The annual Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate is the American Museum of Natural History’s biggest public event, drawing a sold-out crowd for an evening billed as bringing together “the finest minds in the world” to debate “pressing questions on the frontiers of scientific discovery.”

But this year’s installment, to be held on March 20 under the heading “The Existence of Nothing,” may also be notable for the panelist who disappeared.

Among the speakers will be several leading physicists, including Lawrence M. Krauss, whose book “A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing” became a cause célèbre in the scientific blogosphere last spring after a scathing review in the New York Times Book Review by the philosopher David Z. Albert.

But Mr. Albert will not be onstage, having been abruptly disinvited by the museum several months after he agreed to take part.

The tone of the dustup between Mr. Albert and Mr. Krauss — summed up by one blogger as “an ongoing cosmological street fight” that had broken out “broad media daylight” — would have certainly left those who saw both men’s names on early publicity material anticipating something closer to a wrestling match than dispassionate scholarly discussion.

In his review Mr. Albert, who also has a Ph.D. in theoretical physics, mocked Mr. Krauss’s cocksure claim to have found in the laws of quantum mechanics a definitive answer to the vexing question of the ultimate origins of the universe. (So where did those laws come from? he asked.) Mr. Krauss countered with a pugnacious interview in The Atlantic, in which he called Mr. Albert “moronic” and dismissed the philosophy of science as worthless.

The museum originally planned to take the fight inside. Last October, Neil deGrasse Tyson, director of the Hayden Planetarium, sent Mr. Albert an e-mail inviting him to take part in a discussion exploring the “kerfuffle” surrounding his review. The panel, he said, would probably have two or three physicists on it (including Mr. Krauss), a philosopher (Mr. Albert) and another person, to be determined.

But in early January, Mr. de Grasse Tyson sent Mr. Albert another e-mail rescinding the invitation, citing changes in the panel that shifted the focus “somewhat away from the original reasons that led me to invite you.” An invitation was issued shortly afterward to Jim Holt, the author of the recent best seller “Why Does the World Exist?,” which surveys the ways philosophers, cosmologists and theologians have answered the question.

Mr. Albert, who teaches at Columbia, noted in an interview that neither the title of the panel nor its basic composition — it also includes the physicists J. Richard Gott and Eva Silverstein and the journalist Charles Seife — had changed.

“It sparked a suspicion that Krauss must have demanded that I not be invited,” he said. “But of course I’ve got no proof.”

Mr. Tyson, in an interview, said he had withdrawn the invitation out of concern that the event (which will be streamed live at amnh.org/live) had drifted too far from the Asimov core purpose of “exposing the frontier of science as conducted by scientists.”

“I was intrigued by his argument with Krauss,” he said of Mr. Albert. “But once the panel was assembled, I took a step back and said it can’t just be an argument with Krauss.”

Mr. Krauss, who teaches at Arizona State University, said via e-mail that decisions about the lineup were Mr. Tyson’s but reiterated that he “wasn’t impressed” by Mr. Albert’s review. “If it were up to me, I wouldn’t choose to spend time onstage with him,” he added.

But the audience may yet get a taste of the philosophical perspective. In an article about the Krauss-Albert controversy in The New York Times last June, Mr. Holt defended philosophers’ contribution to “conceptually unsettled” questions relating to string theory, quantum entanglement and entropy.

“Physicists expand the circle, and philosophers help clear up the paradoxes,” he wrote. “May both camps flourish.”