Leticia Corral, Mexican Astrophysicist, Recognized For Correcting Stephen Hawking’s Theory

[Judi Lynn]

Leticia Corral, Mexican Astrophysicist, Recognized For Correcting Stephen Hawking’s Theory
By Latin Times | Jan 07 2016, 11:32AM EST


[font size=1]
Mexican astrophysicist, Dr. Leticia Corral, has been rewarded for her discovery about the universe’s origins. Twitter
[/font]

Mexican astrophysicist from Chihuahua, Dr. Leticia Corral, just caught the attention of the entire scientific community around the world by correcting Stephen Hawking on his hypothesis of the universe’s origin. For this, Corral presented a mathematical model, which apparently proves that Hawking’s mistake was to not take time's asymmetry into consideration. “I believe that the universe is cyclical; that it all started from one point and returns to it,” she explained.

The International Association of Engineers recognized Dr. Corral for her work. “This prize is like a recognition to my spirit; it makes me feel like my thoughts go further than time and space,” she said. “It’s for doing what I love and am passionate about, every day.” However, the piece was initially written for Entropy magazine, which rejected it, but Corral was convinced her work was correct so she approached the Association.

More:
http://www.latintimes.com/leticia-corral-mexican-astrophysicist-recognized-correcting-stephen-hawkings-theory-362864

Science:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/122844641

[Gman]

1. He won't be playing Words With Friends with her

Any time soon.

[Ilsa]

4. Haaaaa!!!!

More time to play with Sheldon.

[Freelancer]

2. She's an absolutely brilliant, lovely woman. Met her decades ago. Congratulations! -- nt

[VMA131Marine]

3. The title of the OP is incorrect

She appears to have proposed a correction to Hawking's hypothesis about the origin of the Universe based on her own belief that the Universe is cyclical. There is a lot of actual evidence that her belief is wrong. Furthermore, she couldn't get her paper published in reputable physics journal so it's not been properly peer-reviewed. I can't find any discussion of this on any of the notable science media.