Analysis Finds 4 Major Flaws in Hawking's No-Boundary Proposal

2 articles · Updated · Universe Today · May 15

A new analysis says Hawking’s no-boundary model cannot be treated as a settled account of the universe’s origin because it rests on heavy approximations without a working theory of quantum gravity.
Those assumptions also weaken its predictive power: the proposal’s most probable universe is smaller and less inflated than ours, while less manipulated calculations reportedly produce chaotic outcomes instead of a clear cosmic history.
The critique further targets Hawking’s use of standard quantum probabilities for the entire universe, arguing the Born rule and even the idea of measurement become shaky when observers are inside the system being measured.
Roger Penrose’s long-running objection also resurfaces: the model’s low-entropy, smooth early universe may not be a prediction at all, but an assumption built into the setup from the start.
The analysis concludes that until quantum gravity is established, the no-boundary proposal remains intriguing but unresolved—and still leaves open why the laws of physics exist at all.

Are radical new ideas like quantum wormholes our best hope for finally explaining the universe's ultimate origin?

As Hawking’s ‘no-beginning’ theory falters, could our universe be caught in an endless cycle of death and rebirth?