otherwise for this theorems well it is more or less valid 'theorically' but well
Hawking's analysis became the first convincing insight into a possible theory of [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity"]quantum gravity[/url]. However, the existence of Hawking radiation has never been observed. In June 2008, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA"]NASA[/url] launched the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-ray_Large_Area_Space_Telescope"]GLAST[/url] satellite, which will search for the terminal gamma-ray flashes expected from evaporating primordial black holes. In speculative [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_extra_dimension"]large extra dimension[/url] theories, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERN"]CERN's[/url] [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider]Large Hadron Collider[/url] may be able to create micro black holes and observe their evaporation.
from the same wikipage you quoted :
so yes as i said he has a brain, and he is thinker , but is more famous for his work of vulgarisation, and his theory never been really observed even if its probable that it is true, no experiment at this day really proved him wrong or right, and black hole have been subject to many theory since einstein, hawkins in one of those theory, but never been observed , so the most usefull thing he did was writing a brief history of time, and writing pseudo science fiction stuff on black hole ... but yes he is knowledgable in math and astro physics no doubt, but well his theory is pretty tiny and i don't consider it as being a real break through in science, he has interesting idea and studied black holes a lot, but i see him like some kind of mascot than a real physician, he has been put on top cause he is charismatic and know how to explain things in simple way, i think it is him who wrote 'each equation you put in a book, you loose 1 million reader' or something like this, so he is a good teacher, know how to explain relavitly simply complex stuff, and it is more for this that he is famous than for his theories on black holes, which nobody would really know about if he didn't write those book of 'popular science'His books and public appearances have made him an academic celebrity and he is an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_Fellow"]Honorary Fellow[/url] of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Society_for_the_encouragement_of_Arts,_Manufactures_%26_Commerce"]Royal Society of Arts[/url],[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking#cite_note-soafellow-1"][/url] a lifetime member of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences"]Pontifical Academy of Sciences[/url],[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking#cite_note-2"][/url] and in 2009 was awarded the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Medal_of_Freedom"]Presidential Medal of Freedom[/url], the highest civilian award in the United States.[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking#cite_note-presidential-3][/url]
He has also achieved success with works of [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_science"]popular science[/url] in which he discusses his own theories and cosmology in general; these include the runaway best seller [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time"]A Brief History of Time[/url], which stayed on the British [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunday_Times"]Sunday Times[/url] bestsellers list for a record-breaking 237 weeks.[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking#cite_note-book-7"][/url][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking#cite_note-8][/url]
Popular science, sometimes called literature of science, is interpretation of [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science"]science[/url] intended for a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_audience"]general audience[/url]. While [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_journalism]science journalism[/url] focuses on recent scientific developments, popular science is broad-ranging, often written by scientists as well as journalists, and is presented in many formats, which can include books, television documentaries, magazine articles and web pages.
The purpose of scientific literature is to inform and persuade peers as to the validity of observations and conclusions and the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic"]forensic[/url] efficacy of methods. Popular science attempts to inform and convince scientific outsiders (sometimes along with scientists in other fields) of the significance of data and conclusions and to celebrate the results through [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epideictic]epideictic[/url] rhetoric. Statements in scientific literature are often qualified and tentative, emphasizing that new observations and results are consistent with and similar to established knowledge wherein qualified scientists are assumed to recognize the relevance. By contrast, popular science emphasizes uniqueness and generality, taking a tone of factual authority absent from the scientific literature. Comparisons between original scientific reports and derivative science journalism and popular science typically reveal at least some level of distortion and oversimplification which can often be quite dramatic, even with politically neutral scientific topics.