March 25, 2025

Why Gravitational Waves are Political

Perspectives from Members of the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Collaboration

By Michele Mancarella, Amanda Farah, and Storm Colloms

The following is a slightly modified version of an article that was censored from publication in The LIGO Magazine, a periodical produced by a global scientific collaboration involved in gravitational-wave research. The introduction and conclusion were jointly written by Michele Mancarella, Amanda Farah, and Storm Colloms.

When two black holes collide, they create waves in space and time itself. These gravitational waves (GWs) propagate through the Universe at the speed of light, carrying information about the collision from which they came. The first direct detection of GWs in 2015 therefore opened a new window to the Universe by allowing us to “hear” black holes and neutron stars colliding billions of light-years away.

The construction of GW detectors required decades of advancements in laser technology, optics, mechanical suspensions, and countless other technical feats. Novel statistical and numerical methods were developed to analyze the data from these detectors, and multiple research groups around the world were formed to make theoretical models of expected GW signals from different sources. In other words, the monumental Nobel prize-winning detection of GWs was only possible because thousands of scientists from every continent worked together for half a century. Today, these scientists make up the  “The LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA (LVK) Collaboration.”¹ Such an effort demands strong organization, effective management of billions of dollars in public funding, and the coordination of a diverse global research community through representative institutions. This is both a testament to the power of collectivism and clear evidence that science is deeply intertwined with its political context.

Unfortunately, this seems to differ from the perspective held by many members of the scientific community—including some within the LVK—who view science as an objective endeavor that advances regardless of historical, political, or social contexts.

It is undeniable that science generally and GW research specifically are shaped by the politics of the society in which they are done. The current moment in US politics makes it very clear that science cannot divorce itself from politics. Similarly, scientific work has a recognizable climate impact in computing power, conference travel, and running large scale instrumentation, and is under threat from climate-related events, such as the Eaton wildfire that encroached on NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab and the LVK’s main computing resources. Meanwhile, global political leaders deny the importance of this issue. Rather than pretend to exist in a politically neutral space, GW scientists should embrace their part in creating a more just society.

In this article, three members of the LVK discuss the intersection of science and politics in their work. Inspired by their concerns about the ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon, these GW scientists share how politics impacts their approach to science, and their efforts to foster a scientific community that engages with the global implications of their work.

Author: Michele Mancarella

Author bio: Michele has a tenure-track position at the University of Aix-Marseille, France. He uses gravitational-wave catalogues and other surveys of the large scale structures of the universe to understand its evolution.

“The interconnection between science and its context is all around us, often without our awareness. Precarious short-term contracts, metrics like the h-index or impact factor, and language borrowed from corporate environments—terms like ‘milestone,’ ‘impact,’ and ‘excellence’—not to mention federal policies such those currently taking place in the US, shape modern research. These external pressures influence what research is pursued, how results are communicated, and even which techniques are adopted, ultimately shaping what the scientific community considers ‘science.’

For example, the recent revolution in deep learning did not arise from an internal need within pure science. Instead, it permeated scientific research after its widespread use in commercial platforms, driven by the idea that ‘data is the new oil.’ However, machine learning algorithms are known to reproduce—and sometimes amplify—biases in their training data. Well-documented cases include gender bias in language models and discriminatory errors, such as those seen with the software COMPAS, developed to forecast the chance of a person committing another crime within two years if released, which was shown to be biased against black people.² At the same time, machine learning is frequently subject to dual use in conflict zones.³

This issue feels particularly distressing to me, knowing that techniques I use in my own work can be deliberately weaponized against civilians. This has been happening for many years, notably in Gaza and in the West Bank. For example, Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), which I have used in my own research in cosmology, are a core component in identifying alleged ‘threats’ on the battlefield, as they are designed for pattern recognition. While often promoted as a means to minimize ‘collateral damage,’ their application in warfare raises ethical concerns. Over the past year and a half, more than 61,000 civilians have been killed in Gaza, prompting critical questions: whose lives are deemed ‘collateral damage,’ and who holds the power to define it? Adding to the cruelty, such technologies can be later marketed as ‘field-tested,’ increasing their monetary value at the cost of civilian lives.⁴

Beyond the specific algorithms used in my research, what worries me even more is that research grants and funding are largely allocated based on institutional rankings. This means that formal collaboration with institutions involved in developing or applying technologies for military purposes ultimately contributes to their recognition, legitimacy, and success, and by extension, to their activities, regardless of whether my own research is directly related.

These concerns call more urgently than ever for a deeper and more transparent discussion within the scientific community. Rather than silence and censor each other with false boundaries between what is and is not ‘political,’ we need to widely debate the impact of politics on our scientific work and vice versa.”

Author: Amanda Farah

Author bio: Amanda is a PhD student at the University of Chicago using LVK data to understand the lives of stars and the history of our Universe.

“Science has always been my haven. From trying to ignore childhood bullies who called me a ‘terrorist’ because I am Arab, to avoiding fighting with my parents as a teenager, to forgetting struggles with my college roommates, I could always rely on science to consume my thoughts and give me an escape. But this method to distract myself no longer works.

Every day I watch civilians who look like my family members being killed in the hundreds of thousands, crying for help and peace in the language I associate with home. Even if I was not Arab, I would have been haunted by the scale of this destruction funded by the taxes on my PhD student stipend.

It is hard to go to university knowing that researchers in Gaza have no such luxury; every single university in Gaza has been leveled. I recently watched a heartbreaking video of children in Gaza crying at the recorded sound of a school bell because they, too, find haven in education, yet 85% of their schools have been destroyed.⁵ How can I bring telescopes to Chicago’s elementary schools knowing that when Gazan children look up, all they see are bombs and drones?

Not only does my work seem unimportant amidst these atrocities, it actually appears to be enabling them. For example, when Israel intensified its bombing of Lebanon while I was visiting my family there, it was advancements in laser technology (JDAMs) that enabled the decimation of my great aunt’s orphanage, killing its inhabitants and shaking my grandparents’ home.⁶

Instead of using my research to avoid the world, I need to start working to improve it. However, many of my colleagues have refused to join me in this endeavor, claiming that our work should be ‘apolitical.’  Embedded in the world of federal grants, university endowments, and billionaire donors, and having tangible applications in war zones, our work is not neutral. But even if it were, neutrality should not be an option in the face of injustice. A quote by Desmond Tutu, a South African anti-apartheid activist, helped me understand why my colleagues’ claim to neutrality hurts: ‘If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.’ Not taking a stance is also a political choice, it is a choice to let current injustices remain. Unfortunately, there is no neutrality, even in science.”

Author: Storm Colloms

Author bio: Storm Colloms is a PhD student at the University of Glasgow researching the origins and evolution of binary black holes.

“Over the past few months I would come home from doing my research and watch videos of journalists risking their lives reporting the destruction in Gaza, or activists getting years in jail for speaking up for climate justice. I wanted meaningful opportunities to make the world a better place as part of my scientific work. To me, this involves figuring out how us scientists can work to stop destruction in Palestine. Being Jewish does not negate my wish for peace and freedom for Palestinians, nor should the consideration of antisemitism be an excuse for allowing the destruction in Gaza to happen.

In looking for these opportunities, I joined my colleagues in figuring out how to spark conversations on issues that aren’t given a platform or are actively silenced. Within this group, I apply my research skills—having tough conversations, communicating our goals, leading projects, and supporting each other to do the same—with a new purpose: advocating for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. I have found this to be just as rewarding as my GW research. If all of us work on this together, then it means we can each do a little bit and have a big impact on the scientific community.

During these times I keep returning to the Toni Morrison quote ‘… remember that your real job is that if you are free, you need to free somebody else’. I think our scientific work should be guided by this principle.”

How do we free someone else within our work as scientists? The first step is to do away with the notion that science is immune to its historical and geopolitical context. We then need to work to create a world which does not ignore or tolerate oppression and injustice. This sometimes requires taking an uncomfortable but courageous stance. On an interpersonal level, it requires holding abusive men and racists accountable to ensure that women and people of colour are welcome. The same is true on an institutional level. For example, scientists have pushed Universities to divest their endowments from the fossil fuel industry that is warming our climate and petitioned their societies to sanction harmful individuals.⁷

We have formed The Gravitational Wave Solidarity Committee to determine how to act justly in regard to current social, political and global issues facing our scientific community. Solidarity means unity and mutual support, and we know it is the key to success against powerful forces of injustice. To get involved, follow us @gwsolidarity.bsky.social on BlueSky, @gwsolidarity on Instagram, and join us at our upcoming event, “Why are gravitational waves political?” It will feature Professor of Physics and Women’s and Gender Studies, Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, as well as President’s Postdoctoral Fellow in the Departments of Black Study and Media & Cultural Studies, Dr. Maya Wind. This virtual panel and discussion will take place at 10am PDT / 6pm GMT on April 23rd, 2025. RSVP here.

Scientists are in a unique position, as scientific advancement is a major avenue through which countries exert their legitimacy and power to the global community. Thus, scientists now need to be the ones talking about and acting for justice. While the task feels daunting, enacting meaningful change is possible when large groups of people work together towards one goal. Members of large scientific collaborations like the LVK are experts in this. Despite the challenges of collaborating with thousands of people across the world, scientists do it because it leads to truly awe-inspiring results. If any scientists can work together towards justice, it’s us.

Notes

1. The LIGO detectors are funded by the National Science Foundation, Virgo is operated by the European Gravitational Wave Observatory, and KAGRA is funded by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology-Japan.
2. Aylin Caliskan, et al., “Gender Bias in Word Embeddings: A Comprehensive Analysis of Frequency, Syntax, and Semantics”, Association for Computing Machinery, Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, (July 2022): 156–170, https://doi.org/10.1145/3514094.3534162;  Rachel Courtland, “Bias detectives: the researchers striving to make algorithms fair”, Nature, June 20, 2018, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05469-3.
3. Antony Loewenstein, The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports the Technology of Occupation Around the World (Verso Books, 2023).
4. The Palestine Laboratory.
5. “Reported impact snapshot | Gaza Strip” United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, last modified August 21 2024, https://www.ochaopt.org/content/reported-impact-snapshot-gaza-strip-21-august-2024.
6. “Laser Guided JDAM Debuts in Iraq,” Defense Update, August 27, 2007,https://defense-update.com/20070827_laserguidedjdamdebutsiniraq.html.
7. Ploy Achakulwisut, “The case for Harvard’s fossil fuel divestment: SEI scientist’s letter of support,” SEI Publications, September 17 2021, https://www.sei.org/publications/harvards-fossil-fuel-divestment/; Kit Yates, “Elon Musk is a proven danger to good science, but the Royal Society won’t say it. That’s why I resigned,” The Guardian, March 4 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/04/elon-musk-science-royal-society-scientific-integrity.