Fuel cells are very promising chemical energy conversion devices. Though the first fuel cell was made by William Grove in 1839, they’re just now being explored as a real energy alternative (1). Let’s take a look at how they work: in a fuel cell, electricity is generated by the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen, which forms water. They are similar to batteries and internal combustion engines (ICEs): just as in a combustion engine, where fuel is oxidized, the oxidization of hydrogen generates energy. They’ll work as long as fuel is provided.

Despite these similarities there are some differences that make fuel cells more attractive than batteries and ICEs. A fuel cell works more efficiently and quietly than engines do. When hydrogen is used as fuel, power and drinking water are produced as by-products (2). Having safe by-products answers our concerns regarding older power sources. A battery is dead if it is not re-chargeable; however a fuel cell can be continually reused.

Fuel cells are generally defined by the type of electrolyte used in the cell, and they operate at different temperatures. Alkaline fuel cells (AFCs), proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), and direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs) are called low-temperature fuel cells. Phosphoric acid fuel cells (PAFCs) are an intermediate-temperature fuel cell. Molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs) and solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) are called high-temperature fuel cells (3, 4).

They have been mainly used for stationary, transportation, and portable applications. Since the need for electricity in daily life has dramatically increased, reliable and efficient power supplies have become necessary. Over 2,000 stationary fuel cell systems have been built in hotels, schools, and hospitals. Stationary power generation is considered more commercialized among the other fuel cell applications. Today, these systems have reached an efficiency of 40% when a hydrocarbon is used as fuel. Fuel cell systems are also used in telecommunication systems, and these cells provide power between 1 and 5 kW (5).

Fuel cells have been identified as the most probable alternative power source for transportation applications in place of internal combustion engines (ICEs). There are two distinct features of fuel cells that make them a better choice than ICEs. First, their carbon dioxide gas emissions are nearly zero. Second, fuel cells are much more efficient than ICEs – about two to three times (6). Ballard Power Systems have been developing zero-emission-vehicles by using PEMFCs, which have low operating temperatures and a higher power density.

NASA decided to use fuel cells on American spacecrafts in the 1960s. The advantage of using them in spacecraft was that while they were generating electric power, they produced drinkable water for the astronauts. A fuel cell was used as an integral part of the power supply PEMFCs (1kW) in the Gemini crafts and AFCs (1kW) in the Apollo crafts, both of which were a part of NASA’s human spaceflight programs (6).

Portable applications of fuel cells offer electrical power when reaching the electrical grid is not possible. When they are used as power sources outdoors, they help to avoid air and noise pollution (4). Because these portable fuel cells are lighter and more durable than batteries, they have been considered as alternative power sources for mobile phones, laptop computers, and some electronic devices (5). They are also used by the military in battle. A 4 kW PEM generator was built for the U.S. military by Intelligent Energy Ltd., out of Europe (7). Since direct methanol fuel cell systems are much lighter than the indirect systems, they are mostly used as portable power systems.

Although fuel cells have benefits when compared to other power sources, they are not widely used because of their high cost. In 2010, the Energy Information Administration released that the cost of fuel cells is $6.83 per installed watt, which is almost 7 times more expensive than a natural-gas turbine generator plant (8). In 2008, the Honda Clarity produced one of the first hydrogen-powered automobiles; these require very expensive catalysts: platinum (9). A catalyst makes the chemical reactions occur faster. Platinum is still the best catalyst, so this explains the prohibitive cost. A cheaper substitute for platinum is needed for use in automobiles. Another problem is that hydrogen is widely used as fuel for transportation applications. Until there is a sufficient hydrogen infrastructure, car manufacturers will find it hard to mass produce cars that use fuel cells.

Cetin is a freelance science writer.

References

1. Grove, W. R. (1839). On voltaic series and the combination of gases by platinum. Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, Series 3,14, 127-130.
2. Hoogers, G. (2003). Fuel Cell Technology Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
3. Mekhilef, S., Saidur, R., Safari, A. (2012). Comparative study of different fuel cell technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 16, 981-989.
4. Gencoglu, M. T., Ural, Z. (2009). Design of a PEM fuel cell system for residential application. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34, 5242-5248.
5. Andujar, J., Segura, F. (2009). Fuel cells: History and updating. A walk along two centuries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13, 2309-2322.
6. Iovine, John. “Fuel Cells.(composition, energy-generating processes and industry developments and innovations).” Poptronics. Poptronix, Inc. 2001. Retrieved May 17, 2012 from High Beam Research: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-69015426.html
7. Cowey, K., Green, K., Mepsted, G., Reeve, R. (2004). Portable and military fuel cells. Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science 8, 367-371.
8. Administration, U. E. (2010, November). Updated Capital Cost Estimates for Electricity Generation Plants. Retrieved from http://205.254.135.24/oiaf/beck_plantcosts.
9. Muller, R. A. (2012). Energy for Future Presidents: The Science Behind The Headlines. New York: W.W. Norton Company, Inc.

A small-scale blueprint of the universe, the human body is a miraculous work of art that manifests the beautiful divine names and attributes of God Almighty. A human body is made up of a set of hierarchically organized components: an organ system, organs, tissues, cells, organelles, macromolecules, molecules, atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, and subatomic particles. In this biological organization, it is striking to observe a proportionately allocated space between components on each level for their efficient functioning. The size of human body would be reduced if these spaces between organs, tissues, cells, and atoms could be removed, and the entire human body would not be bigger than a small ball.

The structure of an atom explains a lot concerning the real size of our body, which is filled with space. An atom is comprised of protons and neutrons in its nucleus, around which electrons continuously orbit. The mass of neutrons is almost equal to the mass of protons. Electrons, however, are 1,837 times smaller in mass than neutrons and protons. That is, almost 99.95% of the atom’s mass is in its nucleus. The mass of electrons is almost non-existent compared to the nucleus.

Both the universe and our body are filled with more hydrogen than any other atom. In each one billion atom in our body, six hundred thirty million are hydrogen atoms. In a hydrogen atom, electrons rotate only 0.53 nm (one billionth of a meter) away from the nucleus, which makes the atom’s volume to be around 6.10^-28m³, whereas the volume of the proton is 7.10^-45m³, i.e., the nucleus is only as big as one hundred quadrillionth (100.10¹⁵) of the atom’s total volume. In other words, while the nucleus comprises almost the entire mass of the atom, its volume is of no considerable size. The density of protons in the nucleus is 2,3.10¹⁷ kg/m^{3 (where does the period go here??)}, which means that there is around a hundred trillion tons of matter in only one cubic meter. If we could gather all neutrons and protons in one spot, a man who is 69 kg would be only 3.10^-7 mm³ in volume. That is, the volume the total substance of our body takes up is around one ten millionth of a cubic millimeter. The human body, which is constructed of atoms with electrons rotating on an orbit quite far away from the nucleus, is in a way no different than an “inflated space.” For a comparison, the space between the earth and the sun can be filled with as many as 107 suns, whereas 450 thousand protons are needed to fill up the distance between the proton and electron in a hydrogen atom.

The subatomic world is even more amazing. In subatomic particles are found six types of quarks. A quark is considered a fundamental constituent of matter. Combinations of quarks in different shapes and numbers result in subatomic particles, the further combinations of which produce atoms, molecules, and so on. Quarks are considered to be without mass; that is to say, they are nothing else but energy. Humans have mass, but this mass consists of quarks that are without mass.

This incredibly vast space between atoms that make up matter teaches us that our true value does not lie in our physical structure, but in the artworks of no comparison designed by the Divine as manifestations of His most beautiful names. Thus, we, who are so little in material substance, should seek other gateways in the depth of our souls and attain some value with proximity to the Divine.

We may never have revolted against God Almighty in our entire life; yet still our material minority should free us from all kinds of pride and conceit. Our physical structure is very much like the number “zero,” for 0 is also nothing, and it is drawn by inflating.

We photons are the envoys of the sun. Our duty is to carry the energy that was stored in the sun during the creation of the universe to the earth. In the sun’s center, during the nuclear reaction called fusion, four hydrogen nuclei form one helium nucleus. The mass of four hydrogen nuclei is 4 x 1,6726 x 10 ^-24 grams (i.e. 6,6904 x 10 ^-24 grams); the mass of one helium nucleus is 6,6447 x 10 ^-24 grams. It is clear that the mass of one helium nucleus is a little smaller than the mass of four hydrogen nuclei. If we calculate the difference: 6,6904 x 10 ^-24 g – 6,6447 x 10 ^-24 g = 0,0457 x 10 ^-24 g. This small mass difference is transformed into great energy by order of the Creator, and in this way we and our relatives, neutrinos, are created.

Our Lord has created us as the fastest particles in the universe. We cover 300,000 kilometers in a second. Although we move so fast, the sun’s center is very dense. The density is about 150 times greater than the density of water (1 g/cm3). Thus, as soon as we move, we crash into the hydrogen and helium nucleuses around us. They swallow us, but then they immediately set us free; then yet another strike waits for us immediately. In every collision, our energy is reduced a little, and we divide into several light particles with lower energy levels. Most of our lives-perhaps 100 thousand years-is spent in these collisions.

If we left the center of the sun without any collisions, the earth would be blasted to pieces in a moment when we hit it. As a result of the collisions, we, who have a high energy level in the beginning, are converted into low energy level light particles.

So many of us are created in the sun that at every second a four-million-ton mass is converted into energy. In the sun, which is 5 billion years old, approximately a hundred times the mass of the earth has been converted into energy up to today.

While we are created in the center of the sun, we reach the outer layer of the sun, the photosphere, by passing slowly through the layers from the center to the surface of the sun. On leaving the surface, our energy decreases, our number increases, and our temperature goes down to 5,800 degrees C. You may consider this temperature very high, but you should not forget that our temperature in the beginning was 15 million degrees C.

We pass the 700,000 kilometers from the center of the sun to the photosphere layer in 100,000 years. The photosphere’s density is so low that it is only one percent of the atmosphere’s density at sea level. We leave this layer fast without any collisions. To reach the earth, there is 150 million kilometers of space ahead of us. Here we show our speed, which we did not have a chance to display earlier because of the collisions we have inside the sun. We travel the 150-million-kilometer distance in 8.5 minutes and reach the earth. There are some of us with extremely high energy levels who can cause damage on earth. The ozone layer is responsible for picking them off. The non-dangerous ones among us reach the face of the earth by traveling through the 100-kilometer-deep atmosphere in 1/10000 of a second. Finally, it is time to deliver the energy we have carried to you.

Every photon has a duty. Some of us heat the earth; some of us vaporize the water in the seas to bring the merciful rains. We have many other duties as well as these. Perhaps our most important duty is to be swallowed by the chlorophyll in plant leaves, so as to provide the energy in the food you eat and in the oxygen you breathe.

Possibly the energy that you have used while reading this essay was obtained from a bean you ate in your lunch. Do not forget that we brought from the sun’s center both the energy in the bean you ate and the energy in any plant that was food for any animal whose meat you have eaten.

We also carried the energy that was in the gas of the truck that brought these pages to you. If our brothers that came to the earth a million years ago had not brought energy to the plants at that time, could those plants have been transformed into oil or coal by decaying underground?

Our Lord gave us light particles a mission to carry the energy that is stored in substances so that the energy will be a source of life for you. We fulfill our duties without any error so that you might think and learn a lesson from these facts.

In your next meal, consider looking at the blessings on your plate from the following perspective: “I am about to eat energy that was heated approximately 100,000 years ago at 15 million degrees C in an oven in the sun’s center and later cooled and made appropriate for the bodies of human beings.”

The sun radiates an enormous amount of energy-at a rate of 3.9×1026 Joule per second. This is roughly equivalent to the energy of a 10 billion megaton TNT bomb every second. This huge amount of energy has been maintained for several billion years and will continue for several more. The fusion reaction of the Sun is a process in which hydrogen burns, transforming into helium, which is then followed by thermonuclear explosions. Isotopes of hydrogen, such as deuterium and tritium, are fused to form heavier helium. During this process the released energy can be as high as 17.6 MeV. The energy released from a 17 lbs deuterium fusion is equal to 1,000 kilotons of TNT. Every second the Sun fuses 675,000,000 tons of hydrogen into 653,000,000 tons of helium.

Scientists have attempted to make fusion work on the earth to make larger amounts of energy, thus solving our energy problems for the future. The first nuclear fusion trials were carried out for nuclear weapons. The released energy from the fusion trials was 500 times higher than that from the fission reactions of nuclear weapons¹. The energy released was equal to that of approximately 12 million tons of TNT. The civilian applications for energy production began in the early 1950s, and we are still trying to solve how to control this amount of energy in reactors.

In nuclear fusion, the negative and positive ions of hydrogen, called plasma, reach temperatures of 100 million degrees. To achieve the plasma parameters of the Sun, for example, the same temperature and density, the plasma must be heated to 100 million degrees Celsius and be kept dense and confined for at least 1 second.

Plasmas are mostly heated by Ohmic (resistive) heating, beam injection, or radio frequency heating. Ohmic heating is the result of an induced current being passed through the plasmas. This mechanism is also used to make electric bulbs and heaters work. Ohmic heating cannot attain plasma temperatures; such heating does not rise above 20-30 million degrees Celsius. When the temperature increases, the resistivity of the plasma decreases. Natural beam injection is one of the mechanisms used to obtain higher energy temperatures. Injecting a high-energy beam of neutral atoms into the plasma causes more collisions and increases the plasma temperature by transferring the atoms’ energy to the plasma. Radio frequency heating is another collision mechanism that increases the plasma temperature. Radio waves generated by oscillators transfer their energy at appropriate frequencies to ions or electrons, thus increasing the plasma temperature. Scientists have managed to get to high enough temperatures; however, these plasmas cannot be contained by the reactor walls easily and the reactions cannot be sustained. To prevent a loss of reaction control and to make the plasmas denser, magnetic confinement mechanisms have been developed such as TOKAMAK, Z-PINCH and ICF.

The TOKAMAK (Toroidal Chamber) device was invented in the late 1950s by the Russian physicists Igor Tam and Andrei Sakharov. In this system, mixtures of deuterium and tritium plasmas, confined by doughnut-shaped magnetic fields, are produced by the toroidal coils, which are then heated to very high temperatures. The temperature achieved by the Princeton Labs is 510 million degrees-almost 30 times greater than the temperature of the Sun. One of the major problems in TOKAMAK is that superconducting magnetic coils are needed for the electricity demand, but the superconducting magnets only operate at cold temperatures. So, a space between the plasma and coils must be maintained to avoid the plasma reaching the coils and damaging them. This mechanism is still assumed to be the best for the confinement of plasmas².

Another confinement system is the Z-pinch (Zeta-Pinch) pulse power device. The current flow of experimental devices is in the Z-axis, so the device was called the Z-pinch by the British scientists in the late 1950s. In this mechanism, very tiny wires, thinner than a human hair, are positioned in different configurations, such as cylindrical or nested geometries, and are then placed in an anode cathode gap.

Applying high voltage on the system causes the energetic plasmas to compress and heat the deuterium or tritium fuel in small pellets. The current flows through these wires axially, generating magnetic fields that confine the plasma. The temperature achieved is about 1.6 billion degrees; this result, reported by the Sandia National Labs, is almost 250 times higher than the interior of the Sun. Z-pinches produce the most powerful plasmas, but the generated plasmas are very unstable³.

Lasers were invented in 1962, and have been applied in many areas. Lasers were used in infusion research to confine the plasma in the late 1960s by scientists at Lawrence Livermore. This laser-based process is called ICF (Inertial Confinement Fusion). In this mechanism, laser light is used to compress and heat the pellet. The temperature achieved is about 100 million degrees Celsius and the plasma is compressed almost 1,000 times its liquid density. However, this confinement occurs in less than in a microsecond, which is not enough time to allow the ions to build on the energy of their own inertia.

Today, many countries have invested millions of dollars in confinement and ignition systems to create fusion power. ITER is an International TOKAMAK fusion project that will be built in France (for more information: http://www.iter.org/). Its participants have agreed to provide funding of $13.1 billion. When it is completed, the ITER will be one of the most expensive scientific projects in the world. However, despite the high cost, there are good reasons why scientists insist on the use of fusion. One of these is that no CO2 is produced during the process. Everyone is aware that CO2 has negative effects; for example, it leads to increased pollution and global warming. Another reason is the abundance of hydrogen available for fusion in seawater and on the earth’s crust. Another important reason is that fusion is safer than fission or other energy sources: There are no nuclear accidents, and in case of malfunction, the plasma is absorbed and cooled by the reactor walls. Also, the generated amount of radioactive particles is fewer than those generated by fission.

If everything goes well, scientists expect that fusion will be used as a source of energy in a couple of decades. If fusion is successful, it can provide clean, safe, reliable, sustainable, and widely applicable energy.

M. Fatih Yilmaz is a graduate researcher at Physics Department, University of Nevada.

Notes

1. Frisch O. R.: “The Discovery of Fission – How It All Began.” Physics Today 20 (1967), 11, pp. 43-48; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fission.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak; http://www.ppdl.gov.

3. James Glanz, Science 18 July 1997:Vol. 277. no. 5324, p. 306 DOI: 10.1126/science.277.5324.306.

Most, if not all, of water’s anomalous properties make life possible. To name a few of its many oddities, water is the only material that naturally exists in all possible forms (solid, liquid, and gas) on earth. Of all known chemical compounds, water has the second highest capacity to store heat, which is crucial for climate regulation and keeping living organisms’ body temperatures constant. Water is the second best heat-conducting liquid (after mercury), and this helps large masses of water to reach uniform temperatures quickly. Water has an astonishingly high heat of vaporization which eases body temperature regulation for humans and animals via providing a cooling system through sweating. This high heat of vaporization also prevents dehydration.

The absorption coefficient of water is a million times lower for the visible region of light than the rest of spectrum, a property which enables passage of the useful and prevention of the harmful rays from the sun, and makes the earth amenable to the accommodation of biological life. Furthermore, the greenhouse effect which keeps the Earth’s climate at moderation also stems from this aspect of water. Because the sunlight that is reflected from the Earth is mostly in the infrared region, it is effectively absorbed by the water vapor in the atmosphere due to water’s higher absorption of light within the non-visible regimes, and hence the heat does not escape from the earth.

Water is one if the best solvents, which is very important for cleansing. Finally (and thankfully), water does not display its peculiarity when it comes to taste. Such a “famously odd” molecule is somewhat ironically tasteless and odorless, and extremely easy to drink and consume.

“If We so willed, We would make it bitter and salty. Then should you not give thanks?” Waqi‘ah (56:70)

Although each of the aforementioned physical aspects of water deserves mentioning in its own right, from here on we will focus on water’s properties from a biological standpoint. To this end, we will first introduce some aspects of water, look at the interaction of water with bio-molecules, and finally elaborate on three particular biological examples (protein folding, cellular membranes and water channels), which demonstrate how such interactions provide the bases for life.

Life based on water

“We made every living thing from water.” Anbiya 21:30

Thanks to its abundance on earth, water is easily accessible and inexpensive. However, in the summer of 1986, Professor Michael Levitt of Stanford University spent almost half a million dollars on a tiny amount of water, that would hardly wet the point of a pin. Certainly, the money was not spent on the water itself, but the expenditure (it now costs about 50 cents to run such a simulation) reflected the cost of running a simulation on a cluster of supercomputers for two weeks to understand the interaction between water molecules and a particular protein. Eventually, the money turned out to be well spent. Although the same protein had been modeled before by a research group at Harvard University in 1977, the simulation had been carried out as if the protein were in a vacuum. Levitt and his co-workers realized that the previous attempt to model the proteins in the absence of water was a poor predictor of the real-life scenario. Likewise, earlier DNA simulations meant to model the double helical DNA in the absence of water had failed, Levitt and his colleagues also succeeded in simulating the DNA by adding water in the environment, and the water molecules were found to be interacting with nearly every part of the DNA. Levitt’s groundbreaking discoveries not only revealed the importance of the interaction between water and biological molecules, but also paved the way for computational biologists to simulate biological entities in the presence of their native watery media.

When a drop of oil is placed in water, it does not mix with water. Hence, oil and water are said to be immiscible. In contrast, sugar easily dissolves in water and forms a homogenous mixture upon mixing. Although not as obvious at first sight, the underlying principles which govern this phenomenon can explain how water can interact with biological molecules.

Materials can be classified according to their “water tendency”: the ones that tend to avoid water (e.g. oil), are considered hydro-phobic (hydro: “water,” phobic: “fearing”), whereas materials that mix well with water (e.g. alcohol) are called hydro-philic (or water-loving). Water’s particular molecular structure turns out to yield a non-uniform electron distribution, and thus makes water molecule highly “polar” (see Figure 1.a). As a consequence, polar or charged molecules prefer being close to water molecules, whereas the apolar or neutral ones tend to avoid them.

Many curious aspects of water stem from another fact-that water molecules can interact with each other through “hydrogen bonding” (see Figure 1b). Although the molecules in a liquid are highly disordered, hydrogen bonding gives water molecules some order even in the liquid phase. A molecule’s ability to cooperate in hydrogen bonding is very important for breaking (or formation) of hydrogen bonds, and affect two parameters (i.e. the “order” and the “energy”) of the system which determine the feasibility of a certain chemical reaction.

Actually, most, if not all, of the oddities of water are due to these two properties (water-tendency and hydrogen bonding). Furthermore, these two aspects determine a great deal of how water interacts with other molecules, and the way water enables the proliferation of life. We will now elaborate on some biological phenomena and try to understand them in the light of these aspects of water.

Protein folding

Proteins are biological molecules that carry out the vital tasks of life. In the cell, proteins are initially synthesized as linear chains of amino acids ranging in size from a few to several thousand amino acids in length. Subsequent to synthesis, a linear chain spontaneously folds into a particular three-dimensional (3D) form (see Figure 2). This precise fold is essential for the execution of protein’s specific function (see Figure 3). As simple as it may sound, protein folding is currently one of the biggest questions in biophysics.

Researchers are working hard to be able to devise principles to estimate which 3D fold a certain linear amino acid sequence adopts, and what functions the eventual 3D structures execute. Although these questions related to the protein folding phenomenon are still far from being totally understood, some clues have been discovered.

In 1969 Cryus Levinthal stated that an average size protein would fold within about 1030 times longer than the expected lifetime of the universe if it were to fold via sampling all possible conformations even if the conformational sampling is very fast (e.g. a millionth of a millionth of a second for each conformation). This obviously is not what happens in reality, and the experimentally observed folding times are within milliseconds (a thousandth of a second) – second regime. This discrepancy between the estimated and the measured timescales is referred to as the “Levinthal Paradox.”

Consequently, proteins cannot rely on randomly sampling all the possible conformations to fold, but the folding must rather be a driven and directed process. Scientists hypothesize that water comes to the rescue at this point. As the linear protein chain is being synthesized, water-hating amino acids try to bury themselves away from water as soon as possible. This leads to the rapid collapse of the linear amino acid chain into a compact structure where hydrophobic regions are protected from water (see Figure 2c). This initial compaction which is provided by the interaction with the ambient aqueous medium is thought to be the key step in achieving folding within reasonable timescales. After the first rapid compaction, the protein adapts its final structure by sampling a much smaller number of possible conformations.

Simultaneously, hydrogen bonding helps the stabilization of certain folds with respect to other possible structures and contributes to the folding process. Eventually, the functional 3D fold is thus realized from the nascent linear protein chain.

Cellular compartmentalization

“He has let flow forth the two large bodies of water, they meet together, (but) between them is a barrier, which they do not transgress (and so they do not merge).” (Rahman 55:19-20)

Compartmentalization is an important feature of life. First of all, the boundary of a cell must be well-defined and well-controlled. Secondly, different tasks are carried out by specialized compartments (so called organelles) within most of the cells. The major design principle of the cellular boundaries depends on the immiscibility of water and oil. The subunits of cellular membranes are “lipids” which simply are oil-based molecules. A lipid molecule has two parts: A water-loving “headgroup” and two water-fearing “tails”. Because of the dual water-tendency of lipids, they can self assemble into bi-layers (see Figure 4 a and b), which eventually form enclosed structures. Thanks to the properties of water, this compartmentalization is readily achieved.

The cell membrane thus formed is impermeable to ions, and many chemical agents important for sustaining the cellular functions. Although such a barrier is essential for holding the cell contents as well as maintaining intracellular balance, material exchange between inside and outside of the cell is also an indispensible trait for carrying out the vast majority of vital processes (nerve impulse formation and transmission, cell signaling, nutrition, etc.). In order to achieve well-controlled material transport across the membrane, the cell membrane is decorated with various proteins that function as “channels” (see Figure 4c). These channel proteins come in different flavors and show specificity towards different chemicals. For instance, the channel protein for the potassium ion (K+) only allows the passage of potassium ions, whereas the sodium channel only lets sodium (Na+) through. Other channels have “gating” mechanisms that enable the channel to be “open” or “closed” depending on the need for the transport to happen. Although the specificity and gating mechanism of every channel protein relies on a unique ingenious design principle which deserves detailed mention in its own right, in the rest of the article we will focus on the water channel, for it once again exemplifies the perfect harmony between water and the bio-molecules.

Aquaporin: The water channel

Almost 170 liters of water is recycled in the human kidney on a daily basis, and this requires that kidney tissue possesses high water permeability. Since water cannot diffuse in and out of the cell membrane very rapidly for the reasons given above, reconciliation of the enormous daily flux of water in the kidneys has been a long-standing puzzle. The discovery of water channels (also known as “aquaporin”) by Peter Agre in 1992 resolved the mystery, and this finding was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2003. It is now known that the recycling machinery in the kidney chiefly consists of millions of aquaporins. Like other channel proteins, aquaporins also display selectivity: water is effectively transported across aquaporins, whereas the passage of other ions and miscellaneous agents is not permitted.

However, how this selectivity is achieved presented another riddle: Hydrogen is smaller than water and can move through the smallest opening. How, then, is the hydrogen selected against, while water is allowed? It was also well known that water molecules which are ordered within the channel constriction (see Figure 5) normally form a “proton wire” through which the hydrogen ions (i.e. protons) can easily flow just like an electrical current flows along an electrical wire. Thus, as water is transported across aquaporins, hydrogen ions should in principle move rapidly in and out of the cells through the chain of ordered water molecules (i.e. the proton wire) in an uncontrollable manner. This would cause an imbalance in the cellular environment, and most likely would lead to cell death.

The answer came from a computer simulation of aquaporin by Emad Tajkhorshid and Klaus Schulten at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. They found that the water molecules change their orientation (see Figure 5) as they spun through the water channel. This rotation was achieved via water molecules’ specific interactions with the amino acid residues in the channel. Thanks to this orientation, the formation of the proton wire is disrupted (just like a break in an electric circuit) and the hydrogen ions are not permitted through the channel, while rapid water diffusion takes place. The interaction between water and aquaporin thus provides just another reason water is rightfully considered the cradle of life.

Conclusion

“There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.” Albert Einstein

… and that He sends down water from the sky, and revives with it the earth after its death. Surely in this are signs for people who will reason and understand. Rum 30:24 

References

1. Gedik, N. “The Miracles of Water,” The Fountain, Issue 43, January–March 2005.

2. Ileri, R. “Water and Vitality,” The Fountain, Issue 2, April-June 1993.

3. Unal, Ali. The Qur’an: An Annotated Interpretation in Modern English, The Light, Inc. NJ: 2005.

4. “Simulating Water and The Molecules of Life,” Scientific American, November 1998.

5. Errington, J. R. & Debenedetti, “P.G.” Nature, 409, 318–321, 2001.

6. Water, Wikipedia.

7. “Mysteries of Water,” Physics Today, June 2003.

8. Sener, Hamdi. “Mikroalemdeki Canli Motorlar” (Living Engines in the Micro World), Sizinti, September 2005.

9. Figures are modified from: Chemical polarity, Wikipedia
Hydrogen bond, Wikipedia
http://www.ccl.net/cca/documents/dyoung/water/
http://www.helsinki.fi/~jtvaara/images/water.gif
“Inner Life of The Cell” animation, http://multimedia.mcb.harvard.edu/
“Molecular Biology of the Cell,” 4th Edition; Bruce Alberts et al.
http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=53074&rendTypeId=4
http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/179_11_011203/van10722_fm-5.jpg

One of the most important reasons for the last two world wars was the sharing of energy sources. 60 years on from the last world war, the world is now very close to confronting the same problem. There has been an enormous rise in energy demand since the middle of the last century. This increase has resulted from both rapid industrial development and population growth. As shown in Figure 1 and 2, the world population is 4.8 times greater, and the total energy requirement has increased more than 30 fold from between 1850 and 2000. Many studies have demonstrated that while global demand increases by at least 2-3% per year, the current oil fields are depleting at an average of 3-5% per year. If this demand continues at this rate, we will reach a point of crisis in oil sometime after 2010, and the same will be true for natural gas somewhat later, between 2020 and 2030 [1, 3]. The basic energy source of the world, hydrogen, is a new hope for solving the energy problem. It is likely that this century will be the century of the fuel cell. This technology uses hydrogen as fuel, and offers the prospect of supplying the world with clean, sustainable electrical power.

Hydrogen, which is the simplest element in space, was discovered in the 16th century and its inflammable property was understood in the 18th century. Ninety percent of the known universe consists of this simple element. Hydrogen is colorless, odorless, nonpoisonous, and 14.4 times lighter than air. In its liquid phase it has a temperature of -252.77 °C. It is the fuel of the sun and other stars, hence the main energy source of the universe. Hydrogen is not found as a free element in nature, but rather it is found as a compound, particularly as water. Hydrogen has the largest energy amount per unit mass among known fuels. The energy of 1 kg of hydrogen equals 2.1 kg of natural gas and 2.8 kg gasoline. However, its volume per unit energy is higher. It is 1.33 times more efficient compared with fossil fuels as an energy source. When hydrogen is used to produce heat or propulsion, only liquid water or water vapor emerge, making it an extremely clean energy source.

Hydrogen can be used with fuel cells to produce electricity. At the present time, the cost of this method is 3 times more expensive when compared to other fuels. Fuel cells use hydrogen, or hydrogen containing compounds to produce electrical energy and heat. A fuel cell has no moving parts and makes no noise when operating. A single fuel cell contains three layers, as shown in Figure 3. These are the anode-electrode layer, the membrane layer, and the cathode-electrode layer.

There are three types of fuel cells; Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM), Direct Methanol Fuel Cell (DMFC), and Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC), each named after the material used as fuel. The PEM fuel cell is fueled by pure hydrogen. In the anode, hydrogen is split into its basic elements, a proton and an electron. While the proton migrates through the membrane of the fuel cell, the electron travels around the membrane and goes to the cathode, creating an electrical current. In the cathode-hydrogen proton the electron reacts with oxygen to form water, which is rejected as waste. The basic system is the same for the DMFC and the SOFC fuel cells. The DMFC is fueled by a mixture of methanol and water. Before reaching the anode electrode, the methanol is split into CO²and hydrogen. The SOFC fuel cell can use different kinds of fuels that contain methane and hydrogen. All the reactions are shown in Table 1. One fuel cell can produce 0.6 of a volt. To get enough power, several fuel cells are piled in a stack. The space between fuel cells is filled with gas that helps to distribute the hydrogen and oxygen gas to the membranes.

Although hydrogen energy is a new source, the production of hydrogen is not a new concept. Every year, 500 billion m³ of hydrogen is produced, stored, transported, and utilized in the world. Initially, hydrogen was used for the production of ammonia, but today hydrogen utilization has expanded tremendously to incorporate applications in chemical and petroleum refining, metallurgy, the hydrogenation of edible fats and oils, space and weather programs, fuel cells, and the manufacture of high quality electronic components. The most important consumer is in the petroleum- chemistry industry.

Hydrogen can be obtained by using different methods. Hydrogen can be produced from electricity, using electrolysis to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. Reforming is another method that produces hydrogen. In this method, hydrogen is extracted from a gas with a high concentration of methane, such as natural gas. This process uses hot steam to obtain hydrogen from the methane. When methane gas is mixed with hot water vapor, the gas is split into carbon monoxide and hydrogen.

Although hydrogen can be stored as a gas or liquid, storing and handling hydrogen is difficult as compared to gasoline. While gasoline is a liquid, hydrogen is a gas. At atmospheric pressure at sea level (pressure at sea level is 1.0 atm = 1.01325 bars), hydrogen has a volume 3,100 times greater than gasoline. To decrease the volume of the hydrogen, pressure is used. Hydrogen can be stored under pressure up to 700 bars. At this pressure, hydrogen has a volume 6.4 times greater than that of gasoline.

Another method for storing hydrogen is in the liquid phase. In this phase, hydrogen has a volume 3.6 times greater than gasoline. Liquid hydrogen can be stored under high pressure in steel tubes. Hydrogen should be cooled to -252.77 °C to become liquid. The cooling process requires energy. 25% of hydrogen energy is used for the cooling process. The largest liquid hydrogen tank is at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. It contains up to 3,400 m³ liquid hydrogen.

Hydrogen can also be stored in metal hydrides. When cooling is applied, the hydrogen atoms diffuse inside the metal hydrides. To release the hydrogen, the reverse process, heating, is needed. Due to the large storage necessary, aluminum and boron hydrides have been used extensively over the last 10 years. In particular, boron hydrides are important as they can be used in liquid conditions. Metal hydride storage is very safe because of the low pressure and the fact that there is little free hydrogen inside the storage tank. Another advantage of this way of storing is that metal hydrides hold hydrogen at very low volumes.

It seems that hydrogen may be the major energy source in the future. Eventually, it will be used to supply the energy needed in the economy, being used for transportation, central and distributed electric power, and combined heat and power for buildings, and industrial processes. However, hydrogen technology is currently in the pre-production stage of development. Hydrogen energy is not cheap when compared to other energy sources at this time. There are some challenges that need to be overcome, such as producing, storing, and using hydrogen efficiently before we use hydrogen instead of fossil fuels. However, hydrogen is the key to solving the energy problems of the world. Hydrogen is available in every country, everywhere. Using hydrogen as an energy source will prevent many conflicts between countries. This energy source will help address concerns about energy security, global climate change, and air quality. It seems that the views of Jules Verne, quoted at the beginning of this article, will be realized one day in the future. And people will thank God not only for water, but also for the hydrogen in it.

References

1. “Energy Wars” by David Chapman – a director of Bullion Management Services the manager of the Millennium BullionFund (www.bmsinc.ca).

2. Cook B., ‘An Introduction to Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Technology’, Heliocentris, 2001.

3. www.un.org

4. www.census.gov

5. www.worldenergy.org

6. www.fuelstore.com

7. www.minihydrogen.dk

After the sixth phase, the typical characteristic in the universe was a temperature that reached as high as 4,000 C. At that temperature space was not as dark as it is today, rather it gleamed brightly. As matter condensed into gases and cooled down as time passed, the density values increased and the planets that we know today started to form out of the increasingly solidifying matter. The universe, presumably, was still a homogeneous gas cloud of helium and hydrogen when it reached an age of 700,000 years. Yet, the universe did not become a single galaxy by collapsing on a single point; rather billions of galactic centers were created. So, what made the universe wait as a gas cloud in just that state? Why did it not collapse in on a single point?

While cosmology has been asking this question for years, Roger Penrose, a theoretical physicist and black hole expert, tried to compute the first creation power in one of his studies in 1973. Some tiny particles, smaller than a proton, were discovered. Those particles had been formed not by the collapse of the stars, but during the first creation after The Big Bang. Although those tiny black particles were far smaller than atoms, they behaved like black holes and swallowed everything they encountered. Yet it seems that they left their footprints as they passed. It seems as if hydrogen and helium clouds had gathered around those enormous attraction centers and the cores of billions of galaxies had thus formed. The universe was being shaped and was expanding from particles made up of a cosmic soup, a gas cloud. The Qur’an also relates the great transformation that took place in shaping the universe:

Have the unbelievers not beheld that the heavens and the earth were a solid mass, then We separated them; and of water We produced every living thing, will they not believe, then? (21:30)

From Dust and Gas Clouds to Cosmic Systems

Stars, like living beings, grow older and demise. They go through an infancy, then youth and adulthood. Some gas and dust clouds, known as Nebulas lie among galaxies. Nebulas are considered to be the raw material of stars. In our galaxy, the Milky Way, gas and dust clouds are mostly located on the spiral arms that extend outward. An impact, called a shock wave, causes interstellar matter to come together and condense into huge clouds and spheres in space. The clouds that condense during the first formation of stars are so thin that they do not even have gravitational effect. Due to this lack of gravity, it has not yet been fully understood how these gas and dust clouds came together and condensed.

A condensed cloud heats up due to the collisions within it; these collisions increase as the cloud is compressed in a process that lasts millions of years. These collisions cause the cloud to sparkle and gleam. Initially, some rays, such as infrared or radio waves, are emitted.

While the star forms, the outer crust collapses very slowly, whereas the central parts collapse at a much greater rate. As the cloud condenses farther, it emits more light and starts to shine inside the dark, dusty covering that surrounds it. This nuclear cooking-pot, which has a temperature of 10 million C at its core, sparkles. With the flaring of the star, a disk forms around the newly created center. Strong winds, triggered by the powerful hot gases that are emitted from the upper and lower surfaces of the disk, blow in opposite directions; they sweep away most of the original gas cloud that formerly impeded the visibility of the new star. Thus, the star begins to be visible through an ordinary telescope. The energy produced in the center of the star after it has been formed and reaches a certain age, impedes greater collapse. This energy provides the necessary pressure to block the collapse of matter and seeks a way to escape. Hence, the star reaches an equilibrium.

We cannot observe stars being born in interstellar gas clouds with normal telescopes. This is because the gases in space and within the dust clouds act like the particles in cigarette smoke and absorb the light. Thus, we see the clouds as dark silhouettes on the surface of the star. Formations of stars can only be observed through infrared telescopes. An infrared telescope was first placed on a satellite sent into orbit in 1983. That telescope discovered thousands of young stars hiding in the depths of interstellar clouds.

A condensed gas cloud needs to be of a certain size in order to become a star. If the gathering gas clouds are not large enough, a different situation occurs: a planet is born! The stars and planet systems that orbit the stars are formed in this way. While stars are being formed, the planets are made out of smaller gas clouds.

The Sun is a typical small star that is relatively very young. We can see stars in space that are up to a hundred times as large as the Sun, or ones that are one-tenth its size. When stars are compared to the Sun, the dimmer ones that have a surface temperature of only 3,000 C are at the bottom of the range, while ones similar to the Sun, with a surface temperature of 6,000 C, occupy the middle range. Stars that are much larger than the Sun have a surface temperature surpassing 30,000 C. Contrary to general thought, larger stars live shorter lives, because the denser and the hotter the core is, the more intense are the nuclear reactions that take place.

Thus, these stars have brighter surfaces. A massive star that uses more nuclear power is more likely to run out of fuel sooner. On the other hand, a smaller star that uses its fuel sparsely has a longer life, even though it has less fuel. We know that there is a simple relation between the temperature and the pressure of a gas. If we heat up a gas in an enclosed container, the pressure will increase; if we cool it down, the pressure will decrease. When you think of a star with a temperature reaching millions of degrees Celsius at its center, you can understand how great the pressure is there. We know that heat is being produced through nuclear reactions. Every star is under the influence of an attraction force that approximates and compresses the elements of the atoms it contains. As the mass of the star increases so does the attraction force. This inward force is balanced by the force of outward nuclear explosions. The most significant reaction that ensures the vitality and continuity of the star is the transformation of hydrogen into helium through fusion. Yet, while this happens, the fuel lessens and the reactor will fail to function properly. At this point, the force of the pressure keeping the star in a balance is endangered and the star begins to lose its long struggle against the attraction within its mass.

As stars lose their fuel, they are exposed to different “deaths,” in proportion to their mass. The number 1.44 is the coefficient related to the mass of the Sun. Stars with a mass of less than 1.44 times the mass of the Sun become black or white dwarves, whereas those with a mass of more than 1.44 times the mass of the Sun become supernovas, neutron stars, and eventually black holes. If the mass of a star is more than 1.44 times the mass of the Sun, it will not remain as a dwarf. Its inner temperature and density will increase and the fuel, in the form of iron, nickel, chrome and cobalt, will not be able to burn anymore. Temperature and pressure turn the electrons and protons into neutrons by adhering them to one another. The iron core becomes a huge ball with a diameter measuring 100 kilometers. At a critical temperature the star explodes, emitting a billion times its normal light intensity. This is a supernova explosion. With the explosion, a terrific shock wave and the flow of neutrino (an elementary particle with zero charge and zero mass) spreads. The materials produced in the explosion flow into space as gas clouds.

The Event of the Supernova and the World

As a matter of fact, at one time we were physically part of a star. That star was probably larger than the Sun and was formed right after the creation of the universe, namely in the first few hundred thousand years.

At those times, the universe was almost completely made up of hydrogen. The solar system and the earth had been formed of this element. Hydrogen was the beginning of everything, and whatever material was available in the universe had been derived from the hydrogen atom. Only after being processed in the nuclear furnace for billions of years did hydrogen turn into helium.

Consequently, the star’s life was over. As the fuel in the depots was running out, demise emerged on the horizon. It began in fits and starts, and then when the furnace was about to go out, the mass of the huge star collapsed in on itself. Having increased in size after the collapse, the pressure triggered new nuclear reactions. Thus, a series of elements, ranging from carbon to iron, came to be part of the body. Finally, the star gave its all with an enormous explosion that we call a supernova. A billion-year life ended in just a few seconds. Atom particles at the core of the star melted and turned into neutrons in just a few seconds, and the parts closer to surface were thrown into space at a speed of ten million kilometers per second. It was a magnificent moment in which billions of degrees of heat was produced and in which a great light, as bright as one billion suns, shone. Some of the elements that are heavier than iron were also created during that time.

Supernova means death to a star. The enormous energy once unleashed heats up the outer layers of the star so much that the way is paved for new fusion and energy-absorbing reactions to occur instead of energy-freeing ones. Not only iron, but also other heavy elements, such as gold, lead, and uranium are manufactured in this furnace. These elements are thrown into space together with pre-synthesized and lighter ones, like carbon and oxygen, and combine with the wreckages of other supernovas. During the succeeding millenniums, new star and planet generations are created.

For our planet, fantastic and extraordinary cosmic events, such as supernovas, have been the starting point for the existence of some elements, like oxygen, gold and silver, and ultimately for the creation of life. The sources of carbon and oxygen that are essential to life, the silver and gold rings that we wear on our fingers, the lead plates on our roofs, and the uranium that fuels our nuclear reactors are all results of the death throes of stars that died prior to the birth of the Sun.

As we have seen, a supernova explosion causes matter to move from one point to another. As a result of such explosions, many of the remnants of stars are spread over space and new stars or star systems are created by the accumulation of such remnants. The Sun and the planets in our solar system and surely those in our universe exist as the result of a very early supernova. In this immense universe which houses humanity, the transformation that matter undergoes, and the gradual advance toward a certain destination, all indicate that the Divine Knowledge, Power and Will are intermingled with His Compassion and Grace.

The widely accepted argument today is that the elements used as building blocks of life were first backed in the nuclear furnaces of stars under extra ordinary heat and pressure, undergoing a series of transformations and took their forms as we realize them on our earth. Among all the elements on our planet earth, the unique properties given to carbon and hydrogen elements has made the existence of carbon-based life forms possible.

Carbon combined with different elements in many different quantities and geometric arrangements, results in a vast assortment of materials with vastly different properties.

The molecules that are found in live organisms are created from different quantities, geometric arrangements and assortments of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, nitrogen and sulfur. The base properties of carbon are playing an important role in creating these compounds.

Each carbon atom makes four bonds. Carbon may make bonds with other carbon atoms forming chains, branching chains or rings of linked carbon atoms. These properties given to carbon are important factors in the miracle called life.

When a carbon atom makes bounds with four hydrogen atoms methane gas is obtained (CH4). If we exchange the hydrogen atoms with oxygen atoms in methane we obtain carbon dioxide (CO2). If we exchange the hydrogen atoms with sulfur atoms in methane we obtain carbon disulfur (CS2), which is a combustible and poisonous liquid.

If we exchange the hydrogen atoms with chlorine atoms in methane we obtain carbon tetrachloride CCl4. If we exchange the hydrogen atoms with fluoride atoms we obtain fluorocarbon compounds. The Teflon used in our kitchenware is a fluorocarbon resin.

When two carbon atoms each having three hydrogen atoms attached come together, the ethane molecule is formed. As mentioned before chains, branching chains and rings of linked carbon atoms can be formed this way. Some carbon compound’s molecules consist of just a few atoms; others contain thousands or even millions. This is one of the main reasons of organic versatility that is behind the scene. Attaching other functional groups to the carbon atoms in the chain increases the versatility of compounds. Some examples of these functional groups that are built up with carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, phosphorus, nitrogen and sulfur coming to mind at first would be the hydroxyl functional group (OH), the carboxyl functional group (COOH), the methyl functional group (CH3), the amino functional group (NH2), the phosphate functional group (PO4), the carbonyl functional group (CO) and the sulfhydryl functional group (SH).

If we exchange one hydrogen atom in methane with a hydroxyl group we obtain methanol, which is an alcohol that damages the optic nerves. To turn methanol into ethanol, which is found in alcoholic beverages we need to add a methyl group to methanol. If we add one oxygen atom or a carboxyl group to ethyl alcohol we will obtain acetic acid (vinegar acid). Adding a nitrogen atom or an amino functional group to acetic acid we obtain amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins. Looking to these examples we understand that a slight difference in the structure or order of the atoms within a compound can change the whole functionality of that compound. We realize that live systems are fragile and that very sensitive adjustments are made to create the right conditions for the existence of life and that delicate balances are kept to maintain the order of life, which we enjoy so much. Another important fact these examples can prove is that building everything from one thing or building one thing from everything is one of the aspects of creation. This aspect provides us valuable knowledge about creation.

We can explain this matter further with an analogy. To construct a building we need various materials like bricks, cement, wood and iron. Buildings with different architectures and functionalities are constructed with the same materials in different quantities and arrangements. Similarly, this amazing variety of life forms and the order of life on earth are brought to existence with only a few element types (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, nitrogen and sulfur) which are brought together in different arrangements, representing infinite numbers of different shapes in space.

Life is protected from extinction with buildup and breakdown mechanisms, which change and convert these molecules from one to another.

The popular child game called LEGO is another example that can be used to explain how this infinite variety of life forms is created by a few types of elements. Children can build different objects according to their imagination by using the limited number of plastic pieces in different quantities and arrangements. Just like this, the most merciful has created the amazing nature and every living creature in it by using the limited number of elements in different arrangements and quantities.

Natural forms of pure carbon include graphite, one of the softest minerals known, and diamond, the hardest substance known. The only difference between the two is the structure of the bonds between carbon atoms. Diamond and Graphite, being the same chemical composition, but different crystal structures, are two polymorphs of pure carbon. Another example is aspirin, gasoline and vanillin oil. All three compounds are composed of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen atoms but their properties and usage are completely different. All these examples point to the attribute of creation stating that many things are made from one thing.

Another related topic is isomers. Hydrocarbon variations that differ only in the arrangement of atoms are called isomers. Isomers are very important in biology. The preference for some isomers of molecules that are used in the base metabolism of living beings and biological systems shows us that the existence of life is not without certain intentions and willpower. For example, only the D form isomer of glucose can be used by biological systems. Similarly when the C vitamins are produced synthetically in the lab environment, 50% of those are isomers. Because only one of the isomers is biologically active, our body can use only %50 of the C vitamins we buy from the drug stores.

To stay alive, the human body needs water, air and nutrition from the outside world. It is very important that the nutrition we take has enough elements like iron, zinc ant iodine in it. These elements take place in certain enzymes and molecules, which are important for some proteins and hormones to work properly. For example not having enough iodine in our nutrition can cause an enlargement of the thyroid, which shows up as an abnormal swelling in the neck called a goiter. This illness can be seen more often in mountainous regions where the soil has less iodine because the rainwater washes it away. This reflects on the vegetation and fruits grown in the region and causes the body to not produce enough thyroid hormones. When iodine in nutrition is less than a certain amount it can even slow down the brain development. Similarly iron deficiency causes anemia and zinc deficiency causes growth retardation.

In summary, the magical order and amazing complexity in nature is based on a few molecules, which are arranged in different shapes, orders and in different quantities.

It is one of the miracles of creation that all complex organizations and structures, which even have different specifications, are made from very basic building blocks. The science of complexity (chaos theory, fractal geometries, etc.) has begun to research how God, who is able to make one thing from everything and everything from one thing, has created these astonishing complex beings from very basic and plain molecules. This research to understand how this amazing order and complexity exists will open new doors for the 21’st century science. 

References

• Crawford, M. and Marsh, D. (1989). The Driving Force: Food in Evolution and the Future. Mandarin paperbacks.. Octopus publishing Group. London.
• L. Vlasov & D. Trifonov, 107 Stories About Chemistry, Translator : Nihal Sarier. TUBITAK Populer bilim kitaplari No: 26, ANKARA.

A person living fifty years ago would have found nothing extraordinary in this verse. Yet it is, read in the light of what we know now of atmospheric physics, extraordinarily rich in meaning and significance.

The materialists of the last century regarded rain as the simple precipitation of water vapour and even expected, in their godless arrogance, to be able to produce rain at will. Moreover, they ridiculed those who would pray for rain. It was not realized at that time that the phenomenon of rainfall, i.e. the conversion of a cloud into rain, is not such a simple event after all. An atheistic science was unable to pose, let alone seek to answer, a number of key questions:

1. How can vapour, which is regarded as gaseous water, remain in the same form in atmospheric strata, such as the Siberian skies, where temperatures can drop to forty degrees below zero? Why does it not fall as ice blocks?

2. How does the size of raindrops come about, and in what measure and form do raindrops descend to earth? What are the preconditions for the formation of raindrops of such a convenient size and shape?

3. How does a cloud vaporize, and how and whence does the salt in clouds come to be there, seeing that salt cannot be vaporized at the boiling point of water?

Over the last twenty years, rational-if still only partial-answers have been found to these puzzling questions. Let us now re-read the sacred verse, and identify its relevant points:

a. God regards rain as a physical event of the same order of significance as the resurrection of the dead. That is the meaning of His saying that we will be brought forth from the earth just as He has sent water from the sky in due measure and brought a dead land to life.

b. The Qur’an describes rain as a carefully measured descent of water, the idea of ‘measure’ being conveyed in the phrase bi-qadarin which indicates an ordered and calculated, willed and deliberate, measuring-the definition of a mathematical program.

c. ‘…and We raise to lift therewith a dead land.’ This sentence, the central portion of the verse, is likewise no ordinary statement. It refers directly and specifically to a dead land being raised to life; it does not say ‘plants emerge from it’. We shall examine the implications of this choice of phrasing below.

Let us now briefly review the scientific aspects of the miracle of rain. The results of the latest research have shed light on many previously unknown points relating water, clouds and rain. In doing so, they provide a wonderful exposition of the verse we are considering. We may summarise these points as follows:

1. A study done in the United States by Vincent J. Schaeffer has revealed that particles of water do not freeze down to -40 C when they are very fine and pure. Water has to be impure and formed of large masses in order to freeze at 0 C. A cloud is a special physical structure that is formed of water vapour which is immediately converted into minute water droplets. It therefore does not share the properties of ordinary water. Atmospheric clouds do not freeze and descend even at -30 C.

2. Clouds are formed by the agglomeration of tiny water droplets around particles of salt or cosmic dust. These tiny nuclei constitute the basis for rain. The origin of cosmic dust is unknown; also, the way in which the dust particles become lodged in the cloud is not yet well understood. However, it is believed that the water at the ocean surface participates in the vaporization process by contributing particles of salt.

3. It is conjectured that there are about one billion water particles per cubic millimeter during cloud formation. There are 50-500 cloud droplets per cubic centimeter in clouds. How these droplets are converted into raindrops is a matter of considerable controversy.

4. Up until 1950, the theory of Bergeron-Findeisen was the most widely accepted explanation of cloud droplets. According to Bergeron-Findeisen, the water droplets first form condensation nuclei, and raindrops then coalesce around them.

However, according to more recent studies, the growth of a cloud droplet over time proceeds concomitantly with various circumstances. A drop of water gradually assumes the nuclear state, overcoming conditions even of forty degrees below zero, and produces rain through a very complex equation:

5. As for the production of rain, minute water particles first coalesce around the condensation nucleus. Then, as they grow, the surface area of these water particles increases as they approach the ground. The increase in surface area in turn allows the velocity of the raindrop to be checked by air friction, with the result that rainfall acquires a gentle descent. This balancing process is a miracle of Divine compassion: by the time the raindrop touches ground, it has slowed down to make a soft landing, almost as if by a parachute. The equation for this descent and balanced speed is:

In the light of current scientific knowledge, the sentence Who sends down rain from the sky in due measure can only mean to us that the descent of rain is a matter of the finest, most subtle calculation. Linking it to the latter part of the verse, it is a miracle of Divine science akin to the raising of the dead.

Present day atmospheric physics also regards rain formation and rainfall as a scientific wonder, and many volumes have been devoted to the subject. Interested readers may usefully consult Robert Byes’ Elements of Cloud Physics and Louis J. Nin’s Cloud Physics and Cloud Seeding.

We now come to the implications of the second sentence in the verse: and we raise to life therewith a dead land.

When soil is dry, it is apparently lifeless. In fact the soil is very much alive, needing rain for its life to he activated. What does science have to say about this?

There are a million times a million bacteria in a gram of soil. These bacteria become wholly inactive, dormant, when it does not rain for a long time. It is as if they change into lifeless genetic codes. All these microbes revive when rain falls, and initiate a large production campaign beginning with nitrogen fixation. Their activity gives life in turn to thousands of small organisms. It is as if a dead underground city has come to life. Fertilizers form, the seeds of innumerable small plants revive, opening channels under the ground with their roots, like the roads of a city. Next, small insects and ants, each with their own nests, burrow under the earth, making it comparable to a large city. This is how a ‘dead land’ is revived.

What is the life-giving secret of rain? This part of the verse directs our attention to the connection of rain, and so of water, with life.

The basic chemical substance of living things is a bridge of hydrogen, lending continuity to the life of an organism, which we call the ‘hydrogen bonds’. The hydrogen is changed frequently, forming new bonds and transferring vitality. Since this hydrogen can be replaced only by the hydrogen produced during the ionization of water, water is indispensable for life.

This rule holds for all living things. A dehydrated organism is like a frozen skeleton even if it preserves its DNA and its genetic code: it can neither move nor reproduce. When water arrives and donates hydrogen from its separating H and OH ions, the code of life jumps into action. This is easily seen, particularly in the case of microbes. In more developed organisms, vitality cannot be restored even when water arrives because the tissue layers have been damaged by dehydration. The ‘revival of the dead land’ alludes to such profound biological laws.

We now turn to the last part of the verse: even so will you be raised [from the dead]. Our resurrection, the verse here declares, is a similar activation by Divine command of our codes remaining in the soil. It declares that just as the rain activates the genetic codes in a dead land and suddenly regenerates life, the codes will be processed and revived with the speed of a computer as soon as the Divine Will gives the order: ‘Come to life, arise.’ And finally, the analogy with rain means that God, Who gives life under the ground by sending a hydrogen ion, can doubtless also restore us to life when He wills.

Approximately ten billion human beings have lived on earth since Adam. The size of each individual’s code is about 1 micron; if you collected them all, they would not fill a glass. If God were to pour the genetic codes of all the humans He created from a glass into the soil, including those whose codes have been lost, and were to say ‘Now, Be!’, all human beings would be recreated in the twinkling of an eye

This is the similitude that God provides through this verse, for those possessed of knowledge with understanding. In effect, He is declaring: ‘Just as I have given life to an entirely lifeless land by means of a raindrop, it is no trouble at all for Me to reactivate the hydrogen in your biological genetic codes.’

Cosmology is the study of how the universe we live in came into being, why it looks and behaves as it does, and what its ultimate fate is. Building on the work of Albert Einstein, cosmologists have come up with a new account of the origin of the universe, the so-called big-bang cosmology. Over the past three decades a series of observational developments and refinements to the theory have led to its wider acceptance. For the present, there are no fundamental challenges to the big bang theory, although there are certainly unresolved issues with the theory itself. Astronomers are not sure, for example, how the galaxies were formed, but it is questionable whether there is a reason not to think the process did not occur within the framework of the big bang. Indeed, the predictions of the theory have survived all tests to date.

Nevertheless, we should always bear in mind that present-day science is not the last word, and perhaps Einstein’s theories, and the big-bang cosmology, will in turn be superseded.

Our present knowledge of the universe is restricted to a handful of observational facts. The expansion of the universe, indicated by the law relating the red shift in light from astronomical objects to their distance, was dis¬covered by Edwin Hubble in the early part of this century. The existence of the microwave background radiation corresponding to a temperature of 2.7K, and the cosmological abundance of helium are more recent discoveries. Together, these three observations suggest that the universe was born in a hot fireball from a very dense state-the big bang. Not just matter was created in the big bang, but space-time as well. There was nothing outside for the big bang to explode into-and this nothing means not even empty space.

Cosmologists today do not claim to know exactly what made the universe explode into existence from a state of zero volume and infinite density-a space-time singularity-but they do claim to be able to describe in great detail how a hot fireball of matter and radiation has evolved from a fraction of a second after the instant of creation over about 15 billion years to produce the cool, dark spread of empty space, dotted with galaxies made up of stars, gas, dust and planets, that we see about us now.

The laws of nature as we currently understand them allow us to trace the observed expansion of the universe back billions of years to what would be a true beginning, a moment when the universe was infinitely hot and dense. Although, theorists are now pushing back their speculations about what happened in the first 10-35 seconds after the big bang, with less confidence, the modern cosmological world view begins at a time when the universe had cooled to only 1012K, about 10-5 seconds after the instant creation. At these extreme conditions, the laws of physics as deduced here on earth can be applied to produce the story of everything that ha happened since. At a temperature of 1012K, particles and radiation would be interchangeable, as the mass equivalent of energy in the radiation would be ample to produce particles like protons, neutrons, and electrons, not out of thin air but out of thick radiation, in line with the rules E=mc2 for a particle of mass m and E=hv for radiation with frequency v (h is Planck’s constant). Here higher black body temperature of radiation corresponds to bigger v, that is bigger energy E, and therefore to more massive particle equivalents.

So, one-hundred-thousandth of a second after it began, the universe would have been a seething mass of particles and radiation, a swirling soup in which particle/antiparticle pairs were constantly being created out of energetic photons, and constantly annihilating with one another to produce other energetic photons. Overall though, the total mass/energy of the whole system was constant. For every E/c2 of mass created or destroyed an exactly equivalent E/h of radiation is destroyed or created.

Things began to get more orderly at 1011, still within the first 0.1 seconds after the big bang, as the universe expanded so that the density of radiation at any point was no longer enough to produce the more exotic particles. Only electron/positron pairs, and the massless photons and neutrino/antineutrino pairs, were light enough to have a continuing involvement in the matter/radiation balance.

About 14 seconds after the big bang, the temperature of the universe had dropped to around 3xl09K, and even electrons and positrons needed too much energy for the weakening radiation to create them. As the universe con¬tinued to expand and cool, creation became slower than annihilation, and almost all the particles and antiparticles disappeared. But for some unknown reason, a small proportion of electrons, protons and neutrons were left over. It is this early excess of matter over an¬timatter that survived to form light atomic nuclei a few minutes later, then (after about a million years) to form atoms and, still later, to be cooked to heavier elements in stars, ultimately to provide the material out of which life would arise. The reason for this predominance of matter over antimatter remains a mystery and has been a source of concern to modern cosmology. It is, nevertheless, one of the key initial conditions that determined the future development of the universe.

As the temperature dropped to 109K-about 70 times the temperature in the heart of the sun today-many protons and neutrons fused into helium nuclei, and by the end of first four minutes no free neutrons were left. Some 75% of the mass of the visible universe had been processed into protons plus electrons (ultimately to be bound into hydrogen atoms) while rather more than 25% mass of the universe had been processed into helium. The abundance of these elements in the universe is detectable today, and provides a constraint on the range of allowable models.

Another 700,000 years later, the expanding universe cooled to the point where electrons can bind to helium and hydrogen nuclei to make atoms, at a temperature of around 5000K. This signalled the end of the last remaining links between matter and radiation on a cosmic scale. Although free electrons and atomic nuclei, being electrically charged, interact strongly with radiation, electrically neutral atoms do not. From then on, the background radiation had nothing left to do but spread thinner in the expanding and cooling universe, to become the faint hiss we now detect at temperature equivalent of 2.7K. The very high degree of uniformity of the microwave background today is a strong indication that uniform, isotropic models provide a good description of the universe.

After the first thousand million years or so, with matter firmly established and radiation playing only a minor and decreasing role, the story of the universe can be taken up in terms of gravity, left as the dominating force because of its long range and its independence of electric charge. Gravitational forces then shaped the galaxies by holding stars and planets together.

However, our grasp of the conditions that prevailed in the early universe does not translate into a full understanding of how galaxies formed. Many scientists believe that the hydrogen and helium gases that filled the universe must have been pulled into concentrations by gravity. But there are problems with this explanation: for, what could cause large, diffuse gas clouds to collapse, even with the aid of gravity, while the universe as a whole is expanding?

Having established that the universe began in a hot big bang, and being tolerably happy with a rough understanding of how galaxies formed, the truly cosmological question remaining for astronomers to puzzle over is whether the universe is open (will it expand forever) or closed (will it one day collapse into a new fireball)?

The answer lies in its density. The symbol used for the mass density of the universe is Omega. If Omega, is less than 1, the universe will expand forever, so that, eventually, all the galaxies and stars will grow dark and cold. The alternative to this ‘big chill’ is a ‘big crunch.’ If Omega is more than 1, gravity will eventually reverse the expansion, and all matter and energy will be reunited. For the present, since we are not sure how galaxies formed, the value of Omega is uncertain-most astronomers put it somewhere between 0.1 and 1.

While eternal expansion is the generally favoured hypothesis; there may be enough of the unseen matter in the universe to produce a gravitational pull capable of halting the expansion and eventually producing a recollapse. Though the case is not yet proven, one current idea is that neutrinos, once believed to be massless particles, may have a rest mass less than 1/10000 of an electron. As neutrinos are thought to be as numerous as photons, their aggregate mass could suffice to close the universe. The fact that we cannot see enough matter to close the universe does not mean that it is not there.

During the next decade, as techniques for measuring the mass of the universe improve, we may learn whether the present expansion is headed toward a big chill or a big crunch. What happens then? Just as we do not know how everything could appear from nothing in the big bang if space-time did not exist, we do not know what happens to the universe at this stage; the laws of physics are inadequate to describe such extreme conditions. If there is ever to be a solution to the mystery of the origin and end of the universe, it must await a substantial increase in our understanding of the quantum nature of gravity-the big bang account of creation has forged an unlikely marriage between cosmology, the science of the very large, and particle physics, the science of the very small.

In any event, the universe we inhabit seems to be very improbable. Random processes and statistical fluctuations on cosmological time scales could easily have made it quite inhospitable to life. Are we just lucky? Or is there some deep significance to the fact that we live in a universe just right for us?

For all its violence-including the possibility of a black hole resident at the centre of our own galaxy-the universe seems to be an ideal place for man. Everywhere we look in the universe, from far flung galaxies to the deepest recesses of the atom, we encounter order. The laws of physics can explain beautifully the analytic structure of nature, the behaviour of individual particles and fields, but tell us nothing about the collective, collaborative organization of matter: that is, how the world is put together.

Why is the world the way it is and not otherwise? This is not the type of question scientists normally ask. The customary approach to scientific inquiry is to discuss what we see, not what we might see. Nevertheless, the universe is such a remarkable place, and we, as observers, are perhaps the most remarkable feature, it seems worth while ascertaining just how probable or improbable the present arrangement is.

For example, we do not understand why the fundamental constants of nature have the values they do. Einstein captured its essence when he said: ‘What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world.’ Very slight changes in the physical constants of nature could have made the universe unfold in a completely different manner.

Most of the features of the everyday world and the astronomical scene are determined by a few basic physical laws and constants, such as the masses of the elementary particles and the relative strengths of the basic forces that operate between them. In many cases, a rather delicate balance seems to prevail. For example, if the nuclear forces were slightly stronger then they actually are, compared with electromagnetism, the di-proton-an atomic nucleus containing just two protons and no other particle-would be stable; ordinary hydrogen would not exist, and stars would evolve very differently. If nuclear forces were slightly weaker, no chemical elements other than hydrogen would be stable, and chemistry would be dull indeed. In either case, we would not be here to ponder such matters.

Or suppose the constant of gravity were stronger and the gravitational force were, say 1030 times weaker than the electromagnetic force instead of a factor of 1040 weaker. Then we would have a small-scale, speeded-up universe, in which stars-gravitationally bound fusion redactors-had only 10-15 times the sun’s mass, and lived for about a year. This might not allow time for complex systems-such as life forms-to evolve. The question-Was the relative strength of electromagnetic force over the gravitational force there from the beginning of time or is it an accident of today? -remains intractable.

These mysteries are heightened when we reflect how surprising it is that the laws of nature and the initial conditions of the universe should allow for the existence of beings who could observe it. Life as we know it would be impossible if any of several physical quantities had slightly different values. The best known of these quantities is the energy of one of the excited states of the carbon-12 nucleus. There is an essential step in the chain of nuclear reactions that build up heavy elements in stars. In this step, two helium nuclei join together to form the unstable nucleus of beryllium-8, which sometimes before fissioning absorbs another helium nucleus, forming carbon-12 in this excited state. The carbon-12 nucleus then emits a photon and decays into the stable state of lowest energy. In subsequent nuclear reactions carbon is built up into oxygen and nitrogen and the other heavy elements necessary for life. If the energy of the excited state of carbon-12 were just a little higher, the rate of its formation would be much less, so that almost all the beryllium-8 nuclei would fission into helium nuclei before carbon could be formed. The universe would then consist almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, without the ingredients for life.

Moreover, if the proton and neutron masses were equal, then neutrons and protons could not bind to form deuterium and heavy nuclei, and nuclear burning in stars and, consequently, life would be impossible.

The most ubiquitous examples of orderliness in the universe are the stars. They represent an extreme departure from thermodynamic equilibrium because they burn brightly in a cold, dark space. The source of starlight is the nuclear furnace at the core of the star, where the chief nuclear reaction is the fusion of hydrogen to helium. This is a downhill process, leading to nuclei of greater stability, and the cost paid for achieving it is the redistribution of nuclear energy into the surrounding space in the form of heat and light. This particular orderliness, and with it most familiar examples of terrestrial organization, leads to the question: Is the present structure of the universe-which is made mainly of hydrogen and not helium or heavier elements-just luck, a coincidence? Because, if the universe were made of, say, iron (the most stable element) there would be no stars like the sun.

Also, the structure of our world depends vitally not only on the availability of free hydrogen, but also on the reasonably smooth distribution of the primeval matter. If the big bang had only coughed out black holes-the ultimate triumph of gravity-in which everything is completely obliterated and disappears, no life would have been possible.

Can all these peculiar ‘coincidences’ be understood in terms of some self-evolutionary mechanism?

In its standard form, the big bang theory assumes that all parts of the universe began expanding simultaneously. Observations confirmed this assumption and showed that the expansion is remarkably uniform in all directions. This would seem to imply a collaboration between widely separated regions of the cosmos to expand at the same rate everywhere. Such highly organized behaviour leads us to ask how all the different parts of the universe could synchronize the beginning of their expansion?

Where does the energy that makes the universe expand come from? What could be a permanent, decidedly nonzero source of energy in the universe, with cosmic consequences? Could it be vacuum-as the source of everything yet itself nothing? This is one of the hottest topics in contemporary physics and lies at the heart of perhaps the most important new concept in cosmology of the past decade. If it is correct, could the creation of being out of nothingness occur without the mediation of a Creator?

There are many such peculiar ‘coincidences’ in the universe. Is it just our luck that they have worked out that way, or is there a deeper explanation? One understanding would be that the world is the way it is because it is the creation of a Creator who wills it to be capable of fruitful process: His command, when He desires a thing, is to say to it ‘Be!’, and it is (Ya Sin, 36.82). Without an Organizer, chaos can never be transformed into cosmos. This explanation is not a temporary sop to satisfy our curiosity about phenomena for which we cannot yet work out a satisfactory physical explanation; rather, it is a step guiding us towards a better understanding of the real world.

That does not mean that these mysteries constitute a barrier beyond which science cannot pass. As in the past, we may reasonably expect that, in the future, deeper understanding will be achieved and a more profound pattern discerned at the basis of physical reality, in a new, perhaps new kind, of explanatory theory. It may be some version of supergravity or it may be the novel theory of ‘superstrings’. Or some other theory that we have not yet thought of.

However, we should bear in mind that both our growing knowledge about the universe, and the need, alongside it, to revise it continually, is clear evidence for the inconclusiveness of science and the limitation of its methods.

In addition, the finititude of man’s existence (in this very small part of a vast universe) and the limitations of his senses mean that all our efforts must be considered ‘relative.’ The results of pure and experimental sciences are a limited portion of reality as man can grasp it from his location in the universe and within the very limited time allotted to him, and not the truth itself. There is of course, a great difference between being aware of things and knowing their actual truth. The former is limited to sensible events only, while the latter lies beyond the capacity of our senses.

No inquiry into the nature of creation or any part of it can be closed and concluded. The patterns of God in creation are infinite: there will always be more of them to discover. As we strive to do so, understand more and more about nature, the scientist’s sense of wonder will not diminish but become sharper, more narrowly focused on the mysteries that still remain. The worth of science lies in its commitment to understanding the Divine handiwork. The comprehensibility of the reality around us is among the greatest of God’s favours to us. Einstein remarked this: ‘The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.’

The Qur’an contains many scientifically accurate statements, some of them still relevant to cosmology; it does not contain any statements which are in conflict with the findings of man’s scientific research nor open to criticism from modern science. Many of its verses allude to, and urge, reflection upon the reality around us as a form of worship, as a way to draw nearer to the Creator. I shall conclude by citing (in translation) a verse which draws our attention to the fact that, in a general sense, the future will be the age of knowledge and information, and that as a natural consequence of this, it will be an age of faith and belief:

Soon We shall show them Our signs on the furthest horizons, and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is truth. Is it not enough that your Lord witnesses all things? (Fussilat, 41.53)

USEFUL READING

• GRIBBIN, J. (1982) Cosmology today: A New Scientist Guide
• JAMES, P. et al. (1994) ‘The Evolution of the Universe’, Scientific American, October
• SIMSEK, U. (1986) Big Bang-Kainatin Dogusu, Yeni Asya, Istanbul
• NURBAKI, H. (1989) Verses from the Glorious Qur’an and the Facts of Science, Turkish Foundation for Religion Publications