In the interview, Hawking rejected the notion of life beyond death and emphasized the need to fulfill our potential on Earth by making good use of our lives. In answer to a question on how we should live, he said, simply: "We should seek the greatest value of our action." In answering another, he wrote of the beauty of science, such as the exquisite double helix of DNA in biology, or the fundamental equations of physics.
The quote isn't about defining beauty. And regarding how to live, he says, "We should seek the greatest value of our action." How this escapes you is beyond me.
As far as defining beauty goes, I personally couldn't care less whether anyone someday convinces most people they've got it nailed down. It's subjective and, often as not, apparently arbitrary. For me it's largely admiration of things I find excellent examples of things I appreciate. For you it's whatever it is for you.
In that case, the quote is meaningless. Be irritated if you wish, but if Hawking is going to assert that there is beauty in science, I have a right to ask what this “beauty” thing is? What is is? Why is this something we should live for? He doesn’t have an answer. You don’t either. That’s why you have abandoned dialectic, and resorted to rhetoric.
teilo, there is a reason there's no branch of science called beautology, and likewise no theory of beauty, you irritating ding-dong. And your stupid questions don't even have anything to do with the quote. I swear I'd pay good money to see someone shove ten dollars in dirty nickels up your nose.