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

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

Pauli Principle

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

The lotus, a radiant and graceful aquatic plant with a magnificent ability to repel dirt, has been the inspiration behind a range of self-cleaning and dirt-repelling technologies. Now a registered trademark, the “Lotus Effect” promises a future filled with objects that rarely, if ever, need washing. Finally, this means owning bathroom mirrors that unfog itself and shirts that shrug off ketchup and coffee.

And the earth, We have spread it out like a couch; and how excellent We are in spreading it. (Adh-Dhariyah, 51:48)

The factory of the universe and the guesthouse of the earth are so pure and clean and so untainted and fresh that … if … the act of cleansing is not attributed to the Creator of the universe, then … [e]ither all the creatures would have a share in the universal act of cleansing… or there would have to be a consultative committee the size of the universe in order to decide and regulate all those acts together… This is impossible not just once, but hundreds and thousands of times over. (4)

Have you ever come across a “stinky forest”? How about a “messy desert”? These questions are primarily posed as rhetoric since various means of sanitation is ubiquitous in nature (Stinky forests and lakes actually exist only thanks to pollution—a modern problem introduced by human intervention via misconduct of technology) where Lotus Effect is only one of the mechanisms contributing to the steady “house-keeping” in nature.

In muddy waters, the lotus plant stands out with its ever-clean leaves making it a symbol of purity in Asian cultures. Moreover, lotus leaves keep dry under even the heaviest monsoon rain. Such seemingly ironical feats are accomplished by capitalizing on a principle named after the plant itself: The Lotus Effect.

The Lotus Effect

At first sight, the cleansing of the leaves by the rainfall seems utterly trivial. However, the cleaning of the lotus plant (Nelumbo nucifera) by the downpour is not something to be taken for granted. Curiously, when raindrops encounter the lotus leaf, they adopt an almost perfectly spherical shape, resembling ball bearings, and start rolling off the surface carrying away all the dirt (Figure 1). Easier said than done, the lotus plant always keeps pristine, even at the microscopic level.

In the early 1970s, soon after the electron microscope (which can yield vivid images of the ultra small details that are at length scales on the order of a billionth of a meter) became commercially available, German botanist Wilhelm Barthlott (of University of Bonn, Germany) started imaging plants using the newly discovered technology. Sample preparations for electron microscopy normally demanded tedious cleaning procedures since even a speckle of dust could ruin the portrayed landscape at such minuscule scales. To Barthlott’s surprise, some plants apparently were “self-cleaning”: They required very little (or sometimes none whatsoever) cleaning for detailed inspection with the microscope and the lotus plant was a prince of these (1). Further intrigued by the fact, Barthlott looked at the lotus leaves through the electron microscope to find out what renders the lotus plant remarkably competent to repel even the tiniest dirt.

Water’s love-hate affair

Before delving into the secrets for lotus plant’s sanitation, let’s look at the interaction of water with other materials. At the molecular level, the electrical charges are unevenly distributed across a water molecule (i.e. water is highly “polar”) which becomes entangled in a love-hate type of relationship with other materials: Some materials “love” water tending to maximize their interaction with it, whereas others “hate” it, trying to avoid their encounter with water as much as possible.1 To put things in perspective, we can immediately tell from everyday experience that oil is “water-hating” since oil and water do not mix, while sugar is “water-loving” because sugar can dissolve in water without much effort.

Macroscopically—that is, one can immediately realize by touching a lotus leaf—the lotus leaf surface feels waxy, and should therefore be water-hating. However, the waxiness is not enough to equip the lotus plant with its unusual capabilities to remain clean since the lotus leaf is not alone among plants in its leaves’ surface waxiness. Indeed, there is more to the lotus leaf’s curious surface properties than that, a property which was first recognized by Barthlott under the electron microscope.

Super water-hating surfaces

When Barthlott looked at the lotus leaf, besides its spotlessness in the microscopic sense, the leaf surface was decorated with numerous bumps a few micron sizes each (a micron is one millionth of a meter). Such bumpiness served to enhance the water-hating aspect of the surface making it “super water-hating,” corresponding to a contact angle that is close to 170 degrees. As a result, water encountering the lotus leaf surface rapidly beads up forming a nearly spherical shape (akin to the scenario when one drips water on a hot cooking pan) and drops roll off the surface even with an ever-so-slight inclination of the leaf. Apparently, a rolling water droplet is much more effective in picking up the surface dirt than one that is merely sliding, and all the surface debris is thus wiped off.

Although discovered first in the lotus plant, the super water-hating surfaces are serving a passive yet effective means of cleaning for animals like butterflies, dragonflies and other insects that are not able to clean all their body parts actively. For plants, preventing the coverage of their leaves by water (or other contaminants) is important to maximize the exposure to sunlight which would otherwise cause reduced photosynthesis. Another great biological relevance of surfaces of such nature for all these creatures is that it provides protection against the growth of pathogens by keeping the surface dry at all times.

Inspirations from biology for technology

There are ever-growing biologically inspired technologies, so-called biomimetics, and the lotus effect provides a nifty example. Unfolding the mystery behind lotus’ exceptional competence in self-cleaning, Barthlott patented the idea of artificially manufacturing microscopically-raised, water-repelling surfaces to mimic the lotus leaf. “Lotus Effect” is now a registered trademark which underlies commercial products such as self-cleaning windows and fabrics, as well as a dirt-repelling paint. Other applications that are waiting around the corner are: swimsuits that stay dry for days allowing prolonged underwater excursions, coatings on metals to avoid the deposits of marine bioorganisms which would enable up to 40% reduction on fuel consumption by decreasing friction (2). Metal coatings will also find applications to prevent ice formation on plane engines alleviating their wear-and-tear (3).

Apparently, lotus does not collect dirt, but only patents.

Note

1 Contact angle is a metric for the water propensity of a surface. Water drop displays a higher contact angle (hence lower contact area) on a water-hating surface when compared to a lower contact angle (hence higher contact area) on a water-loving one.

References

1. Forbes, Peter. August, 2008. “Self Cleaning Materials,” Scientific American.

2. http://www.basf.com/group/

corporate/en/innovations/events-presentations/nanotechnology/basf

3. “Water-Repelling Metals,” Prachi Patel, MIT Technology Review, 2008, http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21530/

4. “The Thirtieth Gleam,” Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, Risale-i Nur Collection.

More specifically, groundwater represents 98% of the available fresh water on earth. The contamination of groundwater has increased significantly due to industrial developments over the last century. To illustrate how the modern human has had an impact on the environment, let us look at some numbers: In the United States alone, yearly 100 million tons of hazardous waste is generated and 4 million tons of toxic chemicals are released into streams; in addition, 1.2 million tons of toxic waste are emptied into landfills and 1.5 million tons are injected into deep wells for disposal. Again in the United States, of the 2 million underground storage tanks in gas stations, 450,000 are leaking gasoline and petroleum products to the subsurface. If these numbers do not impress you, remediation costs for contaminated sites in Europe are expected to exceed $1.5 trillion in the near future. These are only some of the impacts of heavy industrialization of which we are aware. The contaminants that are released into the environment severely threaten drinking water, agricultural, and surface waters.

The pollution process of the subsurface environment is ironically simple. Leaks from various contamination sources seep into the groundwater from where they travel and infiltrate the soil with which they come in contact. Contaminated soils and sediments slowly release these pollutants, which over long period of time have become a continuous source. Of course, all these contaminants can potentially cause cancer or have detrimental effects on the ecosystem or on human health. To give an example of how these pollutants easily spread around the globe, in a recent study of dairy products that were collected from countries all around the world, the same type of organic contaminant (PCB:

Polychlorinated Biphenyls) was found in those products that, for the most part, originated in the USA, although the usage and production of this contaminant has been banned since 1976. How have these pollutants managed to persist in the environment and travel all the way from USA to the rest of the world, even as far as Australia? There are several ways this can be done; first the released contaminant volatilizes into the air and travels, through atmospheric depositions of large quantities onto the grass that is eaten by the cow. Another way is that a fish swimming in contaminated fresh water is caught and becomes food at a dairy farm. This research exemplifies how the pollution of the environment can affect us, regardless of where we live on this planet.

It seems like a very gloomy picture though, if nobody is going to take any action against the contamination or clean up the toxic chemicals from vulnerable targets like drinking water sources or terrestrial lands. There are, of course, many precautions that have been undertaken to clean up the environment. This article is about one of the interesting ways in which we utilize microorganisms to clean up contaminated groundwater or drinking water.

It sounds a little strange for engineers to be dealing with bacteria that naturally exist and utilize them in cleaning up the environment. But this is what they are doing, using a technique called bioremediation, wherein natural microbes become stewards for destroying the pollutants in the environment. The simple technical description of bioremediation is the intentional use of the biodegradation process to eliminate environmental pollutants that have been intentionally or inadvertently released. The biodegradation used here is the microbial transformation process of toxic chemicals into nontoxic forms and sometimes mineralization into inorganic elements like carbon, oxygen and hydrogen.

This transformation, which is essentially a process of destruction, first requires the presence of microorganisms. These microorganisms almost always exist in nature, unless there are harsh conditions that prevent microbial growth. The microorganisms use inorganic or organic contaminants as their nutritional and growth source in the life cycle. For example, a commonly encountered organic contaminant, benzene, is composed of six carbon atoms and six hydrogen atoms. During the degradation process, the microorganisms synthesize enzymes that stimulate the breaking down of benzene into carbon dioxide and water or sometimes the simple elements of carbon and oxygen. These enzymes ease the reactions that produce cellular energy and the building blocks for the synthesis of new cells. In essence, the contaminant serves as a nutrient – food – so that the microorganism can continue its life.

The electron acceptors

During the process in which the microorganism feeds on the contaminant (the degradation process), the key issue is the electron acceptors, the complementary part of the chemical reaction that occurs during the biodegradation process. During the breaking down of the large organic molecules into small elements, excess electrons are released into the environment and therefore an electron acceptor is required to maintain the chemical equilibrium and continue the reaction mechanism. This necessity for oxygen or iron dioxide resembles the need for oxygen in our liver to break down the complex molecules that occur during energy production and new cell generation. The process is as simple as this: we breathe oxygen to live and so do microorganisms. Oxygen molecules act as convenient electron dumps for bacteria that usually lie near the soil surface. Depending on the electron acceptor types, degradation reactions are categorized as aerobic (using oxygen) or anaerobic (using nitrate, manganese, iron and sulfate as electron acceptors). Humans can only inhale oxygen, but most insects can utilize other molecules, like iron oxide or sulfur as well.

Moreover, in order to have a successful clean up, scientists need to satisfy chemical and nutritional requirements and this is challenging for engineers. As these electron acceptors are not always readily available, engineers supplement the electron acceptors in the contaminated environment by methods like pumping air into the ground. Sometimes the microorganisms that are necessary to degrade the potential pollutant do not exist and the engineers must first inject the bacteria so that they can consume the pollutants as food.

Geobacter

One of the microorganisms most frequently studied for its degradation potential for organic and inorganic contaminants is Geobacter metallireducens, or the geobacter. Since it was first discovered, more than 20 years ago, researchers at the University of Massachusetts have been studying this incredible creature; however, they admit that there are many things that they still do not know about it. The geobacter was the first organism found to oxidize organic compounds to carbon dioxide using iron oxides as the electron acceptor. In other words, the geobacter gains its energy by using iron oxides (a rust-like mineral) in the same way that humans use oxygen. The main nutrient for the geobacter can be organic or inorganic pollutants for, and it breathes iron oxide in the way the human inhales oxygen. The geobacter can consume soil and groundwater contaminants like benzene and the gasoline additive MBTE, even in an oxygen-free environment. The geobacter, which has been found almost everywhere, even living in the dental spit-sinks, also flourishes in uranium-contaminated sites, converting soluble radioactive material to a material that is insoluble in groundwater, therefore making it easier to isolate for cleaning up. At present the geobacter is being put to work in actual clean up projects. As our understanding of the functioning of the species has improved, it has become possible to use this information to modify environmental conditions in order to accelerate the rate of contaminant degradation.

More interestingly, researchers have discovered that the geobacter spits out unwanted electrons into the circuit while consuming contaminants for energy. The geobacter exhales electricity through 20 to 30 hair-like structures, just 3 to 5 nanometers in diameter, to its surroundings. Although there is hardly enough microbe-produced electricity generated to solve the world’s energy problems, a fuel cell measuring a cubic meter would generate 2 kilowatts, and some engineers are talking about powering sewage treatment plants with a type of geobacter that harvests off the sewage itself. Just to give an idea about the direction of future research, researchers are now working on a selected gene of the geobacter. The gene that limits electricity production will be modified so that electricity production can be boosted during the degradation process. Given that, it would not be surprising if there were technology that created energy while cleaning contaminated soil or groundwater.

Clean water is a basic need for every human being, and it is our moral obligation to work as stewards for the environment; the first thing we must do is to stop contaminating the planet. However, we are faced with resources that have been previously contaminated. As one result of an increasing sense of responsibility toward nature, we are at a point where we can use natural microorganisms or plants as clean-up tools. Although mankind harshly contaminates the environment while creating an industrial and technological world, it is quite ironic that we still rely on the marvels of such divinely ordained solutions to sustain life.

References

• Martin Alexander, Biodegradation and Bioremediation, 199, Academic Press, San Diego CA USA
• Pedro J. Alvarez, Walter A. Illman, Bioremediation and Natural Attenuation: Process Fundamentals and Mathematical Models, 2005, Wiley and Sons, NY, USA
• www.geobacter.org Geobacter project, University of Massachusetts, Amherst Environmental Biotechnology Center
• Jana Weiss, Olaf Papke, and Ake Bergman, A Worldwide Survey of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins, Dibenzofurans, and Related Contaminants in Butter, AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment Volume 34, Issue 8 (December 2005), pp. 589–597

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

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

Sub-atomic particles

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

Studies on matter and anti-matter

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

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

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

Why matter and anti-matter?

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

References

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

Notes

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

A group of scientists attempted to do just this; they used focused electron rays as their writing implement, rather than a pencil. Some researchers at Liverpool University developed a power source that can draw a line of light no thicker than the width of two atoms. This line is so narrow that if millions of them were to come together they would still fit inside the line drawn by the thinnest pencil lead. Drawing such lines would certainly not be something one could do by hand. The smallest vibration would cause the lines to converge. The only way to successfully do this is to send the electron rays by computer.

If we think that nearly 4 trillion atoms can fit on the head of a pin, which is accepted as being equal to one millimeter square, then we can understand how small atoms are. If we arrange the atoms as squares consisting of 100 atoms each, with 10 atoms at every edge, this means that we can get 40 billion of these squares on the head of a pin. We then put one letter into every one of those squares, with some squares being used as blank spaces between the words. If we think that on average there are six letters in a word, we can use 4.7 billion words to fill only 28 billion of our squares. There are nearly 50 million words in the Encyclopedia Britannica. Previously, it was thought that it would not be possible to fit the encyclopedia on the head of a pin, but now we can see that only one percent of the pinhead would be used up. Even if every letter were written ten times larger, it would still fit on the head of the pin. What a huge area a pinhead is! To see if their theory would work the researchers at Liverpool University placed one page of the encyclopedia on the pinhead.

One may wonder what use writing an encyclopedia on a pinhead could possibly be. We wouldn’t be able to read it, so is it not just a futile exercise? In the future, this technology may lead to some new developments, but for now, we can give an example about how this technology could be used by looking at the works of art created by the Divine Power. One of the wonderful examples of “books” in which atoms are used as letters is in the cell of a chromosome. God Almighty writes with His Pen of Power the coded programs and characteristics for living beings in the DNA molecules. The Human Genome Project has made it possible for us to read the genes in chromosomes; each of these can be compared to a library or a data bank. This development has shed a great deal of light on the biological secrets and features of the human being, which can be considered to be a “minor universe.”

How can so much knowledge fit into the DNA? DNA molecules are found in the chromosomes, which are packaged in the form of chromatin in the nucleus of a cell. If a DNA molecule was unfolded and each piece was to be laid side by side, it would measure up to 6 meters. In order to understand how many atoms can be found on such a long DNA, the following example may be of some assistance: if we place 75 million hydrogen atoms next to one another we make a hydrogen chain that is 1 cm. long. As each chromosome is 6 meters, and there are 46 chromosomes in a cell, the total length of the chromosomes in just one cell is approximately 300 meters. Now, if we remember the two-atom wide line drawn by the researchers at Liverpool University with the electron rays, (i.e., a million times thinner than the line drawn by a pencil), then we can imagine how small the DNA chain is in its folded state. In fact, this means to compress human being called micro cosmos as chromosome in 1/100.000 or 1/1.000.000 of one cm. Of course, this miraculous task is not the work of lifeless and unconscious beings called atoms or the result of confused coincidences, but must be the work of God, Whose every job is miraculous and Whose knowledge and power is eternal.

The Qur’an on an atom

Now, can the Qur’an be written on an atom? Since atoms are too small to be seen with the naked eye, let’s think of an apple that is the size of the earth; thus we will better be able to see the atoms, and the subject will be more easily understood.Like everything, an apple is also made of atoms. In such a huge apple, an atom is the size of a football. But still we cannot see the nucleus of the atom, including the neutron and proton. The space between the nucleus and the electron is a vast distance in the scale we are using. The radius of this distance is a ratio of 1/100,000 for the electron to the atom. If we imagine this electron to be in the size of a marble with a radius of 1 cm, this means that the nucleus is 1,000 meters away from the marble. When we enlarge the nucleus to the size of a football, the smallest atom (e.g. the hydrogen atom) is a sphere with a 2,000 meter radius. Then, how many Qur’an copies can we write using electrons, which are as big as marbles, or neutrons and protons which are 1,836 times larger than electrons, as letters. The Qur’an can be written 10 times, maybe even a 100 times on such a huge surface. One of the important things to note in these examples is that atom are almost entirely hollow. If we try to fill atom with nuclei, we need as many nuclei as 1015. If we write the Qur’an not only on the surface of the atom, but also on the inside and the cavities of that huge sphere, then thousands of Qur’an copies, each of which has 300,620 letters, can be written using atom nuclei as letters.

Amazing similarity

There are a hundred trillion cells in one person, whereas, the science of the human being can be summarized in just one cell. But from the aspect of what is contained in just one cell, the human being is more profound than the greatest written works. If a cell were conscious, most probably it would be just as amazed that it can be the index of humans as we are amazed at the concept that we are the index for the universe.

A human being is 1028 times larger than an atom. The sun is 1028 times larger than a man. This cannot be coincidence; therefore, must there not be some relation between the human, the atom and the sun?

The world is nothing more than one point in the solar system; a person is also like one point in the world. The Owner of the Book of the Universe, when summarizing this Divine Book known as the universe, encapsulated it in the human being, and when summarizing humans He encapsulated them in the tiny book written with the atoms called the genome. It is an interesting fact that the Exalted Creator created the solar system similar to the system in the atom. This indicates that the Creator of the universe is the same as the Creator of human beings. He created spheres like the sun and all other complicated systems and the atom to make us think about His artistry and to astonish us with their beauty.

“Ever since the beginnings of modern science, four or five hundred years ago, scientific thoughts seem to have moved humankind and consciousness further from the centre of things. More and more of the universe has become explicable in mechanical, objective terms and even human beings are becoming understood by biologists and behavioral scientists. Now we find that physics, previously considered the most objective of the sciences, is reinventing the need for the human soul and putting it right at the centre of our understanding of the universe!” (Rae 2004)

The last century has witnessed a new scientific approach with the development of the quantum theory. The theory has been tested to such a degree that it has become the scientific theory on which the most experiments have been carried out of all time. Probably this is partly due to the fact that it is the most mind-provoking theory to date. Nevertheless, the new theory has passed all these tests and has been confirmed as being more complete in explaining the cosmos than any previous theory. The quantum theory has shown that the old approach of a mechanical universe was an oversimplification employed to explain the physics of the universe. One of the most important consequences of this is that the quantum theory refutes the main foundations of positivist philosophy. This philosophy sees the universe consisting of what we can observe or measure, with everything beyond not being real. This denial also applied to knowledge that came from religions, and this resulted in the present conflict between religion and science. However, today even modern science says that the universe cannot be limited to what we observe. The very basic principles of quantum physics show the possibility that the vast majority of life or the states of life are beyond the scope of our observations and that we have no way of knowing about them via physical means.

Although positivist philosophy dates back to the 16th century, it was August Comte who defined it in a systematic way in the mid-19th century. The Harper-Collins dictionary defines Positivism as “the view that all true knowledge is scientific.” Positivism includes the view of reductionism which claims that everything in the universe, including astrophysical systems, complex biological systems, social movements, cultural values, and belief systems can all be reduced to simple physical and chemical events. Probably one of the most unfortunate outcomes of this approach was the questioning of belief systems with the tools of the scientific method. In one of his articles Fethullah Gulen says:

“The massive influence of positivism and materialism on science and on all people of recent centuries makes it necessary to discuss such arguments. As this now-prevalent “scientific” worldview reduces existence to what can be perceived directly, it blinds itself to the far vaster invisible dimensions of existence.”(Gulen 2006)

Such arguments against religion that spring from materialism have gone worldwide, and all religious faiths have been questioned. Even the faithful has been confused by these arguments, consciously or unconsciously. Although scientific knowledge should be only one source of knowledge, it was considered to be the only source. In Huston Smith’s words, this was a “blank check” to science to make decisions (Smith 2001).

It should be clarified that the early founders of both classical and modern physics did not perceive science in a positivist way. Copernicus and Newton at the birth of classical physics and Einstein, Dirac, and Planck at the birth of modern physics, all had religious convictions and envisioned science as a part of knowledge. Einstein was even accused of being a theologian in disguise by some scientific historians. It was the positivist philosophy which took advantage of the scientific developments and used it against religion, resulting in the apparent conflict today. However, new developments in science have proven that the basic assumptions of positivism are no longer valid from a modern perspective. Thus positivism should be nothing but an outdated ideology.

From quantum physics to metaphysics

Quantum mechanical behavior emerges when one observes phenomena at microscopic scales. One of its novelties can be seen in that it offers a more comprehensive atomic model. The new atomic model has very important applications to our life, ranging from making lasers to producing computer chips. The early understanding of an atom was that there was a nucleus at the center and electrons circulating around it, like in the planetary systems (the Bohr model). Although this was a great achievement at the time it was proposed, later scientists realized that classical physics cannot explain the circulation of the electron around the nucleus. In such a model the electron should lose energy and eventually collapse into the nucleus.

In the quantum mechanical definition the electron is more like a wave around the nucleus than a particle. So the electron is not really a particle orbiting around the nucleus, but rather more like a cloud that is spread evenly around. Sometimes the electron is called a particle because it acts like a particle in some experiments. As seen in this example, in a quantum mechanical measurement we cannot find an answer to “what the electron really is,” but rather we find an answer to “how it responds to a particular setup.” The actual stuff is a neither a particle nor a wave. We are rather measuring one form of its behavior which is compatible with our experimental system. Then according to the quantum theory, there is no a way to completely understand this actual stuff with measurements.

Above we gave the famous measurement problem, which forms the heart of the quantum theory. Although what we are dealing with looks like a physical problem, “the measurement problem” has far reaching philosophical consequences. The basic problem is that we need to know what this actual stuff looks like so that we can have an answer to the question of “what it really is.” However, any explanation should be able to explain the transition from a quantum physical system into the macroscopic system in which we live so that we can have a meaningful model. Otherwise, paradoxes are inevitable (you can read about the famous Schrödinger’s cat thought experiment if you are interested.)

The most complete and satisfying answer comes from the Copenhagen interpretation (Frayn 2000). It was proposed by Neil Bohr, one of the prominent figures in the development of the theory. Debates lasting for months or longer, especially between N. Bohr and A. Einstein, ended up with the victory of Bohr’s ideas. According to the Copenhagen interpretation, the actual stuff is neither a wave nor a particle but is something not physical; rather it exists only in knowledge. This knowledge collapses into a physical state when somebody measures it. So the new theory suggests a very abstract approach to the universe as opposed to the old mechanical model. The famous astrophysicist Sir James Jeans wrote,

“The stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Human mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter.” (Jeans 2002)

Scientists think that the true picture of the actual stuff can never be completely understood in this physical universe because we are limited by our physical tools. There may be other states, but we have no tools to understand them or get to know about them since we are limited by the tools of this universe. This is the point where the new physics talks about other dimensions which are beyond the observable and measurable universe. But this is exactly what philosophy calls “metaphysics.” So we see that the new physics not only accepts the existence of other metaphysical realms, but it even says that they must exist for completeness!

The necessity of human consciousness

A concern comes to mind about what is unique in this measurement process that results in the ultimate transition from a knowledge system into a physical system. How can the detector in an experiment result in this transition? The answer from the Copenhagen interpretation is very surprising. The detector cannot be the cause for this transition, because it does not make any changes in the system before or after the measurements are carried out. That is, these tools we use to make the measurements do not change anything in the nature of the system. Not even the eyes of the observers or the brain that is making this measurement can do this, as they are no different than the experimental apparatus, except that they are more complex. They are just part of the experimental system in this chain, like mechanical detectors. The chain continues until it ends up in the human consciousness, which is something non-material as any physical identification would put it in the same category as the previous members of the chain. Then the unique role of the human action enters the system; measurement is part of the knowledge in the mind. With this measurement, the human consciousness becomes aware of it. This is the unique property that the human being has which cannot be attributed to any other objects and it plays a central role in the interpretation of the quantum theory.

We infer that human consciousness is something immaterial and behaves quite differently than any other entity in the universe. Interestingly, the distinction of the physical and spiritual side of human beings is found in the teaching of religions, which we now see in the context of modern physics. This is a very important reconciliation between science and religion and it is also reassuring that we are not like any other objects in the universe!

Is materialism coming to the end?

With the new developments in physics, a materialistic worldview seems to be a simple look at life and existence. We remember the classic statement of materialistic philosophy “I only believe what I can see or measure in the laboratory.” Quantum physics would respond to this by saying: “it is not that simple!” We see that there are no contradictions between the new physics and the teachings of religions. We do not know how God creates life in hereafter, hell, and heaven. But one thing we do know is that their existence does not contradict the modern scientific worldview. Also the realms of invisible creatures (like angels and the devil) and their interactions with our physical world cannot be understood with science. Modern physics says we should not seek knowledge of these through science. They can only be known by what is told to us in our holy books and by the prophets.

The extreme approach of materialism to the human being is that the human is the most complexly evolved biological mechanism in the universe and in theory its consciousness and other feelings can be reduced into chemical reactions. This approach is in complete contradiction with modern physics. Modern physics says the human being is totally distinguished from other beings with their non-material consciousness. So we see that modern science removes the human being from the ignorance of materialism and puts it into the center of the universe. This is the same thing that religions have been saying since the creation of Adam and Eve!

As people of the 21st century, we can see that the discoveries of modern science does not contradict faith. We see that modern science is widening its horizons by identifying metaphysics as being part of the reality. In the words of the 20th century scholar Said Nursi, “…the light of conscience is religious sciences. The light of the mind is modern sciences. Reconciliation of both manifests the truth. The student’s skills develop further with these two (sciences). When they are separated, from the former superstition and from the latter corruption and skepticism is born.” A similar statement by Einstein is “…I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

References

• Rae, Alastair. Quantum Physics: Illusion or Reality, Cambridge: 2004.
• Gulen, M. Fethullah, Questions and Answers about Islam, The Light, Inc., NJ: 2006.
• Smith, Huston. Why Religion Matters: The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Disbelief, HarperSanFrancisco: 2001.
• Frayn, Michael. Copenhagen, Anchor:2000.
• Jeans, Sir James. The Mysterious Universe, The Macmillan Company, 1932.
• Henry, Richard Conn. “The Mental Universe,” Nature, 436, 7 July 2005.

When speaking of a huge emptiness in between the elementary particles, the French philosopher Jean Guitton (1901–1999) gives the following example:

Think of the proton of the oxygen nucleus as the size of a pinhead; then the rotating electron would draw a circle that traverses the Netherlands, Germany and Spain (assuming that the center of this orbit was France, as Guitton lived there). Therefore, if all the atoms that make up my body were close enough to touch one another, you wouldn’t be able to see me at all. [I] would be a particle of dust, just one thousandth of a millimeter.

If we could enlarge an apple to the size of the world, each atom, proportionally, would be the size of a football. We would then be able to learn everything about the atoms by taking one of those atoms and examining it in our hands, wouldn’t we?

No, we wouldn’t!

It isn’t this easy. Even if an apple were to be the size of the world, it would still be too small to attain enough information about its atoms. If we want to see the nucleus of the atom, we must enlarge it to the size of a town, not a football. Then the nucleus, which is the size of a football, is in the middle, and one of the electrons, orbiting 1 kilometer away, would be no larger than a walnut.

Now let’s apply this example to the hydrogen atom, which is the smallest atom. If the nucleus of a hydrogen atom were enlarged to the size of a football then the atom itself would be a sphere with a diameter of 2 kilometers.

Quantum field

The discovery of the atom is in fact the discovery of empty space. It might sound strange to hear the words “huge” and “emptiness” in the same sentence when talking about the atom.

One night, a pessimist, an optimist, and a physicist were looking at the cloudless sky. The pessimist said, “What a great emptiness,” while the optimist said, “There are countless stars.” The physicist, on the other hand, couldn’t say anything, because he wasn’t sure whether what they had seen was a vast amount of objects or a vast field of emptiness.

The developments in modern physics in recent years have changed concepts such as, “substance,” “particle,” and “vacuum.” Vacuum is usually defined as “the living environment, life breath, or energy” of the universe.

The vast vacuum that physicist sees in the sky is what we call the quantum field

The quantum field is formless and shapeless. It is the field of all forms and the basic essence of the universe. The durable and solid substance that we call a particle is the condensation of this field into small units. The quantum field is the environment of activity, transportation, and communication, all at the same time. It is noteworthy that this approach is very close to the ancient approach that claims that space is full of ether.

Albert Einstein defined matter as the space region in which this field was extremely condensed. According to the understanding of the new physics, both the matter and the field of the matter are the same thing.

According to quantum physics, all matters in space are like islets in an ocean, and are connected to each other through subjacent earths. In the concept of a quantum field, space is a stable integrated whole and unity of waves and these interactions happen in “waves.”

Vacuum is not emptiness

The vacuum was once believed to be a place with nothing inside it. However, the universe has a beginning, and everywhere in this universe was once a single place that later came into existence. Therefore, it is impossible for a place in which “there is nothing” to exist in the universe. In brief, subsequently, there must have been something everywhere that has been created. Just as there is no dry place in the sea, there cannot be any emptiness in this sea of existence that was created out of nothing. Underlining this truth, quantum physics defines the universe as a whole and says there is no emptiness in the absolute sense. In other words, the universe in which there is no “empty” space is a world that has been “called into being.”

If everything around us, even human beings, consists of atoms, most of which are made up of emptiness, and if in fact the actual physical structures that compose our bodies are so few, then why can’t we go through walls or closed doors, like cartoon characters? What makes matter so solid and durable?

In fact it is not easy to answer this question. Electrons are created in small places, like atoms, and have been given phenomenal speed. An electron moves at 1,000 kilometers per second (that means it rotates one million times around the nucleus). As a result of this phenomenal speed, the atom becomes a tough and solid mass. We can compare this to airplane propellers that appear to be a solid and flat surface when spinning.

The amazing electron

The features of electrons, such as being able to pass through two holes in an obstacle at the same time (no other particle can do this) have astonished scientists and brought out a metaphysical dimension that are beyond the wave nature of light. The granular structures of subatomic particles contradict the understanding of matter. According to the findings of quantum mechanics, the particle is in fact nothing but a dynamic effect and movement. The particles can be composed of energy or they can be entirely converted to energy. The classical concept of elementary particle is becoming obsolete in today’s world.

Nevertheless, the changes in our perception of matter do not necessarily mean matter is unreal. The truth is that particles of matter do not have a constant reality or an independent essence, in contrast to what has been assumed. Whatever seems to be or is reflected as matter, energy, or value, or whatever we call it, is nothing but the manifestation of the Divine Names of the Creator Who created “nothingness.”

Think of a shadow play. The image that the audiences see on the curtain, which is far from the source of light, is not “real.” The real thing is another object that is in front of the source of light or behind the curtain. What we see is the reflection of the object itself or its movements. If we don’t know how this play has been staged, we may think that the image on the curtain is real. Even though there is an image on the curtain, it does not have its own existence and is not real. In the same way matter exists but its existence and its being in this condition is not something under its control.

Before the realm of the quantum was discovered, Newtonian physics had accepted matter as being solid, durable, and constant. Everything we touch, such as walls, trees, and all the objects we see have the solid and durable condition of matter. But if one looks at an object through an electron microscope, they will see that 99% is vacuum and 1% is light. We can form circle of light if we swing a light source in a dark room. If we add a second, third, and fourth source, and move them so that they can form illuminated spheres, someone who is observing from a distance will perceive a three-dimensional sphere instead of a two-dimensional illuminated circle. Thus, we can understand that by increasing the number of spheres we form a three-dimensional model of matter. According to quantum physics, matter found in the universe is pretty much like this example. In short, matter does not consist of a combination of solid particles. There is almost no difference between the “building stone” of human beings and the image of human on television. And we can say that just as the television broadcast disappears when there is a power cut, it is also possible for this universe, which seems so permanent, to disappear with one command.

A television broadcast is constantly being renewed through the transmission of pictures and sound by means of electronic signals. As in the example above, if our existence is like the image on television, then can we say that the universe is also being renewed every second like a TV broadcast?

None of the objects we see (trees, birds, humans, etc.) take their existence from the concrete reality of the matter that we perceive. Thus, they must receive their existence from the power and the names of the Creator Who creates everything out of nothing and keeps it in perpetual motion. In brief, although created out of nothing, existence is being created all the time.

A brief history of lasers

During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, scientists made many improvements to our life. One of the most important was a more accurate understanding of light, currently defined as traveling electromagnetic waves. Like the ocean’s waves, light also has an amplitude (which determines its power) and a frequency (which determines its color and energy). The better we understand light, the more uses we find for it in our life. For example, today we are faced with many technological devices based on light, such as printers, CD writers and readers, and fiber optic devices for telecommunications.

Many scientists are very interested in photons, for they can be used in communication, computation, and many other fields. Also, many researchers think that the technology of the future will be built on optoelectronics”photons and electrons.

The invention of lasers is a very important step in the science of optics. While lasers started out as a major component of science fiction stories, science fiction is rapidly becoming scientific reality due to continual improvements and discoveries.

Lasers defined

By definition, a laser is amplified light. However, its amplification is very different from a normal amplification, for this amplification makes the photons coherent by causing them to have the same energy and same direction. Such coherence enables a laser light to travel over long distances without diverging. If the laser beam is kept in a dispersionless media, theoretically it can keep the same waist size forever. However, the only media that currently can serve as a dispersionless media is a vacuum.

In a laser system, many atoms have to have electrons in the same high energy levels. If this is the case, any effect that stimulates the atoms’ system will emit coherent light. For the emission to continue, the system should be constructed so that there are always some electrons changing their energy level.

Observing several laser systems will give us a clearer understanding of lasers.

Ruby lasers

The first lasing structure was the ruby crystal (see Figure 1), devised by Dr. T. H. Maiman in 1960. This was a surprising development, for researchers thought that gases would be the first lasers. The ruby crystal is Al2O3 (called sapphire), and has an impurity level of 0.05% Cr+3 ions.

The ruby laser consists of a ruby crystal surrounded by a flash tube enclosed within an aluminum cylindrical cavity that is cooled by forced air. The laser cavity is pumped by a flash light. When the light’s power exceeds a certain limit, it begins to re-excite some ions inside the ruby crystal to higher state. The cavity ends are coated with evaporated silver. However, one side has a lower reflection ability so that some light can pass through it.

Gas lasers

Most elements and many molecules can be made to lase in a gaseous state. The first example of a gas laser is the HeNe (helium neon) laser, as depicted in Figure 2. In a high voltage tube, colliding helium and neon atoms transfer energy to neon atoms, which then assume a meta-stable state. After this, spontaneous emission occurs when neon atoms transit from a higher energy level to lower energy level. Like other lasers, the HeNe laser also needs to have a population inversion. The high population for neon’s meta-stable state is achieved by applying a high voltage to the tube. Although the stimulated emission decreases the number of atoms in the meta-stable state, the high voltage pumps the system back into the population inversion condition.

Having many different wavelengths (colors), HeNe laser are useful for all sorts of applications, from semiconductor technology to construction leveling.

Improvements in semiconductor technology have made many contributions to laser technology. Data storage on CDs, computer, printers, and telecommunication tools are just a few examples of the places where semiconductor lasers are used.

Semiconductor lasers

Three different materials have the properties necessary to serve as electron (carrier) conductors: metals, insulators, and semiconductors. Metals are good conductors for carriers, whereas insulators do not conduct electricity. In a solid state material, electrons stay in the bands determined by the attraction between positive and negative charges (electrons and nucleus). The further band for an electron is called the conduction band. In metals, the conduction band is partially filled, while in insulators the conduction band is totally empty. There is also a very large energy difference between the conduction band the valence band (the band just before conduction band). Thus, a large amount of energy has to be supplied in order to produce some carriers in the conduction band.

Conduction occurs when electrons are present in a conduction band, for they are somehow free in that band. They are not so free that they can escape it, but they are free enough to walk around in it. Research is revealing many other surprises or gifts that the All-Wise Creator has put in front of us.Our discovery of certain materials’ ability to serve as insulators and/or conductors has made our life much easier.

A very important step in the field of semiconductors is the use of optics during experiments. The electron in the conduction band can loose energy by radiating light, and one can use this energy to build lasers. The laser’s wavelength mainly depends on the energy gap between the conduction and the valence bands. If this energy gap is known, researchers can grow appropriate semiconductor structures to lase.

As growth techniques for semiconductors improve, the quality and variety of semiconductor lasers increase. Early semiconductor lasers were built from bulk structures. But after the 1980s, scientists discovered that layering different semiconductors could increase optical efficiency. The commercial state-of-art now is semiconductor quantum well lasers. In these structures, the electron’s mobility is restricted on a plane, giving carriers a two-dimensional freedom. Lasers using quantum dots (quasi-zero dimensional structures with superior optical properties) also have appeared during the last 5 years.

Conclusion

To see how our life will change via improvements in optics, just look at how fast communication has become, thanks to telecommunication lasers. Old thick and slow copper wires are being replaced by fast thin fibers. A computer and a camera gives one access to visual telecommunication via the Internet. All of this used to belong to science fiction. Not any more!

I believe that one we will develop a technology to transport material instantly, as stated in Qur’an: One who had knowledge of the Book said: I will bring it to you within the twinkling of an eye! When (Solomon) saw it placed firmly before him, he said: This is by the Grace of my Lord! – to test me whether I am grateful or ungrateful! If anyone is grateful, truly his gratitude is (a gain) for his own soul. But if any is ungrateful, truly my Lord is free of all needs, supreme in honor! (27:40).

In conclusion, we have to learn how to read the Book of the Universe and to understand it so that we can make even more beneficial discoveries.

References

• Arakawa, Y. and H. Sakaki. Multidimensional Quantum Well Laser and Temperature Dependence of Its Threshold Current. Appl. Phys. Lett. 40, no. 11 (June 1982): 939-41.
• Davis, Christopher C. Lasers and Electro-Optics: Fundamentals and Engineering. Cambridge Univ. Press: 1996.
• Hecht, Eugene. Optics. 4th ed. Addison-Wesley: 2001.
• Hitz, Breck et al. Introduction to Laser Technology. 3d ed. IEEE: 2001.
• http://home.achilles.net/~jtalbot/
• Kirstdter, N. et al. Low Threshold, Large T Injection Laser Emission from (InGa) as Quantum Dots. Electron. Lett. 30, no. 17 (Aug. 1994): 1416-17.
• Ledentsov, N. N. et al. Quantum-dot Heterostructure Lasers. IEEE J. Select. Topics Quantum Electron. 6 (May-June 2000): 439-51.
• Maiman, Theodore. The Laser Odyssey. Laser Press: 2000.
• Svelto, Orazio (ed.). Principles of Lasers. Translated by David C. Hanna. 4th ed. Plenum Publishing Corp.: 1998.