Kalam Cosmological Arguments of Huduth and Imkan in light of Modern Scientific Discoveries

Humankind has grappled with the questions surrounding God, life, and creation for as long as we can remember (Gülen 2006, 3-4). Historically, philosophers and theologians have sought to produce systematic and rigorous arguments to rationally prove the existence of the Divine through the means of logical deduction (Gök 2018, 10). One such argument that has been synthesized is that of the kalam (the Islamic theology), a cosmological argument which has provided a historical and modern basis for those seeking to validate the existence of God (Gök 2018, 10-13). This argument has come under particular examination in contemporary circles where modern scientific discoveries are seen to both challenge, and support, the existence of God and hence establish a valid basis upon which to argue either case. This essay will thus seek to discuss the validity of the kalam cosmological argument, and its subsets, in relation to two modern scientific discoveries: the Big Bang theory, and the concept of virtual particles.

The kalam cosmological argument consists of two subset arguments: the huduth (cosmological) argument and the imkan (contingency) argument (Craig & Moreland 2009, 101-102). Historically, notable Muslim theologians, such as Imam Al-Ghazali, utilized this argument as a testament to the proof of God’s existence (Copan & Craig 2017, 5-7). Within the modern Western philosophical and theological context, this theory has been refined by the works of William Lane Craig (Waters 2015). Regarding the huduth (cosmological) argument, Craig summarised the premise of the argument as follows: the universe either had, or did not have, a beginning; if the universe had a beginning then it was either caused or not caused; if there was a cause then this was because of an external and powerful being (Doko 2018). As can be inferred, the argument is based on a question of origins, causality, and in regard to the two preceding arguments, validating that the cause of the universe is external.

In assessing the validity of the huduth argument, the Big Bang theory can be utilized. In modern science, the Big Bang theory has been established as the leading paradigm for the origins of the universe (Paulson et al, 2015). The theory purports that the universe, and all that is contained within it, had a singular starting point whereby from this singularity, the universe has been inflating for what has been calculated as 13.8 billion years (Gonzalo 2008, 207-240). The first premise of the huduth argument is one of origins. The Big Bang postulates that the universe was derived from a singular starting point, with the key being that it indeed had a starting point. Scientists have been able to calculate the age of the universe through utilising data obtained through calculation and observation (Paulson et al, 2-3). In knowing that the universe has an age, and therefore a beginning, one can thus logically deduce that it must have had a point of origin. This complies with the first component of the huduth argument in that the universe indeed must have had a “beginning,” thus validating the first premise.

The Big Bang theory also complies with the second premise of causality. It is accepted by scientists and philosophers alike that in order for an effect to manifest itself within the natural world, there must be a cause to bring about the effect (Rabins 2013, 6-25). Upon accepting the first premise that the universe had a beginning, the universe itself must, therefore, be the manifestation or effect of a preceding cause. Though models such as Stephen Hawking’s “no-boundary-proposal” have been theorized to provide contradictory explanations for the causation of the universe, these have been later disproven by physicists (Wolchover 2019). In this regard, the notion that the universe came into existence without a cause is not logical, thus validating the second premise of the huduth argument.

The last premise argues that once it is accepted that the universe has a cause then this cause must be an external, all-powerful being. Studies into the observed universe are based largely on natural laws and observations that are measurable (Paulson et al, 2-3). Any cause beyond these natural laws of the known universe would thus be “unnatural” and potentially Divine (Ergi 2015). Though the multiverse theory has been proposed as an alternative to a transcendent, external being, the fact still remains that there logically must have been a first universe with an external cause that would then cause the proceeding universes that follow. As such, the third premise of the huduth argument proves itself to be valid, thus validating the argument as a whole.

In addition to the Big Bang, the theory of virtual particles can be used to attest to the validity of the huduth argument. Virtual particles are quantum fluctuations that shift between observed existence and non-existence (Daywitt 2009, 27-28). Historically thought to be empty and full of “nothing,” the vacuum of space has been theorised to contain these finite particles [16]. Through calculation, virtual particles come into existence with a measurable beginning and not out of what appears to be nothing (Jaeger 2009, 144). Physicists have conceived that the particles themselves are in fact not independent, rather that they rely on other quantum interactions and certain laws of physics in order to manifest (Falkenburg 2007, 258-260). In this regard, they have a beginning point of origin. As such, they can be seen to comply with the first premise of the huduth argument. Though virtual particles do appear to come in-and-out of existence there are a number of causal factors that must provide the right conditions for their appearance such as the vacuum-like conditions of interstellar space, the interactions of surrounding “real” particles as well as the mass of these “real” particles (Falkenburg 2007, 58). It is thus perceivable that the particles are caused by several factors and do not come into existence out of non-existence without a cause which adheres to the second premise. The third premise of the huduth argument points to an external cause or creator. As was argued above, virtual particles have a cause and this cause is external to themselves. They cannot create themselves from nothingness and manifest due to the interactions of the real particles around them, which give rise to conditions that are conducive to their appearance. As such, this complies with the logic of the third premise of the huduth argument, as virtual particles require external causes in order to come into existence. Thus, the validity of the huduth argument holds firm when applied to this concept.  

The example of the Big Bang Theory and the concept of virtual particles can also be used when assessing the validity of the imkan (contingency) argument. This argument posits that everything that exists is either necessary or contingent (Ergi, 9). When classified as contingent, it is postulated that something can either exist or not exist, and that if it does exist then this existence is dependent upon factors that are external to it (Gülen 2006, 3-4). The idea that creations within the known universe are contingent is logical, as it can be deemed that nothing exists without a cause (Doko 3-4). In this regard, it is possible to say that contingent items within the universe, including the universe itself, are dependent upon that which is “necessary” and outside of themselves (Yaran 2003, 181-187). The Big Bang Theory provides a solid basis on which to assess the validity of the imkan argument. Everything within the universe originated from that moment, thus the universe is perceivable as having temporal existence (Walles 2016). In being a temporal entity, it is thus contingent on a cause that is external to itself. It would seem illogical that time, space, energy, and matter created themselves as they are contingent elements devoid of consciousness and reliant on physical laws hence would not have been able to exist beyond the Big Bang prior to it occurring. As such, the universe, being contingent and unable to necessitate its own existence, must have been created by a necessary agent. Though this necessary agent has been speculated to be a preceding universe, such as in the multiverse theory, this would propel reality into an infinite regress, a chain of causes contingent on the one before it, a notion deemed to be implausible (Yaran, 181-183). Accordingly, these multiverses would also have to be temporal in disposition and hence the same issue of an eventual point of origin manifests. The logical conclusion is thus that the necessary agent must exist beyond what is known, namely a transcendent being that is beyond temporality and materiality, and thus the logic of the imkan argument is valid.

This principle is similarly seen within the example of virtual particles. These particles are observed to come in-an-out of existence within the vacuum of space (Jaeger, 144). However, this activity is contingent upon necessary conditions, such as the existence of the vacuum itself, quantum interactions based upon the uncertainty principle, as well as surrounding real particles (Greene, 424-425). If any of the aforementioned factors were not present then the existence of virtual particle would only be a probable outcome and not a necessary outcome, similar to that of the universe, in a way that these particles do not necessitate their own existence and are dependent on an external and necessary cause. In this regard, the concept of virtual particles demonstrates the validity in the logic of the imkan argument thus demonstrating the validity of the kalam cosmological argument.

The success of whether an argument is logically valid can be assessed based on the plausibility of the premise presented by the argument (Doko, 4). As is evident, the kalam cosmological argument has been examined with a discussion of its two subset arguments. These arguments have been contrasted against the two scientific discoveries of the Big Bang Theory as well as the concept of virtual particles. Evidently, by its very nature, the kalam cosmological argument is based on sound deductive logic where both its branches contain premises that reach their respective conclusions using logic and rationality. As such, the kalam cosmological argument proves itself to be valid and this has been exemplified by superimposing the matrix of this argument onto real, modern-day scientific discoveries.

REFERENCES

• Copan, Paul and Craig, William Lane. The Kalam Cosmological Argument: Philosophical Arguments for the Finitude of the Past. New York: Bloomsbury, 2017. https://books.google.com.au/books?id=LtI2DwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Kalam+Cosmological+Argument:+Philosophical+Arguments+for+the+Finitude+of+the+Past&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjuxfDOt5fpAhU4lEsFHePeBNIQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
• Craig, William Lane and Moreland, James Porter. The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology. West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2009. https://www.difa3iat.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/William_Lane_Craig__J._P._Moreland_The_BlackwellBookZZ.org_.pdf
• Daywitt, William. “The Source of the Quantum Vacuum.” Progress in Physics 2, 1 (2009): 27-28, http://www.ptep-online.com/.
• Doko, Enis. “Kalam Cosmological Argument and the Modern Science.” Kader 16, 1 (2018): 3, doi: 10.18317/kaderdergi.417640.
• Ergi, Omer Atilla. 2015. Is it Possible to Conclusively Prove the Existence of God? Melbourne: Centre for Islamic Studies and Civilization Charles Stuart University
• Falkenburg, Birgitte. Particle Metaphysics: A Critical Account of Subatomic Reality. Berlin: Springer, 2007.https://books.google.com.au/books?id=EbOz5I9RNrYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Particle+Metaphysics:+A+Critical+Account+of+Subatomic+Reality&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj7lt3f8JbpAhWKc30KHbIcDNwQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
• Gok, Hakan. Atheism or Theism? The Perspective of Said Nursi. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2018.
• Gonzalo, Julio. The intelligible universe: an overview of the last thirteen billion years. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co., 2008. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/reader.action?docID=1193384&ppg=222
• Greene, Brian. The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory Surrey: Vintage, 2000.
• Gulen, Fethullah. The Essentials of the Islamic Faith. Sommerset, New Jersey: The Light Inc., 2006.
• Jaeger, Gregg. “Are Virtual Particles Less Real?. ” Entropy 21, 2 (2009): 144, doi: 10.3390/e2102014.
• Paulson, Steve., Albert, David., Holt, Jim and Turok, Neil. “The origins of the universe: why there is something rather than nothing?,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 13611, 1 (December 2015): 2-17, doi: 10.1111/nyas.12859.
• Rabins, Peter. The Why of Things: Causality in Science, Medicine and Life. New York: Columbia University Press, 2013. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/reader.action?docID=1103422
• Walles, Mathew. “The Existence of God- According to Muslim Theologians and Thinkers.” Fountain Magazine, 1 May, 2016. https://fountainmagazine.com/2016/issue-111-may-june-2016/the-existence-of-god-according-to-muslim-theologians-and-thinker
• Waters, Benjamin Victor. “Toward a new kalam cosmological argument.” Cogent Arts and Humanities 2, 1 (2015): 2, doi: 10.1080/23311983.2015.1062461.
• Wolchover, Natalie. “Physicists Debate Hawking’s Idea That the Universe Had No Beginning.” Quantamagazine, Jun 6, 2019. https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-debate-hawkings-idea-that-the-universe-had-no-beginning-20190606/.
• Yaran, Cafer S. Islamic Thought on the Existence of God. Washington: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2003. https://fountainmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IIA-16-Contents-4f8.pdf

It was a long, cool February night here in the bustling streets of Manila.

Once again, I looked up at the star-filled sky above me. I noticed something that looked like a big spoon but was larger and more distinct in size and brightness despite the presence of thousands; no, millions of stars above me.

The Big Dipper stared at me like a big ladle, ready to take me along on a journey towards destinations unknown.

For reasons that I cannot comprehend up to this very day, I cannot help but smile at the beauty of the constellation at night.

Most probably, it is because I had beautiful memories in life under the light of these stars.

The year is 2006.

I was lanky and tall for my age.

In addition, I was extremely curious about the world around me.

It is the final year of primary schooling at a public elementary school in Zamboanga City, a lively commercial center with an estimated population of more than a million people, give or take, at the western tip of Southern Philippines.

At the time, I never knew what a telescope looked like or what astronomy was all about. After all, our economic status did not provide us the means to buy astronomical equipment or to even buy materials for a full-fledged experiment.

Luckily, my science teachers held a camp in September of that year and they brought their precious telescopes with them.

Under a clear, picturesque sky and with a smooth, light breeze coming in from the sea, we peered upon the telescopes and identified different constellations as our teachers relayed their positions to us.

It was a wonderful experience. I learned a lot about astronomy within that night alone, probably more than what I would have learned inside the classroom or by reading these constellations in books.

However, as with many things in this ephemeral world, life has its own way of stomping through the past and erasing it into oblivion.

As such, I forgot all of them as the years passed by, except for one.

It was the Big Dipper.

Looking at the Big Dipper gives me hope that I could chase my dreams and reach them no matter the odds that I face currently.

Yes, I do face many challenges of varying complexity and novelty, stretching my faculties to its full extent.

Sometimes, the going gets tough.

There are indeed times when I thought of lifting the white towel in order to just get away from all of it.

But as with many of the best things in life, hope is the torch that keeps me moving forward.

As far as this age is concerned, we are living in a state of a partial darkness where wars, dictatorships, deaths, and calamities have become commonplace to the point that they are turned from newsworthy phenomena into an integral part of life.

They have seeped into people’s psyches to the point that hopelessness about the prospect of having a constructive, productive, and inclusive future has become the norm instead of it being the exception.

In this age, hope is a highly-esteemed currency that is held preciously by people who know the value of it.

After all, wasn’t Hope the last thing to stay inside Pandora’s box after sickness, death, turmoil, famine and all the other evil qualities went out of it?

This shows that as long as hope is alive inside a person’s heart, the keys towards a brighter future are always open for exploration and completion.

As I look back towards the ground, I realize something.

At the end of the day, the Big Dipper reminds me about a truth regarding life.

No matter how harsh and cold the night may seem to be, sunlight always follows in its path, rising to the top and eradicating the darkness and fear that is present inside our hearts, minds, and lives.

Most importantly, even though the evenings may be dark, the stars are always there, piercing the veil of darkness and serving as a beacon of hope.

A hope which states that the best things in life always come in the best way possible, regardless of how bad it was in the past.

After having that long gaze, I continue my way home with a smile.

Because I know once again that the night is always the beginning to a brighter morning and that the stars are there to remind me of that fact.

With newly found strength, I trace my steps back home and get ready to face another day in the roads of this journey that is called “life.”

In our times, the Big Bang Theory is generally accepted to be the starting point of the universe. When the Big Bang happened, the universe and light were simultaneously created. The universe came into being at elevated temperatures from a single particle.

For the events that happened after the Big Bang, the most recent and accepted theory is the Inflation Theory. According to this theory, right after the Big Bang, the universe started inflating at an incredible rate, quantum fluctuations were scattered throughout the universe, and a homogenous inflation happened which allowed galaxies to be formed. Light was created at this period for the very first time.

What is “light” and what is the wisdom behind it?

Ibn Sina was the first scientist stating is was possible to measure the speed of light. And Newton used the marble example to explain the phenomenon of light containing colors of different wavelengths. Modern theories state that light is composed of weightless and charge-less particles called photons. Light is now known to be electromagnetic waves that carry energy as well as having the characteristics of refraction and reflection. A major discovery occurred in 1975, when the Danish scientist Ole Romer was observing the satellites of Jupiter. During this study, he was able to prove that the particle model proved to be insufficient, as was seen from the diffraction of light (changing its direction after having passed a narrow slit)..

Although the wave model is more dominantly talked about in modern times, it is known that both models are true.

Femto photography

Various experiments have been done to understand the properties of light. One of these experiments was a photography technique applied by Dr. Edgerton, in 1964. In this photo, the image of the apple right after the bullet passed through it was captured. This famous photograph, which was captured in a millionth of a second, inspired Prof. Ramesh Raskar from MIT (USA) to take a photo of light in order to see it by naked eye. Raskar developed a camera that can take up to a trillion frames per second. This would make it possible to visualize the human body without using X-ray. The wave like property of light was studied by this new technology called Femto Photography.

Light is the fastest substance in the universe. As long as it does not change its environment, the movement of light is linear because of its electromagnetic wave properties. If it passes to a different but transparent environment, it continues its movement. If it passes to an environment where the refractive index is larger than its original environment, it comes closer to the line accepted to be vertical to the surface (normal) and vice versa.

The speed of light and all electromagnetic waves in an empty, airless environment is 299,792,458 m/s (300 thousands kilometers). With this incredible speed, the Earth could be toured 7 times a second. The letter c represents this speed in science, and it’s based on the Latin name for speed: celeritas. While passing through any object (air, water, glass etc.) the speed of light is smaller than c.

If a laser pointer is activated for a thousandth of a second (a couple of femto seconds), a photon cluster is formed which is approximately 1 mm in width. This cluster of photons has a speed millions of times greater than the bullet passing through the apple.

What if the femto photo of a cluster of photons that were sent from the bottom of a glass bottle full of water was taken? How would the light appear in slow motion? Although this short journey of light takes place in less than a nano-second, it is possible to capture how it moves in slow motion by reducing the speed ten billion times with the femto camera. With this femto camera, it is possible to measure the average speed of light in a tomato and gain knowledge about its interior texture and quality without touching it. When a bunch of photons are sent to the surface of a sample, a three dimensional picture of it can be constructed by the high resolution detection of the photons that are reflected at different times from the sample.

With the science of light, technology for transportation that does not require a driver can be developed, creatures can be saved from natural disasters by the reflection of light on windows, and many new age surgery technologies can be developed.

In order for the eye to see, light needs to exist. One of the latest and most astonishing pieces of research done about light is the femto photography technology. By this technology, it will be possible to visualize the human body without the use of X-ray. If there was a femto camera incorporated in our cell phones, we would be able to understand the quality of the tomatoes we were buying when we went to the grocery store without having to touch them. By harnessing the great gift of light, we can make the great gift of life even better.

The Innocence Project, founded in 1992, at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University assists prisoners who could be proven innocent through DNA testing. To date, 280 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA testing, including 17 who served time on death row. These people served an average of 13 years in prison for different reasons like false eyewitness identification, coercing false confessions, withholding evidence from defense, or bad lawyering, before exoneration and release. (From www.dna.gov; www.ornl.gov; www.innocenceproject.org)

I find myself handing my cell phone to the officer at the entrance of the courtroom shortly after getting a speeding ticket after a call from my principal to get to school urgently. My kids are at school, my husband at work; I am all by myself at the court house. I sit at one of the back rows and start waiting. The announcement fills my ears : “People for traffic charges will be called by last name after a few trials.” Wait a minute… My heart normally does not beat this fast. Is it the woman they brought from the back of the room in the orange outfit with handcuffs? Is it her story that makes me so nervous? Or do I finally realize that I would soon get up in front of everybody and answer the frightening question: “Are you pleading guilty?” What am I going to say? I feel as though if I blinked twice, I would find myself in a movie. Is there a way out of this? I remember the radar in the police officer’s hand. He showed me the number on it. My heart starts to beat faster. I remember my friend’s husband going to jail for 3 days after a situation similar to this. A chill passes through my spine. Then there it is, my name. I get up. All eyes are on me. Here is the question. What am I going to say? The radar was wrong?

Suddenly, it feels like a thousand veils in front of me are being lifted one by one. I am dead. All the guardians, officers, and the judge are angels. The people sitting alongside me are other people died with me. The “big angel” is asking me if I did it. It is as if I am watching myself from up above. I hear myself saying, “Yes.” He wants me to come over to the podium and explain myself. I start walking. Everybody is looking at me .You can almost hear a pin drop. What a long distance to cover. It seems like I have been walking forever.

I stand at the podium. I start telling honestly and exactly what happened. On the other side is the police officer, the other “angel” who caught me and brought me here in the first place. The big angel turns his attention to him and asks about my records. The officer tells him I am a “plus one”.

What on earth does that mean?

Never mind. I guess that’s a good thing. After the big angel hears this, I am forgiven. Free to go… No handcuffs… My poor little kids, I can see them again!

I step outside. The cold weather hits my cheeks. I take a deep breath and tell myself to relax and come back to reality. Then I think to myself, what could be more real than death? Well, first of all, it happens every single day. Every minute actually, millions of times. The reality is that I will also die. I don’t know when and where, with whom and doing what. I just know for sure that some day I will die to be born into a new world, and that first, I have to answer questions. Is there a possibility of there being no questioning? If this beautiful country has rules and regulations, how can this universe being so big, crowded, sophisticated, and wonderful, not have any laws and regulations? Furthermore, how can you not be questioned when you do not obey them?

Maybe more than death itself, I am dreading the questioning part, millions of times more than that moment ten minutes ago when I was worried about that one simple question. My blood pressure peaked for a single traffic ticket. How am I going to handle answering and accounting for my entire life? Will there be an angel telling that I am a plus one? What a relief that would be!

I recall the story of a man who comes to Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and says “Who shall give life to decaying bones?” The Qur’an relates the story and answers: “He shall give them life who first gave them life, and He is All-Knowing concerning all creation,” (Ya Sin, 36: 78-79) drawing attention to the fact that making something the first time, creating something original, is much more difficult than making it after the plans are once complete and the outcome is seen. So, I start thinking, that when I die and I am about to answer for what I did with my life, God Almighty has the power to create the scene, the places that I shed my DNA at, and myself from a stain as small as a salt crystal and even smaller, and ask, “Did you commit that sin” right there and then?

What am I going to say? There is no possibility of God’s radar or cameras being wrong. I will most probably find myself saying “yes” just as I did at court today, confessing everything with utmost honesty. That is if I can speak under all that stress.

It is not only the “what I did” part that makes me nervous about answering questions, but what I “did not do” as well. I think about the past. Have I been using it wisely, or did I just waste it, for it seemed like it was something given to me for free.

I am a shy person by nature. It is not easy for me to get used to a new neighborhood, community, or school. How am I going to manage to go into a new world, see and live with totally new creatures that I have never seen before, like angels, spirits, and jinn. Contrastingly, I am wondering about what the other world is really going to be like. What is it like to not have any responsibilities, not having to pray or fast, wash the dishes, prepare dinner, do the laundry… ever?

At least I believe, the new world where we will all die to be born into, there will be no wrong guilty sentences. Everything promised from the beautiful paradise to the scary hell will be there. No wrongful convictions, no unfair treatment. But still, am I ready? Or is there going to be a time that I would totally feel ready? On the other hand, I feel like an ignorant person living in a humble home in a small village—a person who is invited to the palace by the King, to this festive occasion, with the most important people; a person who has a chance to receive precious gifts and drink the potion for eternity, but is still hesitating to go; a person wants to give a present to the King but is unsure whether she has anything to offer that would please him. Besides, wasn’t whatever this person took with her to the King given by the very King himself? When I prayed five times a day, didn’t I do it with the healthy body He gave me? If I made donations, wasn’t it with the belongings He handed over to me in the first place. It is as if for every good I did, I was paid beforehand. Then, even if I do whatever He asks me to do, I can’t be hopeful because of what I do. Rather, I would build my hopes on how generous, compassionate and loving He is, setting my intentions right with utmost sincerity.

There is one other reason that would make me eager to leave this world and go to the other side. It’s because of all those emotions, talents, intellect, and love—faculties of our body and soul which we are not and won’t be using in this world because of reasons like not knowing, not being trained, being too young, too old, sick, or just missing out on the windows of opportunities. Do they not need to get out? Aren’t they like the baby in the womb, squashed in there and wanting a greater place to grow? Seriously, what percent of my brain and heart am I really using? If God gave me more potential in them, it seems impossible to me that he won’t create a place that they will grow and flourish. And I can’t think of a better place to be when that happens.

…

Finally, I found where I had parked my car and the keys that always fall into the black hole of my bottomless purse. I head back to work. I missed first period, but I need to make at least the third to fulfill my plans. It is the time of the day when everybody is already at work. I’m lucky; there is no traffic at all. The roads are so empty. In fact, there are no cars in front of me on the spacious road. Suddenly, it becomes so appealing to me to go a little faster. Just a little bit… My right foot starts itching… Who would know at this time of the day, in the middle of nowhere anyways? Maybe just one more time…

Nihal Zeren Dila is M.S. in Microbiology and Molecular Biology, GMU, Science Teacher at Pinnacle Academy, VA.

But our similarities and differences can also be much more significant, as well. On one hand, for instance, the tenth anniversary of 9/11 was a major occasion for the U.S., but for a great majority of the world it was just a single chapter-albeit a long one-in the chronicles of violence in human history. On the other hand, almost every nation today from the Philippines to Nigeria has diverse security issues, and in many countries mass killings, violent attacks, and explosions have become astonishingly unastonishing. Just before the turn of the year, for instance, terrorism showed its monstrous face once again against Christians observing Christmas in Nigeria. Indeed, these attacks were an unprecedented form of violence by so-called Islamic terrorists-where in the history of Islam can one show violence against Christians as they are worshipping, especially when the Qur’an and the Prophet forbade harming worshippers in churches or monasteries? Is there any permission in Islam to attack civilians? Iraq and Syria have their own fashion of violence: sectarian conflicts in the fight for obtaining the right to rule. There are many major concerns that all human beings share, and this calls for developing a common understanding so that we can tackle them together. In all of the events The Fountain organizes, we try to raise awareness of our commonality by cultivating an environment in which we can learn from our differences.

The lead article in this issue underlines one dimension of one of our universal humanness by relating “happiness” to “virtue.” The article on autism tries to open a window of hope for families suffering from this really difficult ordeal. In “The Optimizing Man,” you will read on the many economic irrationalities we commit for the sake of transient fancies. The article on cultural differences shares with us some interesting differences between varying nations of the world with memorable examples. De Villa guides us on an exploration of the fantastic civilization of Al Andalus, an exemplary era of coexistence in human history.

That morning, however, was unusual for one of the ants, Sayhon. He was intrigued by the noises coming from all directions. He had recorded and investigated the noise generated by bugs when carrying chips of wood, the sound a fly makes when landing on a dry leaf, the clamor of the creeks as they hit the rocks, and so on. But regardless of the cacophony of the sounds, Sayhon was always able to filter out a background noise that showed up consistently. It was as if something or someone was omnipresent in every occurrence, making itself heard. After realizing this, the poor ant found himself in seclusion to concentrate on this subtle message. After a while, not able to figure out the source of this constant noise, nor able to come up with an explanation about its meaning, Sayhon spiraled down into an endless depression. In hard times like these, he always took refuge in the warm friendship of Nurson.

Nurson also conducted his own research, modeling the dynamic geometry of the forest. By formulating the variations in the locations of the fruits on the ground or those on the branch, he benefited the worker ants in establishing the optimum routes for collection. Even more challenging was Nurson’s interest in predicting the time and place of the birth of a new fruit. It was so demanding, this prediction effort, that it shook his antennas wildly. During his research, Nurson had come to the conclusion that, existing or newborn, all the fruits were moving apart from each other. This effect was more evident in the observation of a fruit at large distances.

One day when it was raining, Sayhon was observing how the raindrops splashed on the water, how they created a blasting sound. At the same spot Nurson was studying the expansion of the waves in the puddles made by raindrops. After some gloomy moments, Sayhon wanted to open a conversation.

“Hey dude! Do you hear any noise generated by those waves?”

“YES!” replied Nurson hysterically.

Sayhon was not expecting this kind of a “YES” to his question. Rather, it sounded like an answer to something else. This, in fact, was the case, because Nurson had had an epiphany with Sayhon’s question: “The noise you are detecting everywhere is due to the expansion of the forest.”

Sayhon was startled by the answer he had received for his teasing. Nevertheless, he was eager to continue this conversation: “Hey! Easy now, easy.”

“Look! The noise you are detecting everywhere points to an entity or occurrence that is omnipresent. To date, we don’t know an entity everywhere, but we do know an occurrence that is everywhere: the moving apart phenomenon. So, the only thing that can create this noise you are so curious about is the expansion of the forest. Every fruit, every branch-tip in this forest is moving apart from each other, while leaving behind a signature in the form of sound. Now everything makes sense.”

Enlightenment suddenly seized them both with a shiver throughout their bodies. When they came back to their senses, they couldn’t help but smile; it didn’t take long before Sayhon and Nurson started squealing in joy.

Soon, the entire ant colony was in a tumult about the discovery of the expansion of the forest, but with some subsequent thoughts. For example, an ant suggested that the omnipresent noise must be propagating through some unseen but all-pervading substance; but the experiments to verify this suggestion failed. Another thought was about the size of the forest. Some claimed that it was not possible to know the size of the forest, while others said it was finite, since otherwise it would result in an infinitely intertwined forest. A third item in this list of hot discussions was the age of the forest. According to the expansion theory, if the forest is expanding now, and if you rewind this process long enough, you end up with a single tree, and eventually a single seed, out of which this endless forest has formed. They called this unimaginable start the “big germination.” Based on the big germination theory, some ants suggested billions of years of age for the forest; but some others claimed an age on the order of thousands based on interpretation of their ancient texts.

In the fresh vibrations of these findings, the discussions of the ants about the start of the forest eventually became a discussion of their own existence. What was the origin of life in the forest? How had the living beings come to their current states, each with an optimum design for the survival of their own species and for the well-being of the entire habitat? Were they merely fallen off a tree as a result of a coincidence?

As the founders of the big germination theory, Sayhon and Nurson were invited to speak in huge assemblies where thousands of curious ants were gathered. They had given several interviews, and participated in many events on the subject of the origin of life. The two friends had differing points of views on this matter, but their discussion was as respectful as it was rational.

Sayhon held the view that the living beings had come to existence through a chain of events that are not yet readily known to the ants, but can be discovered with advancements in science. As his initial hypothesis, he proposed a common ancestor to all kinds of animals in the forest, like the start of the forest from a single seed. He supported his theory of a common ancestor with the observations of common traits among different organisms. But eventually, he admitted that his hypothesis is only tentative, and needed further scrutiny. He was open to change his views with new findings and observations, and never suggested that his hypothesis be used as the criterion to judge the veracity of new perspectives.

Nurson, on the other side, claimed that the origin of life in the forest was by the hand of the Creator, just like He was the one who had created the forest in the scenario of the big germination. In the same context, he thought that the scientific studies must be aimed at learning how the Creator was making different kinds of animals in the forest. Nurson said that his view did not essentially differ from Sayhon’s views in terms of scientific foundations or implications, but he positioned himself against unscientific interpretations of scientific findings. For example, he requested that, as he admitted his belief in the Creator is an unscientific presumption, Sayhon must admit his claims about a common ancestor is unscientific, since there was no absolute proof to it. Nurson also expressed his resentment about the ants who inferred the absence of the Creator in the scientific texts as a rejection of Him, since such inference was clearly irrational as well. Overall, Nurson neither tried to alienate Sayhon nor curse his views, he merely requested that both parties characterize their views properly, which was wholeheartedly approved by Sayhon.

In return to the request of Nurson, Sayhon invited him to admit that they don’t have a complete understanding of how creation occurs, and that interpretation of implicit information in the ancient texts cannot be binding. Nurson humbly agreed.

Despite the friendly opposition between Sayhon and Nurson, the ant colony was severely divided into two groups: some siding with Sayhon and others agreeing with Nurson. Each group projected their own view as the ultimate truth, unlike the two friends’ admittance of the unscientific parts in their views. Although Sayhon and Nurson both admitted the tentative and immature level of science in the matter, the public preferred to embrace them as complete and unchangeable. Thus, these two groups socially expelled each other, and showed intellectual hostility. Rejecting the other’s views in their entirety, they mutually evolved into antagonists.

Strange enough, as the tension between these groups increased, the climate in the forest started to change dramatically. Rain became more abundant, yet the weather also warmed up incredibly. They had yet to discover the significance of these drastic changes, but this threat to the entire colony acted as a uniting agent among the ants, and mitigated the divisions on the origin of life.

In one of those hot days, the ants noticed large cracks forming in their nests, which eventually evolved into large channels, through which a violent stream came and flooded the forest. Many of the ants were saved by embarking on the leaves. Now everything was underwater, and would be until it soaked completely into the soil, which was unlikely to occur in their lifetimes. Facing extinction, the big germination and the subsequent expansion of the forest felt like meaningless topics in their hopeless state. Yet, the origin of life was of the highest attention. Even the most bigoted ants who denied the Creator wanted to believe in a higher Hand that could penetrate the doom they were facing and deliver them to salvation.

The flood did not return the ants back home but carried them to another one. By the time they arrived at this new forest, the flood had faded to a nice stream, and the ants could safely disembark from their leaves. But with nothing in their possession, everything had to be reconstructed: a home, a safe environment, and most importantly, the hope for restoration.

Sayhon and Nurson were among these survivors. Seeing that their home forest actually had an end had shocked them. In light of this fact, they had to reconsider all their thoughts from scratch. This was not to be done publicly, because the colony was struggling for survival. Amidst this new land of uncertainties, everyone was in need of a certainty to cling to, and the suppositions of Sayhon and Nurson were the last thing they looked for.

As the colony’s efforts for reconstruction and the internal quests of these two ants continued, they came across the most unexpected thing: another ant colony just like them. It was as shocking to the native ants as it was to themselves. And as their relationship deepened, it was a subtle, mind-altering experience for all of them to see that they both had religious texts telling the same brief story about the origin of life.

They took their muddy shoes and heavy coats off. Dad, looking very sad, sat down on the sofa while my mom whispered something quickly to my sister before vanishing to her bedroom. I could only catch some ominous words like, “…dead…. wake…. we got to go.” My sister did not ask any questions. In no time, Mom came out of her room dressed in black, kissed me on the cheeks, and left. Dad, who up to that moment had been silently gazing at the brown carpet, robotically stood up and followed her. On his way out, he reminded my sister to lock the door.

My sister turned the key twice as if the Big Bad Wolf might knock on the door in a minute. Then she turned off the TV-custom dictates that there is no music or laughter in a mourning house. We sat there looking at each other in silence. My sister looked pitiful, so I gave her some time to digest whatever Mom had whispered to her. Meanwhile, I started to decode what my little radar had caught.

Someone is dead-no doubt about it. Since the news was given sotto voce, it had to have been a shameful death like committing suicide or being shot while stealing. Or, God forbid, it might be an awful death like being crushed by a train or chopped to pieces by a revenge murderer. Since my parents were grieving, it probably involved somebody significant to us. Could it be one of their coworkers? A relative? At this point I grew so anxious I knew I would explode if I did not ask. “Who is dead?” I asked in a trembling voice. “Dad’s stepmother,” my sister answered matter-of-factly.

The answer took me by surprise because I did not know Dad had a stepmother. I knew he had lost his mother suddenly at age six and had lost his father ten years later. I sensed a mystery concealed before me and I could have sworn my sister knew more. The question was how I could fish out the secrets my sister’s heart held so faithfully.

My sister, an ordinary eighteen-year-old, was nice to me most of the time except when I asked too many questions and messed up her drawers. She would never repeat what she knew about her friends and acquaintances, so at times I felt my sister was a mysterious person and I imagined her heart was full of secrets.

“Dad’s stepmother?” I repeated it in my mind over and over trying to define what it meant to me. I knew of only one stepmother, a pretty infamous one for that matter: Snow White’s stepmother. She was mean and cruel. Some people would rejoice at such a person’s death. Yet, everybody was sad. I made up my mind to go ahead and ask my sister no matter what the consequences. My assumptions were taking me nowhere. “Where did she live?” I asked, expecting to be hushed. “In our town,” my sister answered. “Is she nice?” I asked, then corrected myself. “I mean, was she nice?” My sister nodded. Seeing her handle my interrogation calmly, I was encouraged to ask more. Mercifully, my sister spared me all the sweating by revealing the story on her own.

“Dad was six years old when his mother died. Grandpa married again right away so that somebody would take care of his little boy. He chose to marry a close relative of his first wife. Apparently, everybody was surprised that an attractive man with a high standard of education married someone so plain and uneducated. But I guess he only cared that a relative of Grandma would treat his son nicely. He had three more children with his second wife, two girls and a boy.”

I stood there all ears, almost forgetting to breathe, listening to this astonishing revelation. Not only had I a step-grandmother, but a step-uncle and two step-aunts as well. I forced myself to stop wondering and focus on my sister, who, after taking a deep breath, went on:

“Grandfather was right. She took care of Dad so well that she didn’t make any difference between her own children and him. She continued to be good to him even after Grandfather died ten years later. She never remarried. She worked hard to make ends meet, and Dad, because he was the eldest child, helped by dropping out of high school to work full time. That was when he took evening courses and learned to be an electrical repairman.

“At twenty-six, Dad married Mom. I heard that his stepmother loved Mom and boasted to her neighbors about what a fine lady her son had married. In the beginning, everything was fine and they all lived happily together in the same house. After a while, Dad started to give less and less to the family budget and spent more and more from his pay on gifts and movie theater tickets. Mom and Dad used to like to go to the movies every week in those days.

“One night Dad’s stepmother apparently complained. She reminded Dad that she was having a hard time paying the bills. Dad accused her of being interfering and jealous of his love for his wife. His stepmother must have felt humiliated because she vowed that unless he apologized and changed his ways, she wouldn’t speak to him again. Dad insisted he had done no wrong and saw no reason to apologize. Both of them must have gone to bed feeling sore and angry at each other.

The next day, when his stepmother came home from work, most likely hoping that the new day might have helped him to see things in their true color, she found that Dad and Mom had packed up their stuff and moved out. She must have felt betrayed. The sting in her heart, I reckon, made her swear an oath that she never broke. She sent word to Dad telling him that from now on she would have nothing to do with him and warned him never to come back.” My sister stopped her narration and it felt as if time had stopped, too.

“This is too awful to be true,” I mumbled in disbelief. “Did they ever speak again?” I asked, hoping against hope. My sister shook her head. “Neither she nor her children ever spoke to our parents.” My sister continued, “They saw each other almost every day on the street, in the shops, at the stadium, at the hospital, at the post office, you name it. But they changed paths or ignored each other.” She shook her head. “Pride is such a terrible thing sometimes,” she concluded, and I could not have agreed more.

“You know, you met her once!” My sister startled me with this exciting remark. “I did? When? Where?” I impatiently looked into her eyes. “Remember the day when you hurt your knee in the park and when we were on our way back home, and you were limping, two old ladies stopped us in the middle of the road?”

“Yes, I remember,” I interrupted her. Although it had happened almost five years ago I recalled the incident clearly because that peculiar encounter had made quite an impression on me. The intensity with which one of the old ladies looked at me, the way my sister looked around as if she did not want to get caught doing something wrong, had naturally not escaped my curious eye.

“I remember, one of the old ladies kissed you on the cheeks. Then she looked at me and asked her friend, ‘Is this his youngest daughter?’ Her friend said yes and then the first lady hugged me, wiped tears from my face with a tissue, and gave me two candies. Then you pulled me away. You said we were late and our parents would be worried. I followed you but I was looking behind, waving back at the nice lady because she made me feel so special. Later, when I kept asking you who she was, you hushed me. You were angry and sorry at the same time. I even saw you wiping your eyes. I thought you were crying because she didn’t give you any candies.”

“No, silly,” my sister tried to laugh, though I sensed that the same mood of anger and sorrow had overtaken her. “I was crying,” she explained, “for all the things we missed. Every day I came home from school with our neighbor’s son, passing by their door, stopping by just to breathe in the wonderful smell of baking bread and to envy the big smile of his grandmother, knowing quite well that a cold and empty home was waiting for me to turn the key. I was angry with Dad because his pride was depriving us of a God-given right-the wonderful presence of a grandmother. Why did everyone in town just stand by and watch this tragedy? Everyone was pretending to mind their business. No one had the courage to intervene and bring it to an end.”

My sister started crying and I felt pity for us my eyes watered too. Who knows what beautiful bedtime stories she might have known, who knows what delicious meals she could have prepared, and whether she would have had the ear to listen to me-the ear my mom, who worked full time, never had.

“But why did she kiss me twice and give me two candies?” I asked, almost to myself, fearing that my sister would reprimand me for such a stupid question. “She…,” my sister sniffed trying to collect her voice, ”she worked in the only day care our town had. So she practically took care of me and our big sister and big brother as a part of her job for four whole years each. When you were born she had retired. I guess she was sad that she never got to hold you as a baby.” I could hold the tears no longer. Her soft kiss on my cheeks and her compassionate, intense look lingered in my mind. She would have made a wonderful grandmother.

The doorbell startled us, and we hurried to open the door, wiping the tears on our way. Surprisingly, my parents had returned in much worse shape than they had left. Usually close relatives of the deceased stay at the wake until dawn. My parents had been gone for barely an hour. This time Dad, soaked to the bone with rain, his face swollen red from crying, went straight to their room. Mother looked distressed too. She sat on the coach and took several deep breaths.

“What happened?” asked my sister when she realized that Mom was not going to tell us without prompting. “We were not wanted there,” Mom managed to say before she broke down in tears. I shivered as I imagined someone yelling at my parents, “Get out of here!”

“Who told you that?” my sister demanded.

“Her son,” Mom said. I could not help but note that “her son” would have been our uncle, had all this not happened.

“He shoved us out,” Mom continued, sniffing. “He told us that it’s useless to honor the dead when we had shown her no respect in her lifetime.” That made sense to me as much as I wished it did not.

“What did Dad do?” asked my sister. I was becoming annoyed with Ms. Detective. I was afraid of what was coming next. “What could he do?” Mom took a deep breath. “Your Dad stood there speechless for a few minutes. He couldn’t confront his stepbrother. No one at the wake came to his defense, so we left the house in humiliation. He wept all the way home,” Mom said breaking into tears again.

A deep sadness flooded my heart as I realized that our step-grandmother had taken with her to the grave any chance of reconciliation and that I would never come to meet my uncles and aunts. I left Mom to my sister’s questioning and went to check on my dad. The door of their room was ajar. He was sitting on the bed, his back bent, his gaze fixed on the floor. I wished I could read his mind, but more than anything I wished I could console him. But how could I?

There sat my dad, a middle-aged man, proud father of a son and three daughters. There sat my dad, a diligent follower of politics who never missed the evening news in the election season. There sat my dad, a faithful patron of the coffee shop, and a big fan of soccer who could never get enough of the Brazil team at the World Cup. There sat a man sobbing like a child with his head between his palms. I wondered if he felt like a loser. For some unknown reason I could not side with him, although my heart was breaking with pity. And suddenly, I realized that I had spent the whole afternoon utterly fascinated by my sister’s account of my parents’ sins. Immediately, I felt sick and afraid. Did disloyalty flow in our veins? Was that to be the inheritance in our family?

Right at that moment Dad raised his head and looked at me with an expression pleading for something neither I nor anybody else breathing on earth could grant him: forgiveness. Avoiding my reproachful look, he raised his fists and started hitting his graying temples, shouting painfully to himself, “Ungrateful, Ungrateful!”

I could not stand watching him any longer. I backed out and closed the door. And at every rapid beat of my heart I prayed to God to have mercy on us all for what we had done to our parents and to show us a way of atonement.

Mirkena Ozer had her major in Turkish language and literature. She lives in Atlanta, Georgia.

She stopped in front of a vast puddle. “What do you think? Is it possible?” she asked her reflection in the murky water. “No way,” snapped back the image. “With a bunch of brothers and sisters and cousins donating their hand-me-downs every year you stand no chance.”

“Oh well! Hope springs eternal,” muttered the little girl and avenged the answer by stomping on the cruel “other.”

She hurried up to the school just around the corner. There was no one in sight. She was late again. Teachers’ voices blended from the broken windows. She entered her classroom. The teacher let her take her seat with a reproachful look that set her cheeks on fire instantly. The little girl wondered how her cheeks could burn while her feet were ice cold.

She scanned the class discreetly after she had taken her seat. All she saw was a bunch of freezing kids, a door that would not close, and windows that, like her shoes, welcomed everything in. She tried to think of something funny to lift up her spirit. Alas! Even jokes were scarce in her life. Patience was the only thing she had in abundance to help her survive till the end of the school day.

The little girl took the same path in the opposite direction toward home, lost in her thoughts. She felt very insignificant and the fact that her problem seemed irrelevant to the rest of the world increased her desperation.

* * *

At home Mom heard the little girl bark a terrible cough by the burning stove. She fixed her stare on the little shoes drying nearby, then grabbed the shoes and checked them as she had done several times before, only to confirm that in their desolate state the shoes could not stand one more nail. They were about to fall apart. Now it was Mom’s turn to worry.

“Mom, let me buy her new shoes!” Big Sister saved the day. She was volunteering to buy them from her pocket money, usually spent on stuff for her trousseau. Mom consented to Big Sister’s proposal, despite Grandma’s strong belief that it was past the time for her to get married anyway.

The little heart leapt with joy. “For real? Brand new shoes? Tomorrow?”

* * *

The next day came with a lethargic sun, as much anticipated tomorrows always do. The little girl was anxious.

“Let’s go!” The two sisters walked along the street, the big one squeezing her money, the little one squeezing her heart to keep it in place.

The shoe store struck the little girl with terror. It was unpleasantly cold. The saleswoman snailed around, making things worse. Most unfortunately, there was nothing on the metal grid shelves except for a pair of papa-sized boots and a couple of black slippers. Her little heart sank.

The saleswoman and Big Sister exchanged pleasantries. The saleswoman spoke annoyingly slowly as if chatting for the first time in a very long while. Finally the chitchat was over.

“I would like to buy a new pair of shoes for my sister,” Big Sister said, emphasizing the “new” unnecessarily. She was handling the situation so calmly you would think she was buying her daily bread.

The saleswoman stared at the little girl from head to toe and back, though all she needed to inspect were her feet. “I don’t think I have anything for her,” she said matter-of-factly, ”but let me check to be sure.” She disappeared into the unlit back. The little girl wished the saleswoman might disappear completely rather than come back empty-handed. She could take waiting a lifetime, but facing empty hands would be unbearable.

The saleswoman came back with a box. “What’s her size?” The big sister muttered the number. “A one-size-fits-all size,” translated the little heart. “This pair is one size smaller, but this is the closest I can get.” The saleswoman was obviously paying attention only to Big Sister.

The little girl took the right shoe. She almost swooned at the smell of new leather. She squeezed her foot into the shoe. “It hurts, but don’t show it,” said her little heart. She suddenly turned into Cinderella’s stepsister, ready to cut off her toes if need be. Big Sister, not easily fooled, bent down and felt the curled toes. “No, no, you can’t walk straight with these shoes.” The little girl stepped back, defiant. “You’ll have to cut my feet off to take them off me!” her eyes challenged.

The saleswoman, sensing a storm approaching, made a move to prevent the family crisis. “Why don’t you come on Monday?” she said. “A new shipment will be available then.” The girl watched the saleswoman’s face intently for a wink at Big Sister. Deadly serious, the saleswoman did not even blink. With no other option, the little girl dragged herself out of the store.

The two sisters walked silently on the street, the big one squeezing the money, the little one clenching her fists. Too bad there was no one to punch. The little heart was ice cold, yet a flickering flame of faint hope kept burning in a far corner.

“Who am I kidding?” thought the little girl. “Even if she gets new supplies, who says she will get my size? Besides, in two days there is plenty of time for my sister to change her mind or spend the money on some you-can’t-find-it–elsewhere bedspread. By Monday there is even enough time, God forbid, for some distant relative to materialize from nowhere with a pair of very old, smelly shoes, and that would be a nightmare.”

They entered their small apartment. The little girl went straight to her room and sat on her bed, painfully hearing Big Sister explain to Mom and Grandma why they had returned empty-handed. She heard the door open slowly, but she did not turn to look, knowing that no one else but Grandma could be coming in.

Grandma sat by her side with a frown. In her story-telling voice she spoke:

“Once upon a time, there lived a young man in a very far land. He walked down the streets of his little town looking at his shabby shoes, feeling very unhappy, and wondering why he couldn’t have a new pair of shoes. At that moment he passed by a beggar leaning on an oak tree, his hand stretched out asking for alms. As he looked closely he realized that the beggar had no legs. The young man grew very sad and felt ashamed of himself. ‘Shame on me! This man doesn’t have feet and I am feeling miserable because I don’t have decent shoes.’ He reproached himself and gave thanks to God for his feet.” Smiling and caressing little girl’s hair, Grandma continued, “See, my dear, do not despair. God willing, you will get what you don’t have. Meanwhile be thankful for what you already have. Contentment of the heart is the greatest of treasures.”

The little girl, having understood very swiftly the message of the story could not help but comment, “But Grandma, I want to be grateful for my feet and a pair of new shoes.” Grandma smiled at her and whispered, as if revealing a well-kept secret, “God increases the bounties when we thank him. If you are thankful for your feet, he may grant you a pair of shoes as well. Remember, contentment of the heart is the greatest treasure.” After kissing the little girl on the forehead, she left the room as quietly as she had entered it.

The little girl tried to reason, although her brain was turned upside down. “That seems like good advice. What could I be thankful for?” she asked herself. “Well, I have a wonderful grandmother for a start,” she thought with a smile.

* * *

On Monday afternoon they went back to the store. First, the saleswoman smiled at them, and then she sluggishly disappeared into the back. “Thank goodness this time I was spared the torment of pleasantries,” the little girl thought, relieved.

With a box in her hands and the air of a savior on her face the saleswoman returned. She lifted the lid and handed the right shoe to the little girl. It fit perfectly. Ta da! Boy, would Cinderella be surprised, or should I say jealous! Stepsister or no, this time she got the shoes. Her little heart was overflowing with bliss until Big Sister stepped into the middle of the majestic celebration. Now what?

“The color…,” she said. “Dark red is not a very appropriate color. Only black and brown polishes are available. They’ll soon get muddy.”

“I did my best,” the saleswoman announced in surrender. Little eyes pleaded with Big Sister, the shoebox crushed in an unyielding embrace. With the saleswoman no longer an ally, Big Sister waved the white flag.

They left the store with the new shoes inside the box. The new shoes would look wonderful under her desk tomorrow. The whole school would marvel at them. Her little heart was beating like a crazy bird in a cage. Her prayer had been answered.

Wait a minute! The girl stopped. Remembering what her grandmother had told her, she paused and whispered, “Thank you,” to the One who had given her all bounties.

“I will never forget this day,” the little girl promised.

* * *

But the little girl did forget her promise for many years until the day she witnessed a father trying hard to convince his whining little child that plain shoes are as good as the ones with Pooh Bear printed on them. She once again longed for that sincere thank-you, craving the genuine way it came out of her lips on that memorable day of her life when she got her first ever brand-new shoes.

Mirkena Ozer had her major in Turkish language and literature. She lives in Atlanta, Georgia.

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.

Modern theories of creation are built upon quantum theory and Einstein’s theory of gravity. The question is what happened before the Big Bang? Einstein’s equations break down at the enormously small distances and large energies found at the universe’s origin. At distances 10-33cm, quantum effects take over from Einstein’s theory. For questions involving the beginning of time, one must invoke the ten-dimensional theory. The Big Bang probably originated in the breakdown of the original ten-dimensional universe into a four- and six-dimensional universe. Therefore, the history of the Big Bang represents the breakup of previously unified symmetries, and the split universe was no longer symmetrical. Six dimensions have curled up.

Quantum physics abolishes time close to the Big Bang. How did the universe come into existence? Why does time vanish in the black hole? Did time exist before the universe came into being? These questions and realities point to the existence of a Creator.

Unfortunately, quantum theory and Einstein’s theory of gravity are mutually incompatible. In this new millennium, superstring theory, or simply string theory, resolves this tension. Three particle theorists (Yoichiro Nambu, Leonard Susskind, and Holger Nielsen) independently realized that the dual theories developed in 1968 to describe the particle spectrum also describe the quantum mechanics of an oscillating string. This marks the official birth of string theory in 1970, according to which the marriage of the laws of the large and the small is not only happy but also inevitable. Brian Greene writes in his The Elegant Universe: String theory has the inherent capability to show that all of the astonishing happenings in the universe”from the frenzied dance of subatomic quarks (components of protons or neutrons) to the stately dance of orbiting binary stars, from the primordial fireball of the big bang to the majestic whirl of celestial galaxies”are reflections of one grand physical principle, one master equation.

Fundamental forces

During the past hundred years, physicists have proven the existence of four fundamental forces in nature: Gravitational force, electromagnetic force, the weak force, and the strong force. Gravity, the most familiar force, keeps Earth revolving around the sun and our feet planted firmly on the ground. Electromagnetic force, the next most familiar force, is the driving force for such things as lights, TVs, computers, and telephones.

The strong nuclear and weak nuclear forces are less familiar, because they operate in the atom’s nucleus. The strong force (mediated by gluons) keeps quarks glued together inside protons and neutrons, and keeps protons and neutrons tightly crammed together inside atomic nuclei. The weak force (mediated by W and Z particles) determines the radioactive decay of such radioactive materials as uranium, plutonium, and tritium.

Gravitational force is mediated by graviton (the concept of graviton was introduced in 1974), photons for the electromagnetic force (a photon is the smallest EM force or the smallest packet of energy for light). In Einstein’s day, the strong and weak forces were unknown. For 30 years Einstein sought to unify the two distinct forces of gravity and electromagnetism.

String theory

Matter is composed of atoms, which in turn are made of nucleons (protons and neutrons in the nucleus) and electrons orbiting around the nucleus. Nucleons are made of three quarks each. Quarks are made of string. According to the standard model of particle physics, the universe’s elementary constituents are point-like ingredients with no internal structure. However, this standard model cannot be a complete theory, for it does not include gravity. But according to string theory, atomic and subatomic particles are not point-like; rather, they consist of tiny one-dimensional filaments somewhat like infinitely thin rubber bands. Physicists call these vibrating, oscillating, and dancing filaments strings.

String theory takes its name from this point of view. Unlike an ordinary piece of string, which itself is composed of molecules and atoms, the strings of string theory are alleged to lie deeply within the heart of matter. They are so small”on average about as long the Planck length (10-33 cm, or about 100 billion billion [1020] times smaller than an atomic nucleus)”that they appear point-like even when examined with our most powerful equipment. String theory offers a far fuller and more satisfying explanation than that of the standard model.

Moreover, this theory shows the harmonious union of general relativity and quantum mechanics”a major success. In this new millennium, the excitement in the physics community is that string theory may provide the unified theory of all four forces and all matter. For this reason, string theory sometimes is described as possibly being the theory of everything.

String theory proclaims that the observed particle properties (i.e., mass, charge, and spin) are reflections of a string’s various vibrations. Each preferred pattern of a string’s vibration in string theory appears as a particle whose mass and force charges are determined by the string’s oscillatory pattern. All fundamental particles can be described as resonant patterns of these string vibrations. There is even a mode describing the graviton. The same idea applies to the forces of nature as well. Hence everything, all matter and all forces, is unified under the microscopic string oscillations”the notes that strings can play.

Extra Dimensions

Our universe has three spatial dimensions: length, width, and height. In formulating the general theory of relativity, Einstein showed that time is another dimension. According to the general theory of relativity, space and time communicate the gravitational force through their curvature. The special theory of relativity is Einstein’s law of space and time in the absence of gravity.

In 1919, the mathematician Theodor Kaluza unified Maxwell’s electromagnetism and Einstein’s theory of general relativity by adding a fifth dimension. Thus Kaluza was the one who suggested that the universe might have more than three spatial dimensions.

For example, a garden hose viewed from a long distance looks like a one-dimensional object. When looked at closely, a second dimension, one shaped like a circle and curled around the hose, becomes visible. The direction along the hose’s length is long, extended, and easily visible. The direction circling around its thickness is short, curled up, and harder to see. Hence spatial dimensions are of two types: large, extended, and therefore directly evident, or small, curled up, and far harder to detect. As for the garden hose, the curled-up dimension encircling its thickness is detected either moving closer to the hose or using a pair of binoculars from a distance. If the hose is as thin as a hair or a capillary, its curled-up dimension is more difficult to detect.

In 1926, the mathematician Oskar Klein applied Kaluza’s theory to quantum theory, which is used in modern string theory. Klein showed that our universe’s spatial fabric may have both extended (the three spatial dimensions of daily experience) and curled-up dimensions. The universe’s additional dimensions are tightly curled up into a tiny space, a space so tiny that it has so far eluded detection. These extra dimensions are believed to be minuscule, somewhere between 10-35 meters and 0.3 millimeters in size.

The equations of string theory show that the universe has nine space dimensions and one time dimension. At present, no one knows why the three space and one time dimensions are large and extended, while all of the others are tiny and curled up.

Supersymmetry

Symmetry is a physical system property that does not change when the system is transformed. For example, a sphere is rotationally symmetrical, since its appearance does not change if it is rotated.

In 1971, supersymmetry was invented in two contexts at once: in ordinary particle field theory and as a consequence of introducing fermions into string theory. It holds the promise of resolving many problems in particle theory, but requires equal numbers of fermions and bosons. Thus, it cannot be an exact symmetry of Nature.

Supersymmetry, a mathematical transformation, is a symmetry principle that relates a particle’s properties of a whole number amount (integer) of spin (bosons) to those with half a whole (half-integer or odd) number amount of spin (fermions). Bosons tend to be the mediators of fundamental forces, while fermions make up the matter experiencing these forces. Bosons can occupy the same space and have an integral spin (0,1, .), while fermions cannot occupy the same space and have a half-integral spin ( 1/2, 3/2,.). Bosons transmit such forces as photons, gravitons, W and Z particles, mesons, and gluons. Many bosons can occupy the same state at the same time. Fermions (e.g., electrons, muons, tau, protons, neutrons, quarks, and neutrinos) cannot share a given state at a given time with other fermions. The fact that fermions make up matter explains why we cannot walk through walls: the inability of fermions (matter) to share the same space the way bosons (particles of force or energy) can.

Supersymmetry treats all particles of the same mass as different varieties of the same superparticle. This means that there is an equal matching between bosons and fermions. A supersymmetric string theory is called a superstring theory. The original string theory only described bosons, and hence became known as bosonic string theory (BST). Thus it did not describe fermions or, for example, include quarks and electrons.

Introducing supersymmetry to BST engendered a new theory that describes both the forces and the matter making up the universe: the theory of superstrings. String theorists have shown that all string theories are different aspects of a string theory that has not 10 but 11 spatial dimensions. This was called M-theory. The M might stand for the mother of all theories or mystery, magic, matrix, or membrane. The last two refer to mathematical techniques used in science. There is no space or time in M Theory. Furthermore, our space-time is not four-dimensional after all. M theory unites the four forces of nature (e.g., gravity, quantum mechanics, strong force, and weak force) and, remarkably, is a mathematical and geometrical theory. It is attractive because it can explain gravity and an atom’s inside at the same time and thus resolve the contradiction between current theories.

Summary and Conclusions

String theory gives a theoretical description of elementary particles and treats them as one-dimensional curves (strings). Traditional models of interactions between elementary particles are based on quantum field theory, which treats particles as dimensionless points. Theoretical physicists have not developed a workable theory of gravitation that is consistent with quantum mechanics’ principles.

However, treating elementary particles as strings permits the derivation of a quantum theory that encompasses all four forces. Superstring theory, a combination of string theory and supersymmetry, treats particles as very short (10-33 cm along its single dimension, which is 1020 smaller than a proton’s diameter) closed strings (string loops). All of the masses, charges, and other properties of elementary particles result from the vibration of these superstrings at different frequencies. The complex mathematical basis of superstrings involves 10 dimensions: 9 spatial dimensions, 6 of which are invisible, and time. Since superstring theory provides a unified description of all elementary particles and fundamental forces, it is sometimes called the theory of everything.

Some major unsolved problems of string theory are how to condense, 10 dimensions to 6 (spatial) plus 4 (space and time) dimensions, and what is happening at distances smaller than 10-33 cm. In addition, the experimental verification of the existence of strings in the near future poses quite a challenge. Since they are thought to be less than a billionth of a billionth the size of an atom, we cannot use current technology to detect them directly. An indirect test, however, will be carried out within the next decade or so by the Large Hadron Collider, a huge atom smasher being built by CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research, located in Geneva, Switzerland). There also is an urgent need to develop new mathematics in areas of Riemann surfaces, algebraic geometry, singular geometries, number theory, and other related fields. 

Footnotes

1. K stands for Kelvin, a measurement of degree relating to, conforming to, or having a thermometric scale on which the unit of measurement equals the centigrade degree and according to which absolute zero is 0A , the equivalent of “273.16A C.

References

• Adams, Steve. A Theory of Everything. New Scientist 161 (20 Feb. 1999).
• Arkani-Hamed, Nima et al. The Universe’s Unseen Dimensions. Scientific American 283 (Aug. 2000): 62-69.
• Davies, P. C. W. and Julian Brown, Eds. Superstrings: A Theory of Everything? Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
• Duff, Michael J. The Theory Formerly Known as Strings. Scientific American 278, (Feb. 1998): 64-69.
• Green, Michael M., John H. Schwarz, and Edward Witten. Superstring Theory. 2 vols. Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
• Greene, Brian. The Elegant Universe. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.
• Gribbin, John R. The Search for Superstrings, Symmetry, and the Theory of Everything. Boston: Little, Brown Co., 1998.
• Kaku, Michio. Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the Tenth Dimension. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
• Mukhi, Sunil. The Theory of Strings: An Introduction. Current Science 77 (25 Dec. 1999): 1624-34.
• Peat, David F. Superstring and the Search for the Theory of Everything. Chicago: Contemporary Books, 1988.
• Polchinski, Joseph G. String Theory. 2 vols. Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.