Shaqq al-Qamar as a Transient Image-Duplication Event
This paper rewrites and expands the draft analysis of the reported Shaqq al-Qamar into a technical model comparison study. The event is not treated as mechanical fission of the lunar body; it is treated as a transient image-duplication or image-parting event viewed from Earth. Five mechanisms are evaluated: point-mass Schwarzschild gravitational lensing, regular cosmic-string conical-deficit lensing, a Witten-type superconducting cosmic-string variant, Morris–Thorne/Ellis wormhole displacement lensing, atmospheric refraction through a superior-mirage or ducting layer, and an ultrarelativistic compact-object shock. The observational bench mark is supplied by the hadith framework: the Moon is described as appearing in two parts, with a mountain visually between or separating the apparent pieces. Since the lunar angular diameter is approximately 0.52◦, a clean two-piece visual separation requires an angular parting of order δθ ∼ 0.5◦. A Schwarzschild lens can satisfy this angular scale only by introducing a stellar-scale mass, M ≈ 1.24M⊙, at the broad least-disruptive placement, causing catastrophic accelerations and tidal stresses. A wormhole avoids a singular attractive lens only by invoking exotic stress-energy and non-rigid caustic image maps. Atmospheric optics is physically con servative, but it naturally favors low-altitude, vertically distorted, shimmering, and chromatic images rather than a stable high-altitude achromatic bisection. The regular cosmic string is therefore identified as the best clean-split geometric mechanism: its spacetime is locally flat, so it can duplicate images without ordinary Newtonian attraction or tidal destruction. Its fatal empirical weakness is that the required dimensionless tension, Gµ/c2 ∼ 3.5×10−4, is far above global cosmic-string bounds. The paper therefore frames the super conducting local-loop variant as a speculative, conditional model: it preserves the clean conical duplication while providing a possible luminous seam through induced ionospheric currents. The conclusion is not that such a string is established, but that among the mechanisms considered it is the only one that simultaneously matches a stable clean split and avoids extinction-level local tides.

The report of Shaqq al-Qamar, the splitting or parting of the Moon, can be approached in two distinct ways. The first is literal: the Moon physically separated and later reassembled. That reading immediately raises severe geophysical difficulties because the Moon’s gravitational binding energy is enormous and any mechanical rupture large enough to separate macroscopic lunar pieces would be expected to leave dramatic, recent geological signatures. The second is observational: an Earth-based observer saw a transient parting or duplication of the lunar image, while the Moon itself remained physically intact. This paper adopts the second approach.

The purpose of this analysis is not to decide a theological claim by physics. It is to ask a narrower forensic cosmological question: if the observed description is interpreted as an apparent image-duplication event, which physical mechanism best reproduces the visual benchmark while preserving the Earth-Moon system? The answer depends on the ranking criterion. Atmospheric optics is the most conservative mechanism dynamically, but it is not the cleanest visual fit for a stable, high-altitude, achromatic bisection. Cosmic-string lensing is observationally constrained in modern cosmology, but it is geometrically unique in producing duplicated images without ordinary magnification, shear, or Newtonian tidal attraction.

The thesis developed below is therefore conditional and comparative. A global, stable network of strings with the required tension is observationally excluded. However, among the mechanisms surveyed, a cosmic string is the only relativistic model that naturally satisfies the Clean Split benchmark without invoking a nearby stellar mass, a destructive shock wave, or a caustic wormhole boundary. A superconducting local-loop variant is further considered because it could supply luminous atmospheric or ionospheric effects along the apparent seam while preserving the underlying conical duplication geometry.

The hadith reports are treated here only as observational descriptions. Several narrations describe the Moon appearing in two parts. In the narration attributed to Ibn Mas’ud in Sahih al-Bukhari, the Moon is described as splitting into two portions, one associated with the mountain and the other beyond or on the other side of it. Other reports and exegetical summaries mention Mount Hira appearing between the two apparent lunar portions. For the purpose of this paper, the relevant scientific information is not the theological status of the report but the visual geometry: two lunar components with a terrestrial mountain visually between them [2, 3, 4].

This is a strong observational filter. A vague dimming, halo, or cloud-obscuration event is not sufficient. The image must resemble a parting or duplication with a dark or terrestrial reference feature between the apparent lunar components. This motivates the following benchmark:

Clean Split Benchmark: two bright lunar components, each preserving recognizable lunar surface structure, separated by an angular gap comparable to a lunar radius or diameter, with minimal chromatic fringing, minimal shimmer, and no catastrophic physical effect on Earth.

The Moon’s mean radius and mean geocentric distance are taken as [5]
RM ≃1.7374×106 m,
D⊕M ≃3.844×108 m.

The corresponding angular diameter is
θM =2arctan RM/D⊕M
=2arctan 1.7374×106/3.844 × 108
=9.039×10−3 rad ≈ 0.5179◦.

Thus an image separation capable of placing a mountain peak visually between two lunar halves should be of order
δθ ∼ θM ≈0.52◦ ≈ 9.0×10−3 rad.

For a point-mass lens the natural half-separation scale is the Einstein radius, so the benchmark value is
θE =0.25◦ = 4.363×10−3 rad.

For a cosmic string the relevant scale is instead the conical deficit angle, for which the benchmark is
∆≈0.5◦ =8.727×10−3 rad.

The mechanisms are evaluated using five criteria:
1. Angular feasibility: can the mechanism generate δθ ∼ 0.5◦?
2. Visual fidelity: does it produce a stable, sharp, achromatic split rather than rings, arcs, shimmer, or caustics?
3. Geophysical survival: does it avoid atmospheric stripping, crustal failure, and orbital disruption?
4. Forensic invisibility or detectability: would a 7th-century event leave modern traces in lunar ranging, lunar geology, CMB maps, or gravitational-wave constraints?
5. Model economy: does it require speculative entities or fine tuning beyond its baseline mechanism?

The analysis below gives priority to the clean visual benchmark. This differs from a purely conservative physical explanation, where atmospheric optics would dominate by prior probability. The key question is: assuming a stable high-altitude clean split, which mechanism remains viable?

For a point-mass gravitational lens, the thin-lens equation is [6]
β =θ−θ2E/θ

where β is the unlensed angular position of the source, θ is the observed image angle, and the Einstein radius is
θE = 4GM/c2 Dds/DdDs 1/2

Here Dd is the observer-lens distance, Ds the observer-source distance, and Dds the lens-source distance. Solving for the lens mass gives
M= c2θ2E/4G DdDs/Dds

For lunar lensing, take Ds = D⊕M, define
x ≡ Dd/Ds

and use Dds = (1 −x)Ds. Then
M(x) = c2θ2E/4G xD2 s/(1 −x)Ds
= c2θ2EDs/4G
x/1 −x .

With θE = 0.25◦ = 4.363×10−3 rad and Ds = 3.844×108 m,
c2θ2EDs/4G =2.46×1030 kg,

so

M(x) =2.46×1030 x/1 −x kg.
At the broad least-disruptive placement, x = 1/2, this becomes
M1/2 = 2.46×1030 kg ≈ 1.24M

Thus a point-mass lens large enough to generate a 0.25◦ Einstein radius is not a small optical perturbation; it is effectively stellar. Even placing the lens unrealistically close to the observer, say Dd = 100 km with Dds ≈ Ds, gives

M≈ c2θ2 EDd/4G ≈6.4×1026 kg ≈0.34MJ