe was nothing and will return to nothing denies the existence of a something which always was. Denying the existence of God and God’s creation leaves one denying their own existence and their own place in the Universe.
Hope it helps.
Report Post »shirtsbyeric
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:01am“Two different types of when stars end”? He doesn’t sound like a genius.
Report Post »Charles
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:11amMaybe you should meet him to help him with the mathematics he used to reach his conclusions since you’re the genius
Report Post »melthemean
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:51amThe kid’s 12 and stated it simply. Some adults don’t even know how to pronounce “corpsman”.
Report Post »caitlynsdad
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:04pmI thought he was an expert in physics–not grammar.
Report Post »Jamesjim
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:00amUhOh, No big bang………..what will the atheist’s do now?!!
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:08amAtheism doesn’t rest on the Big Bang or any particular cosmological model. While it would deny a supernatural force creating the universe, I suspect everything else is open for consideration.
Report Post »kevtheatheist
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:14amAtheists who are science enthusiasts (a lot aren’t) are thrilled when someone like this comes along. Cosmology has been a pretty messed up area of science. Fresh minds coming in to sweep and tidy up are just what we need. If he can disprove the big bang let him! Let’s see what new and interesting theories he can come up with. I think that science and scientists have a better track record of accepting new ideas than religions do, who may take 400 years to realize that this Galileo fellow was right…
Report Post »caitlynsdad
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:05pmMy favorite one-liner from a Christian in a debate: “I don’t doubt the Big Bang, I just think I know who banged it.”
Report Post »powhatan
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:00amA different mind can be wonderful, but he also needs to be a child and mature as well. I wish him all the best!
Report Post »starman70
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:59amFrom the mouths of babes! Only GOD could create the universe and sooner or later the ‘Big Bang” will wind up on the trash heap of science.
Report Post »ratingsdown_onethird
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:14am“God” is a myth with no proof of any kind – none – to support it. All of the religions are so full of holes that it’s astounding they have any adherents at all. Science is the pursuit of truth and eventually, the truth will be found. But discarding a scientific theory doesn’t automatically equate to the proof of anything, especially “God.” Your statement therefore, has no merit.
Fox
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:48am@RATINGSDOWN_ONETHIRD
The interesting fact is that, conversely, there is also no proof whatsoever that there is no deity which created the cosmos. Your own argument has debunked itself.
If a lack of proof that something DOES exist discredits an argument, doesn’t a lack of proof that something DOES NOT exist also discredit the same argument? You can’t prove that a God of some sort does not exist, especially given the restraints of posting your opinion on a largely conservative news website to a whole bunch of people who will most likely disagree with you and discard your opinion. Just wondering what your goal here is.
Report Post »p8triot
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:46pm“Just wondering what your goal here is.”
Bigotry? Obfuscation? Scientific dogma?
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:06pmRatings..
read Mere Christianity….C.S. Lewis…
Report Post »he uses what we call a LOGICAL arguement with SCIENTIFIC principles…not the ramblings of a bigot
ratingsdown_onethird
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:05pmName calling and word games. The typical swill one can expect from the religious among us. One cannot disprove that Santa Claus or any other fictional character exists by your reasoning, but rational minds know the truth. The point is, science leads to reality, religion leads to delusion.
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 3:22pmWhen the Big Bang prevailed over the Steady-State theory of the universe some 50 years ago, it was widely heralded as actually confirming the existence of God because it gave the universe a beginning,
Report Post »suggesting it must have had a cause, which Steady-State did not.
karenjerry
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 7:17pmWow; Can we lower the age requirement for President?
Jacob in 2012
whaleofatale
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 12:33pm@RatingsDown_OneThird
Report Post »“One cannot disprove that Santa Claus or any other fictional character exists by your reasoning, but rational minds know the truth.”
Let’s look at this for a moment, logically. Santa Claus is a fictional character, based on the works of St. Nicholas, who went about doing good, helping others. Many western cultures have their own version of this St. Nicholas character. The Santa Claus that we know in our day is largely a creation of Coca Cola. Look back in the illustrated history of advertising. It was slightly before Norman Rockwell that Coca Cola began illustrating Santa Claus as the jolly fat man who visits homes once a year to deliver toys. That was used as a means to sell calendars, magazines, newspapers, etc.
So Santa Claus, a fictional character, created by a faceless capitalist corporation to motivate holiday spending, is held up as a so-called proof that God is a fiction. While the inspiration for Santa Claus, a real-life St. Nicholas, has inspired centuries’ worth of generations by his efforts to do good.
So, logically, Santa Claus = holiday spending = money to capitalism (not a bad thing, just something to be aware of) = fictional character.
St. Nicholas = real person = example of good works = copycat good works through the ages.
Fictions come and go. Real people are remembered for their works and the good they have done.
If God is a fiction, then logically, would He not have been disproven by the rationalists? The existentialists? Or any of the other enlightened “fads” of their day?
It is only because of the reality of Diety that His presence and influence is still felt in our day.
Reality lasts. Fiction doesn’t.
1956Danelectro
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 1:20pmA) and a child shall lead them…..back to God!
Report Post »B) Most of us are not as brilliant as this kid is.
C) In reading the pro and cons from most in here, the bashers want to hate this kid like he did a catchy youtube video…
tierrah
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 4:04pm@ratingsdown_onethird: With any theory or belief one has to start with a foundation of sorts. Am I correct? Your belief in a scientific foundation that has no proof as yet, only a theory, is accepted on FAITH just as those of us who believe in God and the creation “theory” (term used to satisfy you) accept by FAITH. i.e. You gotta start somewhere and since none of us were there when it all happened, no one can PROVE anything so therefore must accept a starting point based solely on FAITH
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:57amShouldn’t be terribly difficult, since a lot of the Big Bang hypothesis rests on math which has an 80% fudge factor variable that has not, as of yet, shown up through observation and whose “existence” is based solely on presumed inference. I’m speaking of course about dark matter/dark energy.
I mean, look, if I have to fudge in a variable that accounts for 80% of my entire math being correct, then maybe it‘s my math that’s incorrect? Why not assume that we don’t know everything about gravitational theory yet, which seems far more reasonable a position to take? Unfortunately, lots of scientists are as stubborn and dogmatic as the priest caste of the medieval times, so they’re blind to this and continue to dance around what I suspect will come to be seen as *their* very own pre-Copernican solar system model, writ large.
Report Post »Black3Actual
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:05am@gohstof,
Not quite. As I understand this, dark matter is something the quantum physics guys have tried to “invent” to get around the implications of “The Big Bang;” that there must be a creator. But then, it has been a while since I’ve studied the subject, so I could be wrong.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:13amI don’t know if “get around a creator” is correct. They invented it to make the math work we agree. There are alternate non-deity related cosmological models that they compete with, like String theory, super string, etc that they’ve been in competition with for quite a while. What’s confusing to me is that they can essentially state “we fully understand gravity, ergo, dark matter exists”. That seems very presumptive to me, since it‘s clear we’ve barely scratched the surface on even conceiving of gravity at a mathematical level, let alone veering off into huge tangents like quantum gravity where our understanding is almost 0.0%. But like I said, they‘re as dogmatic as any good Calvinist priest from the 1600’s, so I guess that’s to be expected.
Report Post »Fox
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:28am@BLACK3ACTUAL
Dark matter was first hypothesized to exist in order to explain the acceleration of matter in the universe — scientists figured that, because of the power of gravity, and because every atom and molecule in the universe is pulled on by everything else in the universe which emits gravity, all celestial bodies should eventually coalesce and join up again into one massive speck of matter.
However, since everything is not only rushing away from each other, but actively picking up speed as they travel, scientists are forced to agree that something must be actively “pushing” them away. The hypothesis of “Dark Matter”, the opposite of gravity, was born. I believe some scientists just recently found proof of DM but I’d have to find the article again to accurately cite it.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:58am@Fox
That sum up the “why” of what they did quite nicely. Though, call me crazy, maybe they should instead focus on gravity a bit more under the notion that they don’t grasp it fully yet While I can understand inventing a place-holder variable, it bothers me that they treat the place holder as a monolithic entity that they can “prove”. I strongly suspect that what explains this is varied and complex and no one particular entity per se.
And to my knowledge, no, they‘ve only inferred dark matter’s existence thus far. Their proof usually lay with what the describe as the gravitational wobble of galaxies.
Maybe I’m old fashioned and such, but I’m of the mind that our instruments are highly inferior for taking such long range readings with any amount of accuracy, given what must be a huge amount of “we don’t know” that lay between the point observed and the observer, at this place in history.
Report Post »Fox
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:41amFirst off — I was actually describing what scientists call “dark energy”, but I confused it with “dark matter”, which is the matter that makes up about 95% of the universe, and yet is invisible in any light spectrum… my bad. :) I should also mention that I’m just a musician with an extremely limited knowledge of astrophysics, heh.
Secondly, the observational evidence of dark energy came about in 1998, and there’s a great recent article at Nasa.gov that talks about an alternative to the theory of dark energy that was recently debunked… it’s a pretty fast and easy read, if you want to check it out: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/science/cosmic-expansion.html
“Maybe I’m old fashioned and such, but I’m of the mind that our instruments are highly inferior for taking such long range readings with any amount of accuracy, given what must be a huge amount of “we don’t know” that lay between the point observed and the observer, at this place in history.”
Well…. I guess I understand your point, but personally I’m pretty confident in not only the methods of calculation, but the scientific equipment that we’re using. It’s true that we could be mistaken in our readings, but science is about making our best guess based on the information we currently have, and then moving forward. I don’t think the possibility that some of our data being incorrect is any reason to discredit all the research. Basically, we have to be willing to make mistakes–trial and error has it’s place… if we weren’t willing to do that, we’d have lost so many advances in medicine, military equipment, etc.
One thing is true, for sure–we’re a lot less smart than we tend to think we are, and we’ve got a long way to go, and a lot more to learn. When scientists and regular folks like myself acknowledge that, I think we’re all a lot better off.
Report Post »ilovethiscountry
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:57amToo bad it is not possible to prove creation. Belief in the creation has to come from faith in God.
It is great to see him using his mind for good.
Report Post »9111315
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:20amWhy can’t we discover the mechanics of how God did creation.
Why can’t we discover the mechanics of how God did Creation. Did God just snap his fingers or did God use and control the forces of nature (Physics).
Either way, I would assume that the mechanics of Creation made a lot of noise. Furthermore, part of the big bang theory is that the laws of physics must change at the point of inception (Creation). Man cannot change the laws of physics. Who did.
I therefore propose, that once (if) the big bang theory is confirmed, it will prove that all was created in an instant — or very very short time. Who but god could do that? … while simultaneously mutating the laws of nature at a whim!
Report Post »ME
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:32amIt does not take a genus to prove creations just some very simple math.
0+0=0 right no way to make 0 and 0 make anything else right???
0 + X = anything now we only need to answer what is X is???? I say God fits the equation.
Everything about God is simple the “the simple things of this word will confound the wise”
Report Post »hillbillyinny
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:35amThe Bible says God spoke creation into being, and his Word (God’s communication, come to earth as Jesus), was present in the beginning.
Report Post »ilovethiscountry
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:40am@9111315
Report Post »When God created the universe, He not only created the matter that made up the earth, He also created the laws of physics. We can only discover those laws. A big bang can’t do that. Also with the big bang theory there is one great hole. Where did the matter and energy come from? How did they magically appear so that they could explode in the first place?
wildjoker5
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:42amAnd there has been no proof in evolution, much less the start of how life began on earth or how it could start anywhere without help.
Report Post »Petire
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:45amYou do realize that the big bang proves creation, right?
Before the big bang theory, scientists thought that the universe was eternal. It was the only way that evolution would make sense. But since the big bang theory (which is one of the most well proven theories in scientific history) evolutionists have had to accept the reality of beginning to the univse and now somehow explain away God.
I’m sure this kid is smart, but he’s not going to be able to disprove the big bang. If Steven Hawking tried and failed (and further proved it on accident), this kid isn’t going to.
Because the evidence for the big bang transcends mathematics. He can’t dismiss the expansion of the universe…
Report Post »AzCowboy
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:57amHe might to be taught that light is a wave, Just a sound is. They said the speed of sound couldn’t be broken (well). They say a object cannot go faster than the speed of light (why). Think about this, an object (you) are in this place and time. Light strikes you and is reflected. That is why I can see you. The reflected light isn’t you, It’s just reflected light. If I moved faster than the speed of light in the opposite direction I could veiw your previous actions. I couldn’t change anything as it is only reflected light. It would be impossiable to see (light again) in the future as the light hasn’t been reflected yet. I will stop with this cowboy’s lament. I would like to set this child into a new direction. GRAVITY. It’s just a wave too. One which we totally do not understand. Yes it is centered in mass, but thats about all we know about it. If this young person could take a crack and solve the powers of gravity there would’nt be any power problems, as we would use it (gravity)to move everything. Even light cannot escape gravitiy.
Report Post »Sorry, about all this. Steer the children to the future. Study the past..
jH…
moriarty70
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:13am@Petire
He isn’t disproving the Big Bang as a whole, just the current version of it. It’s more a matter of revising and updating the Big Bang.
And since you mentioned Hawking, I’d love to see this kid end up working along side him at a place like the Perimeter Institute bouncing ideads back and forth.
Report Post »ilovethiscountry
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:17amScientifically, neither creation nor evolution can be proved. To prove something scientifically, you need to be able to reproduce it. It is impossible to reproduce either creation or evolution.
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:19amKeep him away from the Flux Capacitors!
Report Post »thynkr
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:19pmWhy isn’t it possible to prove creation from *proper* science*? The building you live in got there by an actual builder of it, right? It was built by a ‘someone’ with at least enough intelligence to put all those pieces together that are in that building.
Are we not infinitely more complex than any building that humankind can put together?
Consider from a book I happen to be reading right now: “How To Know GOD Exists….Scientific Proof Of God” by Ray Comfort….a few quotes;
“We are intelligent beings, and could not have been formed by a blind, brute, insensible thing…” ~Voltaire~
“Remember, if a Coke can coming into existence by itself is obvoius nonsense, why is the Big Bang theory any more scientific?” ~unknown~
“The irnoy when it comes to God and His creation is that many of us have eyes, but don’t see” ~unknown~
“All I have seen teaches me to trust the Creator for all I have not seen” ~Ralph Waldo Emerson~
“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use” ~Galileo Galilie~
“Creation of new body parts (as evolution would suggest) would be equivalent to a “telegram” giving rise to “encyclopedias” of meaningful, useful genetic sentences” ~unknown~
“A little science estranges men from God, but much science leads them back to him” ~Louis Pasteur~
“I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatsoever” ~Sir Isaac Newton~
“Scientific concepts exist only in the minds of men. Behind these concepts lies the reality which is being revealed to us, but only by the grace of God” ~Wernher von Braun~
“Mutations are random instead of purposeful, and they only modify or remove information, but never add it—–a requirement of the theory. ~unknown~
“Since we recognize that the car is obviously designed, why would we think that our much more intricately designed bodies just happened by chance? ~unknown~
“Despite the fact that the Bible was apparently written by mere men, so were all of my science texts” ~unknown~
“If we were created by a divine Being, it’s reasonable to expect that God would have given mankind evidence of His existence” ~unknown~
“Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse”
“The only way he will ever appreciate the beauty and harmony of the painting is to step back and see the whole picture. The same is true of Scripture” ~unknown~
quotes shared by *thynkr@live.com*
shagstar
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:24pmthis youngster is not learning,,,,he is teaching, and the academic’s want a piece of that pie!
Report Post »ilovethiscountry
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:46pm@thynkr
Report Post »As I said before, To prove something “scintifically” you need to be able to reproduce it. Neither the big bang nor creation can be reproduced. I did not say that you cuoldn’t come up with theories from what you see, I said you couldn’t prove it scientifically.
Echad
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:03pmPETIRE:
Report Post »Actually there are a number of reasons why the big bang theory is wrong. Before Hubble convinced Einstein that the universe is expanding Einstein’s theory was that of a static universe. But it was Hubble that got it wrong! Hubble’s law using the Doppler shift is assuming that the speed of light is a constant, which it is if it is in a perfect vacuum. But light speed is variable when traveling through different mediums and space is not a perfect vacuum there’s lots of stuff out there! So light speed is slowed by traveling through dust, gas etc. giving the illusion that the other galaxies are moving away from us and the farther away they are the faster they are moving away from us. That’s why they have come up with dark matter and dark energy because there isn’t anything that accelerates without a force driving it. Dark matter and dark energy have never been seen or measured. But they assume it must be there otherwise the galaxies could not be accelerating away from us! They just can’t get the fact that they are working on a flawed premise.
Another simple point could be made with the black whole. A black whole has such a massive gravitational effect that not even light can escape its pull. If a rocket where sitting on a black whole there is no amount of power that could be used to accelerate that craft to achieve escape velocity it would have to be able to go faster than the speed of light to do so. Now take all of the black wholes, planets, galaxies that are out there and put them in one small point. There is no amount of force that could accelerate all that mass away from itself it would simply collapse back upon itself.
Non-sequitur
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:47pm“It is impossible to reproduce either creation or evolution.”
“It is impossible to reproduce evolution.”
Actually no, it isn’t. You may want to check up on recent research (last 10-15 years) in the field. Evolution by natural selection was proven under lab conditions.
Report Post »Echad
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 3:04pmNON-SEQUITUR:
Report Post »Please document your so called proof of evolution through natural selection. I have been studying this area for a few years now and have seen no such proof. Maybe you’re talking about Lenski’s E. coli experiment. But that is easily debunked. So again please document your so called proof!
One_Man_Army
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 6:50pmEchad, don’t expect a good answer from Non-Sequitur. He only believes what mainstream “scientists” have tricked him into believing. However, natural selection does actually happen. At the same time, though, natural selection does NOT in any way prove Darwin’s theory of evolution. Natural selection ONLY proves micro evolution, which I’m sure we can agree on here. It does not, in any way, go so far as to prove macro evolution or Darwinian evolution. This is something I doubt Non-Sequitur could actually understand.
Report Post »Echad
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:09pmONE_MAN_ARMY:
Report Post »I agree with you 100% micro-evolution is absolutely true and provable. Macro-evolution on the other hand is a theory based in assumptions and pure speculation no scientific proof whatsoever.
ilovethiscountry
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:01pmOne of the things that they use to “prove” the big bang theory is that the universe seems to be expanding. The only thing that might prove is that space is infinate. If space is infinate, time can also be infinate. God is infinate, no beginning and no end.
Report Post »I_can't_believe_this_stuff
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:57amHere’s a problem he can help us solve: How can we get rid of the 0bama administration sooner, and dramatically cut-back the size of government … and thus save our economy and our freedoms … so there can be more grant money available to him to solve the expanded theory of relativity …
Report Post »USAPLISKENXI
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:38amI’m With You on this one brother……..
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:33pmIf he’s conservative, we would all be better off if he could go talk to the Democrats in Congress. The American people haven‘t been able to get across to them the extent of the damage they’re bringing down on this nation.
Report Post »loadingmyclips
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:55amNobel Prize ? Hmmmm
Report Post »jedi.kep
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:54amHopefully, the kid will develop the character he will need to handle his intelligence. I know too many intelligent people, who are as dumb as a box of rocks in the real world. I hope the kid has some balance.
Report Post »sherminator
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:19amCase in point: Barrack Hussein Obama. Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm.
Report Post »Marylou7
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:24amIf he is going after the Big Bang Theory, he apparently has common sense. You go Jacob.
Report Post »BeerSnob
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:54amummm… disproving the Big Bang Theory does not prove Intelligent Design.
Report Post »just sayin
One_Man_Army
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 6:21pm@ BEERSNOB
That may be true, especially because some Intelligent Design theories actually implement the Big Bang theory by explaining that God created the Big Bang, which actually doesn’t go against the Genesis creation story if one were to put it into its proper context. However, it does go a very long way toward disproving evolution, as well, which, in turn, would bring more proof to Intelligent Design.
Report Post »whaleofatale
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 12:11pm@Jedi.Kep
Report Post »I fully agree with you in hoping that he finds balance in his life. There has been a lot of discussion about intelligence, IQ and problem-solving. I see them as three different things. Intelligence is the innate light or awareness that a person holds within. As they exercise that light and understanding, their light (or intelligence) grows, illuminating others. Intelligence naturally leads to problem-solving. The key is seeing that there are multiple types or kinds of intelligence.
Have you ever known someone who is brilliant with matching colors or spatial relationships? That does not necessarily mean that they are good in math or science. Or someone with a natural way with words – a poet? Or a musician? Intelligence leads to creation – everybody is good at something. It is only a matter of learning who and what we are, and then living in accordance with that light.
Then we come to IQ. Intelligence Quotient is based in mathematics, visual relationships, logic and societal mores. Where is the art? Music? Word usage? Political understanding? It’s not there.
So IQ tests by their very nature limit the type of people that are considered intelligent. Once you know how to solve the problems in an IQ test, it is no longer an accurate test of logical intelligence, merely an exercise in logic with a grade at the end.
I hope that he can solve some theoretical mathematical and physics mysteries. That seems to be where his light is illuminating. I hope that the professors that work with him can let his light illuminate their minds to open new possibilities that their accumulated wisdom can expand upon.
Juliana
Posted on March 28, 2011 at 1:58pmYes, yes yes. Agreed.
Report Post »ares338
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:50amHe is already thinking reward; Nobel Prize. Jaded already.
Winthrop1630
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:58amPerhaps, but the comment about the Nobel came from the professor, not Jacob.
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:58amThere’s nothing wrong with reward or pursuing reward. It’s the very essence of human nature, denying it is absurd.
Report Post »spyderpopp
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:02amHuh? How exactly does someone else (Prof. Scott Tremaine) saying the kid’s in line for a Nobel Prize (if he solves those problems in astrophysics, etc.) make him jaded?
Report Post »drhunt
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:04amThe kid’s too smart to accept a Nobel Prize. Once he finds out whom has won one before, he will probably decline the offer.
On a serious note…great job, Jacob…keep up the good work, and don’t let the Ivory Tower types dissuade you from your destiny.
wildjoker5
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:06amNobel Prize now has been tainted by Obama and Gore to the point that it is just a worthless piece of crap. Maybe this kid can prove other false theories like global warming, or evolution, as he is already destroying the big bang. Theories put out by people that want to discredit there being a God the creator have been falsified and lied about to make their points.
Gold Coin & Economic News
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:08amI‘m wondering if the reporter got his quote wrong or because Jacob is so smart he doesn’t speak so the rest of us can understand yet, but what he said about carbon formation is kind of confusing.
Being that carbon is one of the heavier elements, it wouldn’t be created in the big bang, it would be created in the cores of the first generation stars and then distributed throughout out the galaxies via super nova explosions and ejections from large mass stars, which was what I think he may have said, but then what he said made it sound like he thought that should have happened right at the big bang.
I’m confused, but he’s still sounds like a smart kid.
Report Post »HillBillySam1
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:10amDon‘t be dissin’ the Nobel Prize……our beloved Dear Leader obviously deserved his……I think he got it for identifying all 57 states in the union…….I can only identify 49……..
Uncle Crusty
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:11amSmart kid, but a kid…what he is not thinking about is the TIME factor, the 7 billion vs 21 billion year carbon thought…no one but God knows how old the Earth really is, and man has guessed at it for years. All human science is flawed, because it is made by man. This kid as smart as he is, does not have all the answers. I do applaud his efforts and hope he has a bright future though.
Libertyluvnmomma
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:14amARES338- what a smart connection you made, conditioning at it’s finest. This kid will see through it. Professors cannot help themselves.- (BF SKINNER)
Report Post »ratingsdown_onethird
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:15amYou didn’t read carefully. Try again.
DTOM_Jericho
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:15amTrying to disprove the big bang theory and hoping for a nobel prize is a contradiction. Someone needs to educate this kid on human history.
Report Post »AmericanWarrior
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:33am100,000 times more deserving of the “Nobel” than the royal fool in the White House!
Eliasim
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:42amYep, he’s jaded already, and he’s already confined his mind. It’s funny how people crave absolutism, and humans are really no different than many other species in that even a cat will sniff out coming to know all corners of it’s house. People crave absolute answers; absolute equations; absolute relativity. I always wonder the way a planet doesn’t blow itself up, and yet some how the “Big Bang” did blow itself up. And yet if all things are relative then how did the giant mass blow itself up?
@leftfighter
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:48amThere is absolutely nothing wrong with thinking about an award in this case.
A trophy for participating in Pop Warner football and having a losing season is one thing.
On the other hand, they’re talking about a preteen winning the Nobel freaking prize in physics!
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:49amGive it a try. While you are at it, take a crack at the unified theory.
Report Post »wildjoker5
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:49amOf course if this kids is as smart as they are saying, I am sure he is taking into the account of the massive amount of gavitity that would have been present before the bang, causing an almost stoppage of “time”. But I am not a genius in this kids sense so all I can do is grasp a concepts, but to prove them is extreemly difficult.
My other real question for all those that believe in the big bang, if no matter can be created or destroyed, where did matter come from in the first place?
CyberPro
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:50amBased on recent history, the kid should alread have been awarded the Nobel Prize because of what he MIGHT do. This has been established now as a precedent when it was awarded to Obama.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:53amIt seems to me that there is something that travels as fast as it wants to. If a ship can travel faster than the current of a river, then it must be that the true light from the light can travel faster than light. There is no absolute anymore than there is a smartest person in the world.
skinnydipinacid
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 9:57amI’m okay with handing out Nobel prizes to those worthy of it…
but it seems like their lowered standards for who receives it have hindered it’s notoriety.
Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:02amWhat I find sad is that the professors are already licking their chops to use this kid to get funding.
leftiesaredangerous
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:34amHe’ll only get a Noble Prize if he agress with global warming, macro evolution, and is anti-capitalist.
valleycold1
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:44amI believe that the Nobel Prize remarks are superfluous in the overall context of what the professor was trying to say. He was trying to say that this gifted boy could really open some new direction and dimensions in the field of science; a very exciting and provocative prospect.
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:47am@WILDJOKER5
Report Post »Matter cannot be created or destroyed, but it can be converted to and from energy. Perhaps it came from a large amount of energy. I hope the evolutionists don’t get their hooks into this kid.
I would like to see him disprove Global Warming all over again, just to piss Al Gore and all his disciples off.
@AZCOWBOY
Have they proven light is waves and not particles? I hadn’t kept up or heard. Do they know if gravity is waves or sub-atomic particles? I, too would like to see the problem of gravity solved.
They should be exposing this kid to the works of earlier theorists, and I am sure they are, or he is himself. I hope he uses his God-given talents for the greater good.
Patrick in AZ
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:54amThe professor (the one who made that comment) was just trying to emphasize the scale of the problems the kid, who again is only 12 years old, is working on.
Report Post »The Big Pickle
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:00amWhat a load of tosh!
Report Post »BonnieVonnie
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:13amIt seems I am not the only one who recognizes that this child is not the one to bring up the chance of “reward”. It was the professor, probably thinking about his name being associated with the child and the possibility of the Nobel Prize, and the potential to significantly advance his own career. The child hasn’t done anything yet to warrant consideration.
With the “dumbing down” of the American Public education system and standards of performance, the concept of reward for work well done was removed to “equalize the playing field for ALL children”–no child left behind and all that jazz! The truth is, reward for a job well done is a GREAT (exceptional) motivator. We adults get raises based upon merit (performance). The idiocy of not rewarding good behavior and the pursuit of excellence in performance has always escaped me. And just consider the national results…poorer performance across the board, around the country, except among, for example, the Asian population where hard work and dedication and the pursuit of excellence is still ingrained in the culture.
Yes, there is prestige connected to being awarded a Nobel Prize. At least there used to be. It lost all is appeal to me when our current sitting President was given one (for what amounts to doing nothing of any significant value). Mother Theresa deserved a Nobel Peace Prize. Gandhi deserved his, but Barack Obama?
In reference to the potential in this child, time will tell. If he successfully expands upon Einstein’s theory to the degree that he absolutely astounds the scientific community, he may well deserve the Nobel Prize. But that is yet to be seen…
Report Post »MrsMomAZ
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:13amOh Ares338, your reading comprehension skills or lack of are showing….are you a frustrated academic?
Prof. Scott Tremaine, one of the world’s leading scientists, wrote in an email to the family. “The theory that he’s working on involves several of the toughest problems in astrophysics and theoretical physics.” He added: “Anyone who solves these will be in line for a Nobel Prize.”
Report Post »bryan69
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:32amNo, the professor is thinking about the prize.
Report Post »A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:34am“He could soon be helping out the university, too.”
NOOO! Run to the private sector, Jacob! Teach privately, or become an entrepreneur!
““If we can get all of those creative juices in a certain direction, we might be able to see some really amazing stuff down the road.””
Screwing the potential of students, one tax dollar at a time.
Report Post »UW Girl
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:37amHe’s an amazing, brilliant child, and all you have to say is jaded? That is a very shallow and cynical statement.
Report Post »A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:42amIf you have a mass as dense as what is required for the supposed Big Bang to happen, it’s not going to explode – nothing is moving, because everything is so packed.
Report Post »Dale
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:45am@ares338, he isn’t thinking Nobel Prize – a noted scientist says that should this kid solve these problems, he deserves the prize.
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:49am@Gold Coin
the article did say that he didn’t speak until 2 years old…about 12-16 months late for the average child…said he had Aspergers..mild autism…sounds like he is what would be called an “idiot savant” but that term isn’t PC anymore (someone that has an amazing predisposed ability in one area but is extremely lacking in most others – child prodigy musicians are like this – usually they are social misfits and/or have trouble speaking, expressing emotions, or couping with failure and confrontation – think Dustin Hoffman – Rain Man)
the University is exploiting this boy – or at least his advisory is..the professor quoted…he sees published papers down the line with his name as the PhD and the boy as the grad student/PhD candidate in the footnotes or byline…
but yeah…there were some WHA?? moments when talking to him..and it was probably just that he doesn’t speak or express well…that makes you think he hasn’t REALLY thought through his expansion to relativity….he is genius..high IQ…and he is definitely very good at number crunching in mathematics…but it is the higher order outside the box thinking that will frustrate him…maybe in 10-15 years when he matures emotionally and mentally we will see some great things from him…
but then again..look at Stephen Hawking…everyone said he was the next Einstein too…in line for the Nobel…gonna prove Quantum Mechanics and String Theory right…find the primary force of nature and write the Grand Unification Theory….after 30 years of research and writing and everyone turning to him…about 5 years ago…Hawking comes out and tells the Physics community… hmm..we got it wrong, we have to start over, it looks like Einstein was right, everything we did these last decades was based on a flawed model and math errors…. WOOPS!!!
it wasn‘t Einstein’s high IQ that made him great…even though a 189 or whatever is extremely high… there have been higher…like Hawking…it was the fact that Einstein reportedly used 25% of his conscious mind or more….most humans only use 10-15% consciously/100% subconsciously… Einstein was able to access more than twice his conscious mind. They still do not understand the equations and notes left in his Princeton office, even after 50 years, that is why the room is still sealed. Einstein thought of things that NOBODY had even conceived of before, even QM and ST are just based on the work of Einstein taken deeper, to a place Einstein wouldn’t go based on his philosophy of a fixed universe and order ruling supreme. Einstein didn’t believe in the randomness of Chaos Theory or String Theory or Quantum Mechanics or their need for more than 4 dimensions. He didn’t believe in the concept of a black/white hole even though his mathematics proved them to exist, he simply editted them out of the Theory of Special Relavitity. And even though Einstein was not devote or practicing his Jewish faith, he still believed that God created the universe and not in the Darwinism of his day or the search for the Big Bang.
Showtime
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:56amI’m still stunned that he passed third grade math!
Gee, it must be great to have a brain that actually works. Mine surely doesn’t, not in math.
The kid doesn’t care about the Nobel Peace Prize. He‘s working on expanding Einstein’s theory of relativity! I’m working on balancing my checkbook!
Report Post »Down2TheC
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:58amThat was his professor spouting about the Nobel, not him. And ever since Barry got one, it just doesn’t mean as much anymore.
Report Post »Kalish
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:21pmFor all the evolutionists out there :
Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding, who set its measurements? Since you know. Or who stretched the line on it? On what were its bases sunk? Or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Or who enclosed the sea with doors when, bursting forth, it went out from the womb; when I made a cloud its garment and thick darkness its swaddling band, and I placed boundaries on it and set a bolt and doors, and I said, ‘Thus far you shall come, but no farther; and here shall your proud waves stop’? … Job 38:4-11.
SirDuff
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:23pmAt least he would DESERVE the Nobel unlike some people I know…..cough, cough…Obama and Carter!!
Report Post »GreatAmericanBeckFan
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:27pmAt least there is substance and reason he would be very deserving if he were to get the award. I bet this kid has no use for a teleprompter.
Report Post »White Devil
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:29pmIf he is so smart, why can’t he figure out that the bill of a hat goes on the front of the head to shade the eyes?
Report Post »satanicmechanic
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:45pmLast i checked our entire society is based on a reward system for ones knowledge, intelligence, savvy, or hard work. You know that CRAZY idea of capitalism? All based on seeking rewards of one sort or another. Recognition is nice. Its only too bad that so many morons have gotten the Nobel prize based on nothing but “good feelings” and not actual achievements.
Report Post »feralmonkey4
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:53pmOK there are a lot of poeple not able to distinguish between the Nobel peace prize which is a political and useless piece of metal and the real Nobel prizes. the real prizes are for real scientists not for losers who wouldn’t know science if it bit them. they are awarded in different countries. just remember Nobel peace prize is the aunt that should be institutionalized to keep her from doing harm to the community at large.
Report Post »hologram5
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 12:54pmFor the evolutionists:
Report Post »http://www.google.com/#q=animals+that+defy+evolution+youtube&hl=en&prmd=ivns&source=univ&tbm=vid&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=iciMTezyFJSasAPGmp2GCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CCcQqwQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=beb5cba07b2fe24d
Soldiers_Son
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:02pmI think I should add that there are more than one Nobel Prize. And some of them are still highly regarded as a true reflection on the individual’s achievements. Most of the ones that still hold true value are the ones in science, medicine and technology (where the contribution is not based on opinion, but rather on work that is measurable and repeatable).
Obama got his in the area of peace. And as we have all seen, this particular area of Nobel Prizes has become a way for elites to heap worship on undeserving people, and has become a joke and a by word for the average person who can see through the smoke. There have been some people that really did deserve the prize for peace, but Obama? Please…
Report Post »andy1554
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:11pmWhat? should he be thinking about how to get other peoples money through Obama style fairness or using his brilliance toward earning his own reward. I’d much rather have everyone thinking about earning a living than some commie idealism.
Report Post »KissMYgritZ
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:30pmMaybe we are the jaded. It seems as though we all post here in an attempt to suppress the goodness of any achievement. Have we become so cynical that we now question the motives of a 12 year old boy? Or are we angry that he knows more in certain fields than all of us combined may ever know? Why do we attack the ambitious and find fault when we should focus on achievement and success?
We’ve started sounding more and more like the people we say we disagree with. We should nurture success. We ourselves should strive to succeed. Even applaud when it’s reached. Not bash or bemoan in it.
For the Faithful… God created him and gave him his gifts. Let’s assume God will work through him and good will come of it. Isn’t that what we are supposed to hope for?
Report Post »Montana Made
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:35pmfunny- I never bought into the big bang but couldn’t put my finger on why (beside that fact I believe Diety created it). It just never seemed plausible, but his explaination makes sense in a 12 year old boy way! Thanks Jacob!
Report Post »cemerius
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:37pmWho cares about the nobel “piece” prize? it’s as useless as the emmy or golden globes! Imagine that he is an American and only in America would he have the freedoms to enlarge his knowledge with freedom! Imagine if he was born to a goat herder in the mountains of pakistan? Would he have gotten the same recognition or stoned as a heretic?
Report Post »Montana Made
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:39pmSo now that Obama has bombed the tar out of Libya- does that mean he’s going to give HIS Nobel Peace Prize back??? Or will they just recall it and get back some of the dignity they lost by giving it to him in the first place??!!
Report Post »restorehope
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 1:42pmHe didn’t talk until he was two and has a form of autism. Are there other geniuses out there who haven’t broken through the barriers of autism as this boy did? What could they contribute to mankind if only they could communicate and function like everyone else? I will never look at an autistic child in the same way again.
Report Post »Jacob Malachi
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:08pmThose who are putting him down because he may be in line some day for a Nobel prize are getting the Nobel Peace Prize mixed up with those awarded for science. The science committees have awarded the prize in the past for people who invented the transistor and optical fibers. Hardly controversial.
Report Post »hoges20
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:11pmPeople he might be smart but he’s still just a 12 year old boy. Emotionally you have no idea what he is feeling. So I really don‘t think it’s fair to judge on what little has been said here.
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:22pm@The Big Pickle
Report Post »Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:00am
What a load of tosh!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“At 12-years-old, Jacob Barnett is a genius. He’s already in college.” (No hyphens needed)
Pickle, how old were you when you entered college? Where are the stories of your accomplishments?
YouSir
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:36pmUmmm……..I believe that the current theory is that the “big-bang“ was a universe mass ejecta from an almost infinitly ”small”, (think sub-quantum) rift or apperture, and that it was a result of…….nothing, ie., that it proceeded from nothing and from “nowhere”, or rather a discordant tone in a preexisting harmony, or vibration. Almost like some “force” that caused a tone to produce an off-key note that set off a harmonic distortion wave, causing a rift or tear in whatever fabric that contained the original gestalt. Think also that this gestalt, this fabric, these harmonics are concentrations of energies so dense, so compacted, that infinite universes are birthed from sub quanta. Think also that these energies are in a timeless state of perfection and purity, a true immortality, untill whatever discordant force, destabilizes them, ejects them and because they are no longer perfect, voila, entropy, decay…Time…… These “Universe calvings” are occuring all of the time, they always have and always will, they just are.
You have to be able to wrap your mind around what “infinite” really means, that there’s room in infinity for an infinite, infinities.
Just sayin
YouSir
Report Post »roansmom
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 2:38pmJake isn’t thinking reward…his professor is…frankly, he had me at hello!
Report Post »ChiefGeorge
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 3:13pmThank God his mother did not abort him. He may just solve problems that have a real impact on us all. I can only hope his brain power is put to good use in lieu of some nerfarious uses through Defense programs. We do not need a greater bomb in other words. Great story.
Report Post »razberry379
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 3:13pmand what are you doing that is so much better?
godlovinmom
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 3:21pmwhat would be amazing is that a child would prove all of “mans” theories are wrong…God does indeed work in mysterious ways…I wonder if his parents are believers, and this is why the kid is taking on this subject of the big bang theory?…I say “let him go”..as far as the nobel peace prize…after Gore won it and then obama.. it’s nothing but another pat on the back for librals…this years award will probably go to soros or piven…mark my words!
Report Post »naed5048
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 4:12pmIt would be nice to have him figure how to use hydragin as a fuel supply……It’s beyond me that back several hundred years ago a frenchman can figure how to burn hyrdragin.. where did that knowledge go?
colonial10
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 4:36pmThis kid would make a great conservative Tea Partier. If he is trying to disprove the big bang which can be done through thought and sound mathematics. How nice would it be if he could convince the progressives that their theory of an Utopian society is ungrounded because of the human factor. Even though we have all of our founders that also were genius’s.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 4:55pmTo all the haters due to “Nobel Peace Prize” being mentioned by the professor, Shut it up!!!! Once this young man solves those problems no one else could he will deserve the Nobel Peace Prize and more……
My nephew (13) has Aspergers Syndrome and by the age 9 spoke 4 languages fluently, though his household only speak English. He can watch a movie and read a book once and can tell you word for word the movie and tell you what page, paragraph and sentence line a quote from the book is at. Not to mention he reads a book in bout a hour if it interests him….. The bad part, his penmanship is that of a 6-7 year old and he finally accomplished tying his shoes at age 11. Very non-emotional but occasional you get a little hug or affection but he has to put effort into doing it. At school his peers will be running around the class while he sits there quietly reading a book or just observing. I will say he is one cool kid…..
Report Post »ablisterin
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 5:01pmAll I can say is that there will be lots of evil people trying to get their claws into this kid. Genuis many times leads to madness in the end. Be very careful.
Report Post »faithwillwin
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 5:08pmif the nobel prize meant anything anymore then it would be a nice goal, but he needs to research that institution and figure out why they give these esteemed “prizes” to who they give them to these days.
Report Post »we are far removed from the days of jonas salk and real men of honor and genius.
Eblaze44
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 5:24pmSo trivial a comment. and as someone else said, that’s what his professors goal is. the kid just wants to solve the problem (pun intended).
Report Post »godlovinmom
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 5:57pmso many comments about Jacob having a disease this a disease that…maybe us “normal” people haven’t been diagnosed yet…you know the “dumb butts” syndrome…I’m gonna pray about Jacob..that the Lord indeeds allows him to accomplish whats going on in that head of his :0)
Report Post »One_Man_Army
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 6:06pm@ VRW CONSPIRATOR
Actually, you are completely wrong. You make the claim that the average child starts talking at 8 to 12 months of age. This statement is totally wrong. Most experts who have actually dealt with babies will tell you that the average child starts to speak between 1 1/2 and 2 years. A child who speaks as early as you claim is nearly a full year ahead of the average child. In fact, a majority of children don’t really start to speak until AFTER they are a year and a half old.
Report Post »sd1776
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 6:32pmTwo points:
1. There is actually a third occurrence when a star dies. After the explosion, because of the star’s massive gravity, the center collapses in on itself. It’s called a singularity or “black hole.” This occurs, as stated, because of the large mass of the star which creates a large gravitational force. Now imagine all the mass in the universe being at a single point, as some state it was, before the Big Bang. Why would the Big Bang never occur? Because if a star‘s mass collapsing in on itself can create a black hole because of it’s immense gravity, imagine how much more mass there is when one calculates the total mass of the universe existing at a single point in space. It would essentially be the largest black hole that has ever existed, and black holes don’t explode in a Big Bang. They pull everything into them and just continue to grow.
2. OK, so the kid is a genius. He’s really good at math and things of that nature. I’m not trying to sound negative, but were any of his classes in English? I mean, I’ve read the quotes, and the kid may understand concepts to a greater degree than most people ever will, but his skills in English are those of a third grader. Am I wrong?
Report Post »jbone51
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:18pmYour wrong ARE338. All he needs to do to get a npble prize is to profess his desire to prove his theories. Remember in the new world you don’t have to actually have to do anything you just have to say you want to. ie: Obama
Report Post »Joseph28
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 8:54pmLaw of centripital force already disproves Big Bang, any matter that is cast off of other matter for any reason (be it explosion or just flies off for whatever reason) will spin in the same direction as the matter that it came from.
Big Bang states that in the beginning a piece of matter was spinning before it exploded, everything in universe is said to have come from this, so everything should spin in the same direction (orbits and rotations of planets) they do not. Therefor Big Bang at least as we know it cannot be true.
Report Post »JimDavey
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:24pmYes, he’s only a twelve year old. Genius or not, where should he really be heading in life at this time of his life? Why launch him as some sort of deep space, mathematical machine? He really needs to know more about himself and others around him. I personally think that maybe he should try to run some of his mathematical skills into the study of human history and linguistics, behavioral sciences, etc…something that will let him use his innate mathematical skills to get a better and maybe equally strong grasp on the other dimensions of living. He does need to work on his communication capabilities (maybe his deficiency in that area is due to his Aspergers Syndrome?) if he wants to be able to teach and learn from others. He might find an amplification of his mathematical skills through precision in language. In any case, he needs to grow in the human sense and learn to love and live a life beyond theory and infinity. He needs to find both the bigness and the smallness that lies within him and others. He needs to grow as a human or he will just pale in the light of those such as DaVinci…just like the rest of us oddballs who use less than 7% of the gray matter do.
Report Post »TwitchyGuy
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 10:51pmWho cares? They just hand those things out to anybody nowadays.
Report Post »Woody WoodBecker
Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:53pmProves he’s a capitalist. It’s the Peace prize that they give out like candy on Halloween. The others are actually earned.
Report Post »Chris
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 1:13amRemember that the Nobel Peace Prize is a little different from and awarded separately from the Nobel Prize in chemistry, physics, medicine, etc. The Peace Prize is awarded by a committee in Norway, the rest of them by a committee in Sweden. I don’t think that the crowd that has been getting Peace Prizes lately reflects badly on the other prizes.
Report Post »greyrider
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 2:16amlearn how to read.
Report Post »notreally
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 7:26amThere are Noble prizes which are awarded totally on the basis of subjective liberals values. Nobel Science prizes are not subjective and involve hard science, like e=mc2.
The media and his socialist professors will screw him up: distract him with money, pretty girls and saving the planet from global warming or nuclear power plants,
Report Post »avenger
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 7:49amthe wackos at planned parenthood must be terrified….
Report Post »butchu1
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 8:00amThe Nobel prize? If Obama can get one, well, I think ya know where I’m going with this….
Report Post »saskatchewanboy
Posted on March 26, 2011 at 3:48pmSeriously? Jaded? I’m hoping that was sarcasm. Individual reward and pursuit of individual goals is what America is based on. He should realize that he should be recognized/rewarded for success.
Some great comments in here though. Blaze readers crack me up.
I hope he gets the right opportunities and has the right people looking out for him.
I’m no scientist, not even close, but I always imagined someone scientifically proving creation etc. Interested to see what he can get credit for in the future.
Report Post »QueerConservative
Posted on March 27, 2011 at 3:23amWhat an inspirational story!
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on March 27, 2011 at 8:42amThe Big bang theory I like goes like this– God said “Let there be…” –and BANG it was very good.
Report Post »Soudio
Posted on April 3, 2011 at 3:41pmIt was Prof. Scott Tremaine, one of the world’s leading Scientists, who wrote to Jacobs family and told them that anyone who solves the theory that Jacobs working on is in line for the Nobel Peace Prize. Jacob did not say he is thinking reward. Please read and digest before you condemn. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you! It’s not hard to do, just think of your own feelings first, it’s probably something you do every day.
Report Post »ozchambers
Posted on April 4, 2011 at 9:24amYeah, but can he do THIS (patting my head and rubbing my tummy simultaneously).
Report Post »HorizonScanner
Posted on April 12, 2011 at 8:03amMacArthur, that’s the ticket. More money, and American.
Hire him to advise the Tea Party.
Report Post »