Communication Breakdown

I’ve spoken before about the yearly trips by members of the particle physics community to Washington, D.C. Their purpose is simple. We go to educate Members of Congress about our passion, our science, and its impact on the nation; we listen to what they have to say about science, and take messages back to the community and its leaders. This process has been ongoing for almost a decade, at least in the circles in which I am used to traveling. One message that has arisen time and time again is that we need to better explain, to government and to the public, the meaning and benefit of our work.

A recent hearing in Congress, in the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee [1], revealed just how poorly we have listened to their messages. The heads of three research agencies, as well as a theoretical physicist from Harvard, gave testimony (and heard messages of their own) earlier this month. The Senate committee overseeing research in basic research seemed to know little about the value of things like particle physics. We have a problem . . . still.

I won’t repeat the article I referenced above, except to quote the statement about Rep. Daniel Lipinski’s ” . . . observation that research in these fields is expensive and that more needs to be done to better communicate its results.” When somebody has to say that out loud, what they’re trying to tell you is that we don’t know why we’re spending money on what y’all do.

We have a great story to tell, no less than the quest for fundamental knowledge about matter, energy, space and time. This story and its human core are no less interesting (and entertaining) than the stories of doctors and police, which are routinely over-documented on TV. Clearly, this story is not getting out there (though the beginning lies in things like “The Big Bang Theory” and “Numb3rs” TV shows). Primarily, scientists themselves are not taking enough time to speak to the public – on TV, in newspapers, on the web, on the radio – about their work. Once-a-week shows like “Science Friday” or “Quirks and Quarks” are not enough. Once-a-year Congressional efforts are not enough. Echo chambers like “Fermilab Today” and “SLAC Today” are not enough. We need more.

Start at home. Write a short newsletter about your work and send it to your family. Instead of that annoying seasonal letter to friends and family about the state of your life, talk about the state of your work. Write a short letter to your Members of Congress. Tell them about your work, in short declarative sentences. Be non-technical. Be entertaining. Be honest.

Reach out to your institution. Find ways to get non-scientists at your institution into colloquia. Lessen the echo chamber by creating avenues for simple public communication. For instance, a department newsletter mailed once or twice a year to alumni can have a great effect. At labs, find ways to get the staff engaged in the work of the lab. I’m talking administrators and H.R. people, machinists and welders.

Solving this problem will take years, maybe decades. But it’s clear that even though we’ve started a few things in the past decade, they’re not having an effect. These same questions about the value of our work were around 10 years ago, and from many of the same people and institutions. We’re not sinking in. We have to saturate. The only way to soak the public in science knowledge is to dump truckloads of it on top of them, and hope any of it filters into their lives.

[1] http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/125.html

Freeze out (or, why are these people just standing around?)

Dark matter appears to explain the bulk of matter in our cosmos. While it has clearly been observed to exert influence over normal matter – nuclei, electrons, light – through gravitation, it has never been observed through any other interaction. Dark matter does not appear to directly emit light, nor respond to light; it has never been conclusively observed to scatter off a nucleus in a terrestrial detector, so far ruling out interactions through the strong or weak nuclear forces. A great deal of effort is therefore spent speculating on its properties, in order to design experiments that can measure them.

I’ve been thinking about freeze out, a property of particles which is often exploited in order to make statements about dark matter. “Freeze out” is when a particle species is unable to interact with itself or other matter because either the probability of an interaction is very small or because the likelihood of running into other matter is very small, or both. One can think of freeze out in a very human way.

Let’s consider a social situation, in which you are invited to a party where you don’t know anybody (except maybe the host). Let’s also consider a parameter, your “social cross-section”, which simply is a measure of how willing you are to approach a complete stranger and begin, then sustain, a conversation.

At the beginning, the party is hot. People are densely packed, the music is loud and thumping, you’re walking around with a drink in your hand and bumping into complete strangers. If you have a high social cross-section, you’ll take every bump and jab as a chance to flash a smile and start a conversation. With a sufficiently high social cross-section, you’ll dance with people and even as the party cools off (time goes on, people leave, the music gets less interesting) you’ll continue to stick with party-goers and socialise. You’ll keep meeting up with people, running into them, dancing, forming small social cliques of equally interactive people. Even when the party is completely wound down, you’ll stick with the hard-core types, the most social – maybe even go and have an after-party somewhere else. A high social cross-section can overcome the cooling effect on the party, allowing people to stick together and form new relationships despite a thinning population density at the party.

Consider instead a person with a low social cross-section. They may be comfortable starting a conversation but not sustaining it past small-talk. They certainly don’t like to dance, unless they really get prodded into it. Maybe they really don’t even like to start conversations but they feel obliged to go to the party because of the host. So they go, and the party starts off real hot. They get bumped and jostled, drink spilling, and maybe they flash a smile and start a conversation. But the interactions are weak and rare, sustained in frequency only by the density of the people at the party. Eventually the party cools, people start leaving, high social cross-section folks are cliquing and grouping. The low cross-section people are off by themselves, tapping a foot by the side of the dance floor or standing by the buffet, but not forming new relationships.

This is dark matter, and this is how dark matter “freezes out” of interactions. When the party is hopping, it almost doesn’t matter what your cross-section is. You’re caught up in the fray, forced to interact by the sheer number density of party-goers. But as the party cools and the crowd thins, the inclination to interact remains the same but the opportunity drops precipitously. Now imagine a party where 85% of the party-goers left over when the cooling happens are low cross-section types. That’s our universe. High cross-section people are forced to clump and group in between the low cross-section types, forming little groups in this sea of non-interacting people. Welcome to our cosmos. Nerds rule!

Of course, the trick here is that it’s possible that the low cross-section types are only low on verbal and physical communication. Imagine a party where the low cross-section types are super-techy, and prefer to interact through social media. They’re standing around, mobile phones out and tapping away on their Facebook or Twitter streams, while the high cross-section people have phones put away and are gabbing and laughing and dancing. “This party is lame,” tweets one low cross-section type. “Let’s leave,” types another. “But the dip is good and the beer is free,” says a third. “Good call, let’s stay,” says a fourth. They are actually communicating all the time but the talkers are unaware, because they are not tapped into this social stream.

The promise of studying the dark sector, dark matter and all of its friends, is that we might tap into how they communicate with one another. Maybe every now and then one of the low cross-section types laughs at a Tweet, and a nearby high cross-section type hears them and asks, “What’s so funny?” “Oh, it’s just that my friend PwnN00bs1984 noticed that girl in the corner is so drunk she is mistaking some random guy for the guy she came in with.” “That IS funny,” says the high cross-section type, suddenly exposed to a whole conversation going on behind the scenes.

Let’s hope that eventually, we find a way to tap into the dark sector’s own little conversation. Maybe, then, we’ll figure out what 85% of these people are doing at this party.

Post-doctoral research opportunity at SMU on the ATLAS experiment

I am pleased to announce my very first search for a post-doctoral researcher. The links to the official advertisement are at the bottom of this announcement [1], and the text of the advertisement is reproduced here. As a new faculty member at SMU, and as a new member of the established SMU ATLAS group, this is a very exciting moment for me. The opportunity to do great research and discover deep meaning in the structure of the universe has never been greater. At this new energy frontier, I look forward to working with a post-doc on the great questions surrounding the cosmos, particularly regarding the nature of dark matter, and to contributing to the development and well-being of the ATLAS experiment during operations. I welcome all interested people to contact me about this opportunity.

Post-doctoral research position on the ATLAS Experiment

The Department of Physics at Southern Methodist University (SMU) invites applications for a post-doctoral research position associated with the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. The SMU ATLAS group has a strong involvement in the hardware and electronics of the liquid argon calorimeter, data quality monitoring, and in preparations for physics analysis. There is interest to expand our efforts into the ATLAS trigger. The successful candidate is expected to be located at CERN and to contribute to ATLAS operations and to physics studies. Interested candidates should send a letter of application, curriculum vitae, list of publications, and arrange to have three letters of recommendation sent (preferably by e-mail) directly to:

Professor Stephen Sekula
Southern Methodist University
Physics Department
P.O. Box 0175
Dallas, TX 75275-0175
USA
E-mail: sekula@physics.smu.edu

Applications will be accepted until the position is filled. SMU is an equal-opportunity, affirmative action employer. SMU will not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability, or veteran status.

[1] SPIRES listing, SMU Listing