Debating Doomsday Scenarios in Public: Historical and Philosophical Issues

1. Debating Doomsday Scenarios in Public: Historical and Philosophical Issues Robert P. Crease Department of Philosophy Stony Brook University

2. Historical Issues:Doomsday scenario discussions relating to heavy ion colliders • 1974 (Bear Mountain, NY) • 1977 (S. Coleman on the “False Vacuum”) • 1978 (Bevalac, Berkeley, CA) • 1979 (Michigan State University Cyclotron, MI) • 1983 (RHIC, Brookhaven, NY) • 1999-2000 (RHIC, Brookhaven, NY) • 1999+ (LHC, Geneva, Switzerland)

3. Bear Mountain Conference (1974)

4. Bear Mountain Conference (1974) These ideas may indicate “physical systems that have not been observed,” including another energy density valley. -T. D. Lee and G. C. Wick, “Vacuum stability and vacuum excitation in a spin-0 field theory,” Physical Review D 9 (1974): 2291. “Some of the more timorous participants were concerned that, once started, one of these abnormals might not stop until it contained all matter. It was pointed out, however, that the Lee-Wick theory indicates that 108 or 109 of them have already been produced on the moon, and that the moon is still there, albeit with large holes.” -.Proceedings, Bear Mountain Conference, (1974).

5. S. Coleman on the “False Vacuum” (1977) -S. Coleman, “Fate of the false vacuum: Semiclassical theory,” Physical Review D 15 (1977), pp. 2929-2936

6. Vidal Principle “Never commit irony in public.” -Gore Vidal

7. Bevalac (Berkeley, 1978) Participants of this discussion were not permitted to take notes.

8. Bevalac (Berkeley, 1979) Backdated notes of 1978 discussion: “[The committee] unanimously agreed that super-dense, super-stable neutral matter would not be formed in the Bevalac …If such an event could occur in a laboratory, it should also happen in the collision of cosmic rays on bodies in space, such as the moon. The moon and other bodies in space are continually bombarded by particles at energies like those used in the Bevalac, yet, through billions of years, noting of this kind has happened … no need for special precautions to deal with the remote possibility of formation of super-stable, neutral matter.” -“Position Paper (Revised 5-14-79) Creation of Super-Dense Neutral Matter in the Bevalac.” No byline; committee members: A. Kerman, Kinsey Anderson, A. S. Goldhaber, Miklos Gyulassy, T. D. Lee, Luis Alvarez, and B. G. Harvey.

9. Michigan State Cyclotron (1979)

10. Michigan State Cyclotron (1979) “Ergo, New Cyclotron” “What if … Dangers debated.” A group of “pre-eminent nuclear scientists” had met in 1978 to discuss whether an accelerator of the sort Michigan was building could create “mini-black holes” that could “snowball.” -Lansing State Journal, June 3, 1979.

11. A. S. Goldhaber to H. Blosser, N. Glendenning, B. Harvey, and A. Sessler, June 27, 1979. “[Harvey] seems to favor quiet, confidential discussions among experts. I favor public discussion in the open technical literature. This can be messier and less efficient, but in the long run I think it is both more reliable and more likely to inspire and justify public confidence in science and technology.”

12. RHIC (1983) Talk by Piet Hut on possibility of black hole production at first conference to discuss RHIC proposal, long before approval. -R. Crease, “Recombinant Science: The Birth of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC),” Hist. Stud. in Nat. Sci. 4:38 (2008): 535-568.

13. Media articles by Scientific American, Sunday Times of London, others. “White Paper” response by BNL -R.Crease, “Case of the Deadly Strangelets,” Physics World, July 2000, 19-20 RHIC 1999

14. LHC

15. Philosophical Issues:Stating the Problem • Deferring to authority of experts seems to collide with democratic urge to accord equality to all opinions. • Deciding the role of expertise is "the pressing intellectual problem of the age." • Two easy solutions: Let public decide, or assign the matter to specialists. "The first choice risks technological paralysis, the second invites popular opposition.“ -H. Collins & R. Evans, “The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience,” in E. Selinger and R. Crease, Eds, The Philosophy of Expertise (Columbia 2006)

16. Compounding Factors • Media Behaviors The “melodramatic structure” of risk coverage -R. Crease, “Horror Stories That Grow Legs,” Physics World, February 2002, 15 • Social Iagos: Spreading distrust and fear to promote agendas - R. Crease, “Dealing With Cassandras,” Physics World, June 2004, 16 • Legal Defaults

17. Responsible Decision-Making Obstacles to Responsible Decision-Making in Volatile Controversies involving Scientific-Technological Dimensions: • Power Asymmetries • Vulnerability • Historical Exploitation or Oppression We sense those affected have certain rights: • That the decision be made soundly. • That technical detail is accurate • That it is explained accurately, without jargon or political cant. -K. Whyte, “Integrating Ethics and Epistemology: A Normative Framework for the Inclusion of Indigenous Communities in Technical Decision-Making.” PhD Dissertation, Stony Brook University, 2009 Integrating Ethics and

18. Model for How Doomsday Discussions go Wrong:Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People

19. Developing the‘Off-Stage Position’ • Responsible discussion • Case histories of similar episodes • No secrecy • Role of Comedy (John Stewart’s Daily Show on RHIC, LHC)