God has created this world with astonishing balance in all of its components. This delicate balance prepared the universe to fit the life of the mankind, and this reality implies that man came to this earth to do a mission which is worshipping the creator of this magnificent universe. So let's review how each detail in this universe could affect our existence if it was not at the delicate balance, it exists now.
Allah says in the holy Quran
"Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of Night and Day,― there are indeed Signs for men of understanding * Men who celebrate the praises of Allah standing, sitting, and lying down on their sides, and contemplate the (wonders of) creation in the heavens and the earth, (with the thought): "Our Lord! not for naught hast Thou created (all) this! Glory to Thee! Give us salvation from the penalty of the Fire" (Quran 3:190-191)
The basic forces of matter and the universe are astounding. They could not have come into existence by accident. There are several basic forces in nature which would destroy the universe—or not let it form—were it not for the delicate balance within each of them.
Gravity is the weakest force in the universe, yet it is in perfect balance. If gravity were any stronger, the smaller stars could not form; and, if it were any smaller, the bigger stars could not form and no heavy elements could exist. Only "red dwarf" stars would exist, and these would radiate too feebly to support life on a planet.
All masses are found to attract one another with a force that varies inversely as the square of the separation distance between the masses. That, in brief, is the law of gravity. But where did that "2" [square] come from? Why is the equation exactly "separation distance squared"? Why is it not 1.87, 1.92, 2.001, or 3.378; why is it exactly 2? Every test reveals the force of gravity to be keyed precisely to that 2. Any value other than 2 would lead to an eventual decay of orbits,—and the entire universe would destroy itself!
![]() |
Gravity is the weakest force in the universe, yet it is in perfect balance |
(Another example would be the inverse-square law, which is often mentioned in connection with the redshift and the visibility of quasars. According to this law, light diminishes exactly according to the square of its distance from the observer, not 1.8, .97, or some other fraction, but exactly 2.)
It is the nuclear force that holds the atoms together. There is a critical level to the nuclear force also. If it were larger, there would be no hydrogen, but only helium and the heavy elements. If it were smaller, there would be only hydrogen, and no heavy elements. Without hydrogen and without heavy elements there could be no life. In addition, without hydrogen, there could be no stable stars. If the nuclear force were only one part in a hundred stronger or weaker than it now is, carbon could not exist—and carbon is the basic element in every living thing. A 2 percent increase in the nuclear force would eliminate protons.
Another crucial factor is the electromagnetic force. If it were just a very small amount smaller or larger, no chemical bonds could form. A reduction in strength by a factor of only 1.6 would result in the rapid decay of protons into leptons. A three-fold increase in the charge of the electron would render it impossible for any elements to exist, other than hydrogen. A three-fold decrease would bring the destruction of all neutral atoms by even the lowest heat—that found in outer space.
![]() |
If there is any change in the delicate value of electromagnetic force, any type of matter will not exist |
It is of interest that, in spite of the delicate internal ratio balance within each of the four forces (gravitation, electromagnetism, and the weak and strong forces), those four forces have strengths which differ so greatly from one another that the strongest is ten thousand billion billion billion billion times more powerful than the weakest of them.
It should also be noted that evolutionists cannot claim that these delicate balances occurred as a result of "natural selection" or "mutations"! We are here dealing with the basic properties of matter. The proton-to-neutron mass ratio is what it has always been—what it was since the Beginning! It has not changed, it never will change. It began just right; there was no second chance! The same with all the other factors and balances to be found in elemental matter and physical principles governing it.
A proton is a subatomic particle found in the nucleus of all atoms. It has a positive electric charge that is equal to the negative charge of the electron. A neutron is a subatomic particle that has no electric charge. The mass of the neutron must exceed that of the proton in order for the stable elements to exist. But the neutron can only exceed the mass of the proton by an extremely small amount—an amount which is exactly twice the mass of the electron. That critical point of balance is only one part in a thousand. If the ratio of the mass of the proton to neutron were to vary outside of that limit—chaos would result.
The proton's mass is exactly what it should be in order to provide stability for the entire universe. If it were any less or more, atoms would fly apart or crush together, and everything they are in—which is everything!—would be destroyed. If the mass of the proton were only slightly larger, the added weight would cause it to quickly become unstable and decay into a neutron, positron, and neutrino. Since hydrogen atoms have only one proton, its dissolution would destroy all hydrogen, and hydrogen is the dominant element in the universe. A master Designer planned that the proton's mass would be slightly smaller than that of the neutron. Without that delicate balance the universe would collapse.
A photon is the basic quantum, or unit, of light or other electromagnetic radiant energy, when considered as a discrete particle. The baryon is any subatomic particle whose weight is equal to or greater than that of a proton. This photon-to-baryon ratio is crucial. If it were much higher than it is, stars and galaxies could not hold together through gravitational attraction.
THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE IN THE UNIVERSE
Many other relations, distances, and factors are crucial to life as we know it.
Scientists recognize that there is a strong quality running through nature all about us, that enables life to exist on our planet. This is called the "anthropic principle." It appears that water, atmosphere, chemicals—were all perfectly designed for living things to exist, and, in special sense, for mankind to exist.
This is quite obvious to any thinking individual who is willing, without prejudice, to consider the things of nature in our world and outside of it.
There are many other examples that could be cited in nature which require the most delicate of balancings in order for the stars, planets, life, and mankind to exist.
![]() |
The Universe must have those properties which allow life to develop within it at some stage in its history |
Before concluding this section, we will consider but one more: the distance that the moon is from the earth. If it were much closer, it would crash into our planet, if much farther away, it would move off into space.
If it were much closer, the tides that the moon causes on the earth would become dangerously larger. Ocean waves would sweep across low-lying sections of the continents. Resultant friction would heat the oceans, destroying the delicate thermal balance needed for life on earth.
A more distant moon would reduce tidal action, making the oceans more sluggish. Stagnant water would endanger marine life, yet it is that very marine life that produces the oxygen that we breath. (We receive more of our oxygen from ocean plants than from land plants.) Why is the moon so exactly positioned in the sky overhead? Who placed it there? It surely did not rush by like a speeding train, then decide to pause, and carefully enter that balanced orbit.
Reference: creation-evolution encyclopedia
The following table shows what would happen if the delicate balance in each individual detail of this vast universe is violated. This obligates us to thank our God who bestows upon us with this delicate balance so that we can live in this universe.
Allah says in Quran "Lo! We have created every thing by measure" (Quran 54:49)
From a paper “Limits for the Universe” by Hugh Ross, Ph.D |
|||
1 |
Gravitational coupling constant |
If larger: |
No stars less than 1.4 solar masses, hence short stellar life spans |
If smaller: |
No stars more than 0.8 solar masses, hence no heavy element production |
||
2 |
Strong nuclear force coupling constant |
If larger: |
No hydrogen; nuclei essential for life are unstable |
If smaller: |
No elements other than hydrogen |
||
3 |
Weak nuclear force coupling constant |
If larger: |
All hydrogen is converted to helium in the big bang, hence too much heavy elements |
If smaller: |
No helium produced from big bang, hence not enough heavy elements |
||
4 |
Electromagnetic coupling constant |
If larger: |
No chemical bonding; elements more massive than boron are unstable to fission |
If smaller: |
No chemical bonding |
||
5 |
Ratio of protons to electrons formation |
If larger: |
Electromagnetism dominates gravity preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation |
If smaller: |
Electromagnetism dominates gravity preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation |
||
6 |
Ratio of electron to proton mass |
If larger: |
No chemical bonding |
If smaller: |
No chemical bonding |
||
7 |
Expansion rate of the universe |
If larger: |
No galaxy formation |
If smaller: |
Universe collapses prior to star formation |
||
8 |
Entropy level of universe |
If larger: |
No star condensation within the proto-galaxies |
If smaller: |
No proto-galaxy formation |
||
9 |
Mass density of the universe |
If larger: |
Too much deuterium from big bang, hence stars burn too rapidly |
If smaller: |
No helium from big bang, hence not enough heavy elements |
||
10 |
Age of the universe |
If older: |
No solar-type stars in a stable burning phase in the right part of the galaxy |
If younger: |
Solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would not yet have formed |
||
11 |
Initial uniformity of radiation |
If smoother: |
Stars, star clusters, and galaxies would not have formed |
If coarser: |
Universe by now would be mostly black holes and empty space |
||
12 |
Average distance between stars |
If larger: |
Heavy element density too thin for rocky planet production |
If smaller: |
Planetary orbits become destabilized |
||
13 |
Solar luminosity |
If increases too soon: |
Runaway green house effect |
If increases too late: |
Frozen oceans |
||
14 |
Fine structure constant* |
If larger: |
No stars more than 0.7 solar masses |
If smaller: |
No stars less then 1.8 solar masses |
||
15 |
Decay rate of the proton |
If greater: |
Life would be exterminated by the release of radiation |
If smaller: |
Insufficient matter in the universe for life |
||
16 |
12C to 16O energy level ratio |
If larger: |
Insufficient oxygen |
If smaller: |
Insufficient carbon |
||
17 |
Decay rate of 8Be |
If slower: |
Heavy element fusion would generate catastrophic explosions in all the stars |
If faster: |
No element production beyond beryllium and, hence, no life chemistry possible |
||
18 |
Mass difference between the neutron and the proton |
If greater: |
Protons would decay before stable nuclei could form |
If smaller: |
Protons would decay before stable nuclei could form |
||
19 |
Initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons |
If greater: |
Too much radiation for planets to form |
If smaller: |
Not enough matter for galaxies or stars to form |
||
20 |
Galaxy type |
If too elliptical: |
Star formation ceases before sufficient heavy element buildup for life chemistry |
If too irregular: |
Radiation exposure on occasion is too severe and/or heavy elements for life chemistry are not available |
||
21 |
Parent star distance from center of galaxy |
If farther: |
Quantity of heavy elements would be insufficient to make rocky planets |
If closer: |
Stellar density and radiation would be too great |
||
22 |
Number of stars in the planetary system |
If more than one: |
Tidal interactions would disrupt planetary orbits |
If less than one: |
Heat produced would be insufficient for life |
||
23 |
Parent star birth date |
If more recent: |
Star would not yet have reached stable burning phase |
If less recent: |
Stellar system would not yet contain enough heavy elements |
||
24 |
Parent star mass |
If greater: |
Luminosity would change too fast; star would burn too rapidly |
If less: |
Range of distances appropriate for life would be too narrow; tidal forces would disrupt the rotational period for a planet of the right distance; uv radiation would be inadequate for plants to make sugars and oxygen |
||
25 |
Parent star age |
If older: |
Luminosity of star would change too quickly |
If younger: |
Luminosity of star would change too quickly |
||
26 |
Parent star color |
If redder: |
Photosynthetic response would be insufficient |
If bluer: |
Photosynthetic response would be insufficient |
||
27 |
Supernovae eruptions |
If too close: |
Life on the planet would be exterminated |
If too far: |
Not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets |
||
If too infrequent: |
Not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets |
||
If too frequent: |
Life on the planet would be exterminated |
||
28 |
White dwarf binaries |
If too few: |
Insufficient fluorine produced for life chemistry to proceed |
If too many: |
Disruption of planetary orbits from stellar density; life on the planet would be exterminated |
||
29 |
Surface gravity (escape velocity) |
If stronger: |
Atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and methane |
If weaker: |
Planet's atmosphere would lose too much water |
||
30 |
Distance from parent star |
If farther: |
Planet would be too cool for a stable water cycle |
If closer: |
Planet would be too warm for a stable water cycle |
||
31 |
Inclination of orbit |
If too great: |
Temperature differences on the planet would be too extreme |
32 |
Orbital eccentricity |
If too great: |
Seasonal temperature differences would be too extreme |
33 |
Axial tilt |
If greater: |
Surface temperature differences would be too great |
If less: |
Surface temperature differences would be too great |
||
34 |
Rotation period |
If longer: |
Diurnal temperature differences would be too great |
If shorter: |
Atmospheric wind velocities would be too great |
||
35 |
Gravitational interaction with a moon |
If greater: |
Tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would be too severe |
If less: |
Orbital obliquity changes would cause climatic instabilities |
||
36 |
Magnetic field |
If stronger: |
Electromagnetic storms would be too severe |
If weaker: |
Inadequate protection from hard stellar radiation |
||
37 |
Thickness of crust |
If thicker: |
Too much oxygen would be transferred from the atmosphere to the crust |
If thinner: |
Volcanic and tectonic activity would be too great |
||
38 |
Albedo (ratio of reflected light to total amount falling on surface) |
If greater: |
Runaway ice age would develop |
If less: |
Runaway green house effect would develop |
||
39 |
Oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere |
If larger: |
Advanced life functions would proceed too quickly |
If smaller: |
Advanced life functions would proceed too slowly |
||
40 |
Carbon dioxide level in atmosphere |
If greater: |
Runaway greenhouse effect would develop |
If less: |
Plants would not be able to maintain efficient photosynthesis |
||
41 |
Water vapor level in atmosphere |
If greater: |
Runaway greenhouse effect would develop |
If less: |
Rainfall would be too meager for advanced life on the land |
||
42 |
Ozone level in atmosphere |
If greater: |
Surface temperatures would be too low |
If less |
Surface temperatures would be too high; there would be too much uv radiation at the surface |
||
43 |
Atmospheric electric discharge rate |
If greater: |
Too much fire destruction would occur |
If less: |
Too little nitrogen would be fixed in the atmosphere |
||
44 |
Oxygen quantity in atmosphere |
If greater: |
Plants and hydrocarbons would burn up too easily |
If less: |
Advanced animals would have too little to breathe |
||
45 |
Oceans to continents ratio |
If greater: |
Diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited |
If smaller: |
diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited |
||
46 |
Soil materializations |
If too nutrient poor: |
diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited |
If too nutrient rich: |
Diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited |
||
47 |
Seismic activity |
If greater: |
Too many life-forms would be destroyed |
If less: |
Nutrients on ocean floors (from river runoff) would not be recycled to the continents through tectonic uplift |
||
From a paper “Limits for the Universe” by Hugh Ross, Ph.D |