Before doing so, let us look at his and those who are in his social imagination. Yes, his fellow researchers have said that if the evidence (evidence that theory promises) which the new theory promises had been discovered before Hawking died last week, it may have secured the Noble Prize for Hawking. But, it had not been discovered and it likely won't be. Why? We will answer that.
Continuing to look at the social imagination of Hawking and his those in his social imagination, we should review what is still being said... Hawking's new paper seeks to resolve an issue thrown up by his 1983 “no-boundary” theory which described how the universe burst into existence with the big bang.
Now, that is a problem for the social imagination or I should say for those outside of his social imagination. Why? Because, there are those who social imagination are closer to the truth (absolute source of our information) than others. Hence, now that Hawkings is gone, 'new' evidences promised by his theory won't be discovered or at least not in the same way by the same social imagination; which suggests already that we may be living in an eternal inflation of corrupt information.
The social imagination in order to be true has to have and does have a source of absolute information as its source of its existence; the source of which is absolute, the creator of it. And, there are those close to the source and agreement is stronger than those farther from such truth and in disagreement. You see, in order to have any kind of reality, there must be agreement and it must stem knowing that there is an absolute source for it.
Everything that comes from that source of truth is furthest from its opposite - which is anti- truth as in totally corrupted and broken away from or far from the source of absolute truth. So, the problem with the idea that the universe just burst into existence is that in/for the social imagination that is not or cannot ever possible. Because, it requires total agreement that the social imagination came from 'nothing' and well such nothing is not possible in any social imagination.
This is a truth that stands as a platform for knowing what is knowable; an idea in that just springs up in the social imagination. We have to start from agreeing what is known and or knowable is that it never just bursts into existence. Otherwise, we cannot know anything in the social imagination as a truth or that as such it is knowable. But, there are those who demand we be amazed that everything we know and is knowable just burst/sprang into existence. I have to smile at such imaginations as they are incredibly illogical or let's say - so far from the truth its no wonder the idea of eternal inflation was the last resort to adhere to as truth.
You see, if the universe sprang or burst into existence and we are part of that bursting, we are no greater or less than any of it in such a process we are not able to know a knowable universe because it is not knowable if it just 'sprang/burst'; yet we taut ourselves as such.
Really, how is that possible that we can't know the universe if it just sprang or burst onto the scene? You see, in order to agree on any of this, we 'man' has put himself/ourselves higher to that miraculous event so that we could know it and we would know it to be knowable being greater or higher than such an event.
You see, if we were lower than such an event, we could not know it ot be knowable; we would be like grass and be happy to be grass. You see, if we put ourselves equal to such an event as I said a bit ago, then what is the point to know it since everyone and everything exists in it in equal measure and importance; what has to be known... nothing.
As far as any account that the universe instantaneously expanded from a tiny point into a prototype of what we live in today, a process known as inflation is as much as saying that we just imagined it that way and speaking as a sociologist who writes on the social imagination well that's about right. But, only as right for those who are farthest from the absolute truth of the source of the social imagination.
And, what is more problematic is that Hawking along with 'those' like Hawkings are not satisfied yet with one big bang but insist on the theory of an infinite number of big bangs, each creating their own universe, a “multiverse”; and of course, presents a mathematical paradox because it is seemingly impossible to measure. Why would that be? Because, its farthest from the source of the absolute truth. Why is that? Because, some people in their social imagination are caught up in an eternal inflation of untruth.
This post, in a limited part, or rather was inspired by (imagined from) an article by: Henry Bodkin with the Telegraph, U.K.; March 2018.