Concepts like the number zero, negative numbers, complex numbers, matrices, and spatial geometry are inventions of mathematicians which were studied earlier and presented especially for the use of physicists. When mathematicians theorized the “Group Theory,” they were reported to have said, “Finally we have developed something that physicists cannot use.” However, this theory, which stemmed from intangible algebra, was found to be useful in investigating the symmetry of physical systems and had serious applications in particle physics.

If there were no mathematical advances, would physics and other sciences have developed as far as they have? What does it mean that sciences are found in such an interrelated state, and thus support each other?

The perfect relationship between physics and mathematics, as in the expression of many physical laws via simple mathematical equations, is truly amazing. The laws that describe the physical world – from equations expressing the laws of motion (like X=V.t, V=a.t, F=m.a h= (gt2)/2), to basic electrical equations (like V=I.R, P=I.V, E=V/d), going all the way to the equations that define gravitational forces and the expansion of the universe (like F=G.m1.m2/d2, V=H.d) – can easily be expressed through mathematics. Furthermore, this simplicity and plainness in creation of the universe fascinates many scientists. Einstein expressed this fascination when he said, “The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.”

One of the most important relations between mathematics and physics is that the independent study of intangible works of mathematics unexpectedly became one of the best tools to describe the physical world. Numbers, for example, are one of the greatest inventions of humanity. Humans have used them to quantify their properties. For thousands of years, people used numbers, but then the concept of negative numbers developed for seemingly no reason. For centuries, negative numbers were seen as nonsense. Of course there is not a square with a negative side length, a circle with a negative value area, or a classroom with negative number of students. However, negative numbers were found to be applicable in many areas of physics; they are now accepted as being as real as positive numbers. For instance, it is almost impossible to graph position-time, speed-time, acceleration-time, and the momentum-speed relation of objects without negative numbers.

Ellipses, parabolas, and hyperbolas (plane sections of cones cut in different shapes) were studied by Apollonius (BC 262-200), who was a contemporary of Archimedes. Interestingly these shapes were one day used by Kepler and Newton to describe the orbits of heavenly bodies like planets. Three dimensional pentagonal and hexagonal patterns, like those on the surface of a soccer ball, were also investigated by Archimedes. This shape has been found to be in exact configuration of a special carbon molecule composed of 60 atoms.

Likewise, the number zero, which was introduced by Muhammad bin Ahmad, in 967, led to many innovations in mathematics, as well as physics. Did al-Khwarizmi (780-850) know, when he found and utilized 1st and 2nd degree equations, that he was working on something mathematicians and physicists could one day never do without?

Imaginary numbers, as proposed against the main principles of arithmetic, also provides a very good example for this topic. We cannot think of a number whose square is negative in normal conditions. In other words, when a number is multiplied with itself, the resulting number is always a positive number. But mathematicians thought of a number that is negative when squared and continued various studies accordingly. Again, these studies have proven to be an important tool, especially in understanding electrical circuits by physicists.

Let’s finish our examples with ones from modern physics. Riemann (1826) was a mathematician who studied spatial geometry and proposed the concept of space curves. Mathematical equations designed by Riemann, pertaining to spatial geometry, were used by Einstein in 1908 to describe and formulate the concept of general relativity. Einstein also used Minkowski’s four dimensional geo-spatial continuum when developing his theory of general relativity.

There are many more examples. The famous Russian mathematician Friedman established a mathematical model that allows the expansion of the universe by improving Einstein’s model of universal geometry. This model was also later confirmed by the physicist De Sitter in discovering universal expansion and by Hubble in formulating the expansion. In addition, well before the discovery of quantum mechanics, Davit Hilbert proposed the complex vector space with a very different mathematical purpose known as “Hilbert Space.” This concept of space with an infinite number of dimensions is today used by quantum mechanics.

Sometimes physical realities can be foreseen via these invented equations. For example, Dirac proposed the existence of a particle known as the positron (or as we call it, the twin of the electron; it just differs by the charge) through his mathematical equation that he wrote in 1928. Four years later this particle was discovered by Carl D. Anderson, as predicted. To name, James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879), a famous physicist and mathematician, predicted the presence and speed of electromagnetic waves mathematically via his own equations. Later, these waves were detected by Hertz (1886) through experiments. Again, Maxwell calculated the speed of electromagnetic waves via his equations, and by revealing that it was equal to the speed of light, it was understood that light was also a type of electromagnetic wave. Nowadays, the particle called the “graviton,” which is supposed to be in charge of gravitational forces, and the “Higgs” particle, that theoretically fills space according to quantum theory, are waiting to be discovered.

The book of nature is written in such a way that it is expressible by mathematical language. Famous physicist Sir James Jeans (d. 1946) expressed this situation as follows: “From the intrinsic evidence of his creation, the Great Architect of the Universe now begins to appear as a pure mathematician.” Yes, the level of knowledge that is at play in the universe encompasses both physics and mathematics. The overall interconnectedness of sciences and the interdisciplinary character physics and mathematics point to an owner of this knowledge.

As a conclusion we can deduce that physics and mathematics, just like material and non-material worlds, are in fact intertwined with each other’s various dimensions. The physical face of the universe is the place where records are kept and concepts of matter like heavy or light, big or small, and soft or hard, exist. The mathematical face of the universe (as if spiritual) is the unseen side of events or materials that are hidden and intangible. In a way, this relation between physics and mathematics is a display of the material and spiritual sides of universe.

Nuri Balta is the Head of Physics department at Samanyolu Schools in Turkey. He is also pursuing a PhD degree in Physics at Middle Eastern Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

CERN, the most advanced physics laboratory on earth, announced on July 2012 that they had found a particle that behaved like the Higgs boson, a particle predicted almost 50 years ago to exist. This discovery has brought with it the possibility that the Higgs boson may be responsible for all the mass in the universe and that if it does really exist scientists can unravel the mystery and origins of the universe a little more.

Until the 18th century there was no precise distinction between philosophers and scientists. Philosophy and science merged when the ancient philosophers shaped science and improved scientific methods as we know today. Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, Avicenna (Ibn-i Sina) and Descartes are a few of the greatest known philosophers in history. Most of the prospering scientists in different disciplines have been inspired by their works. For instance, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilee, Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell and Albert Einstein, all highly regarded physicists, were heavily influenced by the works of ancient philosophers. All of the aforementioned physicists tried to understand the physical laws that governed energy, time, and space. Even now, modern physicists are still trying to answer some of the most important questions: What is the nature of the universe and what is it made of? Are there undiscovered physical laws of nature? Are there extra dimensions of space? How can we solve the mystery of dark energy?

Today, in order to understand the composition of matter and how the universe was created, the most prominent particle and high energy physicists are designing huge particle accelerators and detectors. Particle accelerators, also known as atom smashers, are devices that use electromagnetic fields to propel a group of charged particles (ions) to high speeds and collides them with other moving particles or a stationary target composed of a bunch of particles (http://public.web.cern.ch). Particle detectors (radiation detectors) are used to detect, track, visualize and identify particles produced from reactions in accelerators. Scientists analyze the results of the collisions and try to understand interactions between the basic constituents of matter. This is the basis of understanding the components of the universe. The largest and most complex of these scientific instruments is located at CERN, the most advanced physics laboratory on earth. Egin Lillestol, a particle physicist from the University of Bergen (Norway), says that [1] there is nothing quite like CERN anywhere else on earth.

What does CERN stand for? CERN is the French acronym of Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire which means European Council for Nuclear Research. It was founded in 1954. It attracts physicists and engineers from all over the world. According to CERN’s sources, half of the world’s particle physicists, about ten thousand scientists, are either doing active research or visiting there. They all work together toward their common goals of advancing technology, answering questions for better understanding the material world and training future scientists. CERN has also seen the development of many practical scientific applications other than those involved with high energy and particle physics. For instance, the world-wide-web was invented at CERN to allow international scientists to communicate and share their ideas more easily. From 1954 to present, scientists at CERN have received Nobel Prizes in Physics including Sam Ting, Burt Richter, Jack Steinberg and Georges Charpak.

CERN hosts the largest and highest energy particle accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which is twenty-seven kilometers in circumference and about one hundred meters under the ground. The LHC enables scientists to collide two groups of particles such as protons and lead ions. Physicists analyze and study the particles that are created in the collisions to study conditions just after the Big Bang, the phenomenon that is believed to form the universe 13.7 billion years ago. Many people in the world are looking forward to see the results the LHC will be producing.

CERN: Black holes

Some people have expressed concerns about the safety of the collider at CERN. The biggest concern is whether or not an atom-smasher as big as the LHC could create black holes and destroy the earth. In 2003, LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) reported that the possible production of vacuum bubbles, magnetic monopoles and magnetic black holes at the LHC have no real risk. However, concerns about the safety of creating micro black holes in such a high energy particle accelerator have surfaced in the media for many years. Some media sites claimed that a black hole would be formed and destroy everything. Others announced that the LHC might cause earthquakes. According to the administrator of lhcfacts.org, a website in which scientists discuss the lack of safety at the LHC, the possibility of creating a micro black hole at CERN cannot be ignored, and there are two predictions about what that micro hole would be: according to the more optimistic outcome, the micro black hole evaporates before becoming a threat. According to the second prediction, however, the hole could grow quickly and endanger Earth. Eventually, the LSAG finished the discussion by reaffirming and publishing a second review which reports:

“The possibility of creating micro black holes at the LHC is at the rate of the order of one per second. These are harmless because they would quickly decay by hawking radiation (thermal radiation) according to standard calculations. They decay before even reaching the detector.”

Moreover, these kind of events, even with higher energies than those created in any man-made atom smasher, occur naturally and routinely in the universe. For example, ultra high energy cosmic rays (particles created in outer-space) come into contact with Earth’s atmosphere without any hazardous consequences. In brief, American physicist Karen D. Camarda said “If anything bad was going to happen, nature would have already done it.”

CERN: Higgs Boson

Another case which has dominated world news headlines mid-2012 was the Higgs boson, otherwise known as the “God particle.” What exactly is the Higgs boson and why is it called the God particle? The Higgs boson is a yet undiscovered particle which is taught to be a mechanism for how subatomic particles acquire mass. Most likely, it has a mass between the regions 115-130 GeV of energy. The Higgs mechanism was postulated by British physicist Peter Higgs in 1960s. The theory hypothesizes that the Higgs field, a kind of three dimensional frameworks, fills the universe. A particle borrows mass from the Higgs field when it moves through it. This is similar to the process that an electron undergoes as it gains mass when it passes through a positively charged crystal lattice of atoms. The “God particle” was coined as a nickname of the Higgs boson after Nobel prize winning physicist Leon Lederman published his popular science book in 1993 with the title of The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question? Lederman said he gave the particle this nickname because it is “so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter” [2]. To explain further, the term “God particle” is more applicable to marketing than to science and theology. According to many scientists, calling it the “God particle” is inappropriate because it does not have any connection with God or any religion. Many wonder what will happen if scientists find the Higgs boson. Brad Hirschfield, President of the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership said in his article [3] in The Washington Post:

“While not exactly a theory of creation, finding the God Particle would bring us closer to an understanding of the fundamental processes that govern physical existence.”

Furthermore, some scientists admit that exploration in this field will be far from over even after the Higgs boson is found. Instead, the discovery will open doors to newer and more complex questions. For instance, Michio Kaku, the co-founder of String Theory, asserts [4] that finding the Higgs boson is not enough. He says that “we are at the beginning, not the end of physics. The adventure continues.” In spite of these sentiments, some people, including myself, believe that the discovery of the Higgs boson might reveal a very large missing piece in the physics puzzle.

Acknowledgment: This article is produced at Mergeous [5], an online article and project development service for authors and publishers dedicated to the advancement of technologies in the merging realms of science and religion.

Kara is a freelance pop-sci writer pursuing a PhD in Physics.

References

[1] CERN, “A Unique Experience,” http://user.web.cern.ch/

[2] Lederman, Leon M. 1993. The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?: A Tale of Two Particles and the Ultimate T-Shirt, Bantam Doubleday Publishing Group.

[3] Hirschfield, Brad. 2011. “The ‘God Particle’ and God,” The Washington Post.

[4] Kaku, Michio. 2011. “The ‘God Particle’ and the Origins of the Universe,” The Wall Street Journal.

[5] Mergeous, Online article and project development platform, http://www.mergeous.com

[11] DOE/NSF, High Energy Physics Advisory Panel, Quantum Universe, The Revolution in 23st Century Particle Physics, 2003.

If the universe was expanding, then it had to be smaller in the past, and there could even be a moment when the entire universe appeared as a tiny mass. A group of physicists who took these findings seriously, started theoretical research regarding the birth of the universe (that is, the space-time and all of the matter within) and its evolution. Another group of physicists still thought that the universe should have no beginning and insisted in their conception of a static universe. One of these physicists, Hoyle, made a statement during a BBC radio program in order to criticize the idea of an expanding universe and used the phrase “big bang” for the first time. Later on, the phrase, initially used in a sarcastic manner, started to be used as the name of the expanding universe model. It was an entirely new model no scientist had even imagined before. Accordingly, there had to be an electromagnetic radiation (cosmic microwave background radiation) which would emerge after the explosion—this can be compared to the smoke of a gun right after a fired shot. After Penzias and Wilson observed this electro-magnetic radiation in 1964, the doubts about the model disappeared almost completely. As technology developed over time, so many different observations and sensitive measures were made and taken in support of this theory. Since there is no other cosmological model to explain the present data, the Big Bang model has general acceptance among physicists today. We would like to relate some facts about the universe based on contemporary observations and theories before we expand our discussion.

What we know about the Universe

Galaxies are typical formations throughout the universe. The Milky Way galaxy, which hosts our solar system, is a disc-shaped one. The measurements revealed that the diameter of this “disc” is 100,000 light years and its thickness is 1000 light years (one light year is approximately ten trillion kilometers). There are approximately 100 billion other stars in the Milky Way galaxy similar to our sun. Owing to gravitational attraction, the number density of the stars near the center of the galaxy is higher—for the same reason, black holes are thought to exist in the centers of galaxies. The stars visible to the naked eye at night are the ones within the Milky Way galaxy. When further distances are observed through telescopes, other galaxies begin coming to sight as bright spots. Galaxies form galaxy clusters and the clusters form super-galaxy clusters. Even light year appears to be an unimportant unit of measurement in order to express these dazzling great distances. The most successful model we know that describes the universe is Einstein’s theory of relativity. According to this theory, space-time is a dynamic object and it can be curved. As for the force we feel as gravity, it is an outcome of the curved nature of space-time. The Big Bang model appears naturally within the general Theory of Relativity. The essential data we are going to relate here about the universe is mostly based on observations and general theory of relativity.

According to the Big Bang model, the universe was born in a very hot and dense form nearly 13.7 billion years ago. Here, we need to remember that the concepts of “time” and “space” as we know them came to being with the Big Bang. Therefore, asking what was there before the Big Bang is meaningless for this model. Similarly, the common notion of expansion brings to mind something expanding inside something else. However, it is possible to describe the universe without any notions of inside or outside expansion. That is, we do not have to assume another environment inside which the universe expands.

One of the important suggestions of the Big Bang Model is the fact that the universe was at a state of thermal equilibrium in the past. There is important data based on observation in support of this suggestion. Therefore, even though the term Big Bang brings to mind a chaotic happening, there was a very important state of equilibrium at the emergence of the universe. So many physicists have underlined the fact that this state of equilibrium is impossible to happen on its own. Our universe was born out of a very hot and dense state of equilibrium and it began to cool down as it expanded. The heat in the early periods was so high that matter was found in a plasma state formed by the smallest constituents of matter. As the heat decreased, the plasma also changed structure and different cosmic phases took place. For instance, when the heat dropped down to 1010 C atomic nuclei began to form out of neutrons and protons. When it dropped to 3000 C, atoms were formed. There are many observations in support of these different phases. For example, the electro-magnetic background radiation observed by Penzias and Wilson in 1964 is formed out of photons (i.e. light) released after the phase in which the first atoms are formed. The Big Bang model has so many more important details and the calculations made according to this model have been in conformity with observations. Together with that, it should be noted that as the known physics get closer to the moment of the bang (zero time), it loses validity and new theories are needed.

The expansion of the universe in the Qur’an

The Qur’an openly refers to the expansion of the universe. The 47th verse of the 51 chapter (Dhariyat) is translated as follows:

And the heaven, We have constructed it mightily; and it is surely We Who have vast power, and keep expanding it. (51:47)

The original Arabic phrase used, which refers to expansion, is “musiun.” The interesting point is that the sentence is a noun clause which denotes in Arabic grammar a quality of being steady and continuous. Therefore, the meaning can be understood as being “we are expanding it continuously.” According to the Big Bang model, the universe has constantly been expanding ever since it was born. Expressing this fact by saying “We are expanding it,” the Qur’an also guides us to acknowledge that the expanding does not happen in itself but is realized by Divine power.

Other verses related to the Big Bang

The 30th verse of the chapter Anbiya is translated as follows:

Do those who disbelieve ever consider that the heavens and the earth were at first one piece, and then We parted them as separate entities; and that We have made every living thing from water? Will they still not come to believe? (Anbiya 21:30)

According to some scholars of Qur’anic exegesis, the phrase ratq (joined together, one piece) and fataqnahuma (We parted them) can be alluding to the moment of the Big Bang. As we have tried to summarize above, the entire universe was a single and very small mass and then started to expand and grow. As the universe expanded, the matter it contained began to expand and occupy a larger volume. As the universe expanded, its contents also began to separate from one another. So the phrases mentioned might be alluding to this chain of events. Together with that, some scholars thought that this verse alludes to the formation of the solar system, earth, and its atmosphere. The reason is that the verse continues with referring to the creation of living things. Accordingly, ratq might be referring to the phase when the solar system was a single mass and fataqnahuma might be referring to the planets and the earth breaking away from the sun and the formation of the atmosphere. It should be noted that systems forming within galaxies are also considered in the Big Bang model, which is used for referring to all of the phases from the time of zero to ours. Therefore, both possible explanations can be related to this model.

Another phrase which can be related to the Big Bang is the “Originator (Fatir) of the heavens and the earth” used in many different verses (e.g. Yusuf 12:101). Similarly, there is another verse expressing this reality with a verb from the same root (fatarahunna): …your Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth, Who has originated them each (Anbiya 21:56). Normally the phrase “fatara” is translated as “created.” In his study of Qur’anic exegesis (not available in English), Hamdi Yazir (1877-1942) points to the fact that the root “fatara” means to “split” or “split lengthwise,” and to originate something for the first time without a prior model. When these meanings of “fatara” are taken into consideration, “Originator (Fatir) of the heavens and the earth” can be an allusion to the Big Bang. Let us remember the fact that the Big Bang particularly refers to the very moment of the first creation. Therefore, the meaning “to originate something for the first time without a prior model” might be referring to this quality of the Big Bang. In addition, the word “split” expresses the moment of this great explosion better than the word “bang”; and so the beginning of space-time can be compared to splitting of a seed and its emergence.

One of the alternative meanings of “fatara” mentioned by Yazir, “split lengthwise” is very interesting. One of the important misconceptions about the Big Bang is to imagine that the universe was born in a certain spot and began expanding within another space. The Big Bang did not take place at a single spot. According to our theoretical understanding today, the entire space came into being altogether in a single moment. In other words, the Big Bang took place everywhere. When we consider the meaning “split lengthwise,” it might be an allusion to the fact that the Big Bang did not take place at a single point.

Conclusion

Considering the points we have tried to summarize above, the Qur’anic verses related to the creation of the universe can be defined as evidently miraculous. Surely, it is possible to expound on the subject from different aspects. For example we can think about a relation between the phrase “the seven heavens” used in many different verses in the Qur’an and the different phases after the Big Bang (although it is not possible pinpoint the exact number of these phases, figures like seven or seventy are metaphorically used in Arabic for referring to something in relevant multitude). Or they might be referring to some extra dimensions suggested by certain theories (The String Theory, one of the most-studied theories in recent years suggests the existence of seven extra dimensions).

Finally, we would like to underline that this article is an elementary attempt. What needs to be done more seriously is to form a board of scholars, particularly from the fields of cosmology and Qur’anic exegesis, and evaluate systematically all the verses related to the subject, and then try to analyze and understand them without any biased opinions. Such a study can provide deeper insight into the Qur’anic message.

Ali Kaya is a professor of physics in Bogazici University, Istanbul.

Note: This article was translated from Turkish by Korkut Altay.

An exact science is expressed in the highly sophisticated language of mathematics, whereas Sufism is based on meditation and insists that the Sufis’ insight cannot be verbalized. Reality, as experienced by Sufis, is completely indeterminate and undifferentiated. They do not see the intellect as their source of knowledge, but merely use it to analyze and interpret their personal experience.

The parallel between scientific experiments and Sufi experiences may seem surprising due to the very different nature of observation. Physicists perform experiments involving elaborate teamwork and highly sophisticated technology; Sufis obtain their knowledge purely through introspection, without machinery, and in the privacy of dhikr (meditation). Repeating an experiment in elementary particle physics requires many years of training; deep Sufi experience generally requires many years of training under an experienced master. The complexity and efficiency of the physicist’s technical apparatus is matched, if not surpassed, by the Sufi’s consciousness, both physical and spiritual, while in deep dhikr. Thus scientists and Sufis have developed highly sophisticated methods of observing nature that are inaccessible to the layperson.

Dhikr

Dhikr seeks to silence the mind and shift awareness from the rational to the intuitive mode of consciousness. This is achieved by concentrating on one item, like breathing or focusing on the sound of Allah or la ilaha illa Allah. Even prayer, which is considered dhikr to silence the mind, leads to feelings of peace and serenity that are characteristic of dhikr’s more static forms. These skills are used to develop the meditative mode of consciousness.

In dhikr, the mind is emptied of all thoughts and concepts and thus prepared to function for long periods through its intuitive mode. When the rational mind is silenced, the intuitive mode produces an extraordinary awareness, for the environment is experienced without the filter of conceptual thinking. This meditative state’s main characteristic is the experience of oneness with the surrounding environment, a state of consciousness in which fragmentation ceases and fades into undifferentiated unity.

Insight into reality

Sufism is based on direct insights into the nature of reality; physics is based on observing natural phenomena in scientific experiments. In physics, models and theories are approximate and basic to modern scientific research. Thus Einstein’s aphorism: As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. (1) Whenever the intellect analyzes the essential nature of things, it must seem absurd or paradoxical. Sufis have always recognized this, but it has recently become a problem in science.

A great variety of natural phenomena belong to the scientists’ macroscopic environment and thus to the realm of their sensory experience. Since their language’s images and intellectual concepts are abstracted from this very experience, they are limited to describing natural phenomena. But since the atomic and subatomic worlds lie beyond our sensory perception, knowledge of them is no longer derived from direct sensory experience. Thus our ordinary language, with its images from the world of the senses, is no longer adequate to describe the observed phenomena.

As we penetrate deeper into nature, we have to abandon more of the images and concepts of ordinary language. By probing inside the atom and investigating its structure, science transcended the limits of our sensory imagination and thus could no longer rely with absolute certainty on logic and common sense. Quantum physics provided scientists with the first glimpses of the essential nature of things. Like Sufis, physicists now deal with a nonsensory experience of reality and encounter the paradoxical aspects of this experience. As a result, the models and images of modern physics are akin to those of the Sufis.

The problem of communication

Scientists realized that our common language cannot describe atomic and subatomic reality. With the advent of relativity and quantum mechanics in physics, it became clear that this new knowledge transcends classical logic and cannot be described in ordinary language. Sufis have always realized that reality transcends ordinary language and were not afraid to go beyond logic and common concepts. The problem of language faced by both Sufis and physicists is the same: Both want to communicate their knowledge, but when they do so with words their statements are paradoxical and full of logical contradictions.

The duality of light

In quantum physics, many paradoxical situations are connected with light’s dual nature or, more generally, with electromagnetic radiation. Light produces interference phenomena, which is associated with waves of light. This is observed when two sources of light are used, for the end result is bright and dim patterns of light. On the other hand, electromagnetic radiation also produces the photoelectric effect: when short wave length light (e.g., ultraviolet light, x-rays, or gamma rays) strike the surface of some metals, they can knock off electrons from the surface. Therefore, the surface must consist of moving particles.

In the early stages of quantum theory, physicists were puzzled by how electromagnetic radiation could consist of particles (entities confined to a very small volume) and waves (which spread over a large area in space) simultaneously. Neither language nor imagination could deal very well with this kind of reality.

Sufism has developed several ways of dealing with reality’s paradoxical aspects. The works of Attar (d.1299), Hafiz (14th century), Ibn al-˜Arabi (d. 1240), Rumi (d. 1273), Bistami (d. 875), and others are full of intriguing contradictions. Furthermore, their compact, powerful, and extremely poetic language is meant to throw the reader’s mind off its familiar tracks of logical reasoning. Heisenberg once asked Bohr: Can nature possibly be so absurd as it seemed to us in these atomic experiments?(2)

Our sensory experiences, whose realm is the macroscopic world, allow us to draw images and intellectual concepts and express them in a language. This language was sufficient and adequate for describing natural phenomena. The Newtonian mechanistic model of the universe described the macroscopic world. In the twentieth century, physicists verified the existence of atoms and subatomic particles, the ultimate building blocks of nature, through experimentation. As these particles are beyond our sensory perceptions, our knowledge of them is no longer derived from direct sensory experience. Thus we face the problems mentioned earlier when dealing with the essential nature of things.

Modern physics

Sufis say that the direct mystical experience of reality is a momentous event that shakes the very foundations of one’s worldview, that it is the most startling event that can happen in the realm of human consciousness, and that it upsets every form of standardized experience. Some Sufis describe it as the bottom of a pail breaking through.

Physicists in the early part of the twentieth century felt much the same way when this new atomic reality shook their worldview’s foundations. They described it in terms that often were very similar to those used by Sufis. Thus Heisenberg wrote: Recent developments in modern physics can only be understood when one realizes that here the foundations of physics have started moving; and that this motion has caused the feeling that the ground would be cut from science.(3)

The discoveries of modern physics necessitated profound changes in such concepts as space, time, matter, object, and cause and effect. Since such concepts are so basic to our way of experiencing the world, those physicists who were forced to change them felt something of a shock. Out of these changes, a new and radically different worldview was born and continues to be formulated. Quantum theory implies the essential interconnectedness of nature, thus forcing us to see the universe not as a collection of physical objects but as a complicated web of relations between the various parts of a unified whole. This is how Sufis experience the world.

Space-time

Sufis seem to attain nonordinary states of consciousness that allow them to transcend the three-dimensional world of everyday life and experience a higher, multidimensional reality. In relativistic physics, if one can visualize the four-dimensional space“time reality, there would be nothing paradoxical at all. Sufis have notions of space and time that are very similar to those implied by relativity theory.

In Sufism, there seems to be a strong intuition for the space“time character of reality. Sufis experience a state of complete dissolution in which there is no distinction between mind and body, subject and object. In a state of pure experience, there is no space without time and no time without space, for they are interpenetrating. Physicists base their notion of space“time on scientific experiments, whereas Sufis base it on Sufism.

Modern physics’ relativistic models and theories illustrate the two basic elements of Sufism’s worldview: the universe’s oneness and intrinsically dynamic character. Space is curved to different degrees, and time flows at different rates in different parts of the universe. As our notions of a three-dimensional Euclidean space and time’s linear flow are limited to our ordinary experience of the physical world, they have to be abandoned when we extend this experience.

Sufis talk of extending their experience of the world in higher states of consciousness, and affirm that these states involve a radically different experience of space and time. They emphasize that they go beyond ordinary three-dimensional space in meditation, and, even more forcefully, that they transcend the ordinary awareness of time. Insteadof a linear succession of instants, they experience an infinite, timeless, and yet dynamic present. The spiritual world contains no time divisions such as past, present, and future, for they have contracted themselves into a single moment of the present, where life quivers in its true sense.

Mass“energy equivalence

Einstein showed mass“energy equivalence through a simple mathematical equation: E=mc2. Physicists measure a particle’s mass in the corresponding energy units. The discovery that mass is nothing but a form of energy forced us to modify our concept of a particle in an essential way. Hence particles are seen as quanta (bundles) of energy and as not consisting of any basic stuff. But energy is associated with activity and processes, which means that subatomic particles have an intrinsically dynamic nature and are forms in four-dimensional entities in space“time. Therefore they have both a space and a time aspect: their space aspect makes them appear as objects with a certain mass, and their time aspect makes them appear as processes involving the equivalent energy.

When subatomic particles are observed, we never see them as any substance. All we see is continuously changing patterns of one to the other, a continuos dance of energy. The subatomic world’s particles are not only active in the sense of moving very quickly, but are processes. Matter’s existence and activity cannot be separated, for they are only different aspects of the same space“time reality.

In their nonordinary states of consciousness, Sufis seem to be aware of the interpenetration of space and time at a macroscopic level. Thus they see the macroscopic world in a way that is very similar to physicists’ idea of subatomic particles. For Sufis, all compounded things are impermanent. The reality underlying all phenomena is beyond all forms and defies all description and specification. Hence it is formless, empty, void. Sufis consider the world’s phenomena to be nothing but illusory manifestations of the mind and as having no reality of their own.

Conclusion

Modern physics’ principal theories and models lead to a view of the world that is internally consistent and in perfect harmony with that of Sufism. The significance of their parallel views is beyond doubt. Both emerge when researchers inquire into the essential nature of thingsinto the deeper realms of matter in physics and into the deeper realms of consciousness in Sufismwhen they discover a different reality behind the superficial mundane appearance of everyday life. Physicists derive their knowledge from experimentation, whereas Sufis acquire their knowledge by meditative insight. Sufis look within and explore their consciousness at its various levels. In fact, the Sufi’s experience of his or her body is often seen as the key to their experience of the world.

Another similarity is that both groups’ observations take place in realms that are inaccessible to the ordinary senses: the realms of the atomic and subatomic worlds for physicists, and the nonordinary states of consciousness, in which the sense world is transcended, for Sufis. For both groups, these multidimensional experiences transcend the sensory world and thus are almost impossible to express in ordinary language.

Quantum physics and Sufism are two complementary manifestations of the human mind’s rational and intuitive faculties. Modern physicists experience the world through the rational mind’s extreme specialization; Sufis experience it through the intuitive mind’s extreme specialization. Both are necessary for a fuller understanding of the world. Sufism is necessary to understand the deepest nature of things, and science is essential for modern life. Therefore we need a dynamic interplay between Sufi intuition and scientific analysis.

Footnotes

1. Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffmann, eds., Albert Einstein: The Human Side (Princeton University Press, 1981); Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics (New York: Bantam New Age Books, 1980), 27.
2. Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1958), 42.
3. Ibid., 167.

References

1. Capra, Fritjof. The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism. Boston: Shambhala, 1980.
2. Dukas, Helen and Banesh Hoffmann, eds. Albert Einstein: The Human Side. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981.
3. Einstein, Albert. Essays in Science. New York: Philosophical Library, 1934.
4. . Out of My Later Years. New York: Philosophical Library, 1950.
5. Ernst, Carl. Shambhala Guide to Sufism. Boston: Shambhala Publications, 1997.
6. Heisenberg, Walter. The Physicist’s Conception of Nature. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1958.
7. . Physics and Philosophy. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1958.
8. . Across the Frontiers. New York: Harper and Row, 1974.
9. Karplus, Robert. Physics and Man. New York: W. A. Benjamin, Inc., 1970.
10. Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan. Awakening: A Sufi Experience. New York: Tarcher/Putnam, 1999.
11. Schrodinger, Ewin. My View of the World. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1964.
12. Schrodinger, Erwin and Roger Penrose. What is Life? Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1967.
13. Wilber, Ken ed. Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World’s Great Physicists. Boston: Shambhala, 1984.
14. Zukav, Gary and David Finkelstein. The Dancing Wu-Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics. New York: Bantam New Age Books, 1994.

These words attempt to pierce the veil of habit that develops in our minds from not looking into the reason for things. The perfection of the order operative in the universe is of such a degree that it prevents us from being aware of it. In the same way, we only become aware of the faultless operation of the watches we have worn on our wrists for years when they stop working.

In the world-view developed upon the foundation of Newton’s laws of motion, the universe was likened to a flawlessly operating watch. Events were tied to one another in a cause-effect relationship and our knowing the laws of this relationship allowed us to predict events with great accuracy. It was possible to determine with mathematical exactness a wide range of phenomena, from the times of eclipses of sun and moon to the amount of fuel and the speed needed to put an object into orbit around the earth. The success of these ‘natural laws’ led many people to believe that they completely expressed and ‘ruled’ the whole order of the universe.

Because God creates and sustains all things and events from behind the veil of universal general laws, because certain events (causes) are followed reliably by similar events (effects) each time they (the causes) occur, it begins to be supposed that the causes are responsible for or ‘create’ the effects. This is, of course, a gross error, as no number of causes suffices to create even a little effect; for every event even the tiniest, the whole universe must be presupposed first, including the laws operative within it. Moment by moment, all things and all events are created and sustained by God, Who wills from an infinite range of alternative possibilities a particular actuality.

The clockwork model of the universe derived from Newtonian or classical physics is not a complete account of the phenomena which we observe in the universe. Already in the late 19th century, scientists had been bewildered by the lines that turned up in the light spectra emitted by heated gases: the steady, stable clockwork model predicted did not happen. Also, there were problems explaining the behaviour of light: sometimes it made more sense as a beam of particles, sometimes as a wave.

Today our understanding of the universe is very far from the ‘clockwork’ model. The shift in understanding occurred in the first quarter of the 20th century, beginning in 1900 with the publication of Max Planck’s work on radiation. The problem Planck worked on for six years was that the actually measured radiation from hot bodies did not conform to the values predicted by the classical theory. He put forward the suggestion that bodies radiating energy did so, not evenly and continuously, but unevenly and discontinuously in tiny packets or ‘quanta’. So startling was this suggestion that, despite confirmation by experiment, Planck himself thought of his theory as solving the problem of radiation by a sort of trick.

But then, in 1905, Albert Einstein published an article using the notion of packets of energy of definite sizes to explain how electrons are ejected from metal when light (radiation) falls on it. Whereas classical theory had predicted that the voltage (measure of the energy of the electrons ejected) would be proportional to the intensity of the light (radiation), Einstein showed that it was proportional instead to the frequency of the radiation. The conformity of this explanation with experimentally observed results gained Einstein the Nobel Prize. (Einstein didn’t receive the prize for his famous theory of relativity.) The significance of these findings and theories was not fully appreciated at the time.

A few years later in 1910, Ernest Rutherford did a ground-breaking experiment. He bombarded a thin layer made up of gold atoms with high energy particles and showed that the atom contained an extremely small positively-charged nucleus with negatively-charged electrons moving around it. Following the classical physics model, these electrons should have been small particles orbiting the nucleus in the same way as the planets orbit the sun, steadily losing energy until they fell on to the nucleus-in other words, the atom should have been unstable. Again it was a rejection of the classical model, three years later, by Niels Bohr, that helped solve the problem. Bohr argued that the electrons must move in fixed orbits until deflected by the absorption or emission of a unit of energy.

Atoms emit radiation after various external signals and only at specific wave lengths. As Einstein said, every different color of light is composed of energy packets inversely proportional to its wave-length (frequency). Because the Planck constant (h) is very small, the energy of these packets is also very, very small. For example, a normal light bulb emits 1020 light packets (photons) a second. Each of these photons is created when an activated atom or molecule passes to its normal or ‘basic state.’ Thus light, which allows us to see and which is a basic building block of life, develops as a result of the motions (in wave form) of electrons. The concepts of classical physics could successfully explain many of the events of daily life, but it couldn’t explain events on the subatomic level.

During those years (1910-1925) physics fell into a state of

confusion because of the many measurements that conflicted with general theory and could not be explained by it. This situation was to lead W. Pauli (later to discover the principle fundamental to the understanding of the structure and characteristics of elements) to say he would rather have been a singer or gambler than a physicist. Actually in order to explain the observations being made, the whole way in which physical events had been understood required fundamental revision by wholly new methods. This was achieved by Werner Heisenberg, a 24 year-old physicist described by his teachers as a person who dealt with the essence of a subject rather than getting bogged down in detail, a person with powerful concentration and ambition. Perhaps the success of this young mind can be explained by the critical perspective he developed through reading the works of great men such as Kant and Plato, which was later supported with sound knowledge he got from great physicists. Heisenberg, who relaxed from work by climbing rocks and reading poetry, said: ‘It was around three in the morning when the calculations were completed and the solution to the problem appeared in front of me. First I experienced a great shock. I was so excited that I didn’t even think about sleeping. I left the house and, sitting on a rock, I waited for the sunrise.’

Like the other scientists who established quantum physics, Heisenberg was a philosopher-physicist. The philosophy he accepted and advocated that allowed him to interpret atomic events is as follows: ‘Even though it is successful with classical physics, the language we use to explain physical events in the atom or its surroundings is insufficient. For this reason, after making a specific measurement in a quantum system (for example, an atom), using that knowledge we can get a theory that will tell us what kind of results we can find in the next measurement. But it’s not possible to say anything about what takes place between the two measurements.’

What pushed Heisenberg to make such a statement was that the mathematical tools he used to develop a theory that could explain the observed discontinuity of energy in light and atoms were abstract concepts that had not been used before. In classical physics the numbers we know were used to give value to matter’s position, speed, size, etc. In Heisenberg’s quantum mechanics, these sizes were expressed with infinite dimensional n x n matrices which enabled physicists to calculate the properties attributed to electrons (energy, position, momentum, angular momentum) in an approximate way. Because these abstract mathematical expressions didn’t have an equivalent in everyday spoken language, it wasn’t possible to approach them with a classical understanding. It was observed that in order to measure the position of an electron, the experimenter necessarily altered its velocity. This problem was formally expressed in 1927 in Heisenberg’s famous Uncertainty Principle.

Independently of Heisenberg, Erwin Schrodinger made another significant breakthrough in mathematical description of electrons. Inspired by the hypothesis put forward two years earlier by De Broglie about the wave properties of matter particles, Schrodinger developed a ‘wave mechanics’ by which the movement of particles could be calculated. (figure: 1) But the fundamental question remained as to what these strange and original ‘waves of matter particles’ or ‘waves accompanying matter particles’ were.

The mathematical formulations devised by Heisenberg and Schrodinger are complementary in the sense that physicists use whichever best resolves the particular calculations they are trying to make. There is no formally distinct space between the scientists and the phenomena they are seeking to understand and manipulate: their means of observation and manipulation (the mathematics) in some sense ‘posit’, put in place, the very phenomena whose place (among other properties) they are trying to determine. Alongside the notion of an infinite array of rows and points, as invented by Heisenberg, to plot the position or motion of a sub-atomic particle, physicists and philosophers of physics have begun to speak of arrays of events or ‘stories’ to try to explain, in something resembling ordinary language, the ideas they are handling. This cannot be described as a world-view in the way that the Newtonian physics confirmed and sustained a world-view, but it is nevertheless a clear and distinct disposition which, instead of excluding God as the Force Who wound up the clockwork and then retired from His creation, admits the in-completeness and uncertainty of human knowledge as a structural element of reality-in other words, the uncertainty is not a function of our present ignorance (to be relieved by future knowledge), but an actual constituent of the way reality is.

Quantum physics, at least figuratively and metaphorically, has became a vehicle for the interpretation of such concepts as matter, beyond-matter, energy, existence and non-existence in a way nearer to Divine sources; and led to many physicists settling accounts with their conscience and turning towards God Who is understood to be simultaneously transcendent and immanent, there and here.