Roger's Equations

Part II - Wherein extraordinary events and post cold war politics conspire to set particle physics back 25 years. The following is a fictitious account littered with facts.

"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him" - Cardinal Richelieu

Scene 2: 10 years have passed since the events detailed in Part 1. Our heroes, Scientist #1 and Scientist #2, find themselves on the verge of realizing a scientific triumph. Already, some $2-billion has been spent on the construction of the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC), a wondrous instrument that will reveal countless secrets of nature and advance the knowledge of our ever-curious kind. Top scientists from around the U.S. have relocated to Texas in the hope of participating in what will undoubtedly go down in history as a golden age of particle physics. Yet all is not well. Fate is capricious and much has changed in 10 years. Our heroes work as they await the tidings of a messenger (Scientist #3) sent to determine what budget cuts to expect from Congress.

Scientist #3 now arrives at the door to the director's office at SSC headquarters. Scientists #1 and #2 are standing in the office, reviewing blueprints on a table. They're having an animated discussion; neither has slept well for weeks.

Scientist #3: [quietly] I see my noble friends hard at work. Such industry does not deserve the reward I bring. [louder] My friends, I come from Congress with bad news. My mission has failed.

Scientist #2: Be at ease. I'm certain whatever difficulty you've encountered can be overcome. Please, sit and tell us what you've learned.

Scientist #1: Yes, let us know so that we might plan our response. What is most important is that we continue to move forward.

Scientist #3 walks toward the other two but cannot bear to sit, stands and hesitates for a moment, then begins.

Scientist #3: [in despair] Dear friends, I see that you do not yet comprehend the depth of our undoing, and it pains me a great deal to reveal it.

Scientist #1: Why do you speak this way? Have we not overcome much already? Do we not dedicate our lives to removing the veil of nature so as to reveal the truths that lie underneath? How difficult could it be to sell that which will so greatly advance us as a nation to those who are charged with making it great?

Scientist #3: I fear you assign virtues to others and expect like-mindedness where neither exists, especially in Congress where compromise is compromising.

Scientist #1: It is a singular aspect of our race – to endeavor – that separates us from the lesser species. I assign no virtue that isn't inherent to all people. If it is not readily found, then it is buried by fears that we must dispel.

Scientist #3: If it is fear, as you say, then it is a powerful terror. They are quite turned against the SSC. I suspect in fact it is a lack of fear that unmakes us.

Scientist #2: Please tell us in detail what has happened.

Scientist #3 falls dejectedly into the previously offered chair. Scientists #1 and #2 exchange worried glances and seat themselves opposite Scientist #3.

Scientist #3: I've spoken with a number of our advocates in the lesser and greater chambers and all indicate the cause is lost. There is a tide of frugality and meanness sweeping over Washington that targets anything deemed wasteful. As you know, the SSC has been criticized by the Project on Government Oversight for high costs and poor management. The $12-billion that this will now cost is far beyond the original $4.4-billion originally estimated. Our inability to draw international funding to help offset costs hasn't helped either. Since the cost is equivalent to that of funding the International Space Station (ISS), most representatives have decided it can be only one or the other.

Scientist #2: Oh! Such a false choice! The ISS is a political machine to encourage cooperation with the newly formed democracy of Russia. Its scientific merits are far less than those of the SSC. It is foreign policy over science.

Scientist #3: The ignorant know not the difference and are arrogant in their folly. They all agree that the stability and encouragement of the nascent democracy of Russia is tantamount and that the ISS must proceed.

Scientist #1: Then we must make them see the value of the SSC. We must make them understand that it will be as when Galileo peered through his telescope and noticed the satellites of Jupiter and saw that Nebulae were composed of stars. The SSC will do far more than that political toy, the ISS, will ever do.

Scientist #3: [shaking head, sadly] You dream. Congress answers to the people, and the people don't care for Galileo. They only cared for science itself when there was a USSR to fear. Now that this adversary is gone, they care not.

Scientist #2: But surely they desire the comforts of new technology that come from such scientific endeavors?

Scientist #3 rises and walks to the window. Below, construction continues on the SSC. Scientist #3 strains to see something in the distance, then failing, shrugs and still staring out the window responds to Scientist #2.

Scientist #3: The people create their own myths as to how our existing technology came to be. This is just as the Greeks created Prometheus to explain fire, having long-forgotten the prehistoric scientist who invented it. From these myths they will derive justification for cutting science from their budgets. They will lionize free enterprise as the source of invention and deride scientists as ivory-tower pedants. Already the whispers grow to murmurs, and I fear this next election we will witness the roar.

Scientist #1: [shaking head slightly side to side] I don't believe it. One would have to ignore the last 75 years of history to believe such things.

Scientist #3: History is easy to ignore, especially with no adversary with which to compete and keep one honest (so to speak). Remember how after Athens fell, Sparta faded away? Should we really be so surprised that with the threat of communism receding, that the people should become shortsighted and selfish?

Scientist #1: I don't share your cynicism. People are good and do the right thing when given the opportunity.

Scientist #2: It's true that people are good, almost all people, but only as individuals. Put them together as a group … well … remember what Seneca said, "It is proof of a bad cause when it is applauded by the mob."

Scientist #1: We mustn't pretend their arguments are without merit. Our cost overruns have been unacceptable and we should have better anticipated public sentiment in the post-Cold War world.

Scientist #3: Those are merely the excuses. To respond to them is to hug the pickpocket. The truth is that they never understood the science, and without the Soviet Union to scare them, they now feel they don't need it. They have a bottomless pit of condemnations that could have been applied to thousands of projects over the past 50 years – and never were.

Scientist #1 gets up and walks to the window. Scientist #2 follows. All three stare down at the construction below. The workers are on break now, laughing at some unheard joke. Scientist #1 stares off into the distance straining to see something, but cannot. Scientist #2 watches #1. Scientist #3 stares blankly, lost in thought.

Scientist #1: [searchingly] Perhaps they merely wish to embrace frugality after years of reckless spending.

Scientist #3: [sighs] If that were truly the case, there are much bigger projects than ours that they seemed to have missed. No, their actions reveal their true motives. They target those things that they feel they no longer need for political gain. There is no Sputnik to rally them to our cause.

Scientist #2: [resigned] I am beginning to understand. This has nothing to do with this project. The world has turned and we are left behind. How can we convince the people to invest in their future when the Cold War has been won?

Scientist #1 is still searching far out in the distance, even as he answers

Scientist #1: [vacantly] Certainly they must know that there will be other wars.?

Scientists #2 and #3 turn back and return to their seats. Scientist #2 tenderly rolls up the blueprints they had been examining earlier. Scientist #1 remains at the window staring outward.

Scientist #3: Not for a long time. The world is weary of war. Someday – maybe – they will clamor for us, but that day may be a long time off. For now, they will forget what we have wrought and discard us instead. I fear this is only the beginning.

Scientist #1: [stubbornly] There's no question that we thought the most important science project over the next twenty years would happen here. This is a tremendous disappointment. Still, I will continue to fight and try to convince the people that this is needed.

Scientist #2 finishes rolling up the blueprints, realizes there is no place to put them, searches for a rubber band to bind them and cannot find one and finally lays them back on the table where they proceed to unroll themselves.

Scientist #2: [dejectedly] I fear what this means for the future of science in this country.

Scientist #3: With good reason, for the very fools who have undermined this endeavor are, at this very moment, congratulating themselves. Today our country, a beacon of scientific endeavor, that noble shining city on a hill, has turned down its light in the name of frugality. But I tell you that it is not frugality but rather meanness that has brought about this calamity.

[Anger is replaced with despair] Ah! What we could have learned! What wondrous discoveries were waiting for our intrepidity? I understand now how Archimedes must have felt as that gladius plunged into his breast, or how Socrates felt as he drank his fatal tea. It seems the hoi polloi will tolerate only so much progress before their baser instincts demand a respite. I do not fear for science; other countries will fill the vacuum we create. But I fear for my country, which embraces decline with such vigor.

Scientist #1 finally turns from the window but remains standing at the window regarding Scientists #2 and #3, notes the half rolled blueprints on the table, hears the shouts of the construction workers below, and for a moment feels overwhelmed. Then seems to find purpose again, walks to a desk, pulls out some rubber-bands and walks to the table and hands them to Scientist #2. Scientist #2 gratefully puts the blueprints back in order. Scientist #1, still standing, addresses the two other sitting scientists.

Scientist #1: There is always hope, and even if it is as you say, we will labor on and weather the storm, accomplishing less than we could have, but still pushing forward.

And so that most excellent project that would have brought about a golden age of particle physics was cancelled. Even today, 17 years since the cancellation, there has been little progress made since there was no collider powerful enough to probe the energy regions necessary for discovery. There is hope that this decade, the LHC in Europe may achieve half the energy of collisions that the SSC would have achieved more than a decade ago if it had been allowed to be built. Costly were those 10 billion dollars saved. Today the U.S. ranks 25th out of 34 countries in math and 17th in science. Many are the reasons given, but they are all nonsense. The cause is quite simple, children imitate adult's attitudes. Woe to our nation if we continue to turn our back on reason.

The End

Relevant Links:

http://www.hep.net/ssc/new/history/appendixa.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider
http://www.damninteresting.com/americas-discarded-superconducting-supercollider
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom