We have been brought up in an atmosphere in which the victories of love are in our eyes and the sound of the drums of love resounds in our hearts. Our hearts beat with excitement when we see the flag of love waving. We have become so intertwined with love that our lives become purely dependent on love, and we dedicate our souls to it. When we live, we live with love, and when we die, we die with love. In every breath, we feel it with our whole existence; it is our warmth in the cold, and our oasis in the heat.

In this over-polluted world, where evil is everywhere, if there is something that has been left untouched and clean, that is love; among all the fading ornaments of this life, if there is a beauty that has preserved its magnificence and charm without fading, that is also love. There is nothing more real or more lasting than love in any nation or society in this world. Wherever the sound of love, softer and warmer than a lullaby, is heard, all other voices, all instruments, are muted, and they all join together in a contemplation of silence with their most melodic strains.

Creation is the result of lighting the wick of the candle of love, the wick of “being known and seen.” If the Lord did not love creation, there would be neither moons, nor suns nor stars. The heavens are all poems of love, with the Earth being the rhyme. In nature, the heavy blow of love is felt, and in relationships between people, the flag of love can be seen to wave. In society, if there is a currency that maintains its value, it is love, and again the value of love is found in itself. Love weighs more if weighed against with the purest gold. Both gold and silver can lose their value in different markets and places, but the doors of love are closed to any kind of pessimism and nothing can alter its inner stability and harmony. Up to this very moment, only those who are immersed in hatred, wrath and enmity plan to resist and struggle against love. Ironically, the only cure that will calm these brutal souls is love. Beyond the effect of worldly treasures there are other problems that only the mystical keys of love can solve. It is not possible that any value on this earth can overcome or even compete with love. The cartels of gold, silver, coin, or any other object of value, are almost always conquered in this marathon by the devotees of affection and love. When the day comes, despite all the splendid, pompous life styles of the owners of material wealth, their coffers are empty, their fires have burned out; yet the candle of love always burns, giving light and diffusing this into our hearts and souls.

Those fortunate people who have kneeled in front of the altar of affection and who have devoted their lives to spreading love have not left even the smallest space in their vocabulary for words like hatred, wrath, conspiracy, or resentment, and even if it means putting their very lives at risk, they have never indulged in enmity. Their heads are humbly bowed, filled with love, they have never greeted anything other than love. When they rise, feelings of enmity try to find a haven in which to hide, feelings of hatred become jealous, recoiling from the blow delivered by love.

The only magic, the only spell that can destroy the tricks of Satan, is love. The messengers and prophets extinguished the fires of hatred and jealousy kindled by the pharaohs, the Nimrods, and other tyrannous kings; they used nothing but love. The saints have tried to gather together the undisciplined and rebellious souls, spread all over like loose pages; they have used love to try to introduce humane behavior to others. The power of love was great enough to break the spells of Harut and Marut,* and effective enough to extinguish the fires of Hell. Hence, there is no doubt that a person who is armored with love needs no other weapon. Indeed, love is strong enough to stop a bullet or even a canon ball.

Our interest in our environment and our love for humankind – that is, our ability to embrace creation – depends on knowing and understanding our own essence, our ability to discover ourselves, and to feel a connection with our Creator. In parallel with the ability to discover and feel our inner depths and hidden potential within our essence, we will also be able to appreciate that others also possess the same potential. Moreover, because these inner values are directly related to the Creator, and because a respect for the riches that are hidden in every creature is nurtured, we will start to see every living thing from a different perspective and in a different manner. In reality, the level of our understanding and appreciation of one another depends on how well we recognize the qualities and riches that each person possesses. We can summarize this concept with a thought based on a saying of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, “A believer is the mirror of another believer.” We can enlarge on this saying as “a human is a mirror of another human.” If we are able to succeed in doing this, as well as being able to understand and appreciate the riches hidden within every person, we will also understand how to relate these riches to their true Owner, and thus we will accept that anything in this universe that is beautiful, affectionate, or loving belongs to Him. A soul that can sense this depth says, as did Rumi, a famous Muslim saint, presenting us tales from the language of the heart: “Come, come and join us, as we are the people of love devoted to God! Come, come through the door of love and join us and sit with us. Come, let us speak one to another through our hearts. Let us speak secretly, without ears and eyes. Let us laugh together without lips or sound, let us laugh like the roses. Like thought, let us see each other without any words or sound. Since we are all the same, let us call each other from our hearts, we won’t use our lips or tongue. As our hands are clasped together, let us talk about it.”

In our present culture, it is not so easy to witness such a deep understanding of these humane feelings and values; we cannot find these easily in Greek or Latin thought or in Western philosophy. Islamic thought sees each one of us as a different manifestation of a unique ore, as different aspects of one reality. Indeed, the people who have gathered around common points, such as the Oneness of God, the Prophet and the religion resemble the limbs of a body. The hand does not need to compete with the foot, the tongue does not criticize the lips, the eye does not see the mistakes of the ears, the heart does not struggle with the mind.

As we are all limbs of the same body, we should cease this duality that violates our very union. We should clear the way to unite people; this is one of the greatest ways in which God grants people success in this world, and how He transforms this world into a Paradise. It is in this way that the doors of Heaven will be opened wide in order to give us a warm welcome. Hence, we should remove all ideas and feelings that pull us apart, and run to embrace one another.

* Two angels, whose story is told in the Qur’an (2:102), taught the fundamentals of magic to people and warned them against abusing it.

Psychologists have uncovered and grouped intelligence into three main groups: abstract intelligence (the ability to understand and manipulate using verbal and mathematical symbols), concrete intelligence (the ability to understand and manipulate with objects), and social intelligence (the ability to understand and relate to people).¹

Emotional intelligence (EI) has its roots in the concept of “social intelligence,” first identified by E.L. Thorndike in 1920. The influence of this concept on popular culture and the academic community has been rapid and widespread.

As we all know, emotions are a fundamental part of who we are, and play an important part in our relationships with others. They cannot be removed from the picture. However, most of us have traditionally been conditioned “to leave our emotions at home,” believing that in order to be more effective we need to base all our strategies and decisions only upon cold, logical “intelligence.”²

In fact, to do so often guarantees that the suppressed emotions will flare, causing increased conflict and affecting the mood of the individual negatively. But what if we continue to expand our knowledge of emotions in a different way altogether, as another kind of “intelligence,” beyond reason and logic? An intelligence that – if we could learn to access it – could become nothing less than a touchstone to greater collaboration, giving us greater influence with others, motivating us to be more productive and effective.

It could be said that the greatest distance there is is the distance between the mind (IQ) and the heart (EQ). By learning about and utilizing EI, we will be able to shorten that distance, and we will be working with astonishing capacity and effectiveness. Let us address some important questions and issues about Emotional Intelligence.

What Is EI?

When Salovey and Mayer coined the term “emotional intelligence” (EI) in 1990,³ they were aware of the previous work on non-cognitive aspects of intelligence. They described emotional intelligence as “a form of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide one’s thinking and actions.”⁴

Esther Orioli and Robert Cooper state the following in explaining EI: “EI is far more than being ‘nice’ to people. It is the ability to sense, understand, and effectively apply the power and acumen of emotions as a source of energy, information, creativity, trust, and connection.”⁵

Another way to describe EI is the ability to sense and use emotions to more effectively manage ourselves and influence positive outcomes in our relationships.

Why Do We Need EI?

Primitive emotional responses of our EI hold the keys to better health, experiencing greater joy and closer connections, achieving stronger leadership, a clearer vision, greater efficacy, higher goals, expanding our personal power, enhancing our self-awareness, augmenting learning, magnifying clarity, ensuring healthier relationships and finer perception, and finally, the provision of greater satisfaction. These emotional reflexes, rarely conscious but powerful, motivate our choices. In short, we need EI for utilizing the power of emotions.

What Are the Competencies of EI?

In Goleman’s model of EI there are five key steps:⁶ self-awareness, self-regulation, self-motivation, empathy, and effective relationships; each includes a set of different competencies. All the competencies to be successful are not necessary, but the two core competencies (emotional self-awareness and accurate self-assessment) are essential. These are the two foundational abilities upon which all others rest (see Chart).

1. Self-Awareness

The cornerstone or foundation of EI is self-awareness. It supports all the other EI skills. Self-awareness must come first because if we do not know ourselves or what we are feeling, how can we possibly know the needs of others or understand someone else and how they feel?

The more we know about ourselves, the better we are able to control and choose what kind of behavior we will display in any given situation. Self-awareness is about knowing where we are now and where we want to go, so that we will be willing to change to get there. Without self-awareness, our emotions can blind us and guide us to do things or to become people we do not want to be.

To become more self-aware, one must follow these steps:

• Learn the difference between thoughts and feelings. It is extremely important to know the difference between “I think” and “I feel” if you are to know yourself better.

• Ask yourself how you are feeling throughout the day and be honest. If your heart races or you blush or if you are short of breath – this is usually a gut reaction. Ask yourself, “What is the feeling behind it?” Name that feeling – fear, anxiety, love, eagerness.

• Be open to input from others. Friends and associates can often enlighten us about our behavior.

2. Self-Regulation

While we are listening and learning from our gut feelings as a step toward self-awareness, self-regulation is regulating those same feelings and managing them so that they do more good than harm. Self-regulation is giving the rational side time to temper our feelings when needed. It also helps us to act intentionally rather than reactively. When we act intentionally, we mean what we say rather. The other side of the coin is to just spout off without thinking and later regret an impulsive act.

Here are some tips to help you with self-regulation:

• Monitor your self-talk (what you say to yourself in your mind).

• Accept responsibility for your emotional responses in your life. When you are feeling that you are accountable, you are acknowledging your own power.

• Anticipate emotional “triggers” and prepare to manage them.

• Reframe an irritating situation into a problem-solving exercise. When you encounter a situation that provokes an undesirable emotional response, decrease your anger by focusing on the behavior. Reframe it to make the behavior the problem, and not the person.

• Use humor!

• Never underestimate the power of taking deep breaths. Increasing the flow of oxygen to the brain eases tension, clarifies thinking and has a relaxing effect on our psyche and body. It also gives you a moment to collect your thoughts and to think before speaking.

• Remove yourself from the situation and keep moving. There are major benefits in distancing yourself from a bad situation and re-directing your energy into a new activity. This will help you regain your perspective, increase your alertness and re-energize.

Unlike Intelligence Quotient, which is fixed for life, Emotional Quotient can be continually developed to enable people to increase their awareness of their selves and others, to develop.

3. Self-Motivation

Self-motivation is directing the power of our emotions toward a purpose that will motivate and inspire us. It is also visualizing the achievement of a goal and taking whatever the necessary steps are to get there. Various ways to bolster your self-motivation are: — Be aware of how you explain setbacks to yourself… stay realistic. Realize that you can control and choose what you are thinking and feeling. Increase your persistence by keeping things in perspective. — Connect your goals with your values to get energized. Keep your eyes on the goal and follow through so you can enjoy the satisfaction of completing whatever projects you’ve begun. — Strive for reaching a —flow— state while working on projects. — Visualize! — Keep learning! The pursuit of knowledge will build on your areas of strength. You will be more valuable and versatile.

4. Empathy

Once we have become more honest and intentional with our emotions, it is time to look outward. EI is both tuning into our feelings and tuning into the feelings of those around us. It means responding to others appropriately, with sensitivity and compassion. Empathy is being able to see a problem from another person’s perspective. It is good to acknowledge other people’s emotions while still remembering that those are their emotions, not ours. Empathy begins with listening. This means making a connection with people. Individuals who lack empathy are more focused on their needs and pay little or no attention to anyone else’s. Empathy is the glue that will bind a group together to work successfully. Some of the techniques for enhancing your empathy are: — Look for nonverbal cues as well as listening for verbal ones. Studies show that words account for only 7% of communication. Tone and the speed of speech accounts for 38% of the message, while 55% is unspoken and revealed through body language, such as posture, eye contact, facial expressions, and so on. — Share and be honest about your feelings. Good communication leads to trust. — Your spoken and unspoken messages should be consistent. You want what you are saying to uphold what you are doing. This proves that you are being honest, or authentic, which builds trust. — Take the kinder road whenever possible. There are many ways to deliver opinions and criticism. You can be honest and still give positive feedback, which increases confidence. Construc-tive feedback increases competence. — Try to see a situation from the other person’s perspective. Empathy is about imagining what it would be like to walk in someone else’s shoes. We ought to assume that everyone is doing the best they can with the resources that they have at the moment.

5. Effective Relationships

Mastering the abilities of self-awareness, self-regulation, self-motivation, and empathy paves the way to attaining greater skill in effective relationships. This competency is about interacting with people successfully and being adept at managing emotions in others. With heightened social skills, leaders are better communicators and better collaborators. Some EI techniques for having more effective relationships at work: — Share your passion and enthusiasm for your job and the organization’s vision — it’s contagious! Keep the vision in view by relating your own excitement for a project or goal. — Create an inspiring work environment. If you show honesty, trust, and appreciation toward your team, you create the perfect environment for them to do their best work. — Engage in creative brainstorming. Not only is brainstorming good for generating fresh ideas, but the process builds rapport and trust among team members. This could smooth the way to future collaborations because of the creative bond that has been formed. — Be willing to coach or mentor others and be open to being coached yourself. This is the most important relationship skill in the workplace. By sharing your knowledge and expertise with other team members, you are nurturing the next generation. And by allowing someone to coach you, you are showing that you are receptive to others’ ideas and that you do not —know it all.— In conclusion, quite simply the EI competencies of intra-personal and inter-personal skills are central to our life and are a different way of being intelligent. They are the tools that our brains use to define ourselves, to shape the meaning of major concepts like love, success, and happiness. EI has been found to be more important than IQ, technical ability, or experience in determining life success. Unlike IQ, which is fixed for life, EQ can be continually developed to enable people to increase their awareness of their selves and others, to develop self-management strategies, and to connect with others to create collaboration and harmony. In practice, EI also enables people to tap into their true power and creativity and to consciously choose the most effective response to any situation rather than merely reacting impulsively.

Footnotes

1. Ruisel, I., Social Intelligence: Conception and Methodological Problems, 34(4-5), 281-296.
2. Emotional Intelligence Workbook, CRM Learning, Carlsbad, 2001.
3. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. Emotional Intelligence, Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 1990.
4. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J., The Intelligence of Emotional Intelligence, 1993, 17, 433-442. 5 See http://www.qmetricseq.com/
5. Goleman, D., Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, 1995.

“None of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad.”
W. Montgomery Watt

Michael Hart received much heated criticism from some of his readers when he listed Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, as the most influential person of all times in his book entitled The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History.

While Hart’s criteria for selection was fairly objective, for most people seeing the name Muhammad ahead of names like Mahatma Gandhi or Jesus was startling, if not outright disturbing. For people of the western world who are trying to understand Prophet Muhammad, his human character, his ethnic background, and negative stereotypes unjustly associated with him sometimes present a barrier that needs to be overcome. One of the common stereotypes about Prophet Muhammad is to view him as a pious man who dedicated his life to saving his community, the pagans of the Arabian Peninsula, from their wretched lifestyle by claiming prophethood. This view, while appearing innocent at first glance, seriously overlooks his lifetime achievements and his impact on the history of humanity.

The Implications of Two Views

It must be emphasized that being a pious person and trying to save a community by declaring prophethood is not the same, in any way, as being a real messenger of God. The first case implies that the person is essentially a liar. While many adjectives have been associated with Prophet Muhammad, “liar” has never been one of them. Indeed, he was known by his community as their most trustworthy member, al-Ameen in Arabic. Disbelievers accused him of being a magician or a crazy person, but never of lying. In the words of Montgomery Watt:

“His readiness to undergo persecutions for his beliefs, the high moral character of the men who believed in him and looked up to him as leader, and the greatness of his ultimate achievement – all argue his fundamental integrity. To suppose Muhammad an impostor raises more problems than it solves. Moreover, none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad.”¹

Prophet Muhammad lived for 23 years after receiving the first revelation. His companions continuously observed the minute details of his life. Their acquaintance with him only increased their devotion to him. If there had been the smallest sign of insincerity, they would have noticed and would have abandoned him. This never happened. The early Muslim community that started with his wife Khadija and his cousin ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib (may God be pleased with them) in Makka numbered over 140,000 by the time of his death, 23 years later. Some companions were so fond of him that they even saved pieces of his beard and kept them as valuable mementos.

The issue of the authenticity of Prophet Muhammad’s message is a two-sided issue. The two sides in this case are infinitely distant from one another. On the one side is the view that he was a genuine messenger of God. On the other is the position that he was a pious person who worked to save his community from ignorance by declaring his prophethood when indeed this was not the case.

If one views the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, superficially, in the light of what history books narrate of the beginning of his life, one will not be able to perceive him and appreciate his worth or recognize his character fully. However, the religion of Islam and the world civilization of Islam have flourished from him. One should consider the narrations of history and biography books as a thin cover. This cover can be split, just as the Prophet split the moon into two with a single gesture of his finger, and this shows him as the seed and founder of this civilization. One should regard what one sees of the merely human dimension of the Prophet as being the outer covering of the seed from which the blessed tree of Prophet Muhammad has grown. It is a tree that has been watered by Divine blessings and has flourished continually through time with the help of Divine favors. Whatever one hears of the beginning of his life, of his merely human qualities and states should not lead one to get stuck there. Rather, one should immediately direct one’s attention to the degree of greatness he attained at the final point of his greatness, impossible to perceive without recognizing the hand of the Lord of the Universe.

The Fruits of the Tree of Muslim Civilization

Indeed, if we examine what fruits the tree of Islamic civilization bore, we can make the following observations: The polytheist Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula had many despicable habits that were ingrained in their culture. For instance, they used to bury their daughters in order to be saved from the embarrassments these girls might bring on the family when they grew up. Usury, adultery, racism, oppression of the weak, the worshipping of idols, oppression of women and the elderly, rampant drinking, and tribal feuds were the norm of this era. In place of these habits, Prophet Muhammad established virtues, such as charity (to the needy and the relatives), strong family bonds, universal brotherhood of humankind, truthfulness, kindness to the elderly and especially to one’s parents, caring for orphans, the observation of freedom of choice in religion, respect for animal rights, among others. His success in eliminating the vices of racism from his people’s consciences was noted by the famous British historian Arnold Toynbee:

“The extinction of race consciousness as between Muslims is one of the outstanding achievements of Islam, and in the temporary world there is, as it happens, a crying need for the propagation of this Islamic virtue.”²

It is well known to behavioral scientists and social workers that a minor habit, such as cigarette smoking, in a small community can be removed permanently only by a powerful authority with great effort. But Prophet Muhammad was able to remove numerous ingrained habits from great nations that were intractable and fanatical in their beliefs with slight outward power and little effort over a short period of time. In their place he established exalted qualities, virtues common to most world religions, which mingled firmly with their souls. He achieved many extraordinary feats like this. Thus, the Arabian Peninsula of Prophet Muhammad’s time stands as a challenge to those who refuse to see the testimony of the blessed age of the Prophet. If we were to take a hundred philosophers, go there, and strive for a hundred years, would we be able to carry out in that time one hundredth of what he achieved in a year?

Thomas Carlyle was amazed as to “how one man single handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades.” He further commented:

“The lies, which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad), are disgraceful to ourselves only.”³

While Prophet Muhammad performed many miracles, his greatest miracle given to him, the Qur’an, continues to inspire and guide over a billion Muslims in their lives. Many non-Muslim translators and the commentators of the Qur’an have praised it as a masterpiece of Arabic literature.

The Mirror and the Source

Another pitfall that awaits someone who is studying Prophet Muhammad”s character with a doubting or idle curiosity is that they may be unable to distinguish between the subject and the object, the source and the mirror. Such a person may not be able to distinguish between a letter of the alphabet, which has no meaning in itself and therefore draws attention to others than itself, and a word which, having a meaning in itself, attracts attention to itself. He may not be able to distinguish between what is essential to or inherent in the Divine Being and what is disseminated or manifested by Him. The Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, is purely a created servant of God Almighty, one much more advanced than anybody else in worship and servitude to Him. We must view him as one who is the object of Divine manifestations. Whatever perfections he displays are from his Almighty Lord. No created thing, whether big or small, can be, of itself, the real source or origin of anything. But, the tiniest particle can, like a mirror, contain even the stars of the heavens, reflecting what is manifested in it of God”s magnificence. Those who are heedless of this fact may fall into the trap of viewing each thing in respect of itself, and not in respect of the origin of the light reflected in it. Prophet Muhammad was a mirror that reflected the light of the Lord of the universe. To see him otherwise is to deny the historical record of the magnificence of Islamic civilization.

Conclusion

In these difficult times of the early 21st century, people of the world have found a renewed interest in the life and teachings of Prophet Muhammad. The unbiased seeker of truth has to understand the motives of those sources who present him as a pious man who lived in the 7th century Arabian Peninsula and tried to uplift his community by declaring propethood. This seeker should raise his sight from the broken egg, which is the human and ethnic background of Muhammad and view the magnificent peacock that is the servant of God who led his people from darkness to light, and continues to inspire billions. And they need to raise their sights from the seed that is the human Muhammad to the magnificent tree of Islamic civilization with its many fruits. Many enlightened intellects have done exactly this. In his work entitled Historie de la Turquie, the famed French author Lamartine wrote: —Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?—⁴ His view was echoed repeatedly by many well-known names of the world, such as Goethe, Bismarck, Thomas Carlyle, G. Bernard Shaw, and Gandhi during the subsequent centuries: —I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers and his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle— (Ghandi, Young India, 1922). In response to the western labeling of —anti-Christ,— the Nobel laureate George Bernard Shaw said: —I have studied him, the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness.—⁵ The name Muhammad derives from an Arabic root which means —love.— In the Qur’an, God mentions him as a —mercy upon humankind.— But this image strikes a sharp contrast with his current image in the West in the light of recent developments. The true image of the messenger of God is shadowed by historical and recent negative associations that have created a temporary blindness to the magnificent achievements of his lifetime and to 14 centuries of Islamic civilization. To quote again the words of Montgomery Watt, —none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad.— Therefore, the unbiased seeker of truth of the 21st century has a duty to study the life and the message of this great messenger with an open mind, going beyond stereotypes.

Footnotes

1. Watt, W. Montgomery, Mohammed at Mecca, Oxford, 1953, p. 52.
2. Toynbee, A.J., Civilization on Trial, New York, 1948, p. 205.
3. Carlyle, Thomas, Heroes and Hero-worship, p.19.
4. Lamartine, Historie de la Turquie, Paris, 1854, Vol. II, pp. 276-277.
5. Shaw, George Bernard, The Genuine Islam, Singapore. Vol. 1, No. 81936, Ref. 7-p16.

It is We Who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Qur’an 51:47)

In astronomical terms, this is a very short distance. It is estimated that within our own solar system the distance between the Sun and Pluto, the ninth and usually farthest planet from the Sun, is about 4.6 billion miles (7.4 billion kilometers) at aphelion (the point of the orbit that is farthest from the sun). It may be hard to believe that the Sun, Pluto, and all the intra-planetary bodies were once one giant mass. But this is what the Solar Nebular theory, the most popular account for the creation of solar systems, postulates.

The Solar Nebular Theory & the Holy Qur’an

According to the Solar Nebular theory, the emergence of a solar system begins with cosmic gas. A large cloud of gas and dust (a nebula) – believed to have initially come into existence through a slow process of conglomeration – slowly starts to lose peripheral matter as it slowly rotates. This collapse, as the theory goes, happens gradually as the force of gravity pulls the nebular matter inward (toward its center of gravity), overpowering the force of expansion due to gas pressure.

As the cloud collapses, it starts to spin faster in conformance with the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum. The combination of the increased spin and the attraction of gravity cause the nebula to flatten into a spinning pancake-like structure with a bulge at the center. Slowly, the heavier regions within this evolving structure begin to contract gravitationally and condense. Eventually, the sun forms the center and planets form around it, rotating in the same direction and along the same plan (with exceptions, for example, in our solar system, Venus, Mercury, and Pluto spin “backward” – perhaps due to collisions during the formation stage). The centripetal force, a corollary to gravitational force, prevents the planets from drifting out of orbit. It is a very delicate balance.2

It is reported that Kant and Laplace presented the Solar Nebular hypothesis in the eighteenth century³Yet, this hypothesis that consists firstly of the coalescing of planetesimals* to form the solar nebular cloud, and then the differentiating of this cloud into planets, appears to have been referred to in the Qur’an since the seventh century. For example, in 71:14, God may be alluding to the phased nature of the birth of the Solar System. Verses 15 and 16 are further quoted to give the context of this Qur’anic revelation, i.e. the creation of the Solar System:

Seeing that it is He that has created you in diverse stages? See you not how Allah has created the seven heavens one above another? And made the moon a light in their midst, and made the sun as a (Glorious) Lamp? (71:14-16)

In 41:11 there is a verse about stage one – the formation of the nebular cloud; and, in 21:30 about stage two – the cleavage of the nebular cloud into our solar system:

Then He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth:

“Come you together, willingly or unwillingly.” They said: “We do come (together), in willing obedience.” (41:11)

Have the unbelievers not beheld that the heavens and the earth were a solid mass, then We separated them . . . (21:30)

The Arabic word sama (plural samawat) is routinely translated as meaning “heaven” (also sometimes as firmament) in the mainstream translations of the Qur’an. However, in our context here, sky would be a more accurate term. [The Qur’an refers to Heaven itself (the place where good deeds will be rewarded) as either Janna or Firdaws, but never as sama.]

On several occasions, the Qur’an refers to seven skies (seven heavens) being stacked one above the other (as if in levels), for example, in 71:15, as quoted above. There is no consensus among Muslim scholars as to where these seven heavens lie. But if we look at our solar system we find that it consists of an average sized star that we call the Sun and nine planets orbiting the Sun. These planets in outreaching order are Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. “Above” the Earth, therefore, there are six planets and seven interplanetary skies; there are also seven orbits, beginning with the Earth’s orbit, up to Pluto’s orbit.

In my opinion, however, the seven skies oft-noted in the Qur’an refer to these seven interplanetary “skies,” and not to the orbits. The Qur’an is rather explicit when reference is made to celestial orbits, and the Arabic word falak (aptly translated as orbit) is then used:

It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) floats along in (its own) orbit (according to Law). (36:40)

The fact that the sun “swims” in its own orbit – at the formidable speed of about 140 miles per second (225 km per second) – was finally realized in the 1910s when the American astronomer Harlow Shapley characterized our existence in the universe⁴Humanity was in for an “astronomical” surprise.

Our sun, it turned out, is but one of over 100 billion stars that make up our galaxy (the Milky Way) and that rotate around the galactic center (the center of our galaxy) in a near circular orbit. Most of these stars are closer to the galactic center than our sun. The distance from the center of our galaxy to the Sun is about 26,000 light-years (a light-year is about 6 trillion miles or 9.5 trillion kilometers and it is the distance that light travels in a year). The Milky Way itself measures about 100,000 light-years across.5 

It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) floats along in (its own) orbit (according to Law). (Qur’an 36:40)

This discovery closed the chapter on the heliocentric (sun-centered) model of the universe as popularized by Nicolai Copernicus in the sixteenth century and which held sway until well into the twentieth century. We live in an average-size solar system in a universe that is comprised of a potentially infinite number of galaxies.

My point is that most of the cosmological revelations in the Qur’an pertain to the creation of our solar system. Conventionally, 21:30, for example, is often ascribed to the Big Bang theory for the creation of the universe. It seems to me that these verses may be interpreted as referring to the creation of our solar system. Yet, all cognitively defensible interpretations of the holy text are equally valid. This is a component of the miraculous nature of the Qur’an – its fixed text but flexible interpretation. And, I would argue, the same can be said for the Bible.

Relativity

So, in this spirit, let us resume our celestial reflections. Could it be that the six-day creation account found in both the Bible and the Qur’an starts here (i.e., six days for the formation of the Solar System or even our galaxy and not necessarily for the creation of the whole universe)? Which begs the question, are these days necessarily days as we know them? Is it explicitly stated in either of the holy books that a day is necessarily made up of twenty-four hours? The answer is no. Let us review two key verses from each book. Cross-referencing between the two holy books is not unwarranted. Muslims believe that it is the same God who revealed both books.

He Who created the heavens and the earth and all that is between, in six days, and is firmly established on the Throne (of Authority) . . . (Qur’an 25:59)

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Bible, KJV Genesis 1:1)

Reference is made to the creation of “the earth.” There is no compelling reason to assume that the six-day narrative pertains to the creation of the whole universe. Reference may be to the creation of the Solar System or just the Galaxy. Second, there is no particular reason to theorize that the six days are days as we know them now.

Let us ask a simple question here, what is a day? It is the time it takes the Earth to revolve around its axis (24 hours). Given that the Milky Way is a gigantic spiral disk with a bright, central bulge, what would be a day for our galaxy? The time for it to revolve around its axis (galactic center) is estimated to be 225 million years.6

It is estimated that up until now the Sun has completed 20 revolutions around the galactic center – that is a time span of 4.5 billion years (the estimated age of our planet); or, if we look at it in another way, 20 days. Six days in this sense, therefore, is equivalent to 1.35 billion years. We must also wonder whether the time it takes the Earth to revolve around its axis has been twenty-four hours since “day one.” Ultimately, time is a relative measurement.

Einstein’s 1905 theory of time and space, Special Relativity, proposed that distance and time are not absolute. The ticking rate of a clock and the length of a “yardstick” depend on the motion of the observer. The closer you approach the speed of light – about 186,000 miles per second or 300,000 kilometers per second – the slower your watch seems to be ticking relative to others. Another way to put it is, the faster you travel through space, the slower you travel through time. Imagine a vehicle capable of such maneuvering – this is, in effect, a time machine.7

It may not be very helpful to think about this too much, but if you have seen Paramount Pictures’ 2002 sci-fi movie Clockstoppers, imagine: you, moving at a speed approaching the speed of light, would see everyone else as if they were the ones functioning in “hypertime.” This notion of a “hasty” human attitude is reiterated in the Qur’an; and, the whole idea of time relativity is also suggested several times in the Qur’an. Two examples follow. When looked at in the light of Relativity, these verses make perfect sense and are quite revealing:

Yet they ask you to hasten on the Punishment! But God will not fail in His Promise. Verily a Day in the sight of your Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning. (22:47)

The angels and the spirit ascend unto him in a Day the measure whereof is (as) fifty thousand years. (70:4)

Further, Relativity posits time and space as being one insolvable unit called space-time, as the fabric of the universe, as it were. As such, time and space as we know them only started from the moment the universe was conceived… with a “big bang.”

The Big Bang Theory

The Big Bang theory (BBT) is the most popular scientific theory on the origin of the universe. Its most popular version, the -inflationary universe,- presented by Alan H. Guth in 1980, postulates that the universe was created some fifteen billion years ago in an escalatory manner from a cosmic explosion of a -Primary Nebula- (singularity) – that is, an infinitely condensed matter – that cast matter in all directions. The theory holds for an initial expansion rate faster than the speed of light⁸Guth”s inflationary notion came into being in order to account for the fact that if the initial explosion was linear, as held the traditional version of the theory, first theorized by George Lemaitre in 1927, it would not explain the differential interstellar and intergalactic distances. The distances are such that some celestial regions could never have been in proximity at any point in time if the expansion had always simply proceeded at the speed of light⁹The big bang could not have happened at a particular place in the universe, because before it happened, as the theory goes, there was no universe. Rather, there was nothing, except for the singularity which started it all. Quantum mechanics tries to explain how, before spacetime, subatomic particles in this singularity interacted to produce an unfathomable amount of energy which was the initial spark of creation. It is believed that every particle has its anti-particle (as every matter has its anti-matter) that is a complete opposite (for example, in charge, spin, etc.). When these two antagonists meet, they annihilate each other in a tremendous burst of energy that would humble a nuclear explosion. Einstein”s famous relativity equation E=mc2 (where E denotes Energy, M mass and C the speed of light) suggests that energy and matter are interchangeable. Thus, matter was created from this primary explosion which kicked off a rapid expansion of space, and (we think) space has been expanding ever since. In the early 1920s, Edwin Hubble observed that galaxies were moving away from each other at a rate proportional to the distance between them. As galaxies moved away from us, the light they emitted was red-shifted. That is, light waves shifted to longer wavelengths (a phenomenon known as the Doppler Effect). The faster the object moved, the greater the shift. From these observations, Hubble formulated the Hubble”s Law, which helped cosmologists determine the age of the universe, and proved that the universe was expanding¹⁰The Qur’an explicitly foretold this fact: It is We Who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (51:47)¹¹The BBT also predicted the existence of residual cosmic background radiation (the glow leftover from the explosion itself). This radiation was discovered in 1964 by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, who later won the Nobel Prize for their discovery.12

Omega & the Universe

If the universe is expanding, then it inevitably emerged from an ever-smaller mass. Go back long enough (to time zero) and you have the singularity that exploded with a -big bang,- By the same token, Einstein”s 1915 theory of General Relativity offers the antithesis scenario for the BBT. If the gravitational force pulling the matter of a massive star inward exceeds that of its gas pressure, it will collapse onto itself creating a -black hole.- Does a similar -black- fate await the universe? In Stephen Hawking’s Universe documentary, Hawking contends that the concept can be extrapolated to the whole universe. If the universe has too much matter, it will eventually collapse onto itself under the influence of its own gravitational force. This bleak scenario is called the Big Crunch. By contrast, if the universe has too little matter, it will continue to expand indefinitely stretching ever thinner and colder. This bleak scenario is called the Big Chill. If the amount of matter present (i.e. the average density of our universe) is equal to a certain hypothetical value, the -critical density,- a state of perfect balance occurs, leading eventually (albeit hypothetically) to a static universe. The ratio of the average density to the critical density is known as Omega. In a state of perfect balance, corresponding to a flat geometry of the spacetime -fabric of the universe,- Omega equals one¹³Now imagine if in the instance following the big bang, Omega was anything but one. The universe would have either quickly collapsed onto itself (Omega >1), or quickly headed to a big chill (Omega <1). This predicament is known as the Flatness Problem. Guth”s inflationary notion again comes to the rescue. It posits that the initial rapid expansion caused spacetime to flatten, forcing Omega toward one, regardless of what its initial value actually was. In other words, even if the pre-inflation spacetime was curved like a sphere (Omega>1) or hyperbolic like a saddle (Omega<1), the initial expansion thrust forced it into flatness (zero curvature). As it stands, we can only detect too little matter in the universe and our best estimates of Omega lie well below one. We have observed that not only is the universe expanding, it is doing so at increasing rates. Is the universal matter being slowly transformed into energy, thus driving us faster toward the Big Chill? To counter this bleak scenario and in their quest for idealism (Omega equals one), scientists are on the look out for some undetectable -dark matter- that would tip the scales. In the final analysis, it is generally believed that the universe is infinite in time and space and is destined to expand forever. But things get murky when we talk about forever. How long is forever? We can conceptualize what eternity means, even though we cannot comprehend it. Can we say the same of God?

The Convergence of Philosophy, Religion & Science

With this debate of an expanding universe comes the open/closed universe debate, with all its philosophical and scientific controversies. The consensus among scientists is that this is an open universe, expanding and not limited in space. This means that astrophysicists cannot apply the laws of thermodynamics to help decipher the mysteries of the universe, as these only apply to closed systems. Of special interest is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (Law of Increased Entropy), which states: -Energy spontaneously tends to flow only from being concentrated in one place to becoming diffused or dispersed and spread out.-¹⁴Thus, had the universe been closed, the Primary Nebula could not have formed or existed in the first place, unless -someone- had introduced it into the system. Moreover, the mathematical precision that governs the universe certainly defies the Law of Increased Entropy. To admit creation, one has to first admit the existence of a moment when the universe did not exist. Both science (especially the BBT) and religion agree on this point. Science says energy can neither be created nor destroyed (Principle of Conservation of Energy), or simply put, nothing comes from nothing. So, there must have been a master source of energy and matter that started it all: where did the primary nebula come from? I employed the investigation philosophy employed by the fictitious detective character Sherlock Holmes while reflecting on this celestial quandary: when you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. I came up with the following argument that vindicates the existence of God: If there is nothing in the universe, then the existence of God is not required. But there is something. And since nothing comes from nothing, there was an original very first something. This very first something is the originator of everything else; and it is a unity. It must be the most supreme something to ever exist because it needs nothing else to originate. And since it was there first, before everything else, before time itself, and its existence is independent of anything else, it will therefore be there after everything else. And since nothing can overwhelm it, it is omnipotent. And since it exists in no defined locality, it is omnipresent. This most supreme something is God, the originator and creator of everything else.

Conclusion

Whether you choose to believe cosmological theories, no matter how skeptical you are, you must concede that there was an originator for everything. The precision and order (and can we dismiss the mesmerizing wonder of the cosmos?) that govern our solar system and sustain the universe is indicative of an omnipotent guardian. In fact, the very laws of physics are clarion proof of order, not randomness. Order needs a maintainer. God gave us ample revelations; His holy books are too accurate to be dismissed as coincidental. Above all, He gave us intelligence, curiosity and the power to reason. The inquisitive mind of the human and our insatiable appetite for knowledge promise magnificent scientific breakthroughs to unimagined realms and dimensions. We have come a long way since the last opposition. But we are still crawling, attempting to decipher the complex and exquisite codes of the universe and life.

Footnotes

1. http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/allabout/nightsky/nightsky03.html
2. http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/solarsys/ nebular.html
3. http://home.earthlink.net/~meteordust/wsn3F06.html
4. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/programs/html/prog-content_1-4.html
5. http://www.seds.org/messier/more/mw.html
6. http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/AngelaChan.shtml
7. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/relativity/ index.html
8. http://superstringtheory.com/cosmo/cosmo41.html
9. http://islamonline.net/English/Science/2002/10/ article11.shtml
10. http://www.edwinhubble.com/hubble_bio_001.htm
11. http://www.creationofuniverse.com/html/ equilibrium01.html
12. http://www.physicscentral.com/action/action-01-4b.html
13. http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ FlatnessProblem.html
14. http://www.secondlaw.com/two.html * planetesimals: Any of innumerable small bodies thought to have orbited the sun during the formation of the planets.

Prophetic Attributes

We will examine Daniel in terms of possessing the required attributes for a messenger. We can understand the process of choosing someone to be a messenger for humanity if we compare it to how we choose someone to do an important job; this person must possess certain qualities. Our requirements become much more stringent in accordance with the importance of the duty. After the candidate has been found we support this person.

…to God belongs the highest comparison. (Qur’an 16:60)

There are some requirements for representing God and guiding people. These are called the attributes of messengers.

The first characteristic of a messenger is truthfulness; this is the pivot of Prophethood. It could not be otherwise, for if a prophet were to lie, everything connected with the divine religion would be upset. The truthfulness of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, is paramount. He was completely truthful toward all of God’s creatures. The second attribute of Prophethood is trustworthiness. Being a believer implies being trustworthy. All prophets were the best of believers and therefore were perfect exemplars of trustworthiness. They were loyal and never cheated anyone. The third attribute of Prophethood is the communication of truths, otherwise known as “enjoining good and forbidding evil.” Prophets came with the same divine religion based on submission to God, and all had as their sole mission the communication of this Message. Intellect is another important attribute of Prophethood. In this context, intellect has a specific meaning: a composite of reasoning power, sagacity, intelligence, sound judgment, and wisdom that far surpasses the ability of ordinary people through a sublime power of understanding. It encompasses and coordinates all human abilities, whether of the heart and soul or of the mind. The infallibility of prophets is an established fact based on reason. This quality is required for several reasons. First, the prophets came to convey the Message of God. This is their function as guides and good examples to be followed. If we liken this Message to pure water or light, then any impurities would have polluted the Message. Every stumble is an impurity, a dark spot in the heart and causes doubts in the minds of listeners. The last attribute is that the messages of the prophets were concerned about unseen worlds and that they made prophecies. These were among the miracles of the prophets.

Before we start to analyze BD we need to stress some important points. First of all, except for the final attribute, all these attributes should be the target for all humans who want to achieve decency, if not excellence. Secondly, even if a person does not possess these qualities, God can still use this person. Thirdly, we have to honor people who possess these qualities as they are people who possess prophetic morals.

Daniel of the Book

BD starts with a scene where a king is choosing people from different nations as servants for his kingdom. Obviously, due to his intelligence, trustworthiness, physical perfection and many other qualities, Daniel was one of the four chosen from among the Jews. When the king appointed them daily provision, Daniel requested that he should not be given food that is forbidden by God. However, at the same time he stated and proved that lawful food is healthier.

The king had a dream that troubled his spirit. However, he forgot what he had seen in that dream. He called the astrologers, magicians, and soothsayers and asked for an interpretation of his dream. Nobody could satisfy him, which made the King furious. He finally understood the deception of the so-called wise men and he ordered them all to be killed. Apparently God had prepared this scene for the Daniel’s grand entrance. After hearing the order, Daniel prayed to God and God revealed to him the vision and its meaning:

“Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise [men], the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, shew unto the king. But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days.”

Daniel’s job was not to interpret the dream, but rather to tell people about God. Thus, he used this dream as an opportunity. The dream was a statue-like image, which symbolizes the kingdom where each part of the body corresponds to the present and future kings. Later on we witness the faith of Daniel’s friends and how they stood up for their beliefs. Chapter Four starts with the statements of a transformed king who respects and probably believes in Daniel’s God. However, after certain events followed, events that happened in exactly the way Daniel had predicted, the king praised, extolled and honored the King of Heaven and became a believer. In Chapter Five, Daniel showed his truthfulness to the King. Chapter Six shows that people trusted Daniel (6.3) and that his enemies could find nothing to accuse him of at all (6.4;6-5). They therefore tricked the king into signing a law that prohibited Daniel from worshipping God. However, man-made laws could not come between him and God, so he kept praying and making supplications. The king ordered Daniel to be executed, however God saved him. When he returned to the king, just as before, he used this as an opportunity to communicate with the people and he gave full credit to God.

“My God hath sent me his angels.”(6.22)

The following chapters (7-10) are important in terms of Daniel’s visions and his messages from the unseen world, although his dreams and their interpretations will be explained in the next section. The following table shows the important verses where the attributes can be clearly seen.

Truthfulness 4-19; 5-28; 5-17; 5-28

Trustworthiness 2-18; 5-28; 6-3

Communication 2-18; 2-28; 3(indirect);

5-18; 6-10; 6-22

Intelligence 1-4; 1-17; 4-19/24

Infallibility 1-4; 1-8; 6-4; 6-24

Conclusion

In Daniel we see a great example to follow. This is a man of conviction, devotion, truth, trust, wisdom and respect for the Most High. He walks to his death, talks to kings, solves problems and uses every opportunity to talk about God. With such devotion he finds God always near him offering protection and blessings. May God’s blessings be upon his messengers, their companions and their faithful followers.

It would be appropriate to finish this article with some of the names of God that are mentioned in BD. Some things are so good, that one can never read them too many times.

… the God of heaven. (2-19)

He changeth the times and the seasons: He removeth kings, and setteth up kings: He giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding. (2-21)

He revealeth the deep and secret things: He knoweth what [is] in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with Him. (2-22)

God in heaven that revealeth secrets. (2-28)

God [is] a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets. (2-47)

… the most high God. (3-26)

There is no other God that can deliver after this sort. (3-29)

How great [are] His signs! and how mighty [are] His wonders! His kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and His dominion [is] from generation to generation. (4-3)

… He that liveth for ever. (4-34)

… the King of heaven, all whose works [are] truth, and His ways judgment: and those that walk in pride He is able to abase. (4-37)

… the God in whose hand thy breath [is], and whose [are] all thy ways. (5-23)

He [is] the living God, and steadfast for ever, and His kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed, and His dominion [shall be even] unto the end. He delivereth and rescueth, and He worketh signs and wonders in heaven and in earth. (6-26/27)

References

• Wilson, Robert Dick, Studies in the Book Of Daniel.

• Baldwin, Joyce, Tyndale Old Testament Commentary

• Thomas, John, An Exposition of Daniel.

• Sir Isaac Newton’s Observations on Daniel.

The appeal of the Golden Ratio to the human eye and brain has been scientifically tested. When subjects are presented with a range of rectangles, people invariably pick out as most pleasing ones those whose sides are of the Golden Ratio. This golden number is the basic number at work in aesthetics; there are even claims that the Golden Ratio was used by Leonardo da Vinci when painting the Mona Lisa, and by the Greeks in building the Parthenon. But the surprising thing is that a number deemed aesthetically pleasing by human beings also crops up in nature and science. In a newly published article in Physical Review B, it is stated that the Golden Ratio appears in the structures of some metals. The Golden Ratio is seen in the arrangement of seeds on flower heads, in the spirals of sea shells and galaxies, even in black holes. This ratio can be found almost everywhere in the universe.

Although the Greek mathematician Euclid first defined the Golden Ratio in around 300 BC, the followers of Pythagoras probably knew of it two centuries earlier. Euclid defined it as a line that can be divided into two unequal parts (Figure 1), where the ratio of the smaller part of the line to the longer part is the same as the ratio of the longer part to the whole. This ratio is 1.6180339887…, the Golden Number.

What makes the Golden Ratio special is the number of mathematical properties it possesses. The Golden Ratio is the only number whose square can be produced simply by adding 1 and the reciprocal of which can be arrived at by subtracting 1. If you take a Golden Rectangle – that is a rectangle where the length-to-breadth ratio is equal to the Golden Ratio, and take out a square, what remains is another, smaller Golden Rectangle. Also, think of any two numbers. Make a third by adding the first and second, a fourth by adding the second and third, and so on. If you start with 7 and 11, then what you have is:

7, 11, 18, 29, 47, 76… When you have written down approximately 20 numbers, calculate the ratio of the last to the penultimate: the answer should approximate the Golden Number.

In mathematical terminology it is (an/an-1) equals to the Golden Ratio.

Another example of the Golden Ratio is the Fibonacci Numbers, that is a number series where each number is simply the sum of the previous two numbers. These numbers are 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55… The ratio between any two successive Fibonacci numbers approaches the Golden Ratio as the numbers get larger. We can find the Fibonacci series particularly in the spirals of sea shells and in the arrangement of seeds on sunflower heads.

It was the elusive nature of the Golden Ratio that led the Italian friar and mathematician Luca Pacioli to equate it with the incomprehensibility of God. In the 15th century, he wrote a three-volume treatise, Divina Proportione (Divine Proportion), that was crucial in the dissemination of the Golden Ratio beyond the world of mathematics. After him, many artists, architects, and musicians used the Golden Ratio in their works; for example, musicians such as Debussy and Bartok and the architect Le Corbusier.

Let’s examine the arrangement of leaves on the stem of the plant Phyllotaxis. As each new leaf grows, it does so at an angle offset from the leaf below. The most common angle between successive leaves is 137.5 degrees – the Golden Angle; 137.5=3d 360-360/G, where G is the Golden Ratio. Why does the Golden Ratio play a role in the arrangement of leaves? It is all down to the irrationality of the number. A new leaf must collect sunlight without throwing too much of a shadow on the leaves below. A plant must arrange its leaves in such a way that the greatest number can spiral around the stem before a new leaf can sprout immediately above a lower one – that is at 360 degrees. If the leaves were arranged at an angle of 120 degrees, then the leaves would grow as 3 separate columns with large gaps between them. This would effectively block out the sunlight to the lower leaves. If the angle were 50 degrees, then there would be spaces between the leaves. But, with an angle of 137.5, the maximum amount of leaves can be arranged with a minimum of space being left between the leaves.

The Golden Ratio also crops up in hard sciences. Let’s take a look at the growth of “quasi-crystals.” These maintain a five-fold symmetry, which means that they make a pattern that looks the same when rotated by multiples of one-fifth of 360 degrees. Since the time when these crystals were discovered in 1984, many physicists have been researching their properties. In Brookhaven National Lab in New York State, Tanhong Cai imaged the microscopic terrain of the surface of such crystals made from alloys of aluminum-copper-iron and aluminum-palladium-manganese. It is found that flat terraces are punctuated by abrupt vertical steps. The steps come in two predominant sizes, with the ratio of the heights of these two steps being the Golden Ratio. This fact was discovered in 2002.

The most surprising place where the Golden Ratio appears is in black holes, a discovery made by Paul Davies of the University of Adelaide in 1989. Black holes and other self-gravitating bodies, such as the sun, have a negative specific heat. This means that they get hotter as they lose heat. In a spinning black hole there is an outward centrifugal force acting to prevent any shrinkage of the hole. The force depends on how fast the black hole is spinning. It turns out that at a critical value of the spin (when the ratio between the square root of the mass value and the square root of the spinning parameter is equal to the golden ratio), a black hole flips from having negative to positive specific heat. In other words, the Golden Ratio determines the character of the black hole.

Figure 2 shows the finger bones of a hand. The ratio of each bone at the top of the hand to the bones at the bottom of the fingers is the Golden Ratio. Pine-cones show the Golden Ratio spiral clearly (Figure 3). If one looks carefully at an ordinary cauliflower, one can see a center point where the florets are smallest, and the florets are organized in spirals around this center in both directions (Figure 4). The flower, Echinacea Purpura, has the same spirals (Figure 5).

With the help of developing science, new examples of the Golden Ratio are waiting to be discovered in the universe. The latest discoveries demonstrate that by using this ratio in technology, new products which make our lives easier will soon be available to all. This mystery that is spread throughout the universe may be an opportunity to renew and change our points of view on life.

Reference

• Chown, Marcus, “Why Should Nature Have a Favorite Number,” New Scientist, 21-28 December 2002, 55-56.

I was approached by The Fountain editorial board to write something on the issue of parents and family, on the occasion of Mother’s Day. Family relations and respect for parents and elders are considered among the universal values of humanity. In this modern day, the importance is ever more evident. Almost all religious traditions share in these values – one need not look far to find Judeo-Christian or Islamic references to this. The Judeo-Christian tradition posits this value among its Ten Commandments and there are many Qur’anic and Hadith references to this in the Islamic tradition. It is interesting to see in all of these addresses that Nursi uses general terms to refer to all humans, not only Muslims. In many cases, this mimics the Qur’anic method.

Nursi frames his discussion of honoring one’s parents by making use of a Qur’anic verse, which is as follows:

Your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him and to be kind to your parents. If either of them or both reach old age with you, do not say to them “Fie,” nor rebuke them, but say to them kind words. And lower to them the wing of humility out of mercy and say: “Lord, have mercy on them, as they took care of me when I was a child.” Your Lord knows best what is in your hearts. If you are righteous, He is All-Forgiving to those who repent. (17:23-25)

Nursi is most concerned with those who are heedless in their observance of this duty – those who house their parents or other relatives reluctantly or without honoring them. He writes:

“O you, who are unaware of the filial responsibility towards parents, in whose house is an old parent, or a helpless, invalid relative or brother-in-religion unable to make a living! Heed the verses quoted above and see how they insist in five different ways on the affection to be shown to parents!”1

He continues:

“Of course, paternal affection for children is one of the sublime realities of worldly life and, in turn, filial gratitude to them is a most urgent and heavy duty to be performed. Parents sacrifice their lives lovingly for their children, and if this is so, what falls to a child who has not lost his humanity and transformed into a monster of ingratitude, is to show sincere respect for them, to serve them willingly, and to try to gain their approval.

“With regard to filial respect and service, uncles and aunts are like parents.”2

Nursi emphasizes one of the problems which modern humanity faces; the busy, fast-paced lifestyle and the financial burdens involved in maintaining a modern standard of living. In response to those who justify their reluctance to care for elderly relatives based on these terms, Nursi contends:

“O you, who are immersed in earning your livelihood! Know that your disabled relative whom you regard as unbearable in your house is, in fact, the means of blessing and abundance. Never complain that you can scarcely make a living (that your means of subsistence are strained), for were it not for the blessing and abundance bestowed on you, you would have to face even more difficulties in making your living. This is an undeniable reality, which I could prove to you except that I would like to keep this letter brief. Believe me, I swear by God that this is an established reality to which even my satan and evil-commanding self have yielded.”3

Nursi compares the caring of elderly relatives to that of young children in the following:

Indeed, as is witnessed by the whole of existence, when the Generous, Majestic Creator, Who is infinitely merciful, compassionate, gracious and munificent, sends children to the world, He sends them together with their sustenance which He abundantly provides through the breasts of mothers. In the same way, He sends in the form of blessing and unseen, immaterial abundance, the sustenance of the old, who are like children and even more worthy and needy of compassion than children. He does not load their sustenance onto mean, greedy people.”4

Following this quote, Nursi refers to two Qur’anic verses, which are, respectively:

Surely, God is the All- Provider, the Mighty One, the Strong. (51:58)
How many a beast does not bear its provision, yet God provides for it and for you. He is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. (29:60)

According to Nursi, not only do humans receive their sustenance through God’s grace, but animals do as well. He writes:

“So, not only the sustenance of old relatives, but also that of pets, like cats, which are created as friends to human beings, and usually live on food from human beings, is, again, sent in the form of blessing. I have personally observed this:

“Some years ago, my daily ration consisted of half a loaf of bread. Since the loaf was very small, I barely managed with it, until four cats became my everyday guests. No sooner did they begin sharing my bread, than the same ration was always enough for all of us.

“I witnessed this so often that it convinced me that I benefited from the blessing coming through the cats. I openly declared that I was rather indebted to them, and not they to me.”5

Nursi addresses all humans in general terms, writing:

“O man, a human being is the most esteemed, noble and most worthy of respect among creatures; among human beings, the believers are the most perfect. Among the believers, the helpless, old people are those who are the most worthy and needy of respect and compassion. Among the old, the relatives deserve affection, love and service more than the others, and among the relatives, parents are the most truthful confidants and most intimate companions. Now, O man, if an animal becomes the means of blessing and abundance when it stays as a guest in a person’s house, then you can conclude how invaluable a means of blessing and mercy parents are in a house and, additionally, as stated in the hadith ‘But for the old bent double, calamities would be pouring down upon you,’ what an important means for the removal of calamities they are.”6

In the following excerpt, Nursi makes a fitting comparison to the prospect of one becoming an elder in need of compassion and service oneself. He cites a statement from Islamic culture that holds that “punishment is based on the nature of one’s actions.” Thus, if one does not offer respect to his or her parents, then one’s children will, in turn, not respect or provide service in the future. By extension, if one wants the compassion of the Most Merciful, one need be merciful to those entrusted to one’s household and care. It is interesting that Nursi notes that whatever one lives for, either worldly desires or the afterlife, such compassion and service are requisites for attaining any future goals.

In further writings on the sick and infirm, Nursi speaks of those who care for these patients. He says:

“Indeed, there is significant reward for believers for looking after the sick. Enquiring after their health and visiting the sick – on condition it does not tax them – is Sunna and also atonement for sins. There is an Hadith which says, ‘Receive the prayers of the sick, for their prayers are acceptable.’”

Especially when the sick are relations, in particular parents, looking after them is important worship, yielding significant reward. To please a sick person’s heart and console him or her, is comparable to significant alms-giving. Fortunate is the person who pleases the easily touched hearts of their father and mother at the time of illness, and receives their prayer.7

Footnotes

1 Nursi, S., The Letters, Kaynak A.S., Izmir, 1997 Twenty-first Letter, p. 53.

2 ibid., 53-54. 3 ibid., 54. 4 ibid. 5 ibid., 55. 6 ibid.

7 Nursi, S., The Flashes Collection, Sozler Publications, Istanbul, 2000, Seventeenth Remedy, p. 278.

When Did English and Hindi Begin to Differ?

The long-established “comparative method” of linguistics uses vocabulary, the structure of words, and the sound systems of languages to draw language family trees, depicting in what order related languages (such as, English, Hindi, and ancient Hittite) diverged from their mother languages and the relative “relatedness” of sister languages. Dates of divergence are usually referred to dates of historical or archaeological significance. For example, the Romanian language, a relative of Italian, must have been introduced to the region between 112 and 270 AD, when Roman troops occupied Dacia. However, the comparative method does not provide any dates itself, other than those of relative chronology. Lexicostatistics, the rival study for vocabulary change, extracts essential vocabulary from languages, such as “I, three, and hand,” which are assumed to be more resistant to change, and produces a metric of shared cognates and, hence, language kinship. Assuming a constant rate of language change over time, one can extrapolate to pre-history dates for language evolution. For example, one may try to estimate when the proto-Indo-European, the ancestor of English, Hindi, and Hittite, started branching into distinct new languages. Unfortunately, the promise of lexicostatistics (and its method, called glottochronology) became doubtful quickly after its birth. It was criticized very much in the same way as biological phylogenetic analyses were. One example to show the correspondence is that just as the mutation rates of genes (sequences of DNA) may change over time, languages may also be changing faster or slower at certain periods. Lexicostatistics is unreliable, as the similarity between languages could be mere chance convergences, or borrowings, or on the other hand, distant relatives could be unrecognizable after a great deal of divergence. These objections have plagued biology in similar ways.

Phylogenetics and Philology Side by Side

IJeJaEghoManMeHandMainRukaCheriDastHathThreeTroisTriTriaSeTinMotherMereMatMiteraMaderMaNewNouveaunoviykenuryosTazeNeyanoseNezNosMitiNaNak

Figure 1: A partial list

for Indo-European words used by Gray and Atkinson (Dyen, I. Kruskal, J.B. & Black, P., FILE IE-DATA1 at http://www.ntu.edu.au/education/langs/ielex/IE-DATA1)

The recent study by Gray and Atkinson from the University of Auckland, New Zealand, published on November 27 in Nature, uses enhanced methods developed for phylogenetic studies in language tree construction, which produces trees that are consistent with those established by the comparative method. Most importantly, maximum-likelihood models and the Bayesian inference method were employed, both being statistical methods now established in phylogenetics, to counteract any weaknesses found in past attempts of glottochronology. Their method makes it possible to estimate divergence times without a strict rate of change, also enabling the determination of unsubstantiated sections of the tree, and the incorporation of these uncertainties in the calculation of the trees and divergence times. Gray and Atkinson only used fourteen age constraints to calibrate their divergence time calculations in estimating chronology, and after confirming tests eliminated some of these constraints, doubtful cognates, and other problems, they were able to come up with a date for the initial divergence of all Indo-European languages of 7,800 to 9,800 years ago. These dates coincide beautifully with the Anatolian farmer hypothesis, which claims dispersion of Indo-Europeans from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) with the spreading of agriculture around 8,000-9,500 years ago, a hypothesis now supported by genetic studies that report a Neolithic, Near Eastern contribution to the European gene pool as well.

An Alternative Theory

This study does not extinguish one of the fiercest discussions of this century, which is favored by many linguists, that linguistic evidence favors the Kurgan expansion hypothesis, with Kurgan horsemen invading and spreading from the Asian steppes 6,000 years ago. It is thought that Kurgan horsemen possessed certain advantages, like the knowledge of the wheel and horseback riding, just as the Anatolians knew about farming. These linguists claim that the statistical and computational methods used in biology do not reflect the way languages change, and these methods use only vocabulary, but ignore grammar. This new study is a shot in the arm for the supporters of the Anatolian theory and resurrects glottochronology. Obviously, the discussion is far from being over. To reconcile the two, Gray and Atkinson note that they have observed an intense diversification period in their data at a date of 6,000 years ago, and they refer to an inclusive theory of both Anatolian origin and Kurgan expansion.2

Intertwined Trees

In their article Gray and Atkinson predict the combination of computational phylogenetic methods and vocabulary data to examine archaeological hypotheses in the future, as methods developed for biology continue to establish themselves in social sciences. As David Searls of Glaxo-Smith-Kline Pharmaceuticals concludes in his “News and Views” article in the same issue of Nature,3 “[this work] should stimulate even more cross-fertilization of ideas among those studying the intertwined trees of life and language.”

Is this not the mysterious truth of human life? Will we not find ourselves in a similar place to the one in the fable one day? Maybe our world is made more bearable with the atmosphere that we need to breathe, with the beauty of nature, pleasant flowers, the magnificence of the sea, the fruit of the trees… These sound pleasant, but why are we here? Where are we going? And what will happen at the end? Who knows the truth behind everything?

Life and death are two concepts that cannot be thought of as being separate from one another. The moment we are born is also the moment we start to approach death. The world we find ourselves in may be full of potential pleasures and beauty, but in all cases the idea of an approaching end is everywhere, making every pleasure bitter. When people become aware of this contradiction they ask themselves, “If I will cease to exist, then why do I exist now, what is my purpose?” “What is the vocation of a human as a human, and what are the surest ways in which people can fulfill this?”

The questions on the meaning of life, the mission assigned to humanity, and its definition are unavoidable questions, and may be the most frequently studied problems of philosophy. It would not be stretching the point to state that these questions are in fact the questions of human life.

Philosophical Perspectives

Philosophy has generally adopted two approaches to the problem of trying to find the “meaning” of life: pessimistic and optimistic. Some people prefer an optimistic outlook, thinking that life has a meaning, while others are pessimistic, believing that everything is meaningless, thus making life not worthwhile.

I would like to start this discussion by looking first at the pessimists and their arguments. One of the most famous Pessimists is Schopenhauer. He thinks it would be better if the world did not exist at all. He expresses this idea in the following words: “We have not to rejoice but rather mourn at the existence of the world; that is non-existence would be preferable to its existence; that it is something which ought not to be.” Schopenhauer believes in the impossibility of happiness. For Schopenhauer, nothing is worth pursuing, and in any case, the things which may be worthwhile are impossible to reach. Moreover, people deceive themselves by thinking that in the past they were happy or that in the future they will be happy. He says, “The present may be compared to a small dark cloud which the wind drives over the sunny plain: before and behind it all is bright, only it itself always casts a shadow. The present is therefore always insufficient; but the future is uncertain and the past is irrevocable.”

There are people who were more pessimistic than Schopenhauer, like Clarince Darrow. He even becomes angry with the fact of existing. He sees life as being an “awful joke.”

The Pessimists consider the meaninglessness of life as being the unchangeable truth, and according to them there are few solutions to escape this painful fact; these can be briefly listed below:

a) We should ignore everything that is meaningless and we should not ask any questions, like “what is the meaning of life, if any” or “why do I exist?”

b) We should disregard death and try to make the most of time. We should enjoy life, have fun and not miss out on any opportunity to take pleasure. This idea has been so popular that it affected many English poets, called “Cavalier Poets,” who always encouraged people to enjoy themselves before they die.

c) The exact opposite solution is that we should commit suicide. According to most pessimists, this is the best solution, because in a meaningless world, it is meaningless to live. They even think, “It is better to be dead than alive; best of all is not to exist.”

d) We should accept that life is meaningless, yet learn to live with this fact and behave rationally.

Is Happiness Really an Unattainable Emotion?

I think the significant point here is to reconstruct our lives so that we can evaluate the events. If we have the ability to look on the bright side of every event then we will be able to see well and even take pleasure at the reality of death.

The Optimists commenting on the meaning of life argue that there is a reason to live. Life exists for a purpose. In other words, it has a meaning. The Optimist view is based on two suppositions: one, that God exists and that the promised afterlife will happen. However, some philosophers think that without God and immortality, life can still be meaningful. Providing that you choose an aim for your life or if you devote yourself to something, your life will become meaningful and you will have a reason to live. To put it more bluntly, supporting the superiority of a race, or of an idea, or the pursuit of science, or a career in a certain occupation and many similar goals can be an aim for life that makes it meaningful. Nonetheless, when we look for an absolute meaning which is valid for everyone, the optimist position invites us to presuppose the existence of God and afterlife. We can liken the Optimist understanding of life to the following situation: A fish still in its egg cannot see anything. Let us suppose that a young boy buys the egg from the pet shop. He wonders where he can put the egg. He takes a mixing bowl from the kitchen and spreads sand on the bottom, so that he can bury the egg. Then the boy plants a water plant in the aquarium and fills it up with water that has been given a chance to oxygenate. Having prepared this small aquarium, the boy puts the egg in the bowl. The new aquarium is a welcoming environment as everything in it meets the needs of the fish and is an indicator of the boy’s intentions and knowledge.

According to the Optimists, the situation of the fish in the example is not very different from that of humans. When we are born, we find a welcoming environment; an atmosphere that meets our respiratory needs, soil that produces food, sun that gives heat and light, plus many more wonderful features. Humankind found the Earth ready and waiting, it has always been in harmony with our needs. Such a design causes the Optimists to imply the necessity of a reason for existence and the necessity of the Creator of that reason, God, and the afterlife.

Of course, neither the Pessimist nor the Optimist view can dominate the other unless people want to believe in a Creator and an afterlife. If one chooses to believe in a Creator, then the interpretation of the fable changes directly; the Islamic thinker, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi says in the “Eighth Word” of his great work The Words, that the allegory in the fable is reality for all humans. It is only the individual perspective of everyone that can change the meaning of the allegory. The desert is the Earth, and the pursuing beast is death. The well is a person’s life, sixty meters being sixty years; the average life expectancy. The gnawing mice are day and night. The mouth of the dragon in the well is the mouth of the grave. For believers it is the door to the eternal Garden and the beast becomes a disciplined and well-trained horse that brings us to the eternal Garden.

Therefore, one whose goal is eternal life will find peace and happiness, despite all the darkness of life.

Why Men Search for the Meaning of Life

Whatever our preferences are, either optimist or pessimist, I think first we must answer the question as to why we search for the meaning of life. It may well be that most people are tired of looking for a meaning in life and simply continue to live without direction. On the other hand, some people make a decision and side with either the Pessimists or the Optimists. Before we adopt one of these views, however, the important thing is that we should begin with the question, what leads people to look for a purpose? This is the key question that proves that our lives are not meaningless; the question itself has the power to prove that we have a reason to live a meaningful life. If this were not the case, it would not have become the most frequently asked question in the history of the world.

Maybe people want to feel safe, to welcome the future by knowing about it in advance. They may want to use this knowledge to discover the importance or the meaning in their lives. Maybe it is something similar to the instinct that causes people to find food or plants that are useful and nourishing; it may be an instinct that is leading us to find the answer.

“Why Do I Exist?”

I think that people try to find an answer to this question because they want to decide how they should live. Different answers to this question will affect people in how they determine the way that they will live their life or the shape of their future. There are millions of people and all lead different lives. People observe others around them; they see their ways of life. While observing they search “How should I live?” “What am I to live for?” To make this a bit clearer, we can say that when people observe other people, they wonder, sometimes even worrying, “What should I do?” “Where should I go?” People want to avoid the uncertainty of the future and to make up their minds. To choose a way of life, they need an objective to attain, a reason to live for, and it is at this point that they ask if there is an absolute meaning of life that is worthwhile or even obligatory.

To clarify our point, I want to give an example that has much affected me and which illustrates the need of people to decide how to live. Fritjof Capra, in his book, Uncommon Wisdom, relates that he had serious questions about whether he should become a scientist, a hippie, or a Buddhist priest. He was trying to decide a way of life, but he had several choices and did not know which would be the correct one for him, which one would be the most worthwhile. His hesitation can be summed up like this: He was living as a part-time hippie and a part-time physicist. To be a complete hippie, he should have left behind physics and dropped out of school, because all hippies were dropping out and taking up a craft to earn their lives. They were cooking their own bread and living a communal life in tents. They had long hair and wore colorful clothes with flowers on them to protest against the rich businessmen who wore suits. They held special rituals, concerts, poetry readings… This was an ideology that protested against modern capitalist America and thus required a certain way of life. However, he enjoyed his scientific work, so science was important for him as well. He was offered a scholarship to do research and was invited to conferences. Apart from all these, he was interested in Eastern philosophy. Finally, he went to a conference given by J. Krishnamurti, a famous Buddhist master. He was talking about the basic problems of existence, such as fear, death, loneliness, love, etc. After the conference, he asked Krishnamurti about the contradiction he was in, and he received the following reply: “First, we are humans, then we are something else.” He was told about the meaning of being a human.

This is a good example that strikingly reflects the situation. Even if not to this degree, people, one way or another, live through doubts and try to choose the true way of life. Finding a way of life requires finding the meaning of life that will shape our future. The Taoist thinker Chuang Tzu says that he looked for a king to employ him for many years; that is, he looked for a fact to shape his destiny.

A second reason, which may cause people to ask, “Why do I exist?” may be the habit of living in a comfortable environment. When the sea is rough, people ask, “Why is the sea rough?” and they get the explanation: “There is a difference of pressure between two regions, so a breeze occurs which in turn forms a wind and the wind causes the water to be rough.” People expect an explanation for every event, a reason. To make this clearer, we can refer to the “formula of concrete,” invented by Claude Levi Strausse. He talks about this formula in his book Savage Mind. According to him, the human mind needs order and obtains this order by giving a role to everything that makes up its environment. For example, in a primitive African tribe the green leaf is a symbol of evil, while in another tribe it is the symbol of good. This is not because the green leaf actually has evil or good in it, but rather it is seen as such because people have imbued it with a role in order to make a network of relation and order in their world. As a result, we can conclude that as people tend to give a role or a meaning to such simple things as leaves, they cannot do this without asking, “What is the role of life?” and subsequently, life must be given a role as well.

A third reason may be the notion of death. The fact that everything has an end leads people to ask why there is existence. In every incident of death, people feel its coldness. Existence becomes an absurdity if we are to consider death as the end.

In conclusion we can say that no matter which answer people find, whether they cling to ideologies or they become people indulging in passing pleasures, they must be able to say “I lived for this or that reason.” Human beings have to be able to make this statement if they are to justify their battle to live in a causal world. 

References

• Bubner, Rudiger, The German Idealist Philosophy, Penguin Books, London, 1997.
• Edwards, Paul, Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Macmillan & Free Press, New York, 1967, Vol.4.
• Kapra, Fritjof, Yeni Bir Dusunce, Iz Yayinlari, Istanbul, 1991. Originally published as Uncommon Wisdom.
• Levi-Strauss, Claude, Yaban Dusunce, Yapi Kredi Yayinlari, Istanbul, 2000. Translated by Tahsin Yucel. Originally published as The Savage Mind, University of Chicago Press, 1972.
• Nursi, Said, The Words 1, Kaynak A.S., Izmir, 1997.

The theorem published in 1931 by the 25 year old Austrian scientist, Kurt Godel, made a great impact on the scientific circles. Not only did it destroy the hopes of many scientists, but it also initiated a new point of view concerning AI and the mind. This theorem is one of the most important ones to be proven this century, ranking alongside Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. However, very few people know about it. In this article, we will examine in detail the effects of Godel’s theorem on AI.

What is Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem?

As a formal definition, proof is a sequence of well-formed-formulas (wff), each of which is either an axiom or a wff that is derived from preceding wff’s. Godel’s contemporary Hilbert, one of the most famous mathematicians, thought that all proofs in mathematics can be obtained in an automated way (with an axiomatic system) and he started to work on this project. He believed that if he derived all wff’s in basic arithmetic from its own axioms, then he could derive all facts in mathematics using these axioms.

Unfortunately, Godel demonstrated the impossibility of this. First of all, he found a method of translating the syntax of a formal system into arithmetic. Then he formulated the statement, “This formula is improvable in the system,” (G) in arithmetic. Using the same method, he also formulated the negative of the statement G (“This formula is provable in the system”). For the next step, he showed that if the truth value of G was calculated, the truth value of negation of G could also be calculated, causing a contradiction. At the end of his calculations, Godel arrived at two very important consequences:

1. If a formal system that contains minimal arithmetic is consistent, then it is incomplete.

2. Consistency of any formal system containing minimal arithmetic is not internally provable (by using the system’s own rules and formulas).

Surprisingly, even if G were added as a further axiom into the system, a new Godel sentence could be easily found. In other words, no matter how many axioms we add, one can find a Godel sentence that will make the truth value undeterminable.

What Does the Theorem Imply for Artificial Intelligence vs. the Mind?

By examining Godel’s Theorem, one can determine very important consequences for artificial intelligence. An English mathematician, Turing, described an abstract machine called the “Turing Machine.” This is an abstract machine which has an unlimited amount of storage space and which can go on computing forever without making any mistakes. This machine can compute any type of algorithmic problem. According to the Turing Theorem all computers are Turing equivalents. After proposing this, Turing went on to observe that some type of problems have no algorithmic solutions. In the meantime, “the Halting Problem” emerged – the problem of deciding those situations in which a Turing Machine action fails never comes to a halt because of the consequences of the Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem.

It has been proven that a halting problem is computationally insoluble. This leads us to an important conclusion; a computer cannot be the same as the human mind because the non-computational physics of the mind is not available for Turing equivalent machines and the nature of the algorithms is not compatible with the thinking process due to the halting problem.

The argument of the Godelian Case problems made great sense to AI supporters. Godel’s Theorem started a great debate between supporters of AI vs. those of the human mind.

Reviews of the Theorem on AI vs. Mind

Penrose claims that the human mind cannot be compared to artificial intelligence. Penrose bases his claim on Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem. By appealing to the results obtained by Godel (and Turing), mathematical thinking (and hence conscious thinking generally) is something that cannot be encapsulated within any purely computational model of thought. This is the part of Penrose’s argument that his critics have most frequently taken issue with. In addition, he states that there are certain classes of problems that do not have any algorithmic solutions (R. Penrose, 1994, p.29). In fact, Turing described this as the halting problem. Penrose gives an example of the completely deterministic, but non-computable “tiling problem” (R. Penrose, 1994, p.30-33).

Penrose asserted that some mathematical relations required long chains of reasoning before they could be perceived with certainty. But the object of a mathematical proof is to provide such chains of reasoning that each step is indeed something that can be perceived as being “obvious.” He concluded that the endpoint of such reasoning is something that must be accepted as being true, even though it may not, in itself, be at all obvious. One might imagine that it would be possible to list all possible “obvious” steps of reasoning once and for all, so that from that time on everything could be reduced to computation. But, what Godel’s argument shows is that this is not possible. There is no way to eliminate the need for new “obvious” understandings. Thus, mathematical understanding cannot be reduced to blind computation (R. Penrose, 1994, p.56).

Penrose claims that the results of Godel’s

theorem established that human understanding and insight cannot be reduced to any set of computational rules (R. Penrose, 1994, p.65). In the chapter entitled “The Godelian Case” of his book Shadows of the Mind, Penrose supported his idea with Turing’s Halting Problem and showed sound examples on non-computability. At the end of the chapter he answered possible technical objections to his idea based on Godel’s Theorem in details (R. Penrose, 1994, p.64-116).

Penrose believes that there is something beyond computation in the human mind. In Chapter 3 of Shadows of the Mind, he examines the thinking process and non-computability in mathematical thought carefully and uses formal representations (R. Penrose, 1994, p.127-209). Godel’s theorem states that in any sufficiently complex formal system there exists at least one statement that cannot be proven to be true or false. Penrose believes that this would limit the ability of any AI system in its reasoning. He argues that there will always be a statement that can be constructed which is unprovable by the AI system. However, Penrose believes that somehow the human mind can see the truth of such Godel statements directly (R. Penrose, 1989).

Along the same lines as Penrose, Lucas believes that Godel’s theorem seems to prove that the idea of “Mechanism” is false, that is, that minds cannot be seen in terms of machines. He claims that Godel’s theorem must apply to cybernetics, because the essence of being a machine is that it should be a concrete instantiation of a formal system. It follows that for any given machine which is consistent and capable of doing simple arithmetic, there is a formula which it will be incapable of producing as being true (i.e., the formula is improvable in the system but which we can see to be true). It follows that no machine can be a complete or adequate model of the mind, that minds are essentially different from machines. This does not mean that a machine cannot simulate any piece of the mind; it only says that there is no machine that can simulate every piece of the mind. Lucas says that there may be deeper objections. Godel’s theorem applies to deductive systems, and human beings are not confined to making only deductive inferences. Godel’s theorem applies only to consistent systems, and one may have doubts about how far it is permissible to assume that human beings are consistent. Godel’s theorem applies only to formal systems, and there is no a priori bound to human ingenuity which rules out the possibility of our contriving some replica of humanity which is not representable by a formal system (J. Lucas, 1970).

Chalmers examines the situation when a formal system F, which understands the consequences of Godel’s Theorem, is given. According to his claim, F may not be sound, so Godel’s theorem cannot be applied. He specifies that the crucial point of Godel’s argument is not to know “a formal system is sound”; but to determine “if we know that our system is sound.” It follows that we perhaps have a sound system, but we can not conclude that “we know that we have a sound system” (D. J. Chalmers, 1995).

Like Chalmers, McCullough claims that not only artificial intelligence, but also the human mind is tightly related with Godel’s theorem. Godel argument did not prove that human reasoning had to be noncomputable – it only proved that if human reasoning was computable, then it had to either be unsound, or it had to be inherently impossible for a human to know both what a human’s own reasoning powers were and to also know that they were sound. And adds, Penrose dismisses the possibility that a human knows its reasoning powers, but does not know that they are sound. In his paper, McCullough also examines the appliability of Godel’s theorem on non-computable systems and the human mind. According to him, both are possible, by the way he asserts that Penrose’s idea is wrong. Consequently, McCullough agrees with Penrose that human reasoning cannot be formalized in some sense, because humans do not understand their reasoning system well enough to formalize it. This limitation is not due to a lack of human intelligence, but is inherent in any reasoning system that is capable of reasoning about itself. (D. McCullough, 1995).

As a short conclusion, it seems that the discussion between AI vs. mind will last for a long time. But, considering the present situation, AI has a long way to the go in order to achieve the expected skills.

References

• Chalmers, D.J. (1995). “Minds, Machines, and Mathematics”. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-09-chalmers.html

• Godel, K. “On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica”. http://www.ddc.net/ygg/etext/godel/

• Lucas, J.R. (1970). “Minds, Machines and Godel”. The Freedom of the Will, Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://users.ox.ac.uk/jrlucas/mmg.html

• Maudlin, T. (1995). “Between The Motion And The Act…”. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-02-maudlin.html

• McCarthy, J. (1995). “Awareness and Understanding in Computer Programs”. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-11-mccarthy.html

• McCullough, D. (1995). “Can Humans Escape Godel?”. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-04-mccullough.html

• Penrose, R. (1989). The Emperor’s New Mind. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Penrose, R. (1994). Shadows of the Mind. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Penrose, R. (1996). “Beyond the Doubting of a Shadow”. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-23-penrose.html

• Pysche (1995). An Interdisciplinary Search of Consciousness, Vol. 2, Symposium on Roger Penrose’s Shadows of the Mind. http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/psyche-index-v2.html