All human beings have similar organs, but each organ has qualities unique to itself and to the person it belongs to. Research has revealed that even some of the genes of monozygotic twins are different [1]. As opposed to the previous assumption that “when it comes to DNA, every cell in the body is essentially identical to every other cell,” it has been found that each cell has a DNA of its own [2]. This uniqueness originates from the fact that the order and number of molecules and proteins are different, which is valid for atoms and sub-atom particles as well. Having spent countless hours on microscopes and spectroscopes, a university professor of mine once said, “I witnessed different structures of iron atom each time I observed one. We even need to produce a separate periodic table for the iron element alone.”

We also witness that particles have been created uniquely, just like human beings are. From the micro universe (one millionth of a meter) down to femto universe (one quadrillionth of a meter), each particle is called a boson or fermion. When particles are examined to find out in what conditions they resemble each other in the femto universe, doors of a new world will be opened in terms of knowledge and contemplation. According to this new perspective, while the things and events are sometimes explained through mathematical equations and formulations, they are sometimes explained through experiments of thought trying to attain the truth behind them. Pauli exclusion principle is one such experiment.

Pauli Principle

There are around 380 sub-atomic particles [3]. In atomic and subatomic dimensions, two fermions (e.g. two electrons) of an atom cannot have the same set of quantum numbers. Wolfgang Pauli first explained this principle in 1925 and was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1945 after experiments proved that the theory was correct. This theory has gone down in history as the Pauli Exclusion Principle.

The motion equations of subatomic particles are expressed by their magnetic states. Pauli said that none of the electrons of an atom can share the same quantum state at the same time. In other words, two electrons in the same atom cannot share the physical features such as magnetism, motion, position and velocity in the same state [2].

In addition to the three quantum numbers (principal, subordinate, and magnetic quantum numbers) described so far, Pauli defined a quantum number for the spin of a fermion (e.g. electron). The spin quantum number is related to the rotation of the electron around its axis because an electron rotates around its own axis as it rotates around the atomic nucleus. According to the Pauli Principle, if an orbit has an electron with a spin of 1/2, an electron with a spin of -1/2 can be placed in the same orbit. If we assume that the spin of an electron rotating clockwise is 1/2 the spin of an electron rotating counterclockwise will be -1/2. Thus, with Pauli’s contribution, four quantum numbers were defined for subatomic particles and it was stated that even if the other three quantum numbers were the same, electrons with different spin quantum numbers could circulate in the same orbit.

The Pauli Principle shows that atoms are not identical. This principle also applies to solid crystals, that is, the materials we use daily. The Principle is also able to explain the fact that the ores that make up the element are different, and the fact that there are different elements in the periodic table. With this principle, important properties of superconductors have been discovered.

In 1927, based on the Pauli Principle, German physicist Karl Werner Heisenberg showed that it is not possible to measure the physical properties of a particle, such as the position and momentum, at the same time and that these results can only be expressed with uncertain probability and statistics [5].

This uniqueness also manifests itself in the space we call the macro world. Stars consisting of only neutrons are called neutron stars. A neutron star is very dense: its mass is 2–3 times that of the Sun, but only about 10 km in diameter. A neutron star should theoretically collapse into a black hole, but this does not happen. The reason for this, it has been discovered, is that neutrons that cannot share the same position prevent collapse and that neutron stars remain in balance [6].

The universe has been created with balance, and everything, from the minutest particles to the stars in the outer space, follows their particular courses to maintain the order.

References

1. scientificamerican.com/article/identical-twins-exhibit-d/
2. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090715131449.htm
3. lbl.gov/2017/listings/contents_listings.html
4. wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_Pauli
5. phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/uncer.html
6. phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pauli.html

We can use electron or tunnel microscopes to extend our observations. Moreover, we discover that the great forces which help to keep together all the parts, from the biggest to the smallest, are active all the time just in order to make the wall stand still. This tells us that the wall has been built according to pre-determined calculations and geometry. So we can extrapolate this and imagine the creation of matter first as a sub-atomic particle, after that as a nucleus,¹ an atom and a molecule and continuing on. This situation clearly shows that at first matter (a kind of raw material) was created in a way that we cannot explain with causes. This matter was then subjected to construction by the Divine Knowledge, Will, and Power in the framework of the relationship of cause and effect in the universe. Today, we know that, starting from the molecule and going into more detail, that in the atomic system there is the atomic nucleus, and in the nucleus there are nucleons (protons and neutrons) and quarks in each nucleon; these tiny particles are kept together by very high forces (strong nuclear force). In other words, as the sizes of things get smaller in this physical world-from the galactic scale to the subatomic scale-the force required to keep things together becomes greater, in inverse proportion to the size. There are four kinds of forces known in the physical world: gravity, weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force and electromagnetic force. Gravity is the weakest of these forces, while strong nuclear force is the strongest. Gravity, the natural force by which all objects are attracted to each other, operates between immense objects like stars, medium-scaled things like planets and small things like apples. Gravity is 1,040 times weaker than the strong nuclear force that is used to keep the sub-atomic particles, such as the proton and quark in the nucleus, together. It is still a matter of debate in quantum physics if sub-atomic particles (those that are smaller than the electron) have a physical entity that we call a “body,” even though their existence has been proven and they have been named.

Can sub-atomic particles give information about the actual nature of matter?

Sub-atomic particles

It has been determined in research that has been carried out since the 1930s, as a result of collisions in particle accelerators, that the quark is the smallest particle. Another, theoretical, way to obtain the quark would be to heat matter to a trillion degrees Celsius and, break the matter down as much as possible. But in today’s conditions this is not possible. Therefore, the theory of Big Bang first came about as an idea that said: “There must have been extremely hot temperatures, or more accurately, there must have been very great and sudden explosions that caused these hot temperatures during the first creation of matter.” This idea has been widely accepted among physicists. At the end of the 20th century, it was realized that the same situation is valid for anti-matter. It was also obvious that matter and the organization and continuity of its mirror image, anti-matter, cannot be explained by mere coincidence.

Studies on matter and anti-matter

Matter can be defined as the intensified condition of energy and which can be converted to energy again (E=mc²). The reactions of fission and fusion² mean the transformation of the one-thousandth or one-ten thousandth of a mass into energy (the rest is transformed into other masses). However it is possible for matter to combine with anti-matter and be transformed into energy with 100% efficiency. So what is anti-matter? In 1931, Paul Dirac started to make predictions about the existence of a strange group of particles that he called anti-matter, as a result of theoretical studies.³ After Carl Anderson of the California Technology Institute carried out studies that supported Dirac’s ideas began to attract attention. But not liking publicity and being a retiring type, Dirac did not encourage the media to become interested in this subject-he had earlier turned down the Nobel Prize. Today, Dirac’s name is known only by those who are expert in the subject, but anti-matter is one of the deepest secrets of modern physics. It is not difficult to understand anti-matter, in spite of the fact that it is often presented as a very complicated subject. In some cases, the particles of anti-matter are the same as those of matter-for example, mass. In anti-matter the situation of properties such as electrical charge,⁴ magnetic moment,⁵ and spin,⁶ which are related to the main particles, is the opposite of the main particles of matter. The greatest difference is that the electrical charges are opposite. The nucleus of anti-matter is negative, not positive. In its orbit there are positrons with positive charges, not negative. The existence of anti-matter has been proven with particle accelerators.

Physicists have been able to obtain very small amounts of anti-matter by breaking down the sub-atomic particles with a speed close to that of the speed of light in CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva) and in the Fermi Laboratories (USA). Just as the system of matter was created from very small sub-atomic particles, anti matter was also created from very small anti-matter particles. The only difference between them is that their charges are opposite. As soon as the very small and very fast main particles of both matter and anti-matter come into existence, they cannot survive long and immediately become energy (in one-billionth of a second) and disappear with the ambiguous physical aspects; this is because they are not suitable structurally or functionally for the conditions of the universe, which has already cooled. In order to determine this, particles without mass or those with very small masses which were obtained after collisions in the particle accelerators were kept in very special conditions; the lightest matter in the universe, that is hydrogen, and the anti-matter of hydrogen (anti-hydrogen atoms) were synthesized (a hydrogen atom is the proton itself). However, all these processes are very expensive. The life of nine anti-hydrogen atoms that were produced in CERN in 1995 was just 40 nanoseconds (one forty-billionth of a second). One million anti-hydrogen atoms were produced in the same laboratories. Their total weight was just one quadrillionth of a kilogram (Weed, 2003). As of 2005, the yearly global production of anti-hydrogen atoms was approximately one hundred billionth of a kilogram and it costs one quadrillion dollars to produce on ounce (28.3 grams) (Berman, 2005). In almost all Big Bang models, it is estimated that equal amounts of matter and anti-matter were created in the time-space universe that existed 14 billion years ago. Taking into account the scale of the universe, the fact that everything was created in pairs seems logical. But apart from the anti-matter that “appears and disappears” in particle accelerators, there is no trace or mark of this. All the anti-matter that is thought to have been created with matter at the beginning seems to have disappeared in less than a second, even if the universe came into being with the Big Bang or something else. So where has all this anti-matter gone and how did it happen? The studies to understand this continue. One of them is related to the radioactive beta decay of weak nuclear force, which is accepted as one of the four fundamental forces. During this decay, a neutron in the atomic nucleus becomes a proton, but the time in which it does this is unpredictable. Meanwhile, an electron and a particle called the anti-neutrino⁷ are emitted from the neutron. In some rare isotopes, we see double beta decay. In this process, both neutrons in the nucleus decay at the same time, which means that they are converted to protons, with two electrons and two anti-neutrinos are emitted at the same time. Physicists have been experimentally observing double beta decay for more than 20 years. However, Hans Klapdor-Kleingrothaus and his colleagues from the Max Planck Nuclear Physics Institute (Heidelberg) say that they have been observing a different version of double beta decay and claim that no anti-neutrino appears in this experiment. This process was predicted by the Italian physicist Ettore Majorana in 1937, but he found it impossible to prove it. The Heidelberg team now says that they have succeeded this. The important thing about the matter and anti-matter relationship is this: if one or two anti-neutrinos are emitted from the nucleus during a normal beta or double beta decay, this means that there is a neutrino in each neutron. On the other hand, in double beta decay, in which no anti-neutrino is emitted, an anti-neutrino appears as a result of the decay of the neutron and is absorbed by another neutron without being able to be emitted; this is contrary to well-known laws. Did the Divine Power hide anti-matter in this way? If the results are correct, double-beta decay that does not emit anti-neutrino apparently indicates that the neutrino, which is hidden in the structure of the neutron, has a different place among the fundamental particles of matter.

Physicists state that the interactions and decay of matter and anti-matter are dependent on special laws, such as the preservation of energy and the number of leptons.⁸ These laws say that the duration of the exchange of matter and anti-matter is equal to time dating back to the beginning of the universe (the Big-Bang). When we look at the emission of a neutron, we can see that anti-neutrinos indicate the same number of neutrons that at the beginning each absorbed a neutrino. The results attained by the team in Heidelberg may help us to explain why the universe is full of matter and not anti-matter and why there is no visible anti-matter.

Why matter and anti-matter?

It is difficult to store anti-matter in great quantity and it is also dangerous and costly; if anti-matter comes into contact with matter, both disappear and release a great deal of energy. Dirac thought that anti-matter masses could be hidden in remote places of the universe. At this time this was a reasonable hypothesis, as a galaxy created out of anti-matter could not have been differentiated from a normal galaxy. Spectroscopic analyses at that time did not reveal any differences. But today it has been claimed that anti-matter is infrequently found in outer-space. The contact between electrons and positrons produces gamma rays with an energy equivalent to 511,000 electron volts. If anti-matter were galaxies to exist, they would interact with the usual particles that swim through intergalactic space and would cause gamma ray circles around existing galaxies. These kinds of circles were looked for, but nothing was found. We live in a new universe of matter (Berman, 2005). Marc Lachièze-Rey, the French astrophysicist, says that, “If there were any antimatter asteroids in our galaxy, they would emit x-rays that we would be able to detect as soon as it disappears with its material,” (Poirier & Greffoz, 2001). The current explanation of the physicists about the domination of matter over anti-matter in the universe has the laws of physics arranged in favor of matter. When a team from the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (2004) determined a minor but distinctive difference in the behaviors of some matter and anti-matter particles, this explanation was supported. This result implied an arrangement in which the material side overpowered the laws of physics. In terms of the causes operated being dependent on these laws, a universe that includes so much anti-matter would be very dangerous; when matter and anti-matter contact, the result is the transformation of matter into energy (E= mc²). It means a release of energy 143 times greater than a hydrogen bomb. If a marble that weighs an ounce collides with an equivalent anti-marble, 50 billion times a trillion erg of energy is released as a result of this reaction; this is enough to light all the electric bulbs in the US for a day. (Berman, 2005). In fact matter and anti-mater are similar to one another. Nobody has been able to explain why matter is dominant over antimatter instead of the other way round. Today, theoretical and experimental physicists predict that the half of the universe has been lost and the last time that it was seen was at the time of the creation of the universe. Matter and its opposite-charged anti-matter demonstrate that there was a certain predestination at the beginning of Creation, to be more exact before the Creation, in terms of knowledge, power and creating. This means that matter and anti-matter cannot exist by themselves. All the causes from the beginning were gathered to reveal a “universe of matter” (not a “universe of anti-matter”) that we can spiritually and intellectually comprehend. Anti-matter and matter demonstrate that they were created with a knowledge, will and power that existed before the creation. Otherwise, how could the first subatomic particles like hadrons, then the protons and the neutrons, then the atomic nucleus, after that the atomic system and the molecules in the sea of quarks, which are thought to be the most transparent, the most scattered, but at the same time the most fluid state (this is what can be predicted by looking at the results of particle collision experiments) of matter that appeared as the result of the Big Bang and under very great temperatures (trillions of degrees Celsius), have been formed? How could the laws that operate as the causes of this universe, a realm of symmetrical matter and antimatter, and then the structures and functions that became dominant have been formed? Could the sea of quarks (maybe the ether), which is the basis of matter, have been transformed by itself into organizations of new matter in the shape of nucleus, atomic system, and molecule only as a result of a decrease in temperature?⁹ Even if the temperature decreased, the sea of quarks could have remained the same, considering its structure. The cause and effect relationship-which we explain with the present physical laws-about temperature changes or about different states of matter may not have existed. Could the quarks have established this law? If the existence of matter and space¹⁰ occurred as a result of the Big Bang and a heat of trillions of degrees Celsius; how, when, for what reason and in which physical realm did this accumulation of energy happen? If there was no physical realm before the explosion, does physics stem from the metaphysics? Yes! The universe was created from nothing. Even if we search for the answer to this question in terms of the exact sciences, we again arrive at the same answer. The universe was created! These questions are not being asked for the first time. However the “hand of science” cannot grasp metaphysics (or pre-physics). Another interesting point here is this: the events on the large scale of the galaxy or even of the universe are trying to be understood by studies on a small scale (such as with sub-atomic particles) and by collisions in accelerators. We can say that small particles contain the index of the entire universe. Moreover, the studied particles do not individually exist. They were in the conditions of the high temperature. We can also say that, if we go in depth in sub-atomic particle studies, the existence of the particles that have very small mass (one quadrillionth of a kilogram) or those with no mass, are very rapid and have a very short life; this makes us think that matter can be created out of nothing at any moment and can be transformed into larger particles that have a greater mass. Most importantly, if we had not seen the activities in the sub-atomic realm we would not be able to understand that God’s Knowledge, Will and Power have penetrated everywhere at all times. If the sub-atomic realm had been static and inactive, God forbid, we would think that this realm was left to its own devices or that the Divine Power could not reach here. If God had not created such small, quick particles that can come into existence at any moment and be transformed into something else, we would not be able to comprehend the greatness of His Power and the intricacy of His Knowledge and Calculation.

References

• Berman, B., “What’s the Antimatter?” Discover, Vol 26, No 10, October, 2005.
• Weed, W.S., “Startrek,” Discover, Vol 24, No 8, August, 2003.
• Poirier, H. & Greffoz, V., “Asteroïdes: La menace se précise,” Science & Vie, No 1006, July, Paris, 2001.

Notes

1. This before and after relationship is valid; Our Creator, Who created the time, is not bound by time.
2. The slow chain reaction fission (the division of atomic nucleus) is the working principle in nuclear plants and it is the working principle of atomic bomb as a rapid chain reaction.
3. In 1928, Paul Dirac also predicted the existence of the positron, the anti-particle of the electron. This prediction was proven by physicist Carl Anderson at California Technology Institute in 1932.
4. The electrical charge is the application of the force of a matter on another matter, and the unit is the coulomb (C). A body is charged with electricity as a result of friction, induction, or chemical change. The charge itself shows an electron unit on the body (negative charge) or loss of electron (positive charge). The static electricity that we see when putting on an acrylic sweater or combing our hair is the result of the loss or gain of an electron from surface atoms. A charge flow, such as the passing of electrons from a copper wire, is electrical current and its unit is the ampere (A).
5. Magnetic momentum is the effect that happens dependent on the length and force of the magnet.
6. Spin is the natural angular momentum of a sub-atomic particle, such as a proton or neutron, of an atomic nucleus, an atom or a molecule; spin continues to exist even if the particle becomes inactive. A particle, in a certain state of energy, has a spin peculiar to itself as well as having an electrical charge and mass.
7. The neutrino is one of the three uncharged main particles (and one of the three uncharged anti-particles) belonged to leptons and it has a very small mass (almost zero). The three types are electron neutrino, muon neutrino and tau neutrino. The anti-particle of an electron neutrino is the anti-neutrino that is emitted during the beta decay of a nucleus.
8. Being one of the fundamental particle types that are not affected by strong nuclear forces, leptons correspond to the electron, muon, tau and the neutrinos of these three particles and also to the six anti-particles of these. In July 2000, direct proof of the tau lepton was obtained in the Fermi Laboratories. The muon, on the other hand, is a fundamental particle similar to the electron except for its mass. It is 207 times greater in mass than the electron. Its half-life is two millionthof a second. It is transformed into electrons and neutrinos at the end of this period of time. Although it is thought that the muon is a meson in origin, it has not been classified as a lepton yet. Meson is an unstable sub-atomic particle group consisting of a quark and anti-quark. Its existence was determined by cosmic radiation and it is emitted by a nucleus that has been exposed to the bombardment of very high-energy particles. The sub-class of hadrons, mesons, includes kaons and pions. Their existence was predicted by the Japanese physicist Hideki Yukawa in 1935.
9. It seems that the existence of matter and anti-matter causes the high temperature present at the beginning to drop and the combination of the sub-atomic particles (nuclear synthesis). The encounter of matter and anti-matter causes high energy. Therefore, we can understand that a very large explosion (the Big Bang) and very high temperatures were the conditions at the beginning of time.
10. Today physicists accept that matter was created out of nothing and in the space in which it was embedded.

In the 21st century, we are plunging forward into a new era of technological power — one that offers enormous promise and danger.

What is nanotechnology?

In its most basic form, nanotechnology refers to the manipulation of materials at the atomic or molecular level. The name derives from the nanometer, a scientific measurement unit representing a billionth of a meter, three to four atoms wide. Scientists are learning how to connect atoms and molecules together to create nano-scale mechanisms that create switches or transistors, or even small machines that can perform complex tasks.

To use an oft-quoted comparison, a human hair is between 100,000 and 200,000 nanometers thick, while a typical virus can be just 100 nanometers wide. Atoms are typically between one-tenth and one-half of a nanometer wide. Due to the difficulties involved in working at this scale, manipulation of items as “large” as 100 nanometers is generally included in the concept of nanotechnology.

Nanotechnology enables scientists to create new materials atom by atom. With increasingly more powerful microscopes, scientists can see molecules that are mere nanometers (billionths of a meter) in size. To clarify this size, a pinhead is one million nanometers across. The field intertwines nearly all fields of science.

Most nanotechnology discussions deal with the futuristic concept of nanomachines or nanorobots: microscopic devices that carry out tasks at the atomic or subatomic level. Nanotechnology, also called molecular manufacturing, is “a branch of engineering that deals with the design and manufacture of extremely small electronic circuits and mechanical devices built at the molecular level of matter.” The goal of nanotechnology is to manipulate materials at the atomic level to build the smallest possible electromechanical devices, given the physical limitations of matter. Many of the mechanical systems that we know how to build will be transferred to the molecular level as some atomic analogy.

A typical vision of the twenty-first century: “Nanotechnologists will be building our cars one molecule at a time, invading our bloodstream to declog our arteries, and replicating themselves thousands of times over.”

Nanorobots (1)

A nanorobot is a computer-controlled robotic device constructed of nanometer-scale components to molecular precision, usually microscopic in size (often abbreviated as nanobot). This reminds one of the 1966 film Fantastic Voyage, in which a team of scientists (including Raquel Welch) are miniaturized, placed in a tiny submarine, and injected into a sick man’s bloodstream. Nanotechnology invariably involves work on a much smaller scale than the average blood cell.

Producing commercially viable nanomachines will be more challenging, since atomic manipulation, while not theoretically contrary to the laws of physics, is still extremely slow and costly. The most widely discussed long-term solution is to make the nanomachines self-replicating. Control mechanisms for such systems, mainly how a machine “knows” to copy itself and when to stop doing so, are still in their very early stages. Once again, theory is far ahead of practical reality.

Many of nanotechnology’s more recent practical applications have been in the area of material research. However, scientists believe that transistors eventually could be built in this way, paving the way for computational technologies that do not depend on silicon and that can pack even more circuitry into microscopic spaces.

Nanoshells (2)

Nanoshells, defined as tiny particles that can manipulate light, can be used to transform medical procedures, ranging from cancer therapy to medical testing and drug delivery. They are ideal for biotechnology applications because they are biocompatible, can be altered and modified, and absorb light easily in the near-infrared region, where human tissue is most transparent.

Nanoshells can be tagged and delivered specifically to tumor cells, thereby leaving healthy cells undamaged. In addition, they can reduce the amount of time needed to conduct medical tests from several days to a matter of seconds. When incorporated into temperature-sensitive polymers, nanoshells can be triggered to release a chemical using infrared light, thus enabling a patient to control the release of medicine that requires periodic dispensing.

A new bandage (3)

A new bandage that imitates natural healing process is used for injuries ranging from minor cuts to gunshot wounds. The bandage, a flannel-like material, stops bleeding immediately and eventually is absorbed by the body. This new material is developed by spinning a compound naturally found in the blood into a bandage that can minimize blood loss and be absorbed by the body, according to an article in the 12 Feb. 2003 issue of Nano Letters, a journal of the American Chemical Society. “We’ve taken an old technique — electrospinning — and applied it to natural fibers,” says Gary Bowlin, associate professor of biomedical engineering at Virginia Commonwealth University.

When a person bleeds from a cut or a wound, a blood clot forms and netting made of a substance called fibrin develops over the clot. According to researchers, fibrinogen, the compound in blood that comprises the “natural” bandage, is a fibrin precursor that can come from human, bovine, or genetically engineered bacterial sources. The goal is to pack the bandage like gauze so that it can be used to treat trauma patients, according to Bowlin.

Science fiction into reality (4)

Imagine a world in which cars can be assembled molecule-by-molecule, garbage can be disassembled and turned into beef steaks, and people can be operated on and healed by cell-sized robots. Sounds like science fiction? Well, with current semiconductor chip manufacturing encroaching upon the nanometer scale and the ability to move individual atoms at the IBM Almaden laboratory, we are fast approaching the technological ability to fabricate productive machines and devices that can manipulate objects at the atomic level. With this ability, we will be able to develop molecular-sized computers and robots that will give us unprecedented control over matter and the ability to shape the physical world as we see fit.

Nanofabrication techniques with applications in fiber optics, biotechnology, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), and “tiny mechanical devices such as sensors, valves, gears, mirrors, and actuators embedded in semiconductor chips,” are of particular interest, as they are but a mere step away from the molecular machines envisioned by nanotechnology. MEMS are used in automobile airbag systems as accelerometers to detect collisions, and will become an increasing part of our everyday technology. In 1986, K. Eric Drexler, a researcher at MIT, foresaw the advent of molecular machines. In his Engines of Creation, he outlined the possibilities and consequences of this emerging field, which he called nanotechnology. Drexler has written numerous books on the subject, such as Unbounding the Future, and has founded the Foresight Institute, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the responsible development of nanotechnology. Today, nanotechnology research and development is widespread in numerous universities. The U.S. government has created an organization, the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), to monitor and guide research and development in this field.

Potential benefits

It does not take much of a leap of imagination disassemblers dismantling garbage to be recycled at the molecular level, and then giving it to assemblers who will use it to build atomically perfect engines. Stretching this vision a bit, you can imagine a Star Trek type replicator that could reassemble matter in the form of a juicy steak, given the correct blueprints and organization of these nanomachines.

A laboratory-scale “in vivo nanoscope” could be capable of providing atomic resolution, real-time movies of happenings inside living cells in intact living animals. This nanoscope, a hybrid of conventional technology and early (pre-assembler) nanotechnology, is an enormous leap in the ability of biologists to understand the workings of cells and develop medical therapies.

Some of the more prominent benefits of nanotechnology would be precision manufacturing, material reuse, and miniaturization. Medical applications are pharmaceutical creation, disease treatment, and nanomachine-assisted surgery. Environmental applications lie in toxin cleanup, recycling, and resource consumption reduction.

Nanomedicine deals with the comprehensive monitoring, control, construction, repair, defense, and improvement of all human biological systems by working at the molecular level with engineered nanodevices and nanostructures; the science and technology of diagnosing, treating, and preventing disease and traumatic injury, as well as relieving pain and preserving and improving human health through the use of molecular tools and molecular knowledge of the human body; and the use of molecular machine systems to address medical problems and using molecular knowledge to maintain and improve human health at the molecular scale. Cosmetic nanosurgery carried out with simple nanomachines (no on-board computers, for example) could change hair color, cause hair to grow or not to grow in specific locations, keep teeth clean and skin smooth, and so on, all far more effectively than current treatments.

Looking somewhat further in the future at more radical modifications of the human body through nanotechnology, Edward Reifman describes dentistry with assembly-fabricated teeth, and even with the teeth and jaws being made of diamonds. “In the long term, we hope to be able to build small nanorobots which can search out and destroy cancerous tumors when they comprise just one or two cells” or “small drilling machines which dissolve clots.”

Viruses, which are natural nanomachines, could be fought more effectively, as the body’s own immune system has some handicaps: it tends to forget the shape of its enemies, cannot always successfully identify malignant cells, and suffers from a certain delay until the immune reaction is fully developed. Therefore, nanomachines could support the immune system. Nanomachines could rout bacteria, excise tumors, reconstruct damaged tissue, and even make a huge contribution to treating the process of aging.

Along with the obvious manufacturing benefits, there are many potential medical and environmental benefits. With nanomachines, we could better design and synthesize pharmaceuticals, directly treat such diseased cells as cancer, better monitor a patient’s life signs, and make microscopic repairs in hard-to-operate-on bodily areas. With regard to the environment, we could use nanomachines to clean up toxins or oil spills, recycle garbage, and eliminate landfills, thus reducing our natural resource consumption.

Potential dangers

The downside to these benefits is the possibility of using assemblers and disassemblers to create weapons, to be used as weapons themselves, or the possibility that they may run wild and wreak havoc. Other less invasive but equally perilous uses would be in electronic surveillance.

However, with nanotechnology, armies could develop disassemblers to attack physical structures or biological organisms at the molecular level. A similar hazard would be if general-purpose disassemblers escaped into the environment and started disassembling every molecule they encountered, the so-called “gray goo scenario.” Furthermore, if nanomachines were created to be self-replicating and, for some reason, had a problem with their limiting mechanism, they would multiply endlessly, like viruses.

Even without considering such extreme disaster scenarios, we can find plenty of potentially harmful uses for nanotechnology, such as the erosion of our freedom and privacy. For example, people could use molecular-sized microphones, cameras, and homing beacons to monitor and track others.

Ethical issues and analysis

Given the awesome potential dangers inherent in nanotechnology, we must analyze its potential consequences. Nanotechnology may never become as powerful and prolific as envisioned by its evangelists, but as with any potential near-horizon technology, we should formulate solutions to potential ethical issues before the technology is irreversibly adopted. We must examine the ethics of developing nanotechnology and create policies designed to assist its development while eliminating, or at least minimizing, its damaging effects.

Nanosensors(5)

A nanosensor is defined as a chemical or physical sensor constructed by using nanoscale components, usually microscopic or submicroscopic in size.

Nanotechnology brings science fiction into everyday life6 Nanotechnology’s more immediate future lies in its application in such sensors as electronic “noses” that can detect, for example, the presence of individual protein molecules in a blood sample. This involves a fingernail-sized chip with thousands of sensors, each set to detect a specific substance. It might even be possible to make these noses so small that they could fit on a needle. Then, there would be no need for a blood test, for a finger prick would be sufficient to allow a full blood analysis.

Nanosensors also will be of great value in producing new medicines, for they can effectively find active substances. So far, it has been possible to build this type of sensor one by one; the difficulty lies in integrating perhaps 100,000 of them on one chip.

Aging can be delayed by repairing human cells one by one. Unlimited computer power can be obtained by improved microchip performance. Global warming can be reduced by cleaning greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere with nanoparticles, and pesticides could kill insects without harmful byproducts. Creating artificial muscles and sensors, as well as nanocoating for metal, could increase power plant efficiency and potentially save millions of dollars a year for electricity generators. For example, we now have self-washing windows that repel dirt, thanks to their nanostructured surface.

Nanofluids (7)

On the medical front, researchers at Virginia Polytechnic Institute are developing magnetic nanofluids. They posit that magnetic particles attached to medicines, like those used in chemotherapy, can be concentrated on one part of the body by using external magnets on patients. 

Always clean clothing (8,9)

Imagine textiles that cannot be stained or wrinkled, that always maintain the look and feel of fabrics made from natural fibers. Imagine materials that are 100 times stronger than steel, but weigh only one-sixth as much. Nanofibers could be used in astronauts’ suits, moving with them as they work to give them greater flexibility in space, or to allow the disabled greater mobility by acting as extra muscles.

Imagine batteries that take up less than one cubic millimeter, but supply a medical implant with power. Imagine sensors, smaller than a pinpoint, that detect anything in extremely low concentrations, from specific antibodies to toxic chemicals.

A big splash of coffee leaves an unmistakable stain on an ordinary pair of trousers; on a pair of nanotextile trousers, it can be brushed off without leaving a trace. A titanium frying pan and the laser in a fairly modern CD player are both based on nanotechnology. By using nanotechnology, wall paint could automatically sterilize an operating theatre, filters could be used in water purifiers to automatically kill undesirable bacteria, and roofing tiles that convert solar light into household electricity could give way to reinforced self-repairing houses immune to all natural disasters “short of a large incoming meteor.(10)

Hence nano-technology is and will continue to become part of our everyday lives … sometimes without us even noticing.

Michael Crichton (11)

Crichton says “These organisms [self-reproducing tiny computers] will be created by nanotechnology, perhaps the most radical technology in human history: the quest to build man-made machines of extremely small size, on the order of 100 nanometers, or 100/billionths of a meter. Such machines would be 1,000 times smaller than the diameter of a human hair. Experts predict that these tiny machines will provide everything from miniaturized computer components to new medical treatments to new military weapons. In the 21st century, they will change our world totally.

“The potential benefits are spectacular: Tiny robots may crawl through your arteries, cutting away atherosclerotic plaque; powerful drugs will be delivered to individual cancer cells, leaving other cells undamaged; teeth will be self-repairing. Cosmetically, you will change your hair color with an injection of nanomachines that circulate through the body, moving melanocytes in hair follicles. Other nanomachines will lighten or darken skin color at will, removing blemishes, birthmarks and liver spots in the process; still others could cleanse the mouth and eliminate bad breath. Nonsurgical nanoprocesses could even perform liposuction and body reshaping. They will also repair knees and spines.

Living spaces will be transformed with self-cleaning dishes and carpets and permanently clean bathrooms. Windows will lighten or darken at will; programmable paint will change color. You can walk through the walls of your house, since they are composed of particle clouds. Your personal computer and your watch will be painted on your arm. Temperature-sensitive clothing will loosen when it gets hot, insulate when it gets cold.”

In the future, roving nanomachines will convert trash dumps to energy, solar nanomachines will be coated on the houses to generate electricity, and flexible nanomachines will provide earthquake protection. It may even be possible to move a house across the lawn on the backs of millions of nanomachines.

In 2003, nanotechnology is still very much in its infancy. However, such major corporations as IBM, Fujitsu, and Intel are funding this research. U.S. government investment has gone from virtually nothing only a few years ago to well over $600,000,000 per year in 2003.

At present, nonotechniques are being used to make sunscreens, stain-resistant fabrics, and composite materials for cars; soon, they will be used to make extremely small computers and storage devices. Pittsburgh based PPG Industries, Inc. is making self-cleaning window glass; the Westaim Corporation of Toronto is making nanocrystal wound dressings with antibiotic and anti-inflammatory properties. Currently, nanotechnology is principally a material technology.

Most experts predict that self-reproducing machines are only a decade away. Man-made, self-reproducing entities already have been released into the environment. The first of these, of course, were computer viruses. The first viruses were created as a game (“core wars”), a 1960s battle between mainframe programmers, each releasing a program into the other’s mainframe computer. Originally limited to specialists, hackers soon joined in. The growth of computer networking made rapid worldwide transmission possible. Computer viruses, worms on the Internet, have become an international threat to information and global business.

Scientists are witnessing some of the problems of self-replicating biotechnology agents. For example, a recent report indicates that modified maize genes are appearing in native maize in Mexico, despite laws against it and efforts to prevent it. This is only the start of probably a long journey to control this new technology. Laws have been passed to put hackers in jail; delinquent biotechnologists will soon join them. We need international controls to deal with self-reproducing technologies right now, whereas now there are essentially none.

Footnotes

(1) www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/enterprise/story/0,2000048640,20267134-2,00.htm

(2)www.rice.edu/projects/reno/Newsrel/2001/20010402_nanotechnology.shtml.

(3) www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=5481.

(4) http://cseserv.engr.scu.edu/StudentWebPages/AChen/ResearchPaper.htm.

(5) www.nansosensors.com.

(6) Nino Simic, “Nano into Everyday Life.” www.oresundit.com/composite(1610).htm.

(7) Ryan Randazzo, Reno Gazette-Journal, 15 June 2002.

(8) www.agg.com/Practice/Nanotechnology_main.html.

(9) www.oresundit.com/composite(1610).htm.

(10) www.foresight.org.

(11) Michael Crichton, “Could Tiny Machines Rule the World?” Parade Magazine, 24 November 2002, pgs. 6-8.

Some nanotechnology links:

• www.about.com/nanotechnology (A search engine that compiles various sources and articles).
• www.jmtour.com (Professor Jim Tour’s research home page).
• www-ece.rice.edu/~halas (Professor Naomi Halas’ research home page).
• www.nano.gov (The National Science and Technology Council’s site for nanoscale technology, including information on federal initiatives). 

Following the classical Newtonian physics and under the spell of developments in science, physicists of the 19th century claimed that they could explain every phenomenon in the universe. E. Dubois Reymond, at a meeting held in memory of Leibniz in the Prussian Academy in 1880 was a bit humbler: ‘There have remained eight enigmas in the universe, three of which we are unable to solve yet: The essential nature of matter and force, the essence and origin of movement and the nature of consciousness. The three of the rest that we can solve although with great difficulties are: The origin of life, the order in the universe and the apparent purpose for it and the origin of thought and language. As for the seventh, we can say nothing about it. It is the individual free will (quoted in A. Adivar, Ilim ve Din (Science and Religion), Istanbul 1980, p. 282).

The sub-atomic world threw all scientists into confusion. This world and the ‘quantum cosmology’ which it introduces, rather than being a heap or assemblage of concrete things, is made up of five elements: the mass of the electron in the field where an action occurs (M), the mass of the proton (m), the electrical charge which these two elements carry, the energy quanta (h)-the amount of the energy remaining during the occurrence of the action-and the unchanging speed of light (c). These five elements of the universe can even be reduced to action or energy waves travelling through space in tiny packets or quanta. Since the quanta required for an action are special to it and exist independently of the quanta required for the previous action, it becomes impossible to predict the exact state of the universe. If the universe is in t1 state now, it cannot be predicted that it will be the same in t2 state. Paul Renteln, assistant professor of physics at California State University, writes: ‘Modern physicists live in two different worlds. In one world we can predict the future position and momentum of a particle if we know its present position and momentum. This is the world of classical physics, including the physics described by Einstein’s theory of gravity, the general theory of relativity. In the second world it is impossible to predict the exact position and momentum of a particle. This is the probabilistic, subatomic world of quantum mechanics. General relativity and quantum mechanics are the two great pillars that form the foundation of 20th-physics, and yet their precepts assume two different kinds of universe.’ (American Scientist, Nov.-Dec, 1991, p.508)

The real nature of this sub-atomic world and the events taking place in it make it impossible to construct a theory to describe them, because they cannot be observed. One reason for their unobservability is that, as Renteln writes in an attempt to propose a theory which he calls quantum gravity to reconcile the two different worlds of classical and quantum physics, ‘the events take place at a scale far smaller than any realm yet explored by experimental physics. It is only when particles approach to within about 10-35 meter that their gravitational interactions have to be described in the same quantum-mechanical terms that we adopt to understand the other forces of nature. This distance is 1024 times smaller than the diameter of an atom-which means that the characteristic scale of quantum gravity bears the same relation to the size of an atom as an atom bears to the size of the solar system. To probe such small distances would require a particle accelerator 1015 times more powerful than the proposed Superconducting Supercollider.’

At the outset of this century, electrons surrounding the nucleus of an atom were thought to orbit the nucleus like planets in a miniature solar system. However, later researches modified that view. The electron is now understood to be more of an energy field cloud fluctuating around a nucleus. The nucleus itself seemed to be composed of two smaller constituents-protons and neutrons. However, in the 1960s, physicists Murray Gell-Mann and George Zweig confirmed by experiments that protons and neutrons were made up of even more elementary particles, which Gell-Mann called ‘quarks.’

Quarks cannot be seen, not just because they are too small but also because they do not seem to be quite ‘all there.’ Quarks are better described as swirls of dynamic energy, which means that solid matter is not, at its fundamental level, solid at all. Anything you hold in your hand and which seems solid, is really a quivering, shimmering, lacy lattice of energy, pulsating millions of times every second as billions of fundamental particles gyrate and spin in an eternal dance. At its most fundamental level, everything is energy held together by forces of incredible power. This is not all that makes us unable to predict even the nearest future of the universe. According to Werner Heisenberg’s theories, at just the time when we can know either where a particle is or how fast it is travelling, we cannot know both. This is because the very act of measuring the particle alters its behaviour. Measuring the particle’s speed changes its position, and measuring its position changes its speed. 

However, the unpredictability in the sub-atomic world does not change anything in our everyday, predictable world. Everything works according to the basic laws of classical Newtonian physics. Why is this so and how should our view of the world and events be? Scientists who believe in the existence of God and His creation of the universe suggest that creation was not a single event. That is, God did not create the universe as a single act and then leave it to operate according to the laws He established. Rather, creation is a continuous act (creatio continua). In other words, roughly like the movement of energy or electricity and its illuminating our world by means of bulbs, existence continuously comes from God and returns to and perishes in Him. Through the manifestation of all His Names, God continuously creates, annihilates and re-creates the universe. Some medieval Muslim scholarly saints such as Muhy al-Din ibn al- ‘Arabi and Mawlana Jalal al-Din al-Rumi called these pairs of acts as the continuous cycle of coming into existence and dying. Because of the incredible speed of this movement, the universe appears to be uniform and continuous. Rumi likens this to the fast spinning of a staff on one end of which there is fixed a light. When spun at speed, the light on the end of the staff appears as if a circle of light. Unable to explain the extreme complexity of existence and the events taking place, some scientists assert that everything is in chaos and attribute the formation of the universe as it is to mere chance. According to them, other universes could have formed, they simply did not, and there is no reason that the universe is the way it is. Given that it is impossible for even three or more unconscious things moving at random to come together by themselves to form even the simplest entity, it is highly questionable whether a rational person can accept that the wonderful order prevailing in the universe according to which we can direct our lives can be explained without attributing it to a supernatural intellect. A. Cressy Morrison writes:

The proverbial penny may turn up heads ten time running and the chance of an eleventh is not expected but is still one in two, but the chance of a run of ten heads is very small. Suppose you have a bag containing one hundred marbles, ninety-nine black and one white. Shake the bag and let out one. The chance that the first marble out is the white one is exactly one in one hundred. Now put the marbles back and start over again. The chance of the white coming out is still one in a hundred, but the chance of the white coming out first twice in succession is one in ten thousand. Now try a third time, and the chance of the white coming out three times in succession is one hundred times ten thousand or one in a billion. Try another time or two and the figures become astronomical. The results of chance are as closely bound by law as the fact that two and two make four. All the nearly exact requirements of life could not be brought about on one planet at one time by chance. The size of the earth, the distance from the sun, the thickness of the earth’s crust, the quantity of water, the amount of carbon dioxide, the volume of nitrogen, the emergence of man and his survival-all point to order out of chaos, to design and purpose, and to the fact that, according to the inexorable laws of mathematics, all these could not occur by chance simultaneously on one planet once in a billion times. It could so occur, but it did not so occur. (Man Does Not Stand Alone, New York, pp.98-9.)

Attributing the impossible to chance is a trick of the human mind, its stubborn resistance, which confuses a theoretical possibility with the actual facts. For example, it is possible that the Pacific Ocean has now changed into milk, but actually it has not. As it is impossible to construct a building on a flowing stream, God Almighty spread over the unpredictability of the sub-atomic world the veil of the speed of its movement and made the universe dependent on what we call laws. It is for this reason that everything in the outer face of nature works according to the basic laws of classical Newtonian physics. However, it is a matter of controversy between the two schools of Ahl al-Sunna wa ‘l-Jama’a whether the universe has a continuous existence working according to established laws and things accordingly have perpetual properties or God continuously creates the universe and orders each component of it what to do at every moment. The followers of the Maturidi School assert that God created the universe and set it to operate according to certain laws which He established, giving each thing certain properties. For example, fire burns because God gave it the quality of burning. Whereas, the followers of the Ash’ari School maintain that the universe does not have a perpetual, established existence and reality. Nor do things have essential qualities of themselves. God creates the universe anew each ‘moment’ and directs it continuously by ordering each thing to do what it must do. For example, fire does not essentially have the quality of burning, rather, God gives it the order to burn and it burns. Since according to the dictates of life in the universe, He usually orders it to burn, we think that fire essentially has the quality of burning.

As we accept the ‘relative’ truth of both Newtonian and quantum physics at the same time, we can also accept the truth of the views of both schools of Muslim faith. As a matter of belief and as life at the most fundamental level of existence as in the sub-atomic world points out, God is continuously active, creating the universe anew and directly administering it. While at practical level, life will be impossible for us if we do not accept or assume the uniform continuity or stability of existence. What would life be if we were conscious that the sun would not rise tomorrow morning or that we might not live a second longer, although it is theoretically conceivable both that the sun might not rise tomorrow and that we might not survive a second longer?