Theory of Relativity and the Quran

In the Quran, God tells us that during doomsday each day will be 1000 years of our earthly days. “32:5 He governs all that exists, from the celestial space to the earth; and in the end all shall ascend unto Him [for judgment] on a Day the length whereof will be [like] a thousand years of your reckoning.” -- As-Sajdah (The Prostration).
Also, “70:4 All the angels and all the inspiration [ever granted to man] ascend unto Him [daily,] in a day the length whereof is [like] fifty thousand years…” Al-Ma'arig (The Ways of Ascent).

And finally, “22:47 And [so, O Muhammad,] they challenge thee to hasten the coming upon them of [God’s] chastisement: but God never fails to fulfill His promise - and, behold, in thy Sustainer’s sight a day is like a thousand years of your reckoning.” -- Al-Hajj (The Pilgrimage).

In both cases the Arabic word used for ascend is “Yaruhu.” I am here attempting to understand how a day can be 1000 years or even 50,000 years.

Before Einstein, scientists assumed that time is constant. The journey of the change in that concept began with the Danish astronomer Ole Christensen Roemer. He did so by observing the Jupiter moons. Jupiter is the largest planet in the solar system. He observed that the times it took the moons behind Jupiter were not evenly spaced if the moons went around Jupiter at a constant rate. As the earth and Jupiter went around the sun, their distance varied, therefore the distance of the moons to the earth also varied. He argued that that this was because the light from the moons took longer to reach us when they were farther away. He calculated the speed of light to be 140,000 miles per second, an error of 25% compared to the currently measured speed of light at 186,000 miles per second.

The second major progress was the development of Maxwell’s theorem. Maxwell’s work predicted that electromagnetic currents and waves must be traveling at a constant speed. The way he discovered that was by attempting to mathematically explain Farday’s experiments that showed that when an electric current passes in a wire, it deflects the compass. Conversely, the movement of magnets generates an electric current in wires. This means that changes in electric fields generate changes in magnetic fields and vice versa. In a rare event in history of science in which a mathematical equation predicts physics first, Maxwell’s mathematical expression predicted in the absence of magnets and wires the disturbances in electric fields generate disturbances in magnetic fields and they interact together to travel at a constant speed. That constant speed was estimated to be exactly the speed of light to be exactly 299,792,458 meters per second. Maxwell literally stumbled on the speed of light.

The problem here is, as we all know, speed must be relative to something else. The problem with Maxwell’s equation is that it doesn’t have any frame of reference. That speed was not relative to anything else. Scientists of that time did not bother too much about that. They assumed that waves must have been occurring due to the oscillation of something. This something they called the ether. The ether was conceived to permeate everything. The sun and the earth must be moving in the ether. Scientists conceived that this motion must be generating ether winds. That means that in the earth’s journey around the sun, at one point it is moving with the ether waves and at others moving against the ether waves. That means that because the speed of light is relative to the ether, the speed of light relative to earth must be changing depending on the position of earth relative to the sun. Michelson and Morley tried to measure any variation in the speed of light at different seasons. They couldn’t detect any and by 1881 they published their results indicating that the only feasible assumption is that ether does not exist. This means that that speed of light must be a constant independent of the speed of the observer. No matter how fast you are moving, the speed of light is a constant. This was bizarre. Commonly, if we jog fast enough we should be able to catch up with light. Not any more. No matter how fast you jog, the speed of light relative to you will be constant at 299,792,458 meter per second.

Einstein came in and made two axioms:
1- That laws of physics including Maxwell’s are applicable no matter what the speed of the observer or source is. This called the principle of invariance, meaning laws of physics do not change from one place to the other. Seems simple but has profound impact.
2- There is no experiment that is capable of identifying absolute motion. This assertion dates back to Galileo. It means that if I am sitting on a train and the train is moving, I cannot really tell if the train is moving or the earth around me is. There is no experiment I can make to assert which way it is, while sitting on the train.

To understand the consequences of the above, Einstein started to make thought experiments. This was his favorite way of thinking. Einstein argued to develop a light clock. The clock consists of two mirrors, between which a beam of light bounces back and forth. If the two mirrors are 1 meter apart, then the light takes 6.67 nanoseconds to complete a round trip. If the mirrors are put on a fast moving train. For an observer on the train, the light takes 6.67 nanoseconds to bounce back and forth. For an observer on earth however the light is traveling a longer distance since by the time the lights lands on the mirror is has already moved at the speed of the train and by the time it bounces back to the source mirror, it too has moved. Therefore, for the observer on earth, light is traveling longer. The only way for this to happen is that light must travel faster relative to the observer on earth. However, the speed of light c is the same no matter what as Einstein postulated. Therefore, the only way to resolve this is if the clock ticks at different rates. In order for the light to traverse the longer distance, time must be slower on the moving train compared to time for the platform observer. This is what is called the theory of special relativity. A person on the platform is therefore aging faster than a person sitting on the train. Let us try to understand that. For a passenger on a train the clock takes 6.67 nanoseconds and each of her heartbeats takes 150 million ticks of the light clock. However, for a person on the platform the clock on the train takes longer than his own clock. It takes slightly more than 150 million ticks of the train clock to make one heartbeat. Time moves slowly for the train passenger. This means that life itself can change because of speed. An experiment at Brookhaven national lab confirmed that. The scientists at Brookhaven in the late 1990s built a machine that produced beams of muons (the muon is identical to an electron except it is heavier. Scientists to date do not understand the reason of muon’s existence) circulating around a 14-meter diameter ring at a speed of 99.94 percent the speed of light. At normal speeds, the lifetime of those muons is only 2.2 microseconds. These muons survived for 60 microseconds, which is exactly the number predicted by the Einstein’s special relativity. This concept is referred to as time dilation.

Basic trigonometric equation can be developed to show that g = square root ( 1 – square(v/c)). It is actually a surprisingly simple derivation. A nice video of the light clock thought experiment can be found at: http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/more_stuff/flashlets/lightclock.swf
The proof itself can be be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

According to relativity, a clock traveling at speed actually slows down compared to a clock standing still. g is the slow down ration and it is in our case will be 1000*365 = 365000. According to Einstein, g = square root ( 1 – square(v/c)), where v/c is the ratio between our speed during doomsday and the speed of light. Therefore, during doomsday, we must be moving at a speed = 0.999999999996247 of the speed of light. This is very close to the speed of light.

Now, for the angles ascending to the sky in a day worth 50,000 years, it is even closer to the speed of light. They will be running at a speed of 0.999999999999998 of the speed of light.

Next time, let us try to understand the implication of those figures and what it means to ascend at that speed and why God said ascending in reference to the angles, all inspirations, and then in doomsday to all creatures.

Moral Panic

One cannot escape to note the Egyptian and Algerian reaction to the soccer match where Algeria won 1-0 and qualified to the world cup for the first time in twenty some years. Egypt also has not qualified since 1990, almost thirty years. It is certainly a symptom of deeper issues that need to be carefully analyzed. There is no need to further analyze the symptom, they are widely discussed everywhere. There is a need to understand the deeper causes.

The Strategic Causes

First, there is the broader issue of the Egyptian-Arab relations. Since the emergence of Nationalism after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, several factors have made Egypt the natural eminent state in the Middle East. A vibrant Cairo culture, a rooted history, a large population, a courageous fight for independence from British rule, an economy that is largely connected to the outer world, an attractive royal elite, a significant economy, and a strong education system that graduated people such as Taha Hussein and Al-Aqad who knew how the world works and appeared ready to accept the challenges of independence and nationalism. The Tanweer or enlightenment movement in Egypt created an aura around Egypt that attracted the rest of the Arab world. This was at a time when the Middle East space was either occupied or so backward that did not attract any attention from t he rest of the world.

Egypt however was (and still remains) indecisive on its role as the eminent state in the Arab world. For example, Egyptian government in 1948 decided not to enter the Palestine war. Only a reversal by King Farouk led to Egypt entering the war. Egypt has always been torn by differing identities competing for the heart and soul of its people on deciding the nation’s path forward. Islamic, Arab, Mediterranean, Ancient Egyptian, Western, or even European are among those competing identities reflecting Egyptian long and rich history as a crossroad of the world. Taha Hussein had the most adventurous foray in attempting to reconcile those competing identities. An Azhar trained scholar, who lived and was affected by the European culture, Taha Hussein attempted to revise the moribund Islamic tradition and reconcile it with modern European concepts of science, freedom, and liberty. The Arab world failed to understand these competing identities and often interpreted an Egyptian tendency to drift toward a more European or Cosmopolitan or even Ancient Egyptian identities as a renege on Egypt’s core Islamic beliefs and commitment to the Arab cause. Even worse, it was often interpreted as Egyptian blasphemy or cowardice. The rest of the Arab world failed to understand that these tendencies are natural and that Arab themselves had to embrace and support the Egyptian search for identity not to use it as an accusation platform. As a matter of fact, the Arab accusation of reneging on Egyptian Islamic beliefs or commitment to Arab causes reinforces the Egyptian tendencies to look for other identities where accusations are not thrown. The latest Egyptian-Algerian soccer affair highlights that. For example, Algerian accusations thrown on Egypt of Zionism only pushed Egyptian thinking further into disassociating the nation from its Arab surrounding. There is no doubt in my mind that these tendencies are best described as shenanigans largely because geography cannot be changed. However, a search for a national identity and achieving a national consensus over it, is a process that has to be performed through the free will of its citizens and its cultural political elite so the results can be assured of longevity. However, the Arab world failed to realize that and saw the confusing identity dialog on cultural identity in Egypt as a laughing matter. This has been accentuated by the fact that while Egypt is a multi-cultural and diverse society that has been traditionally open for various cultures, the rest of the Arab world is either mostly monolithic or suppresses its minorities. During the belle époque at the beginning of the 20th century, Egypt had vibrant minorities achieving significant status in the Egyptian social and political ladder. Therefore, what was in Egypt a vibrant cultural identity dialog was viewed in the rest of the Arab world through a different prism. Another example of this rift in views is worth mentioning. For example, when Egyptian movies depict dancers and prostitutes in Egypt, Arabs view this as exposure of what should not be exposed and an indication that most of Egypt behaves as such. This is a failure of understanding that the role of cinema is to expose, a concept is largely alien to the monolithic aspiring (and I wouldn’t say monolithic since it is not) nature of Arab society.

Now, the Arab-Egyptian relation suffers not only from Arab lack of understanding of the Egyptian society and needs, but also from the Egyptians elevated expectations of that relation. There was a time until the 1960s when the Egyptian preeminence was almost taken for granted by the Arabs. However, several factors have changed. First, it is economic. The rise of oil wealth has created more powerful powerhouse in many Arab capitals, not least of them is Riyadh. Second, the glitz associated with the Egyptian royal family or with Nasser is only now a reflection of a bygone era. The glitz now is in abundance in the new wealthy Arab states of Qatar, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi. Third, for decades Egypt provided political and cultural leadership to the Arab world. This means that the Egyptian society was addressing the problems of its age and was on the leading edge of the issues of the époque. In the 1920s, Egypt led the independence movement till the 1950s together with countries like India. Ghandi in Egypt was mirrored with Saad Zaghloul in Egypt. Then, in the 1950s and 1960s, Egypt led the fight for socialism and equality. Nasser in Egypt was a world star, like Obama today. He shared the world stage with stars like Jawaher Nehru and Titu. However, when Egypt’s biggest political struggle now is suppressing Muslim brotherhood, reconciling Palestinian factions, and ensuring a peaceful transition of power to the president’s son, this makes Egypt like the rest of the Arab world. This certainly is neither leadership nor preeminence. Finally, while Arab wealth has led to at least the perception of civilization in traffic and social behavior, the economic and political pressures in Egypt damaged Cairo’s metropolitan status and damaged the behavior in the Egyptian society at large compared to other Arab societies. Many parts of Cairo now are only a sad image of its glorious past with a significant part of its society who immigrated to the wealthy oil countries only attempting in vain to make their livings in Egypt comparable in all aspects (including attire) to those in Riyadh or Doha, on the false premise that the attire is what can lead to improvement in quality of life through God’s blessings. When the situation is as such, it is certainly a reversal of leadership. This deterioration in Egyptian position in the Arab world was accentuated by the rift of the 1970s and 1980s when Egypt was politically ostracized in the Arab world for its peace with Israel.

Egyptians on their part failed to comprehend that this deterioration in the materialistic definition of position is real. Most Egyptians inside their psyche resent that deterioration because it is only ascribed to the rise of oil. Egyptians mostly maintain that Arab societies are still inferior to them. This has led to complex relationship. Egyptians expect that Arabs behave in such a way that Egypt still is the leader while Arabs are aspiring to claim their own identities and do not see winds of leadership blowing from Egypt anymore. Egyptians are better off accepting that in terms of material leadership, their nation has lost its preeminence, although leadership is not only measured in money. Egypt has a lot it can offer to its region but has failed to do so. For example, Egypt did not continue its historical trend of leading on world issues from anti-colonialism to socialism. The issue of the 1990s was democracy and Egypt did not and doesn’t yet provide any leadership in that regard. Leadership is not about money. It is about the presence of vibrant debates, cultural exchanges, and powerful institutions that can provide a moral and political compass to the rest of the Arab world. Egyptians failed to create that. Probably the only area that Egypt has excelled in is the freedom of its press and even that was not without black and tarnished spots. Nevertheless, Egypt still expects itself to lead and be viewed as the leader, while in reality leadership is not only about the history and what was, but it is mostly about the future and what can be, it is about painting a picture for the future and having a philosophy for how to achieve such a vision.

This complex Arab-Egyptian relationship has led to bizarre symptoms. For example, Algerians truly believe that they are better than in Egyptians in terms of their abilities to fight the Israelis or stand more firmly to Israel. This of course is laughable because it is such a hypothetical dream that even if the myth is true, one cannot test it or translate it into reality. For example, even if Algeria is a stronger foe to Israel, how do we change geography to allow that Algerian-Israeli battle to occur? This is borderline melancholy. Also, if Algeria is that strong, why doesn’t it project its force 3000 miles away and interfere directly in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. These are all hallucinations unfortunately. The natural Egyptian response to that is things like how come Algerians speak that way given that Egypt has aided Algeria in its fight for independence and has suffered the 1956 invasion largely because of its role in aiding Algerian independence movement. This hot exchange between the two countries highlight the Egyptians tendency to dwell on the past and assume it can be premise for leadership and the Arab misunderstanding of Egyptians and the assumption that when Egypt settles with Israel, it means it is reneging on its Arab and Islamic roots. Unfortunately, this exchange is not constructive, as it cannot build a strong foundation for the future.

Complicating Factors

The complications of the Arab-Egyptian relationship is the main broad theme underlining the Arab-Algerian soccer affair, however, is not the only one unfortunately. There are few other less strategic issues but they are equally lethal. First is the situation in Cairo and Algiers. Cairo is going through a risky succession plan that is fraught with dangers. The political elite in Egypt is looking for any reason to make the succession plan successful. Certainly a fight against a common enemy helps particularly if that fight can only be in words given that this enemy is 3000 miles away and has virtually no presence in Egypt. Egyptians are also unwilling and unable to confront their malaise or their economical and political problems. This is frustrating Egyptians for sure who find it hard to confront their government and inflict the change they need and with the same token are disagreeing with their government policies and resent the status of their current affairs reaching such a new low. Therefore, soccer probably remains as the only outlet for venting Egyptian frustration or uniting a defeated country looking for any victory.

In Algiers, the country has been fighting a civil war for the past 30 years. The political elite is attempting to show a new unified country at any expense. Also, the Algerian civil war, which claimed at least 200,000 lives and has seen some of the most horrific massacres in the history of mankind has severely undermined the basic fabric of the Algerian society and has made it drift further toward more violence. Similarly, Algerians are looking for a victory of any kind that would represent an escape from confronting the real political issues they face and a necessary look in the mirror to solve the perennial Arab-Berber tension, corruption, lack of a functioning political system, and a need to establish healthy Algerian-French relationship. Because none of that is occurring, Algeria is also escaping into soccer fantasy.

It is amazing how media in both countries is so keen on how each country is viewed in the rest of the world. Both nations are defeated nations, looking for recognition and view world cup as a demonstration of success. None of that is really true in absence of confronting their real issues.

With 100 million people in both countries looking for an escape from a dreaded situation, and with civil war violence enshrined on one of the sides, and with a heavy loads of misunderstanding in the Arab-Egyptian relations, both sides confronted each other and a spark was all that is necessary to cause a hysterical reaction.

What Will Happen Next?

Moral panic is defined as the intensity of feeling expressed in a population about an issue that appears to threaten the social order. Stanley Cohen, author of the seminal Folk Devils and Moral Panics (1972), says a moral panic occurs when "[a] condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests. The current media frenzy on the Egyptian-Algerian soccer affair can only be described as moral panic.

Moral panic has several distinct features. According to Goode and Ben-Yehuda, moral panic consists of the following characteristics:

1- Concern - There must be awareness that the behavior of the group or category in question is likely to have a negative impact on society.

2- Hostility - Hostility towards the group in question increases, and they become "folk devils". A clear division forms between "them" and "us". This is clearly happening right now in the Egyptian and Algerian media.

3- Consensus - Though concern does not have to be nationwide, there must be widespread acceptance that the group in question poses a very real threat to society. It is important at this stage that the "moral entrepreneurs" are vocal and the "folk devils" appear weak and disorganised. Gamal and Alaa Mubarak are clearly the moral entrepreneurs who are providing moral leadership to Egypt against the Algerian. Egypt will start characterizing Algerians as immoral, barbaric, and disorganized.

4- Disproportionality - The action taken is disproportionate to the actual threat posed by the accused group. For example, injuries to 22 Egyptians in Sudan cannot be compared to the death of thousands of Egyptian in Iraq or the 3000 Egyptians who died on the Red Sea Cruiser Al-Salam, or to the flogging of Egyptian doctors in Saudi Arabia, etc. For sure, the Algerian violence is deplorable, however the Egyptian reaction is disproportionate. The Algerian reaction is also similar. Declaring a national holiday the next day after winning a soccer match is a stretch probably not seen anywhere else in the world.

5- Volatility - Moral panics are highly volatile and tend to disappear as quickly as they appeared due to a wane in public interest or news reports changing to another topic.

We should start seeing the volatility of this moral panic within the next 2-3 weeks. Both countries will claim some form of victory. Algeria reached world cup. Egypt has taken measures to boycott Algeria and protect its citizens.

What SHOULD Happen Next?

This is a very different question. However, I certainly hope that the following is what would happen.

First, Egypt needs confront its own political issues. It needs to admit that it has deteriorated in the materialistic definition of power and it can only provide now political leadership by providing a vision for the rest of the region to follow. This can only be achieved by utilizing Egyptian cultural strength to build strong democratic institutions, renew the debate on Egyptian identity, and attempt to reconcile those competing identities into what is truly Egyptian multi-cultural identity. This means enshrining those identities and what they represent into a coherent and lasting constitution of the Egyptian people.

Second, after reconciling with itself, Egypt needs to reconcile with its surrounding and build a foundation of healthy relationship with its neighboring Arab countries. This relation can only be established if the first step is taken of an Egypt that is reconciled with itself. If Egypt is confused about its Islamic, Arab, Pharos, or Mediterranean identity and is unable to resolve those identities into meaningful debate in healthy institutions, Egyptians should expect the rest of the Arab world to be also confused. The political tension between the Egyptian government and Muslim brotherhood is only a consequence of that confused identity. By confronting its own issues, recognizing reality, and understand that leadership is only about the future not about the past, Egyptians would have a chance of building a healthy foundation in their relation to the rest of the Arab world.

Third, Arabs failed to embrace and understand Egypt. It really is about time to do so and understand the Egyptian exceptionalism. When achieved turned toward socialism, it was a necessity of Egyptian poverty and not a slap against Saudi Arabia. Also, when Egyptians hopefully pick democracy it is because a multi-cultural and multi-religious Egypt truly needs it and it is not a sleigh to the rest of the undemocratic Arab countries. That Arabs need to respect that and refrain from supporting Gamal Mubarak’s presidential aspirations for fear that a democratic Egypt will in turn upset the ruling families in the Arab world. It is an unfortunate fact that most of Gamal’s support is coming from Saudi Arabia, Emirates, and Israel.

Fourth and regarding the specific soccer affair, Egypt needs to elevate the rule of law and effectively and diligently prosecute those who committed crimes whether Egyptians or Algerians. This is important first for the rule of law and for everybody to understand that actions carry consequences. Second, it is important for Egypt’s moral standing in the world and for its respect for itself. When a son of the president is on TV saying that whoever insults me I hit him on the head, I am not sure that really reinforces the rule of law in the country. I understand he is genuinely upset and I believe him to be truly nationalistic and loves his country, nevertheless, Egypt really needs a strong emphasis on the rule of law. I am not saying that simply because I am just in love with prosecution and the rule of law. I am saying it because prosecution is the only option Egypt has to inflict damage on the Algerian troublemakers. For example, severing diplomatic ties has no impact. Withdrawing the ambassador has no impact and certainly doesn’t put Egypt in a leadership position. Harrassing Algerians in Egypt will result in intensifying the retaliatory attacks on Egyptians in Algeria. Short of declaring war on Algeria, Egypt’s only effective course of action is prosecution. This is not without precedence. When Algeria’s soccer star Bellloumi attacked an Egyptian doctor in Cairo, he was sentenced to a prison term in Egypt. The Interpol was after him and therefore he could not leave Algeria until recently when Egypt rescinded the verdict. Same needs to be applied this time. Those who attacked Egyptians in Sudan need to be prosecuted in either Sudan or Egypt. A diligent investigation has to start and be carried meticulously. Credit cards, cell phone calls, hotel identities must all be traced to reach to the culprits. Even more important, the journalists and soccer federation officials who instigated violence need to be also prosecuted for instigating violence. French authorities will cooperate in that prosecution given their own grievances with Algerian vandalism in the streets of Paris after Algeria’s victory. Also, it is important that Egyptians who committed crimes must also be equally and justly be punished.