MUHAMMAD’S TELESCOPE

The unbelievers contended that the Quran was Muhammad’s own invention and not the revelation of God. How then would these dissenters explain the fact that Muhammad had been the only person who was aware of the expanding universe long before the 1900s. Could it be that he had invented in the 600s a telescope similar to the one contrived in the 1900s? Could it be that he had been familiar with the handling of such a telescope and acquainted with the motion of stars and that he had concealed it from his fellow men? If those who accused the Prophet of lunacy and alleged that in his delusional states he imagined himself the messenger of God, are justified in their claims, how will they account for the fact that he knew facts not known to his contemporaries, facts that were to be discovered 1300 years after his revelation of them? If those who assert that the Prophet had devised a religion to serve his own ends how can they explain that his so-called delusions materialized after a lapse of 1300 years? His pronouncements at the time did not promote his interests in any way; quite the reverse was the case, since he unwittingly gave his enemies a hint they might take advantage of. Can a person whose own interests prevail over the interests of others declare something not to his own advantage that was sure to be bitterly censured and much derided by those whose naked eyes failed to observe the expansion of the universe. If despite this, a person came up with the contention that Muhammad was an intelligent man who might have perceived this truth, what sort of an intelligence this might have been? And, instead of boasting of having been the depository of such knowledge, why did he prefer to tell an untruth and claimed that this was not his own discovery but the revelation by God? While the inventor or discoverer of a pin is inclined to brag about his breakthrough, why on earth did Muhammad choose to be modest and categorically declared that the Quran was not his own production, but revelation of God? Was this due to humility? Would these people – who had denied his prophet hood and accused him of having been an impostor – have dared qualify him with the laudable attribute of ‘humility’?

DISCOVERY OF THE EXPANDING UNIVERSE

In Newton’s physics there was a gap. Newton believed in an endlessly vast and static universe. His law of gravity encountered a difficulty. How was it that the physical bodies defying their mutual attractions, had failed, in the course of aeons, to collapse into a unity? The formula that Einstein devised had abandoned the notions of absolute notions of space and time as reference points for all objects in the universe.

Alexander Friedmann, Russian physicist, basing on Einstein’s formulas, discovered that the slightest effect would cause the universe to expand or to contract. Georges Lemaître, a Belgian cleric, astronomer and cosmologist, formulated that the universe had begun in a cataclysmic explosion of a small, primeval super-atom, like the growing of an oak tree from acorn. This theory explained the recession of galaxies within the framework of Alfred Einstein’s theory of general relativity. This was so incredible that even Einstein could not believe it, although all this had originated from his own formulas. He claimed that physics was not the forte of Lemaître, and the universe was an infinite expanse.

The initial theory posited that the universe was expanding. This was a statement that no philosopher had ever postulated. Kant had said in his Critique of Pure Reason that this was an antinomy insoluble by human intelligence. This theory fitted everything and explained the reason why the universe did not collapse despite gravity; he combined thus the formulas of Newton and Einstein. There was no alternative. The key had fitted the lock. It was the correct explanation of the enigma. However, this statement met with usual adverse reaction: “No, it is not the fact…”

Outside the sphere of theoretical squabble, about the same time, American astronomer Hubble was making observations with his sophisticated telescope in the Mount Wilson observatory. He had observed that galaxies were receding from each other, which proved that the universe was expanding. In answer to those who said they could not believe in things their eyes had not witnessed, Hubble’s discovery led to the following declaration: “Now that you see it, you’ve got to believe”. Hubble had showed this by the Doppler Effect, by the change in apparent frequency or wavelength because of relative motion of a source of radiation and an observer. Thus the wavelengths of receding bodies prolonged in the spectrum of light waves, shifting to red, while, if the bodies approached each other, the wavelengths would shorten shifting to blue. The light that came from galaxies shifted to red that showed that the galaxies receded. In line with this observation, Hubble found out a striking law; the speed of galaxies that receded was directly proportional to the distance between galaxies. The farther stood a galaxy, the more its speed of recession augmented. The result was tested again and again. In 1950, a high-magnification telescope was installed on Mount Palomar in USA, the largest instrument of its kind. The new tests and controls justified this observation. The measurements made pointed to the fact that the creation of the universe had taken place about 10-15 billions years ago.

Both Einstein and Lemaître took an interest in Hubble’s work, Einstein, who did not agree with Lemaître at first, eventually acknowledged during a conference that Lemaître was right after all. He confessed that his failure to endorse Lemaître’s findings had been the gravest error in his life. The fact that the universe was of a dynamic nature and expanding, confirmed by observations was also validated by the great physicist Einstein.

In the examples presented by Hubble and Lemaître, we see illustrated how a physicist arrived at a conclusion both in theory and through observation. Lemaître demonstrated how he had had recourse to Einstein’s formulas to substantiate his discovery theoretically achieved, while Hubble presented the data that his observations had supplied and the conclusion he had arrived basing on them. As we see, the result obtained by physicists is the consequence of a chain of researches. The Creator of physical laws provides answer in the Quran to the issue of towering importance on the agenda throughout history. The Quran’s communication makes a beeline for his addressees unlike the devious paths the scientist follows; the path it has followed and the manner in which he attained the truth are not important. The provider of this answer does not have to go through all the labyrinths a scientist has to go. The Quran’s method is perfectly straightforward, unswerving and explicit.

Had we had the possibility to look at the universe from above and somebody asked us to describe what we saw, our answer would be that it was expanding. To the Quran’s revelation of this fact 1400 years ago, we could have access only by the assistance of accumulated scientific data acquired throughout long years and sophisticated telescopes. Some ask:”Why people did not believe in Jesus who had performed miracles and healed the sick and the blind?” At a time when science confronted religion, the Quran had furnished answers to the most arduous scientific problems, in a way nothing could challenge them. Observations made by sophisticated telescopes confirm the statements of the Quran. Despite such miracles the Quran contains, unprecedented in history, the persons resolved not to take heed, prefer to remain adamant in their creeds. The Quran, perfectly aware of the human psyche with its prescience, states that the unbelievers will insist on their convictions. This example shows the way why the people did not believe in Christ and other prophets despite their miracles. Miracles change in fact as time goes by, but the type of human being resolved to remain a nihilist remains unchanged.