Advertisement

Ethics Inside and Outside the Physics Lab

  • Marshall ThomsenEmail author
Living reference work entry

Abstract

Most ethical issues that arise in the field of physics can also be found in other disciplines, yet by comparison to other fields such as the life sciences, much less has been written about ethical issues in physics. There are, however, a handful of well-documented and well-explored cases in physics that highlight important ethical issues. By exploring these cases, we can understand key issues that routinely confront physicists, albeit in much less dramatic ways than illustrated by these better known cases. This chapter will explore the Ninov and Schön cases, the N Ray affair, the “cold fusion” phenomenon, the role of physicists in weapons research, and underrepresented groups in physics. The impact of these events on professional codes within the physics community will be discussed.

Keywords

Ethical physics Research misconduct Weapons research Manhattan Project Victor Ninov Hendrik Schön N rays Cold fusion Leo Szilard Victor Weisskopf Physics codes 

References

  1. American Institute of Physics (2018) Race and ethnicity of physics PhDs, Classes of 2014 through 2016. https://www.aip.org/statistics/data-graphics/race-and-ethnicity-physics-phds-classes-2014-through-2016. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  2. American Physical Society (2002) APS guidelines for professional conduct. https://www.aps.org/policy/statements/02_2.cfm. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  3. American Physical Society (2018a) APS statements: ethics and values. https://www.aps.org/policy/statements/index.cfm. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  4. American Physical Society (2018b) Minorities in physics. https://www.aps.org/programs/minorities/index.cfm. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  5. Australian Institute of Physics (2018) Code of ethics. http://aip.org.au/aip-code-of-ethics/. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  6. Blue J, Traxler A, Cid X (2018) Gender matters. Phys Today 71(3):40–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Browne MW (1989) Nuclear power gain reported but experts express doubts. New York Times March 24, 1989, p A12Google Scholar
  8. Canadian Association of Physicists (1994) CAP code of ethics. https://www.cap.ca/membership/. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  9. Canadian Association of Physicists (2018) P Phys code of ethics. https://www.cap.ca/programs/pphys-certification/pphys-code-ethics/. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  10. Close F (1991) Too hot to handle. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  11. Dirnagl U, Przesdzing I (2016) A pocket guide to electronic laboratory notebooks in the academic life sciences. F1000Research.  https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7628.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DPG (2018) General principles and objectives. https://www.dpg-physik.de/dpg/profil/leitbild.html?lang=en. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  13. Ecklund E, Johnson D, Matthews K (2015) Commentary: study highlights ethical ambiguity in physics. Phys Today 68(6):8–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elsevier (2018) Publishing ethics. https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/publishing-ethics. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  15. European Physics Letters (2018) Ethical policy. https://www.epletters.net/ethical-policy/. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  16. Federation of American Scientists (2018) About FAS https://fas.org/about-fas/. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  17. Goodstein D (2010) On fact and fraud: cautionary tales from the front lines of science. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greer SC (2017) Elements of ethics for physical science. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  19. Institute of Physics (2016) Regulations: code of professional conduct. http://www.iop.org/about/royal_charter/file_67323.pdf. Accessed 1Aug 2018
  20. Ivie R (2018) Beyond representation: data to improve the situation of women and minorities in physics and astronomy. American Institute of Physics Statistical Research Division. March, 2018. https://www.aip.org/statistics/reports/beyond-representation-data-improve-situation-women-and-minorities-physics-and. Accessed 4 Dec 2018
  21. Ivie R, Tesfaye CL (2012) Women in physics: a tale of limits. Phys Today 65(2):47–50.  https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.1439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Journal of the Korean Physical Society (2018) Authors: Article 11 (Code of Ethics). http://www.jkps.or.kr/authors/sub01.html. Accessed 1Aug 2018
  23. Kirby K, Houle F (2004) Phys Today 57(11):42–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Langmuir I, Hall RN (1989) Pathological science. Phys Today 42(10):36–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (2001) Results of element 118 experiment retracted. http://www2.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/118-retraction.html. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  26. Levi BG (2001) Buckeyballs found to superconduct at 52 K. Phys Today 54(1):15–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levi BG (2002) Bell labs convenes committee to investigate questions of scientific misconduct. Phys Today 55(7):15–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lucent Technologies (2002). Report of the investigation committee on the possibility of scientific misconduct in the work of Hendrik Schön and Coauthors. https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170403_1709/misconduct-revew-report-lucent.pdf. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  29. Matthews R (1989) Scientists pursue endless power source. Times [London, England], 23 Mar.. Infotrac Newsstand, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A117220214/STND?u=lom_emichu&sid=STND&xid=e7293ee0. Accessed 7 Sept 2018
  30. Merner L (2015) African American participation among bachelors in the physical sciences and engineering. American Institute of Physics Statistical Research Center, November 2015. https://www.aip.org/statistics/reports/african-american-participation-among-bachelors-physical-sciences-and-engineering. Accessed 4 Dec 2018
  31. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018) Sexual harassment of women: climate, culture, and consequences in academic sciences, engineering, and medicine. https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24994/sexual-harassment-of-women-climate-culture-and-consequences-in-academic. Accessed 4 Dec 2018
  32. Ninov V, Gregorich KE, Loveland W, Ghiorso A, Hoffman DC, Lee DM, Nitsche H, Swiatecki WJ, Kirbach UW, Laue CA, Adams JL, Patin JB, Shaughnessy DA, Strellis DA, Wilk PA (1999) Observation of Superheavy nuclei produced in the reaction of 86Kr with 208Pb. Phys Rev Lett 83:1104–1107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Physical Review Letters (2002) Editorial note: observation of Superheavy nuclei produced in the reaction of 86Kr with 208Pb. Phys Rev Lett 89:039901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Resnik DB (1998) The ethics of science: an introduction. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Rotblat J (2001) The early days of Pugwash. Phys Today 54(6):50–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Russell B (1955) The Russell-Einstein Manifesto. In: Pugwash conferences on science and world affairs https://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
  37. Schwarzschild B (2002) Lawrence Berkeley lab concludes that evidence of element 118 was a fabrication. Phys Today 55(9):15–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Somerville RCJ, Hassol SJ (2011) Communicating the science of climate change. Phys Today 64(10):48–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Szilard L (1978) Leo Szilard: his version of the facts. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  40. Trefil J, Swartz S (2011) Problems with problem sets. Phys Today 64(11):49–52.  https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Weisskopf V (1991) The joy of insight: passions of a physicist. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Wood RW (1904) The n-rays. Nature 70:530–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wood RW (1973) N rays. In: Weber RL (ed) A random walk in science. Institute of Physics Publishing, BristolGoogle Scholar
  44. Wylo B, Thomsen M (1998) Should physics students take a course in ethics? – Physicists respond. Sci Eng Ethics 4:473–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physics and AstronomyEastern Michigan UniversityYpsilantiUSA

Personalised recommendations