“There was a footpath leading across the fields to New Southgate, and I used to go there alone to watch the sunset and contemplate suicide. I did not, however, commit suicide, because I wished to know more about mathematics.”
-Bertrand Russell, Nobel Laureate and Mathematician

It is mystical when you step outside on a snowy morning. Snowflakes are swirling around the vast sky and falling and blanketing the ground. If a snowflake lands on you, it is like a winter angel. There are no flowers around, for they cannot survive the cold; yet what lies before your eyes is an incredible beauty. And it’s remarkable, you come to realize, that no two snowflakes are alike. It is as if the uniqueness of a snowflake is controlled by a divine force. The individuality of a snowflake’s structure draws a parallel to human life. Like snowflakes, everyone has a unique story to tell.

I am not the only one who ponders about snowflakes; many mathematicians do the same. Actually, they think about the characteristics of snowflakes because they are particularly important for three basic mathematical principles: pattern, symmetry, and symmetry breaking.

A little-known scientist, Wilson Bentley, a.k.a. “the Snowflake Man” took pictures of snowflakes almost every day and observed them until he died. You can buy his book about his work on Amazon. If you wish to know why he did it, read about it at snowflakebentley.com.

“Under the microscope, I found that snowflakes were miracles of nature; and it seemed a shame that this beauty should not be seen and appreciated by others. Every crystal was a masterpiece of design and no one design was ever repeated. When a snowflake melted, that design was forever lost. That beauty was gone, without leaving any record behind.”
-Wilson Bentley

When I checked the Oxford dictionary, there were 3 definitions for the word “pattern.” Two of these definitions [listed below] are important for this article.

Pattern: 1. A repeated decorative design; 2. An example for others to follow.

When we check the pictures and delve deeper into each snowflake, we will see that the structures of the snowflakes are totally different. However, they have something in common: symmetry and a hexagonal structure.

These perfect ice crystals are genuine, even though it is hard to believe they are not fake.

When I take a close look at a snowflake, the beauty of the combination of ice molecules fascinates me every time; each flake is unique. However, uniqueness is not the point here. The things that make snowflakes important objects for mathematicians are their symmetry and their hexagonal structure. Math-loving people have a lot of interest in transformations. They love moving objects. And, surprisingly, if an object is symmetric, transformations are not even noticed by many.

To be more precise, when you have a hexagonal symmetric snowflake, or any other symmetrical object, when you rotate it in any direction, 60°, 120°, 180°, 240°, 300°, or 360°, people watching you wouldn’t realize it. If you check the images below, you will see rotated shapes but no difference. It appears to be the same shape in exactly the same place.

1- Counterclockwise rotation by 120°

2- Reflection through a vertical axis

3- Reflection axes of a snowflake[1]

Snowflakes also possess reflectional symmetry. If we stand in front of a mirror, our reflection looks exactly the same. Hence, if we put a mirror in the middle of a snowflake, there will be a reflection. For a snowflake, we can put a mirror 6 different ways. Thus, we can say that a snowflake has 12 symmetries: 6 from reflections, and 6 from rotations.[2]

Now we can define symmetry as a transformation that leaves things unchanged. We can also claim that a combination of any of the transformations will give us exactly the same shape. For instance, we can rotate our snowflake 60° two or three times in a row and flip it over, and it will remain unchanged.

At this point, you might ask the question: “You have all these fancy symmetries for this particular snowflake. But, does every snowflake possess the same symmetries?”

Snow is a molecular structure of an ice crystal. And ice is a structured substance. It is a different form of water. When the water cools down, the molecules move more slowly, and this begins to impact how the molecules line up. Hydrogen atoms of one water molecule bond with two oxygen atoms. As the water freezes, the molecules arrange into hexagonal patterns. They prefer to stay as far away from each other as possible, and that makes them take up more space. The large space affects density. The density of ice becomes less dense than water. This is why ice floats. Almost all other liquids have a higher density when they freeze.

When we examine an ice crystal carefully under normal conditions, we always see a combination of molecules with six-fold symmetry. Snowflake molecules make a honeycomb structure. This results in an inordinate amount of hexagonal symmetry in these molecular three-dimensional structures.

Okay, we saw the structure of a snowflake under normal conditions. But, what if we changed those conditions? Johannes Kepler answered this question after his experiments and wrote a book about snowflakes, particularly The Six-Cornered Snowflake.

There are two key elements which affect the structure of a snowflake: temperature and moisture. Each time the temperature or the amount of moisture change, the structure of a snowflake changes. If you check the snow crystal morphology diagram below, you will see that when the temperature nears 0° and humidity is high, the structure of a snowflake will be flowery. Flowery structures are called dendrites. When you make it a little bit colder, the structure will be fancy hexagonal plates. We can apply many combinations and get varying structures.

The Snow Crystal Morphology Diagram. Source: Snow Crystals – http://www.snowcrystals.com/science/science.html

Professor of physics Kenneth G. Libbrecht is the owner of the diagram below. In a PBS interview, he said, “It’s a mystery as to why snowflake shapes go from plates to columns to plates to columns as the temperature lowers. That’s one of the things I’ve been trying to understand. It has been a mystery for about 75 years, and it’s still unsolved.”[3]

The Shapes of Snowflakes | Source

In the end, although the structure of (almost) all snowflakes are the same, some of them are not completely hexagonal. For instance, there are some snowflakes that have tree structures. Some snowflakes have branches, and each branch has tiny branches.

But, why is the structure of some snowflakes not hexagonal?

So far, we have talked about pictures which were taken at a particular instant. We have seen the pictures of the motion of the snowflakes for the smallest amount of time that can be measured. However, a snowflake never stops spinning in the air. They tend to oscillate. That means the shape of the snowflake is changing all the time. But how? When you see a snowflake in the air, it changes its place after a second because it would be whirled about, and it will be under different conditions at that time. This process will occur up until the snowflake lands on the ground. We know from the diagram that the temperature and amount of moisture always affect the shape of a snowflake. While small-scale conditions are almost the same, on a larger-time scale, conditions will differ. And these differences will change every corner of a hexagonal snowflake, resulting in a different structure. This is the main reason behind the variety of snowflake structures and uniqueness.

In conclusion, we can say that a snowflake can preserve its six-fold symmetry at all times. I think we have another reason to love mathematics! I want to finish my piece with Hermann Hankel’s words:

“In most sciences one generation tears down what another has built, and what one has established another undoes. In mathematics alone, each generation adds a new story to the old structure.”

Bent down in prayer as winds blow by.

No glimpse of greed or poverty,

Once again she stretches up beneath the sky.

Listen closely to the flower’s song,

As pedals play their part.

To turn Man’s eye for a moment long,

To God’s great work of art.

“See order in my rhythm,

See plan in my design.

See prayer in my precision.

’I’ve been sent here as a sign.

Ponder now, before I’m gone,

For winter here draws nigh.

Without knowledge of why we’re here,

Is not wisdom naught but a lie?

And as I sing my final song,

This is what we all will learn.

To God it is we all belong,

And to Him is our return.”

As one of Turkish national arts, ebru is carried out by transferring onto special paper a design which is formed by scattering dye on dense water. It is argued that the root of the word “ebru” is from “ebr” (cloud-like), “ab-rû” (water surface) in Persian, or “ebre” (moiréd) in Chagatai. Owing to its moiréd appearance, it is called “marmor papier,” “papier marbre,” or “marbled paper” in European languages, and “waraqu’l-mujazza” in Arabic.

The art of Ebru, which is believed to have origins in Bukhara (a city in Uzbekistan, Central Asia) in the eighth or ninth century, reached Anatolia and Istanbul via Iran along the Great Silk Road. Ebru, like other book arts, continued to develop in Istanbul, reached maturity in the sixteenth century, and experienced its brightest period of time in the seventeenth century. The Ebru that was produced in that period in Istanbul was enough to meet the demand from Europeans.

The oldest example of Ebru ever known is in Istanbul University Library. It is estimated that it was made before 1519. Another piece of Ebru, which is believed to have been made in 1539, is kept in Topkapý Palace, in Istanbul. It is impossible to know much about early Ebru artists, (except those from the last period of the Ottomans) because there was no tradition of adding the artist’s signature to the work in that period. sebek Mehmet Efendi, Hatip Mehmet Efendi, seyh Sadýk Efendi, Nafiz Efendi and Hezarfen Ethem Efendi were famous Ebru artists who lived in the Ottoman period. Names such as Necmettin Okyay, Sami Okyay, Sacit Okyay, Abdülkadir Kadri Efendi and Mustafa Düzgünman were famous Ebru artists who lived in the early Republican period. Today, in Turkey, where the art of Ebru is becoming even more popular, there are a lot of contemporary Ebru artists.

Early Ebru artists produced almost all the equipment that they used. The materials which are used are paper, kitre (a gum-like substance made of cow’s gall), a table, naphtha, an awl set, combs, dyes, and brushes. The dye that is used in Ebru is water-proof. In traditional Ebru, soil pigments are used. The pigments are crushed on a marble base with a hand-carved stone called a “destezeng.” They are then put in a bowl, and mixed with water and gall. The mixture is left to stand for some time so that it reaches the right consistency. The period of waiting may be from several weeks to several years according to the type and quality of the dye. Owing to the difficulty of its preparation, this technique has almost been completely replaced with using readymade products.

Ebru is categorized according to the design and the motif used. By manipulating the dye on the surface of the water, different styles of Ebru can be made such as “the tide,” “the shawl,” “the striped,” “bülbülyuvasý,” (drawing spirals from outside to inside) “Hatip,” (drawing concentric circles with drops of colors) and “flowery.” Battal Ebru is made without manipulating the dye and transferred to the paper directly.

To judge the beauty of a piece of Ebru, three points should be taken into consideration. These are hav (the nap), the nimbus (hale), and the design. The nap is the height of the dye on the surface of the water. It feels velvet-like when it is touched with the fingers. The best nap can only be obtained with a soil dye. The nimbus is a white, glimmering circle around every drop of dye. It is achieved with the gall which is added to the dye. The design is the general appearance of the Ebru. It is composed of color distribution, coherence, form, and the location and size of motifs.

In the contemporary world, different schools of Ebru can be distinguished. The Turkish art of Ebru is one of these styles or schools. Hundreds of Ebru artists perform Ebru in their own way.

Today, most Ebru artists practice it as an independent art. In addition, Ebru is also used with miniature, calligraphy, tezhip, and other arts such as painting. The production of Ebru for book binding has declined in recent years.

There are different arguments about the relation between traditional and modern Ebru. While some artists are more sensitive about carrying on the traditional school, others are freer about the use of equipment and technique. It is useless to argue on which is better. There are already hundreds of Ebru artists around the world who deal with Ebru in the way they want. Whether the work is admired or not depends on art lovers. It is probable that a technique or a school which does not attract any attention today will be demanded more in the future.

There are too few Ebru artists who have received education and license to teach from the early masters. For that reason, the condition that every Ebru teacher should have a teaching license may restrict the art and artists. It can be understood whether one is really an Ebru artist or not, through one’s works, not just by looking at a person’s certificate. On the other hand, it would be beneficial if expert trainers could come together and determine some criteria.

The art of Ebru in today’s world has been experiencing a period of revival. Both in Turkey and in the rest of the world, there is increasing interest in Ebru. In tandem with the fact that many Ebru artists have been trained, there have arisen new techniques and schools.

I began my research by reading all the Turkish material I could find on the subject. Most of the works I found were Turkish translations of European travelers’ reports about Ottoman life. Of course, it was necessary to separate fact from fiction, because many travelers, males in particular, described aspects of Ottoman life they had never personally seen-the inside of the harem, for example. But in spite of this, I was able to glean a fairly accurate description of Ottoman women and the harem from a number of different travelers (mostly women) who can be considered as eye witnesses to harem life. The portrait of Ottoman women that emerged reflected a very feminine appearance and demeanor, refined manners and decorum, and a pious and chaste character. Their domestic roles of wife and mother further reinforced this strongly feminine image.

The portrait of Ottoman women I found from my reading was a far cry from the Orientalists’ exotic stereotype. I learned that only approximately ten percent of the young slave girls in the imperial harem were actually royal concubines, and this number included concubines to the princes as well as to the sultan. The rest were groomed and trained for service to the royal family by means of the administrative hierarchy in the imperial harem. Even the belly dance, which is always associated with slave girls in the harem, apparently did not even exist in the imperial harem. That is what we are told by Leyla Saz Hanýmefendi who grew up in the palace from the age of four and who was closely associated with the royal family during the reign of six different sultans during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Armed with the information and knowledge I had gained from many travelers’ reports and secondary sources, I felt ready to challenge the sensationalist myth of the harem. Little did I know at the time, however, that an even greater discovery regarding Ottoman women awaited me in future research.

By a quirk of fate, I found myself spending a year with my daughter who was studying for a master’s degree in Islamic studies at a leading North American university. One of the courses she took was related to the Muslim qadi or judge and Ottoman court records. Much to my amazement I learned that throughout the duration of the Ottoman state (six centuries) women had many significant legal rights, more perhaps during that time than any other women in the world. This was a point that had been somehow overlooked in the many sensationalist books on the harem! Investigating this point further, I learned that Ottoman women had legal agency or, in other words, they could sue and be sued in court independent of their husbands. They could enter into legal contracts like marriage contracts with their husbands, or into business contracts with others. They had the right to own property and to inherit it. They had the right to initiate divorce. They had full control over their own income and property and could do with it as they wished. Ottoman women also had the right to be guardian of their children in case of the death of or divorce from their husband. European women, on the other hand, gained these rights much later, and today in some parts of the world women are still struggling to obtain them. British women, for example, did not have these rights until 1882. Previous to that time they had to turn over any property, inheritance or income to their husband upon marriage. Women did not have legal agency nor were they able to make legal contracts independently. Also they were unable to defend themselves in divorce cases and they could not get legal guardianship of their own children.

Furthermore, I learned that not only did Ottoman women have these legal rights, but that they actively pursued their rights as well. There are thousands of court records that attest to this. By no means were legal rights enjoyed just by a privileged few. They were accorded to Ottoman women of all social and economic strata. For example, one of my favorite cases was taken from early seventeenth-century Kayseri court records. It involves a woman named Teslime who was working on her land when her neighbor’s donkey strayed onto her property. When she seized the animal, her neighbor, who was a man, cursed her. Teslime immediately filed a complaint with the local qadi. Two witnesses were found to support her complaint and she won her case. While reading her case, I could not help but wonder how many women today would take a man to court for cursing them; and if they did so, how many would be taken seriously? There are countless recorded cases of Ottoman women who turned to the courts to get redress for injustices perpetrated against them. Upon review of such cases a different image of the Ottoman woman in the legal arena emerged: a strong and courageous woman who put Haqq (Truth and Justice) above everything else.

It was the discovery of this side of Ottoman women that really clenched my respect and admiration for them, because it enlightened me in regard to how Muslim women should be. They were not only very feminine and refined, but they were also strong defenders of Haqq. Their feminine and masculine natures were amazingly well balanced. As a Muslim convert, I have found the female model I was looking for. Whenever I get into trouble, I first ask myself, “What would an Ottoman woman do?”

Furthermore, I discovered that the spiritual nature of women was honored in Ottoman society.

Ottoman women were honored in the harem, not imprisoned there. Unfortunately, this way of perceiving women has all but been lost today. Much of the time women are perceived mainly as physical beings and, in its lowest form, as sex objects. They are often valued to the degree that they can rival the accomplishments of men. Ottoman women, however, were honored and valued as women.

I wanted to share these discoveries with others. I began lecturing on the subject of Ottoman women in Turkey, and these lectures eventually led to a small book in Turkish entitled, “Osmanlý Toplumunda Kadýn ve Aile (Women and Family in Ottoman Society).” Later on I began thinking about writing a book on Ottoman women in English-not an academic work, but a book giving a general overview that would appeal to any Western reader interested in the subject of women. Again, I rolled up my sleeves and set to work. As the book took form, so did my concept of how the book should be illustrated. I wanted it to reflect the spirit of the Ottoman woman-the beauty and harmony and refinement of her life. Once Tughra Books (formerly The Light, Inc.) agreed to publish the book and the design concept was agreed upon, members of their graphics design department did an extraordinary job that eventually led to the book being a finalist for the 2008 PMA Benjamin Franklin Award in the category of cover design/large format.

My book was published under the title “Ottoman Women: Myth and Reality” at the end of 2007. In the spring of 2008 I went on a book promotion tour in some major US cities: Los Angeles, New York, Washington D.C., Atlanta, Pittsburg, Rochester and Newark. The people I met and spoke to-men and women, young and old, American and Turkish, Muslim and non-Muslim-all responded positively to the book. Many were surprised to learn about the high social status of Ottoman women, particularly about their legal rights. Some, young Turks in particular, were thankful that the myth of the harem was finally being challenged. Almost all commented on the beautiful design of the book. The highlight of the tour occurred on the evening of the annual PMA publishing awards dinner in Los Angeles. That night my long journey of discovery in regard to Ottoman women was crowned when my book won the PMA Benjamin Franklin publishing award in the category of history/politics.

As a final comment, I would like to mention the great contribution to the book of my now deceased son, Sahin Sancar. He was with me every step of the way, from the signing of the contract with my publisher to the final touches in the design. He was a beautiful person and he contributed greatly to the beauty of the book. May he live eternally in beauty and light.

Asli Sancar has two more books and numerous articles, mainly dealing with women and family.

This book by the author, entitled “Ottoman Women: Myth and Reality,” combines both splendid design and objective narration, and could be referred to as a proof of the real status of women at that time giving full information on every aspect of their lives.

World of women-not as seen on TV

In our time when the rights of women are not well protected but are at least widely spoken about, it is very important to have research on the position of Ottoman women based not on common imagination (sometimes very colourful), but on the historical truth.

Unfortunately the further the topic moves to the East the more deviated the data becomes. Remarks untrue from the very beginning are more and more likely to be decorated with what-somebody-thinks-(s)he-could-have-seen. So for decades, when it came to the issue of a woman living in Muslim society there were only two options: whether a sultan’s harem full of silk, coffee, gold, hatred and intrigues or a harem in a mud house managed by a cruel and uneducated husband.

The truth had always been a card – laid at the table, played and beaten. Real facts were mixed with fruits of imagination; objective data was presented only when it could have been useful for the narrator.

In her book the author successfully presents the real state of affairs proving her point of view by documents from Ottoman records and remarks by Western travelers. Ottoman society was a highly organized and sophisticated system, so the position of a woman – should the issue concern her life in a household harem, childbirth and custody, charity and social activities – was regulated by religion and law. Even the foreigners disliking Muslim society and bearing hostility towards the Ottoman Empire, in particular, could not help but admit that Ottoman women enjoyed much more freedom and were way more respected and loved than their Christian sisters.

Ottoman woman: social position, rights, life in the harem

This research consists of six main chapters describing all the main aspects of Ottoman women’s lives. The chapters are dedicated to description of Ottoman women by Western travelers, life in the household harem, the status of slaves in the harem, the imperial harem, Ottoman women in court records and the metaphysical meaning of being a woman in the Ottoman Empire. The first chapter presents observations through Westerners eyes. Placing this part at the beginning is quite logical in respect to putting things in order and separating proven documentary facts from the fairy tale. Special attention was paid to the remarks of several female travelers and persons who had stayed in the Ottoman Empire for a long time and thus witnessed Ottoman life.

Even travelers’ comments needed to be studied with great care. Their accuracy had to be taken into consideration. The Ottomans would never have tolerated any interfering in their private life, so even female travelers with well-established diplomatic connections were accepted into the Ottoman harems with great restrictions.

Arabian nights vs. Ottoman daylight: outbeating the harem myth

When a woman needs to struggle with an enemy, she does it in a very delicate, feminine way. Here we see the author beating the harmful myth of harem life in a very confident and logical manner. “Women are not prisoners in any sense of the word, nor are they pining behind the latticed windows as we are sometimes led to believe…,” Elizabeth Cooper wrote in 1916.

Starting the second chapter of the book dedicated to life in the household harem by breaking with a popular myth presenting Ottoman and thus Oriental women as prisoners of their homes, is both bold and logical. It can be clearly seen that Ottoman women were never captives of their part of the house. But the fantasies of the Arabian nights made her image a hostage to common opinion in Western eyes. French translation of Arabian tales published in Europe at the beginning of XVIII century served the Ottoman women badly, turning them into sensual, infidel, vile creatures inventing one intrigue after another while spending their days in the sweet laziness of the harem.

Contradiction between exotic tales and reality should be solved fairly – this is what the author wants, and what women would have desired. They were secluded because they were loved and cared about, not imprisoned. The harem had never been a prison, but a sacred space where all the family enjoyed everyday life, celebrated holidays and was engaged in various social activities. Richer women were busy with distributing charity and caring for orphans and the disabled. They hardly had time for gossip, and their strong faith in God and the education they had would never have let them act improperly.

The chapter dedicated to the imperial harem is marvelous. Whoever thinks of “dolce far niente” practiced by the harem women day after day should study it carefully. A reader will see that not a single creature in the imperial harem possibly could be accused of doing nothing. If one takes a walk in modern Istanbul, no matter what the route is, he/she will surely see a mosque, a public bath, a hospital, a market complex, a water-spring, or a school ordered to be built by a queen mother, or by a mother of a prince, or by any other high-ranked lady from the harem. For God’s sake when did they manage to do all these? Between gossiping and intriguing? Oh that’s a shame! There should be some Turkish coffee break in between…

Winning her rights back: court records

Imagine an Ottoman woman coming to the court to protect her rights.

An Ottoman woman appealing to an Ottoman court. Winning the case, having been restored in her rights. It is not simply “possible.” This was a real documented process clearly showing that a woman living in the Ottoman Empire should never be thought of as something between a nice pet and a piece of the home decor. For centuries she was free in her half of the house which was considered sacred.

Here I can give a lot of examples of what an Ottoman woman did in her life. And the reader acquainted with Oriental life and traditions only by means of pocket novels written in a month, read in a couple of days and forgotten forever, could think that this book is just another fantasy product attributing more freedom to the prisoners of the harem in order to gain more attention by female readers.

The truth is even more shocking. A creature considered indolent, depraved and exotic will sooner or later come to the court of civilization and appeal to get back her dignity and good name. Indeed she has all the evidence of what she really was – the author presents citing from the Ottoman court records as well as the opinion of Lucy M. Garnett who in 1909 wrote: “With regard to their legal status, Turkish women – already possess the legal, personal, and proprietary rights necessary to give them a social position equal, if not superior to that of European women generally.”

Design of the book

“The interior is as exciting and rich as the exterior. Images are beautifully reproduced be they photographs, drawings or old paintings.” (PMA review of the design of the book)

“Her beauty is of color rather than of line”, says Z. Duckett Ferriman. Design of this book is both of color and line. It is of luxury worthy of the Topkapý Palace. Graphical concept is deeply connected with the spirit of the book. Richness of colors and illustrations, selected with major taste and care, seem to reflect the position and respect an Ottoman woman enjoyed. The very notion of East has always been associated with luxury, mystery and wonderful colors that could hardly be seen in the West. This time this is not just a stereotype. That is why there are so many attractive definitions like “Oriental green,” “Turquoise,” “Glow of the Desert” used especially for goods closely related to style and fashion. The cover could be called royal green with semi-sweet coffee foam beige and wedding bracelet gold on it. Gentlemen in charge of art and graphic design did everything possible to turn this book into a real pearl of the harem – with textile details and paintings by Osman Hamdi, every page takes us to the world of women – beautiful, pure and splendidly decorated.

The book was highly appreciated by PMA for its perfect design. Everyone who will read it will be deeply impressed by the luxury of every single page, clarity of paintings, photographs and any other illustrations – each of them in its place, in total harmony with the message of the “Ottoman Women.”

Ottoman woman: year 2008

Finishing this review, I would like to express my sincere gratitude and admiration to the author, Asli Sancar Hanimefendi, for marvellously starring in two roles at the same time: one of them is that of an American-born lady writing fairly on Ottoman women (almost three hundred years after Lady Montague, one hundred and seventy after Miss Julia Pardoe and nearly a hundred years after Z. Duckett Ferriman), and the other is the role of a Turkish woman, member of the new society feeling respect and devotion to history and the truth. There is also a third one behind every line and in every color of this book.

An Ottoman woman in the court.

Presenting her book.

Calling for justice.

Valeria Kolos is a Ukrainian Turkish-English-Russian translator. Having graduated from the Oriental Studies Department of the Kyiv Shevchenko National University in 1999, she has been living in Istanbul for 6 years. V.Kolos has some publications (poems in Turkish) in several literature magazines.

Optimality is defined as the “most favorable condition or greatest degree or amount possible under given circumstances.”¹ It denotes a general equilibrium in which no improvement in one part of a system is possible without a larger sacrifice in another part. Thus, optimality is not mere order; rather, it is the highest state of it. Every optimal state is also orderly, but every orderly situation does not have to be optimal. The houses that we live in are examples of this. It is quite clear that our houses are not the optimal design for a house, but they are still orderly, hence the result of intention and intelligence.

A common trend among today’s evolutionists is to consider apparent sub-optimality (or “poor design” as some put it) sufficient proof for the nonexistence of a designer (hence, God). Biologist Richard Dawkins, for example, contends that “evidence of telling imperfections” in design is important evidence that “no designer exists.”² However, there are serious problems with this argument. First, judgments about optimality require knowledge of the entire set of objectives and available means, whereas we have no complete knowledge of divine objectives as to the creation of anything. The Bible refers to this point in Job 38:4, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” Similarly, the Qur’an states, “I did not make them witnesses of the creation of the heavens and the earth, nor of the creation of their own selfs” (Kahf 18:51). As we were not witnesses to the creation of the universe and human beings, we can never confidently say that something is “sub-optimal.” As one political scientist, George Tsebelis, has noted, cases of apparent sub-optimality are in fact cases of disagreement between “the actor” and “the observer”: “while the observer focuses attention on only one game, the actor is involved in a whole network of games”-what he calls nested games.³ What appears sub-optimal from the perspective of only one game is in fact optimal when the whole network of games is considered. Consequently, all conclusions about sub-optimality in the universe are unwarranted because as observers we have no comprehensive vision and understanding regarding God’s plans and objectives, which relate to multiple issues and platforms. Indeed, most sub-optimality arguments regarding creation are based on the assumed objectives of scientists, which do not necessarily correspond with the more complex and comprehensive objectives of God.

The sub-optimality arguments of evolutionists come in two forms: biological and theological. A famous example of the former is the “poor design” argument regarding the “inverted” arrangement of the vertebrate retina.⁴ Several neo-Darwinians have taken issue with the way retina is typically situated in vertebrates. The vertebrate retina is inverted in the sense that the photoreceptors sit at the back of the retina, so that light has to pass through a layer of neurons before it reaches them. Evolutionists have argued that this invertedness results in inefficiency in vertebrate vision, which is sufficient for them to conclude for the nonexistence of an all-knowing and all-powerful God. Yet, later research proved that in return for the above-mentioned negligible loss in vision, the current structure of the vertebrate retina is found to make possible better absorption of excess light⁵ and superior supply of blood to photoreceptors,⁶ both of which are essential for healthy vision. They are so essential that “[i]f the human retina were ‘wired’ the other way around,” concludes Peter Gurney, “the photoreceptors would be left in darkness.”⁷ This brings us to a verse in the Qur’an: “Were the truth to follow their lusts and fancies, the heavens and the earth and all those who live in them would certainly have gone to ruin” (Muminun 23:71).

A prominent example of the theological sub-optimality arguments of the evolutionists is the so-called “problem of evil,” which goes back to Darwin himself in the evolutionist tradition; Darwin had troubles with the apparently cruel acts in the animal world. Some of Darwin’s famous contemporary followers also take “the existence of human evil as well as of natural catastrophes and diseases” to mean that a benevolent God does not exist.⁸ For these evolutionists, the coexistence of evil and good is a sub-optimal situation and this is sufficient proof to reject the idea of a benevolent God. This argument suffers two ailments, though. The first and most ironic one is that the argument itself is more theology than science. From a scientific point of view, the question for which an answer is sought is whether the universe and everything inside it could have come into being by chance or not. The nature of God and how He ought to act are not questions that science seeks answers for. Second, these arguments stem from evolutionists’ own expectations regarding how the things should be, which are bounded by their strictly earthly considerations. When transcendental and other-worldly considerations are also taken into account, the problem almost evaporates into thin air. Throughout history the “problem of evil” (or theodicy) has been debated by hundreds of scholars in almost all religions. The reconciliation of worldly pains and sorrows with the mercy of a benevolent God has been one of the most challenging topics in the history of religion. Scholars of many religions have offered diverging explanations with varying degrees of consistency and persuasiveness. Some Christian explanations for human evil, for example, have rested on God’s wish to love and be loved out of free will. From this point of view, a genuine love requires a genuine free will, which results in evil actions as well good ones.⁹ Muslim scholars have also developed explanations that would account for all types of “evils.” First, similar to the previous Christian argument, human evil is argued to have been allowed for the realization of a genuine relationship between God and human beings. As for other “evils” such as natural catastrophes or diseases, most Muslim scholars do not view them as evils to start with. In the Muslim faith, everything that takes place happens out of a divine wisdom, which ultimately aims at the well-being of a believer in the afterlife. In this line of thinking, an adversity such as a disease can play three main possible divine roles. It is either a punishment for a believer’s sins or misbehavior in this world, which would replace a harsher punishment in the hereafter; or a test to be passed for spiritual development; or a tool to make a believer approach God by increasing his or her supplications meanwhile.¹⁰In each of these cases, the disease is given to the believer with a benevolent wisdom on the part of God. Moreover, some Muslim scholars have pointed out that sick people also remind other healthy people to give many thanks to God for their health, thereby channeling the whole community to the path of God. As such, what evolutionists claim as sub-optimalities are indeed essential parts of the divine plan, and they collectively function for the realization of the ultimate goal of creation. Thus, for Muslims, a disease is a gift of God with an evil face. As the Qur’an states, “it may well be that you dislike something while God has set in it much good” (Nisa 4:19). Again, a holistic view renders sub-optimality arguments unwarranted.

What these examples suggest is that most sub-optimality arguments are premature and assumptive. Proving a “poor design” argument requires more work than many evolutionists believe. Given our lack of comprehensive knowledge regarding the universe, it is safe to believe that we can never be sure whether something is ultimately sub-optimal. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily doom the study of optimality to a state of impasse. Although it is almost impossible to prove the theoretical optimality of things, we can assume tentative practical optimality in cases where we cannot suggest some practical means to improve on existing things. Thus, a practical test of optimality can be replacement of any purportedly sub-optimal thing in the universe with its artificial counterpart that is produced by human beings. If we can manage to replace any sub-optimal part with a better alternative without introducing new sub-optimalities elsewhere, then we might have a right to a tentative claim for sub-optimality. What is interesting is that all human attempts to improve on natural goods have failed so far. A prominent example to these failures is sugar substitutes. After the scientific discovery of the relationship between sugar consumption and certain health problems such as obesity and tooth decay, several scientists have advised that certain, if not all, people should refrain from or minimize sugar consumption. This resulted in a scientific interest in as well as a popular demand for sugar substitutes (or artificial sweeteners) that would give us the same sweet taste without sugar’s adverse effects. Surprisingly though, recent studies have demonstrated that sugar substitutes create more problems than they solve. Sugar-free sweeteners like aspartame and saccharin come with dozens of side effects, some of which are lethal.¹¹ Consequently, an increasing number of dietary experts advise us today to refrain from “diet” products, most of which include artificial sweeteners.¹² Thus, here we might be justified in claiming that natural sugar has practical optimality because it is proven to be superior to all other alternative sweeteners so far. Another prominent example is baby formulas. Despite all improvements in biochemistry, all baby formulas continue to come second after breast milk. Until human beings succeed in producing an infant formula that is overall more nutritious than breast milk and that is inexpensive enough to be produced in mass quantities, we are safe in saying that breast milk has practical optimality.

Finally, I should note that even if any sub-optimality does exist in the universe, it does not by itself provide any evidence for the absence of an all-powerful Creator. True, most believers believe in a God who is perfect in its self or essence and in its creation. Yet, this does not come to mean that any sub-optimality in the universe would necessarily negate the idea of God. From an Islamic point of view, for example, as everything in this life is part of a test, negligible sub-optimality might have also been purposefully included in God’s “design” as a test for human beings. If everything in the observed world was as perfect as each and every one of us would like it to be, there would be little room for disbelieving in God. However, the Qur’an states that this is not something God wished for human beings. Faith requires a struggle; and minimal sub-optimalities (if there are any) might be part of that struggle as well. If one in a thousand parts comes in seemingly sub-optimal character, it is not rational to conclude for the absence of intelligence or design.

Kaan Kerem has a PhD in Political science. He is freelance writer on philosophy and scientific thought.

1. Wordnet Online dictionary: http://dict.die.net/

2. Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: Norton, 1986), p. 91.

3. George Tsebelis, Nested Games: Rational Choice in Comparative Politics (University of California Press, 1991), pp: 6-7.

4. Dawkins, pp. 93-4.

5. Juan Ramon Martinez-Morales, Isabel Rodrigo, and Paola Bovolenta, “Eye Development: A View from the Retina Pigmented Epithelium.” BioEssays. 26:766-777, 2003.

6. Helga Kolb, “How the Retina Works,” American Scientist, 91:28–35, 2003. 7. Peter W.V. Gurney, Technical Journal, 13(1):37–44, 1999.

8. Massimo Pigliucci, “Design Yes, Intelligent No.” Skeptical Inquirer, September 2001.

9. Richard Swinburne, Is There a God? (Oxford University Press, 1996). Also see, Casey Luskin, Good Theology and Bad Design or Bad Theology and Good Design? http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/722

10. Said Nursi, The Flashes, trans. S. Vahide (Istanbul: Sozler Publications, 1996), pp: 26, 28, 334–336.

11. Janet Starr Hull, Sweet Poison (New Horizon Press, 1998). Visit author’s website www.sweetpoison.com for detailed information.

12. Michael F. Roizen and Mehmet Oz, You: The Owner’s Manual (Collins, 2005).

The innovations implemented in nature have the potential to improve the way we do everything, from desalinating water, gluing things together, to streamlining cars. Where there is a design problem, there is a solution for it in nature created by nature’s Designer. We can distinguish the levels in biology that technology can be modeled after as i) mimicking the natural methods in the manufacture of chemical compounds to create new ones, and ii) imitating mechanisms found in nature. There are a few examples of biomimetic materials that are already part of our daily lives. Velcro, for instance, is a brand name of a fabric that consists of hook and loop fasteners used to connect objects. It was invented by Georges de Mestral, a Swiss engineer/inventor. The idea came to him after he took a close look at the Burdock seeds which stuck to his clothes and his dog’s fur on their daily walk in the Alps. He closely examined the hook-and-loop system that the seeds used under a microscope, and realized that the same approach could be used to join other things together. Velcro is commonly used in many different areas, such as in the automotive industry, clothing, shoe making, and for bringing rigid or soft surfaces together. The lotus, which possesses tiny wax crystals on the surface of its leaves, remains pristine and white, even in the midst of swampy, contaminant-rich conditions. For some, the lotus plant is even a symbol of cleanliness.

The lotus effect in material science is defined as the observable self-cleaning property found in the lotus plant. The characteristics of the lotus brought about a new application of biomimetics to the self-purification of surfaces, such as paints and roof tiles that maintain a clean surface like the lotus, by creating a surface that is similar to that of the lotus plants.1 The figure shows that dirt particles are unable to adhere to the paint and simply flow away with the rain. Everybody knows about the vivid colors of butterflies. But where does this color come from? One would naturally think that butterflies must use pigments, as in the paint industry. Actually, there are two fundamental mechanisms by which color is produced on butterfly wings. One leads to what we call ordinary color, and the second leads to the spectacular iridescent color. The ordinary color is due to the presence of chemical pigments, which absorb certain wavelengths and transmit or reflect others. The iridescent color is produced not by pigmentation, but by the interference of light due to multiple reflections within the physical structure of the material. The parts of a butterfly wing are shown in the Figure 3 in the following order, from left to right: Wing > Scales > Veins > Ridges. The size and periodicity of arrangement of the features on the wings causes interference with the visible light, creating color. Using this concept, structures and physical mechanisms that produce a shining color, like that found on the wings of butterflies, have been reproduced in carbon by an international team based at Allied Signal in Morristown, N.J. These highly periodically patterned novel carbon materials possess unique and potentially useful properties. 2 Another striking example that inspires design principles is the box-fish. These are rigid-bodied marine fish that live predominantly in shallow-watered, highly energetic, tropical reef environments. They are remarkably stable and agile swimmers.

They are able to maintain smooth swimming trajectories with minimal pitching, rolling, or yawing, even in highly turbulent waters. Moreover, they are capable of swimming rapidly (> 6 body lengths s-1), can spin around with a minimal turning radius, and can maintain precise control of their position and orientation.3 What applications could these types of properties be used for? In fact, one of the leading car manufacturers produced a bionic concept car that is based on the contours of the boxfish carapace and takes advantage of its drag reduction benefits. Not only the shape, but also the organizational composition of living organisms is highly advanced.

Therefore, great efforts are made to study and understand the formation of the hierarchical structures of these creatures. The shell of the abalone, for instance, is known for being exceptionally strong. It is made of microscopic calcium carbonate tiles that are stacked like bricks. Between the layers of tiles is a sticky protein substance. Even though calcium carbonate is one of the softest materials in nature, when the abalone shell is struck, the tiles slide, instead of shattering and the protein stretches to absorb the energy of the blow. Material scientists at the University of California, San Diego are studying the tiled structure for insight into stronger ceramic products, such as body armor. Researchers at Princeton, working on a grant from NASA, are analyzing the remarkable strength of abalone shells to help make impact-resistant coatings for thermal tiles. There are numerous groups that are working towards a better understanding of the structure and the governing mechanisms involved in the assembly of natural composite systems that have amazing mechanical properties. In synthetic composite structures, the hardness of the material is proportional to the inorganic/mineral content. However, there are striking examples of design in nature in which almost negligible amounts of minerals are used in a specially tailored environment, and very high levels of hardness, comparable to human dentine, can be achieved. An interesting example is sea-worms. Although mainly consisting of soft tissue, these worms have very hard jaws that have an exceptionally low amount of inorganic consistency. The jaw material is of particular interest because of its hard, lightweight and abrasive-resistant properties due to some gradient elements. The chemical surrounds and forms of these elements are not clear enough to be able to identify or mimic the arrangement/structure. These jaws, in addition to their extraordinary mechanical properties, are very good examples of natural gradient materials that have a perfect interface between the hard and soft tissues. Although many high-tech analysis techniques have been devised to understand how such a composite could be formed, particularly in highly unfavorable salty sea or ocean water, and how they have such great mechanical strength, the findings are still incomplete.

The information gathered is like the scattered pieces of a puzzle; to finish the puzzle, the missing pieces must be found with new advancements in analytical tools. What about mussels then? “If we have Batman and Spider-Man, why don’t we have any mussel super heroes?” asks Professor Herbert Waite of the University of California, Santa Barbara. Mussels may not be the biggest or the flashiest creatures in the sea, but they do one thing exceedingly well. They make a glue that lets them anchor themselves firmly to a rock and remain there-drenched by water, buffeted by the ocean’s waves. “I don’t know any other adhesive that can do that,” says Waite.6 Not only the glue, but the threads they make to attach themselves to the rocks are very significant in terms of both their composition and complexity, according to Niels Holten, who is conducting research on these systems at the University of California, Santa Barbara. These threads can elongate and relax with extraordinary mechanical flexibility under great impacts from ocean waves. The Waite group research on these thread cuticles reveals a very important aspect of material science, the significance of which has only very recently been understood: interface engineering. These threads have a very low amount, ca. 1-2 wt%, of metal ions in a polymeric matrix holding together large polymeric chains, which is possibly what gives the structure its flexibility and extensibility. Man-made structures cannot compete with the mechanical performance of these threads, especially at such a low volume of metal ion ingredients.

The ultimate goal of ongoing research is to understand the formation principles of these features so that similar structures can be made, using the same set of principles in laboratory conditions. In fact, the perfections of designs that are implemented in nature turn out to be an enormous fountain of ideas. Jewel beetles, which lay their eggs in freshly charred trees, can detect fires from miles away; the defense industry is studying these beetles for clues to design new low-cost, military-grade infrared detectors. Meanwhile, one of the leading car manufacturers is tapping the locusts’ famed ability to fly in dense swarms without colliding for a possible key to anti-collision devices in cars. And the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is funding development of a robot that can climb vertical surfaces, using the same principle that geckos use to walk up walls and saunter upside down across ceilings. There are several examples that could be given on this matter, but, due to limited space, we can only briefly summarize some of them. However, our understanding of the mechanism in nature is very limited, and it is expected that better insight will be gained with the advancement of available analytical tools. The great diversity of product designs in nature is produced from only a few common components, whereas we use a great number of materials and components to achieve new designs. Such high control and hierarchy in design in nature can only be attributed to an artist or designer who hides the perfection of his creation in the details. It is up to us to find out, see, and appreciate these perfections. Material scientists, of course, have the duty of transferring the findings from nature for the service of humankind by turning them into applicable forms in our daily lives.

Notes

1. Lotusan Paints. (2002). Retrieved 12 Nov, 2003, from http://www.lotusan.de Translated by http:// www.google.com.
2. Anvar A. Zakhidov et. al., Science, 282, 897 (1998).
3. URL: http://www.gharib.caltech.edu/bioinspired_ design/index.html
4. http://www.daimlerchrysler.com/dccom/0-5-7154-1-503504-1-0-0-503518-0-0-135-7145-0-0- 0-0-0-0-1.html
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abalone#_note-0
6. Anne Underwood, “Nature’s Design Workshop,” Newsweek, U.S. Edition, September 26 (2005).

The role of mathematics in understanding nature

Mathematics is a discipline of thought. It helps to develop our way of thinking and is an exercise in improving our intelligence. Mathematics can be considered as another kind of language, a language very different from that of a spoken language. When it is hard to convey our thoughts in terms of words, or our words become insufficient to express our thoughts, mathematics may be used as an alternative. On some occasions, expressing ideas via mathematics might be more concise, much clearer and more understandable. Although mathematics is considered to be a separate branch of science, in fact it is related to all branches of science. Nowadays, even in biological and social sciences, extensive studies are being conducted using mathematics.

Engineering was one of the earliest application fields of mathematics. It has strong links with mathematics as well as physics. Many engineering problems can be considered as an application of mathematics and hence applied mathematicians and engineers share common research areas. Engineers try to improve the quality of life by designing new products and in the design process, geometry and mathematics play a vital role.

Since the first day of existence on the world, mankind has tried to understand and formulate the surroundings and events that take place around them. They have investigated the world and the cosmos and accumulated knowledge. Each question that was answered yielded more questions to be answered and the more the knowledge that was acquired the better the extent of our ignorance about the universe was understood.

The universe has been established in a very complex orderly manner. The magnificent order observed cannot be expressed well in words, but may also be expressed using mathematics. A person who develops their knowledge of mathematics can understand more about this supreme order. For example, the universal gravitational law, which describes the movement of planets, can best be understood through mathematical equations, while the solutions of the equations yield the well-known elliptic paths. The concept of infinity that is attributed to the Creator can be realized through the concept of infinity that is frequently used in mathematics. So mathematics is an essential tool in developing our understanding of the nature and universe. It is essential also in applying the principles of physical laws in nature to improve our quality of life. The design of an airplane requires extensive mathematical calculations and applications of physical laws.

Finally, it should be noted that mathematics also has its limits, as it is something that has been developed by human beings and may not be sufficient to express the total order and all physical laws. Chaotic motion, a very complex order, was developed recently to understand some phenomena that do not obey the rules of deterministic motion. A daily example of such motion would be atmospheric motion. With even super computers and satellite technology, the path of the hurricane Katrina could not be predicted precisely due to its largely chaotic behavior and these errors cost thousands of lives.

Basic engineering principles and their applications in nature

First, let’s briefly describe some of the fundamental engineering courses and their aims. Dynamics is the science of motion. It models motion, describing the relation among displacement, velocity and acceleration. The specific type of motion and its causes, such as forces, movements, impulses etc. are examined. Dynamics deal with solid bodies while fluid mechanics basically deals with liquids and gases.. In the context of fluid mechanics the rest states of fluids as well as their motions are investigated. The strength of materials deals basically with the design of structures and mechanical parts to loading conditions. Under a given loading condition, what would be the best design for withstanding the loads while using the minimum amount of material? Materials science deals basically with the mechanical properties of various materials and the causes (microstructure etc.) of those properties. Proper selection of the materials to perform the required task is another important issue.

Living organisms can also be considered as some sort of design, but of course they are different from man-made designs. Living organisms, whether they are plants, animals or human beings, are designed to perform a specific predetermined task. The organism has to move, find food, safely operate and resist the forces that act on it throughout its life, and it must reproduce. Therefore, organisms have to be designed (or more precisely created) according to the principles of engineering. The development of technology drew attention to creatures and the underlying engineering principles in their structures. Extensive research on living creatures revealed a clear conclusion: Designs applied in nature are much more sophisticated then the ones humans come up with.

Bernoulli’s principle is a fundamental principle in fluid mechanics. Basically, the principle states that when the velocity of fluid increases the pressure drops and visa versa. The lift force generated in the wing of a plane is explained with this principle. Air separates in front of the wing and reattaches at the back. When the upper surface of the wing is slightly curved and the bottom flatter, the air particles in the upper part travel a further distance at a higher velocity and meet the particles traveling under the wing at the back. The relatively higher velocity on top causes a pressure difference in the lift direction and this lift force balances the weight of the plane. Many applications of Bernoulli’s principle can be found in living organisms. A fish moving in water is a good example. In particular, fish that swim at great speeds, like the tuna, have distinctive body shapes: The mouth of the fish is at the front where the fluid comes to rest and the pressure is very high, making the fluid intake of oxygen easier. The heart is located at the minimum pressure point to make it easier for it to beat. The eyes are located on a precise saddle point, a place which is not affected by velocity changes. Since the pressure is constant for all ranges of velocities, vision is not distorted by movement. Another example is the human body. When one breathes in the fluid velocity in the nose increases and pressure drops. The outer pressure is higher than the inner pressure and the walls tend to collapse. If bones were found at the tip of the nose, they might easily break when excessive force was present. We need some other material to sustain the shape yet be elastic enough not to break down. Cartilage is the best choice in this case, as it has both strength and elasticity. Our ears are also made from the same material. If bones were used instead of cartilage in our ears, resting our head on one side would be painful or even cause damage to the ears.

Insect flight is another important issue and has attracted considerable research recently. Fluid scientists now realize that insect flight is much more developed than our flight techniques. Turbulence is the main issue. In turbulent flow, the fluids move in erratic paths colliding with each other, forming eddies and irregularities. This is a dangerous state, especially for planes, and increases the friction forces between fluid and structure. Therefore the maintenance of a regular flow (laminar flow) over the wings is advantageous. However, all insects benefit from turbulence and some portion of their lift is gained from eddies that are formed over their wings. Mechanical insect robots are built to understand insect flight. Insects have movable elastic wings, but aircraft only have immovable rigid wings. Movable elastic wings would certainly improve the flight of planes and their maneuverability, but extensive research has to be done before these designs can be safely implemented.

The bumps on the fins and heads of some whales are not accidents of nature. They were given to them by the Creator for some very special purposes. They decrease the friction (drag) force by 10% and increase the lift by 5%.1 When some have the effect of decreasing drag, they can also decrease lift and visa versa. This effect of both decreasing drag and increasing lift, which can be observed in whales, is very uncommon in fluid mechanics.

Streamlining is a very important issue for an object that moves in a fluid. Fluid particles move around an object that follows a path. Roughly speaking these paths are streamlines (in a steady motion) and it is a general rule that abrupt distortion of these streamlines should be avoided. Smooth changes in the streamline help to reduce the friction force between the object and fluid. All organisms, particularly those that move at greater speeds, have been created in accordance to streamlining principles. In these you can find many species of birds and fish, such as dolphins, sharks, whales etc. The friction reduction caused by the shape of a dolphin is still a controversial issue in science and the underlying mechanism has not yet been well understood.

An example of the strength of natural materials can now be given. Our bones are optimum structures, combining strength with lightness. In modern buildings, 60-70% of the buildings consist of the skeletons, which carry the loads and moments. In our body, our skeleton is only 1/7th of our body weight. Bones have inspired a new generation of lightweight structures. For instance, a bridge inspired by the backbone was recently designed.2 When a longitudinal cross-section is taken from a femur, some curved lines are observed. Recent numerical simulations revealed that these lines are to be found in one exact place and their configuration increases the strength of the bone. Our backbone and the muscles around it withstand very high loads, equivalent to 7,000 Newtons or approximately 700 kilograms of weight.3 The bones of mammals are hollow inside to increase strength. The inner to outer ratio of the radii is at the optimum range, between 0.4 and 0.7.4

Hardness is another important issue in some applications. Seashells are the leaders in this issue. Their microstructures are being investigated under electron microscopes to invent new materials with extreme hardness properties. Micro-cracks inside a material grow over time, finally leading to failure. This is a major problem in turbine blades and this phenomenon is responsible for some plane crashes. In seashells, micro-crack inhibiting mechanisms are inserted to prevent crack growth. Inspired by spider silk and the microstructure of bird feathers, a new generation of bullet-proof waistcoats has been developed.

Owls are very silent flyers; they need to be so in order to approach rodents as rodent ears are highly sensitive to sound. Recent investigations have shown that the special geometry of their wings results in this silent flight. Their feathers are placed to form fringes on their wings. The technology might be mimicked to reduce the noise generated in planes.5

A recent engineering discipline is robotics. There are industrial robots, which are designed to perform some very special tasks. But there are also robots inspired by living organisms. A new robot is designed to mimic caterpillar motion so that it can be stable enough in a hazardous region, pass through small gaps and detect humans who are alive under debris.6 By mimicking the motion and body of a scorpion, a military robot was designed with a camera and sensors to safely operate in a battle region.7 Of course there are human-like robots that are designed to mimic our motion and activities. The developments in robotics teach us a very important lesson: All animals are much more sophisticated in their locomotion, actions, and behavior and it is extremely hard to mimic those. A robot that can move freely like a cat and climb a tree yet maintain its balance has not yet been produced. Our robots are very slow in motion, and their stability in movement is an important technological issue that requires extensive sensors and control designs.

Newly developing engineering branches

As mentioned above, one of the newly developing branches of engineering is robotics. Day by day, better robots are being designed and those designs try to better mimic animals and humans. Some 50 years ago, a human walking might be considered a simple issue, but now we know that comfort in walking and excellent balance in such movement are very complex issues.3 Each new design in robotics adds to our knowledge of understanding animal locomotion and behavior and how miraculous their designs are. Some people think that robots may take control of the world in the future. Yet this is simply not possible: If humans are to design them, there is no way that such machines can be superior to the designers.

Other promising new fields are the MEMS (Micro-electrical machinery systems) and nano-technology. These are design attempts on extremely small scales which actually mimic some micro biological systems and micro-physics. A vertebrate consists of an enormous number of cells, while the chemical and physical events that take place inside the cells and their establishment as a system are crucial parts of staying alive. It is extremely hard to design at the micro and nano scale and it is likely that research in this field will reveal more about understanding the art of God.

Notes

1. M. Le Page, “Speed Bumps Give Humpbacks a Surprise Boost,” New Scientist, 13 January 2001, p. 22.
2. I. Sample, “A Bridge with Backbone,” New Scientist, 16 September 2000, p. 7.
3. R. Mc Neill Alexander, The Human Machine, Colombia University Press, 1992.
4. R. Mc Neill Alexander, Optima for Animals, Princeton University Press, 1996.
5. C. Seife, “Deadly Hush,” New Scientist, 6 march 1999, p. 10.
6. C. Zandonella, “Wriggle into Rubble,” New Scientist, 10 November 2001, p. 22.
7. D. Graham-Rowe, “Walk Like a Scorpion,” New Scientist, 21 April 2001, p. 18.

Even if the defenders of the theory admit it to be just a theory, it is still being presented to the masses as if it were a scientific fact. In fact, there is a great deal of evidence against the theory, and this accumulates, day by day. Recently, the claims of great genetic similarity between apes and human beings have been refuted. The article entitled, “Chimpanzee Chromosome Surprised,” published in Nature reveals that the genes of humans and chimpanzees are far more different than they were thought to be.

An interview was held with Dr Michael J. Behe, a leading American biochemist. Dr Behe, famous for his work criticizing the theory of evolution, has made important contributions to shedding light on the question of the true origin of life:

Dr Behe, could you tell us about your opinions concerning the scientific data given in the article published in Nature that proves the genes of humans and chimpanzees to be very different in reality?

A group of researchers from the University of Tokyo have compared all the letters on the alphabets of the 21st and 22nd chromosomes. The conclusion they arrived at is very remarkable, for it has turned out that there was a far greater difference between the two species, as opposed to what was formerly accepted. Darwin’s theory really gets into trouble here. As a matter of fact, the more we learn about biology, the more trouble Darwinism gets into. If we have a superficial knowledge of living beings, we think them to be simple and we can accept Darwinism, which tries to explain seemingly simple systems through small accidental changes. Within the last thirty years however, we have learned that life is incredibly complex, beyond our imagination. For instance, bacteria, seen by evolutionist taxonomy to be the simplest creatures, have minute but very complicated and perfect biochemical motors that enable them to move. The only way to explain how bacteria can have such a complex mechanism is to accept the existence of a supernatural creation.

Then what does the similarity between the different proteins, genes, and organs of different creatures signify?

Can they be considered as evidence supporting Darwinist claims?

No, similarities between different creatures first of all fail to answer the basic question of biology. That is, how did organs and systems so peculiar and complicated come to exist? Darwinism can give no answer to that.

On the other hand, there are surprising similarities even between the species that are thought to be very different from each other. Between humans and bacteria for instance. . . The question is: “Do these similarities constitute a picture compatible with Darwin’s theory?” In fact, they don’t, because the species which are supposed to be close relatives according to Darwinist claims sometimes turn up to be genetically different. Or some living beings that are supposed to be totally irrelevant to each other have very similar organs or genes. For example, the human eye and the eye of the octopus are almost the same. But of course this does not mean that we are relatives of octopuses. It is more logical to accept that these two eye structures do not come from a “common ancestor,” but from a design that emanates from “the knowledge of a single Creator.”

In my opinion, this concept of “design” is based on the theory of “intelligent design,” which you also support. Do you think this theory explains the similarities between living things better?

Yes, you can explain these similarities through design. We know that many designers or inventors use similar parts in different systems. For instance bolts, nuts, or cables are used in different devices. They are the best pieces to be used in the relevant mechanical systems. Of course, we cannot say that one device with a cable evolved from another. They were designed separately. The intelligent design theory is very consistent in its accounting for such similarities.

The intelligent design theory is sometimes severely criticized by defenders of Darwinism and they have tried to refute it. There is an inclination to present Darwinism as if it were an undeniable part of biology. What do you think is the reason behind this?

The reason is not scientific, but rather there is a philosophical and ideological aspect. Some scientists believe that we must explain the universe and life by natural factors alone. The basis for their belief is presumption that accepts the universe as a product of natural forces alone. But what if this is not so? Even when we see a pair of eyeglasses, we know that it is not a product of natural forces; we can infer that it was made by an intelligent and skilled optician. And life is thousands of times more complex than that. Therefore, we conclude that life must have been created as well. Here, the important point is evaluating scientific evidence without prejudice, as much as possible. Darwinists claim that science cannot accept a supernatural power. But until the mid-19th century, a great majority of scientists accepted the existence of a creative power, namely, God. The claim that science should be materialistic became widespread after Darwin. However, this claim increasingly conflicts with scientific evidence. Science should not try to give a materialistic explanation for life but rather to produce a correct explanation for life. Evidence should be analyzed, even if some people’s philosophical assumptions are disturbed.

Your book “Darwin’s Black Box” has been chosen as one of the most important 100 books of the 20th century by National Review magazine. In your opinion, what was it that made this book so important?

As a matter of fact, the reason for this was not the new and original information found in the book. I only showed the reader that in molecular levels of life there are very sensitive and complex systems and all these constitute evidence for a conscious planning and organization. When most people take a superficial look, when they consider plants, animals, birds, or fish, they can feel that there is some plan and program. But Darwin’s theory of evolution, which is taught in schools, tells us that this order and system in nature can be explained without a Creator. I think the greatest influence of my theory was to show that the Darwinist explanation was too superficial and misleading.

What do you think is the greatest challenge Darwinism faces?

The greatest problem for Darwinism is explaining how new biological structures, how new creatures, come into existence. Darwinism can shed light on how already existing biological structures may undergo small changes. For example, it can offer you an explanation about how the small differences in the beaks of finches in the Galapagos Islands appeared. But how did birds come to exist in the beginning? How did complex structures like the feathers or wings of a bird form? How did all the sensitive organs and systems like the brain, the eyes, the clotting of blood, all of which require several parts to work in perfect harmony, come to be? It is impossible for Darwinism to explain these, for each of these is a very complex structure that can function only when complete. The most consistent way to account for their origin is to accept the interference of a Conscious and Omnipotent Power, a supernatural Creator.

Do you have any expectations about the future of Darwinism? Do you think Darwinism will survive?

I believe that Darwinism is leaving the stage. It will be seen that explaining life through this theory is not possible and the theory will be abandoned. The process leading to this end has already begun. The reason for this is not what I and scientists like me are doing. The more we learn about life, the better we understand how complex it is. Scientists are beginning to realize that such complex structures cannot be attributed to purposeless and random mechanisms.

As we know, the supporters of Darwinism usually say that they think within scientific grounds, and those who oppose them base their ideas only on religious belief. The picture you are giving seems to be refuting this claim. Do you agree?

Yes, exactly. In the past people used to reject Darwinism on a religious basis. And the defenders of the theory so far have always claimed science to be on their side. But the surprising findings obtained since the last quarter of the 20th century have reversed the picture. Today, our rejection of Darwinism is not based on what we do not know; rather it is based on what we know. Now the followers of dogmatic thought are Darwinists themselves. We present them scientific evidence demonstrating that living beings are created in a planned and programmed fashion, whereas they reject this only due to their philosophical and ideological worldviews.

There are insistent narrow-minded defenders of old theories that occurred before scientific revolutions. But then science is victorious against false theories. I think this is what will happen to Darwinism soon.

Who is Michael Behe?

Dr Michael Behe, still teaching biochemistry at Lehigh University, shook the scientific world with his book Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution in 1997. The National Review magazine defined his work as “one of the most influential books of the 20th century.” In his book, Dr Behe has put forward a new theory called “the intelligent design” in order to explain the origin of life. Today, there are hundreds of scientists, several institutions and scientific foundations that support the intelligent design theory. As a result of these organizations, the Darwinist claims in the school books in Georgia, Ohio, and New Mexico states have been taken out. The debates concerning this in other states are still going on. The organization Discovery Institute, which leads the intelligent design movement, is presided by Bruce Chapman, one of the consultants of Ronald Reagan.

Human and Chimpanzee Genes Have Proven to Be Very Different

The latest scientific research for comparing the genetic structures of humans and chimpanzees has revealed there to be a far greater difference between the two species than was thought to be. In the research carried out by a group of scientists presided by Dr Todd Taylor in Riken Genome Science Institute in Yokohama Japan, human and chimpanzee genes were compared one by one for the first time. The conclusion surprised the scientists, who had expected to find a great similarity. Dr Taylor et al. published the result of their research in their article in the famous science magazine, Nature. In the article entitled “Chimpanzee Chromosome Surprised” the first detailed comparisonhas revealed that human and chimpanzee genes are unexpectedly different.

Formerly, it was claimed that there was a 98% similarity between human and chimpanzee genes as a result of some limited comparison, and this proof was often repeated in support of evolutionist claims. Dr Fujiyama et al. for the first time made a detailed research on the subject. The scientists who meticulously compared the 22nd chromosome of chimps and the 21st chromosome of humans, which are claimed to be similar, found that 68,000 DNA units in total were different. The researchers have stated that in the 231 genes they studied, they determined a great deal of difference, approaching 83%, and that 23% percent of the genes they studied were completely irrelevant.

Sydney Morning Herald newspaper commented on this result, saying “chimps are not as close to us as they were thought to be.” Dr Jean Weissenbach, the leader of Genoscope, a genetic research institute in France, agreed and pointed to the fact that chimpanzees have thousands of genes that are different from us.

Therefore, the products existing in nature should be far more sophisticated than ours. Investigating any species of plant or animal whether it be a microscopic or a giant creature, we reach the following conclusions: They have been specially designed to adopt their environment. They own the precise and perfect skills, organs and defence mechanisms, needed for their survival. They are so perfect that none of our engineering skills are enough to produce anything even approaching the quality of these organisms. We need also to mention that products in nature are alive, a concept which has not yet been precisely understood or described despite all our advances in technology and science. Examples supporting the above argument are innumerable, covering all branches of science. I will present only a few for illustration purposes. Fish flow in a medium of liquid. They are exposed to two components of pressure while swimming, the static pressure and the dynamic pressure. The static pressure is directly related to the weight of the water above them and does not vary while swimming at constant depths. However, this is not the case with dynamic pressure. It increases or decreases depending on the velocity of the liquid flow around the body. Researchers have found that the eyes of fish are precisely located on the body so that the dynamic pressure is always zero. This means that vision is not distorted while the fish are swimming at varying speeds. The heart of the fish is located at a point where the dynamic pressure is most negative. This enables the functioning of the heart to be much easier at high swimming speeds. The mouth is placed at the very front of the body where the total pressure is highest. This high pressure makes it easier to take water for oxygen during fast swimming. Consider another example, the octopus, which is one of the more primary creatures in the so-called evolution process.

For thousands of centuries, the octopus has been using the conservation of momentum principle. The octopus takes in water and propels it through a narrow pipe in a direction opposite to its line of movement. This jet propulsion principle has been effectively used in man-made motors only in this century. It should be evident then that these sophisticated designs and techniques cannot be generated by those animals themselves, still less randomly produced by the trial and error of blind (unguided) natural forces. The physical laws and the perfectly adapted designs must originate from the same source, the Supreme ‘Engineer’. This explanation is the most rational and logical. Other explanations, which attempt to attribute design and engineering skills to plants and animals or to blind and deaf nature, make no sense at all. Another example is the development of the embryo. From the manufacturing point of view, this development can only be explained by the term miracle. In engineering practice, the size of each part in a product is predetermined and manufactured separately. Those parts are then assembled together to form the final product. Let us call this type of manufacturing static manufacturing, since the sizes of the parts remain the same during assembling. In the case of an embryo, the sizes of organs are changing with time while a continuous assembling takes place under those conditions. New organs are created inside, without any interference from outside, developing in size over time, yet holding the assembly in a perfect condition at each interval of time. This process is an example of dynamic manufacturing which is, to put it bluntly, quite impossible for us to achieve. In usual manufacturing, the size of a part is smaller than the raw bulk of material from which it is produced, and some of the material is wasted. In some cases, moulds are used to achieve the desired shapes. In the creation of an embryo, however, there are no moulds at all, no spare parts thrown away, no wastage.

These manufacturing techniques are by far beyond the limits of humanity. Note that we have not yet mentioned the events that take place at the micro level inside the cells. Even a general glance at the global events shows us how extraordinary the development of an embryo is. A final example will be given from the mechanics of materials. For birds to be able to fly, they must balance minimum weight with maximum strength. Their bones can be considered as hollow pipes. Calculations reveal that the ratio of the inner radius of the bones to the outer radius is selected in the optimum way precisely so that, with minimum weight, maximum strength is achieved. We have not mentioned the macro creation process (cosmos, galaxies, solar systems etc.) since these topics are more related to pure sciences such as physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology etc. An understanding of creation, even then not comprehensive, requires knowledge of these pure sciences together with knowledge of engineering and design. The Creator of the earth and cosmos describes Himself as ‘the Best of Creators’ (Mu’minun, 23.14). The reader may consider what we have said here as a tiny effort towards understanding this verse.