NEWSA Publication of The American Physical Society http://www.aps.org/apsnews

November 2004Volume 13, No. 10

APS members electedJohn Hopfield, the HowardA. Prior Professor ofMolecular Biology atPrinceton University, asthe new APS vice presi-dent in the 2004 generalelection. Hopfield will takeoffice January 1, 2005. In2006 he will become presi-dent-elect, assuming the mantle ofAPS president in 2007. The APSpresident for 2005 will be MarvinCohen of the University of Califor-nia, Berkeley.

In other election results, theUniversity of Chicago’s ThomasRosenbaum was elected chair-electof the APS Nominating Committee,which is responsible for propos-ing a slate of candidates each yearfor the Society’s general election.Ann Orel of University ofCalifornia, Davis, and Lucent Tech-nologies/Bell Laboratories’ RichartSlusher were elected as generalcouncilors. Also approved was anamendment to the APS Constitu-tion, slightly modifying themechanisms for the formation andtermination of topical groups.

Kenneth Cole, Special Assistantto the Executive Officer, describedthe 2004 election as “the easiest andsmoothest in the four years since wehave been offering online voting.”In addition to saving the Society agreat deal of money in mailing costs,the online voting option has provenoverwhelmingly popular with mem-bers: 91% of all those who voted didso online. Those few remaining mem-bers who prefer paper ballots can

APS Members Elect Hopfield as NewVice President in 2004 General Election

request them. The per-centage of APS membersvoting was 22.8%, slightlyhigher than in 2003, butbelow the all-time high of24.9% in 2002. Before theonline voting option wasoffered, the percentage ofmembers voting hoveredbetween 18% and 20%.

VICE PRESIDENTVICE PRESIDENTVICE PRESIDENTVICE PRESIDENTVICE PRESIDENTHopfield was born into a phys-

ics household in the midst of theDepression. His father had taken aone-year position helping set upthe physics exhibit at the ChicagoWorld’s Fair. His mother had met

him when they were both gradu-ate students in physics at Berkeley.“The culture of the household wasthat anything physical could andshould be observed, measured,taken apart into its components,understood (if necessary evenrepaired) and that joy, deep satis-faction, and new technologiescould all come with successes inthis process,” he said.

Hopfield received his PhD fromCornell in 1958. He joined the theo-retical group at Bell Laboratories fortwo years, and began his teachingcareer in the physics department atBerkeley in 1961. In 1964 he re-

Quinn Holds Summit MeetingWith President of Vietnam

APS President Helen Quinnreceived a letter in September fromMaura Harty, Assistant Secretary ofState for Consular Affairs, inresponse to her signing a jointstatement on the need to stream-line the visa process.

Harty indicated that new pro-cedures arranged with theDepartment of Homeland Securityand other Federal agencies havenow reduced visa processing time.“As of September 2, 98% of allVisas Mantis cases are beingcleared in less than 30 days,” shewrote. “More than 2000 on-goingcases were just cleared.” The StateDepartment has also recentlybegun posting visa appointmentwait times on the Internet. See http://www.travel.state.gov.

In May, the APS joined morethan 20 other science, highereducation and engineering orga-nizations in developing a jointstatement urging the federal gov-ernment to adopt six practicalrecommendations for improvingthe current visa processing crisisby removing unnecessary barriersto multinational collaborations.(See APS News, July 2004. Full textof the statement is available at:http://www.aps.org/statements/03_1.cfm

Taken together, the grouprepresented 95% of the USresearch community. It was the firsttime that US science and academicleaders have endorsed a compre-

Quinn Receives State DepartmentResponse on Improved Visa Process

HHHHHighlightsighlightsighlightsighlightsighlights

Despite reported improve-ments, the APS continues toencourage all visa applicants toapply at least 3-4 months aheadof time. If an applicant has notreceived a visa within 30 dayssince the visa application, theapplicant should visit theNational Academy of Sciencesvisa website at http://www.nationalacademies.org/visas/

Fill out the “Visa Question-naire” (4th link down in the liston the right hand side of thepage). Once the questionnaireis completed, NAS staff reviewthe information each week tototototoidentify visa applications thatidentify visa applications thatidentify visa applications thatidentify visa applications thatidentify visa applications thatare still pending 30 days pastare still pending 30 days pastare still pending 30 days pastare still pending 30 days pastare still pending 30 days pastthe initial application date.the initial application date.the initial application date.the initial application date.the initial application date.

This is quite helpful, sinceonce each week everyeveryeveryeveryevery case thathas been pending over 30 daysis now reported by the NAS tothe State Department. If thecase is not resolved the follow-ing week, the NAS continuesto report it again each weekuntil the case is resolved oneway or another. The StateDepartment also communi-cates each week to the NASregarding which cases theyhave resolved.

This system helps make surethat the State Department isaware of those cases that havebeen significantly delayed, andalso helps to make sure theydon’t “fall through the cracks.”While this process doesn’t guar-antee US Government action,it guarantees visibility to pend-ing applications.

The APS has been designatedthe primary beneficiary of abequest of over $1 million from M.Hildred Blewett, an acceleratorphysicist who died in June. Blewettleft nearly everything she had toAPS for a scholarship for womenin physics.

The scholarship will be knownas the M. Hildred Blewett AnnualScholarship for Women in Physics.Eligible candidates will be womenwho have had to give up doingresearch for a time but would liketo resume their careers, womenwho wish to change the area oftheir work, and recent postgradu-ates who are in their first academicposition and need financial supportto establish themselves. Additionalinformation will be available in

APS Establishes M. Hildred BlewettScholarship for Women in Physics

Apker Award Finalists

Photo Credit: Shelly Johnston

The Apker Award is given annually to two students for outstanding research as anundergraduate. One award is for a student at an institution granting a PhDdegree; the other goes to a student at an institution that does not grant a PhD. Therecipients are chosen from six finalists, three in each category, who assemble inWashington in September for a day of interviews with the selection committee.Shown here after the long day of interviews had ended are: (l to r): Nathan Hodas(Williams College); Joseph Checkelsky (Harvey Mudd College); Yuk-yan Lam(MIT); Ibrahim Cisse (North Carolina Central University); Matthew Pysher(Colgate University); and Jonathan Heckman (Princeton University).

2005 when APS solicits applica-tions for the first scholarship.

While signing the will shortlybefore she died, Blewett said,“Everything I have came fromphysics, so everything has to goback to physics,” recalled FrankMalinka, Blewett’s financial advisor.

Blewett was born in Ontario onMay 28, 1911. She began hercareer in physics working at Gen-eral Electric in Schenectady, NewYork, in the 1940s, where she de-veloped a method of controllingthe pollution from smoke from fac-tory chimneys. In 1947 she and herthen husband, John Blewett, wereamong the original team membersat Brookhaven National Labora-tory. Hildred Blewett later workedat Argonne National Laboratory,and then at CERN. She retired from

See BLEWETT on page 4

Hildred Blewett, in the days when a com-puter was a person, not a machine.

See ELECTION on page 6

87 Zero Gravity

Haiku winnersHaiku winnersHaiku winnersHaiku winnersHaiku winners

The Back PageRembering Oppen-Rembering Oppen-Rembering Oppen-Rembering Oppen-Rembering Oppen-heimer: The Theimer: The Theimer: The Theimer: The Theimer: The Teachereachereachereachereacher,,,,,The ManThe ManThe ManThe ManThe ManBy Edward GerjuoyBy Edward GerjuoyBy Edward GerjuoyBy Edward GerjuoyBy Edward Gerjuoy

By Ernie TretkoffAPS President Helen Quinn

traveled in early August to Viet-nam, where she attended ascientific conference and metthe President of Vietnam.

Quinn attended the 5th

Rencontres du Vietnam, a particlephysics and astrophysics meeting

in Hanoi. While she was there, shevisited with the leadership of theVietnam Physical Society, andtalked about the relationshipbetween the societies.

Some of the conference attend-ees were invited to meet with thePresident of Vietnam, Tran Duc

See QUINN on page 3

The President of Vietnam is 5th from the left, and Helen Quinn is 6th from the left,in the front row.

See VISA on page 6

2 November 2004 NEWS

This Month in Physics HistoryThis Month in Physics HistoryThis Month in Physics HistoryThis Month in Physics HistoryThis Month in Physics History

APS News (ISSN: 1058-8132) is published 11X yearly,monthly, except the August/September issue, by theAmerican Physical Society, One Physics Ellipse, CollegePark, MD 20740-3844, (301) 209-3200. It containsnews of the Society and of its Divisions, Topical Groups,Sections and Forums; advance information on meetingsof the Society; and reports to the Society by its committeesand task forces, as well as opinions.

Letters to the editor are welcomed from themembership. Letters must be signed and should includean address and daytime telephone number. The APSreserves the right to select and to edit for length or

clarity. All correspondence regarding APS News should bedirected to: Editor, APS News, One Physics Ellipse, CollegePark, MD 20740-3844, E-mail: letters@aps.org.

Subscriptions: APS News is an on-membership publicationdelivered by Periodical Mail. Members residing abroadmay receive airfreight delivery for a fee of $15.Nonmembers: Subscription rates are available at http://librarians.aps.org/institutional.html.

Subscription orders, renewals and address changes shouldbe addressed as follows: For APS Members—MembershipDepartment, American Physical Society, One Physics Ellipse,

College Park, MD 20740-3844, membership@aps.org.For Nonmembers—Circulation and Fulfillment Division,American Institute of Physics, Suite 1NO1, 2 HuntingtonQuadrangle, Melville, NY 11747-4502. Allow at least 6 weeksadvance notice. For address changes, please send both the oldand new addresses, and, if possible, include a mailing labelfrom a recent issue. Requests from subscribers for missingissues will be honored without charge only if received within6 months of the issue’s actual date of publication. PeriodicalPostage Paid at College Park, MD and at additional mailingoffices. Postmaster: Send address changes to APS News,Membership Department, American Physical Society, OnePhysics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740-3844.

APS COUNCIL 2004PresidentHelen R. Quinn*, Stanford University (SLAC)President-ElectMarvin L. Cohen*, University of California, BerkeleyVice-PresidentJohn Bahcall*, Institute for Advanced Studies, PrincetonExecutive OfficerJudy R. Franz*, University of Alabama, Huntsville (on leave)TreasurerThomas McIlrath*, University of Maryland (emeritus)Editor-in-ChiefMartin Blume*, Brookhaven National Laboratory (emeritus)

Past-PresidentMyriam P. Sarachik*, City College of New York - CUNY

General CouncillorsJonathan A. Bagger*, Janet Conrad, Frances Houle*, EvelynHu, Gerald Mahan, Cherry Ann Murray*, Arthur Ramirez,Laura Smoliar

International CouncillorSukekatsu Ushioda

Chair, Nominating CommitteeJohn Peoples

Chair, Panel on Public AffairsArthur Bienenstock

Division, Forum and Section CouncillorsEdward “Rocky” Kolb (Astrophysics), Kate Kirby (Atomic,Molecular & Optical Physics), Robert Eisenberg*(Biological), Sylvia Ceyer (Chemical), Moses H. Chan(Condensed Matter Physics), Richard Martin(Computational), Harry Swinney (Fluid Dynamics), PeterZimmerman (Forum on Education), Gloria Lubkin (Forumon History of Physics), Patricia Mooney (Forum onIndustrial and Applied Physics), James Vary* (Forum onInternational Physics), Philip “Bo” Hammer (Forum on

Physics and Society), J. H. Eberly (Laser Science), G.Slade Cargill*, III (Materials), Bunny C. Clark*(Nuclear), John Jaros (Particles & Fields), StephenHolmes (Physics of Beams), James Drake (Plasma),Timothy P. Lodge, (Polymer Physics), Gian Vidali, (NewYork Section), Joe Hamilton (Southeast Section)

ADVISORSRepresentatives from Other SocietiesJim Nelson, AAPT; Marc Brodsky, AIP

International AdvisorsMichael R. Morrow, Canadian Association of Physicists

Staff RepresentativesAlan Chodos, Associate Executive Officer; Amy Flatten,Director of International Affairs; Theodore Hodapp,Director of Education and Outreach; Robert L. Park,Director, Public Information; Michael Lubell, Director,Public Affairs; Stanley Brown, Editorial Director; CharlesMuller, Director, Journal Operations; Michael Stephens,Controller and Assistant Treasurer

Council AdministratorKen Cole* Members of the APS Executive Board

Coden: ANWSEN ISSN: 1058-8132

Series II, Vol. 13, No. 10November 2004

©2004 The American Physical Society

Editor ............................................................................................................ Alan ChodosAssociate Editor .................................................................................... Jennifer OuelletteSpecial Publications Manager .................................................................... Patti MasconeDesign and Production ..................................................................... Stephanie JankowskiForefronts Editor ............................................................................................ Craig DavisProofreader ..................................................................................................... Edward Lee

November 25, 1975: Patent for Full-body CANovember 25, 1975: Patent for Full-body CANovember 25, 1975: Patent for Full-body CANovember 25, 1975: Patent for Full-body CANovember 25, 1975: Patent for Full-body CAT ScanT ScanT ScanT ScanT Scan

NEWS

When British physicistWilhelm Roentgen accidentallydiscovered x-rays cast by hiscathode ray tube in 1895, thephenomenon quickly foundpractical application in medicalimaging and diagnostics. Itwould be another 80 or so yearsbefore x-rays were harnessed ina new, improved form of diag-nostic imaging: computer -assistedtomography, or CAT scanning.

In a CAT scan, the x-ray tubeand detector rotate around thepatient, capturing images ofeach cross-section of the bodyor organ under examination.A CAT scan uses crystal detec-tors that emit signals whenstruck by x-rays, which arestored and analyzed in a com-puter. The result is a 3-D imageof the body part.

The two men credited withthe CAT-scan’s invention areAllan Cormack and GodfreyHounsfield, who shared the1979 Nobel Prize in Physics forthe discovery.

A native of South Africa,Cormack became interested inastronomy as a teenager, andchose to study math and phys-ics because they were essentialto a career in astronomy.

Career prospects forastronomers weren’t good, so hestudied electrical engineering in-stead at the University of CapeTown. Within two years hisinterests had reverted to mathand physics; he eventuallyearned bachelor’s and master’sdegrees in physics.

He worked at CambridgeUniversity’s famed CavendishLaboratory before returning to hisalma mater as a faculty member.Much of his research was innuclear physics; he becameinterested in what is now knownas CAT-scanning in 1956.

Cormack provided the theo-retical framework for CAT scans,analyzing the conditions fordemonstrating a correct radio-graphic cross-section in abiological system, which waspublished in two papers in 1963and 1964, respectively. Hisresults didn’t initially garnermuch attention; it wasn’t until1970 that other developments

in the field causedhim to devote moresub-stantial efforts tothat area. Cormackunderstood that itwas basically a matterof finding a two-dimensional math-ematical function torelate the observedtransmission to thevarying absorbtion asthe x-rays passthrough a cross-section. Althoughothers beforehim hadd e d u c e ds i m i l a rmethods of calcula-tion, Cormack wasthe first to state thebasic principles forreconstructing across-section oforgan tissue. He alsoforesaw that solvingthis problem wouldopen up radio-therapy and imagingdiagnostic applica-tions in medicine.

Building a practi-cal machine becamethe purview ofHounsfield. He grewup in the Englishcountryside on afarm, the youngest offive children, andearly on evinced afascination with all thingsmechanical on the farm: thethreshing machines, the binders,and generators.

During his teenage years hestarted doing his own experiments,building electrical recordingmachines, and investigating theprinciples of flight by launchinghimself from the tops of haystackswith a homemade glider. And hevery nearly blew himself up whileexperimenting with water-filled tarbarrels and acetylene to see howhigh he could propel the waterjet.

In school, he excelled primarilyin math and physics. When WorldWar II broke out, he joined theRoyal Air Force, driven by his loveof aeronautics. He eventuallypassed a City and Guilds examina-tion in radio communications at

the Royal College ofScience and, later,the Cranwell RadarSchool. And he alsobuilt a large-screenoscilloscope andd e m o n s t r a t i o nequipment asinstruction aids.

After the war, heearned a bona fidedegree from theFaraday House Elec-trical EngineeringCollege in London. Hejoined the researchstaff of EMI in 1951,working on radarand guided weaponry,and on computers,

which were thenin their infancy.

After trans-ferring to EMI’s

Central ResearchL a b o r a t o r i e s ,Hounsfield proposeda project onautomatic patternrecognition. Thiswork led, in 1967, tothe idea that becameknown as computer-assisted tomography.

In his Nobel Prizeautobiography, herecalled the manyfrustrations andtechnical hurdles hehad to overcome toproduce the first

clinical brain-scanner—includ-ing traveling across London bypublic transport carryingbullock’s brains for use in anexperimental scanner in the lab.

Computer tomography wasfirst used to take images of theskull, for study of diseases of thebrain. A whole-body version ofthe CAT scan was invented byRobert Ledley, a professor ofphysiology and biophysics atGeorgetown University.

Ledley received a patent forthat device in November, 1975.Since then, CAT scans havebecome a mainstay of the medi-cal profession, and not just forimaging the brain or specificorgans. It has also been used tomonitor effects of radioactivetreatment of cancerous tumors.

Allan CormackAllan CormackAllan CormackAllan CormackAllan Cormack

Godfrey HounsfieldGodfrey HounsfieldGodfrey HounsfieldGodfrey HounsfieldGodfrey Hounsfield

“If Los Alamos really was abunch of arrogant… cowboys, theywould appear to have a safetyrecord and incidents safety viola-tions twice as high as anyplace elseor, you know, way out of the statis-tical clouds, and that wasn’t thecase.”—Brad Holian, Los Alamos NationalLaboratory, on safety and security atLANL, National Public Radio (NPR),September 20, 2004

✶✶✶“Usually when people cite a

work, it’s because they found it use-ful. I’d say that this is something thatI’d want to list among my majorachievements.”—John Perdew, Tulane University, onhaving written the world’s most citedphysics paper, Times-Picayune (NewOrleans), September 20, 2004

✶✶✶“I’m sitting in my kitchen look-

ing at this large collection of cellsput together into this amazing thingcalled a cat. What is the differencebetween a cat and a crystal of salt,which also is the product of self-assembly?”—George Whitesides, HarvardUniversity, on self-assembly, DallasMorning News, September 5, 2004

✶✶✶“The Telescope Array experi-

ment is meant to help solve thepuzzle of the origins of ultra-high-energy cosmic radiation. We don’tknow where they are coming from.We don’t know why they are here.”—Pierre Sokolsky, University of Utah,Salt Lake City, on cosmic rays, KnightRidder Newspapers, August 30, 2004

✶✶✶“There was a big pit in my stom-

ach. This just wasn’t supposed tohappen. We’re going to have a lotof work picking up the pieces.”—Roger Wiens, Los Alamos NationalLaboratory, on the crash of the Gen-esis space capsule, Associated Press,September 8, 2004

✶✶✶“The science fiction aspect ... is

not enough to justify doing this, butit doesn’t hurt.”—Jeffrey Hangst, CERN, on produc-ing anti-atoms, The Dallas MorningNews, September 19, 2004

✶✶✶Two quotes from Russell Hulse in

the Dallas Morning News, September19, 2004:

“My first reaction was not‘Eureka!,’ but rather ‘Nuts, what’swrong?’ ”

(on his discovery of a pair of pul-sars orbiting each other)

✶✶✶

“Science was never a career tome, but a way of life. If you can givethat to kids, it’s a wonderful gift.”

✶✶✶“I wondered why hasn’t anyone

written a book about the scienceof football. It seemed to me thatwas odd because there’s every bitas much physics in football as inbaseball.”—Timothy Gay, University ofNebraska-Lincoln, on the physics offootball, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette,October 4, 2004

✶✶✶“For people like me that choose

to work in this field, enhancing ourknowledge is the payoff. And thesescientific breakthroughs are reallyour payoff, and everybody thatdoes basic research does it becauseit’s a lot of fun.”—Deborah Jin, NIST, National Pub-lic Radio (NPR), September 28, 2004

✶✶✶“The theorists will be surprised,

but they do not exclude such a pos-sibility.”— Moses H. W. Chan, Penn State, onhaving produced supersolid helium, TheNew York Times, September 21, 4004

✶✶✶“I have written at least one

paper in the remote past about thepossibility of supersolid behavior. Iwould have bet at least 100 to 1against it.” —Anthony Leggett, University of Il-linois, on supersolid helium, The NewYork Times, September 21, 2004

✶✶✶

Quotes about the 2004 NobelQuotes about the 2004 NobelQuotes about the 2004 NobelQuotes about the 2004 NobelQuotes about the 2004 NobelPrize in Physics:Prize in Physics:Prize in Physics:Prize in Physics:Prize in Physics:

“I was in the shower. I hadn’tslept all night because I was just toonervous. And my wife answered thephone. I stepped out of the showersoaking wet, and I started listeningto the people congratulating me. Itwas lovely. Then I called up my par-ents right away.”—Frank Wilczek, MIT, on receiving thephone call informing him he’d won theNobel Prize, NPR, October 5, 2004

✶✶✶“One of my colleagues at the time

said, ‘David, this is a great thingyou’ve come up with, and a greattheory, but it will never be proven.’”—David Gross, University of Califor-nia, Santa Barbara, Washington Post,October 6, 2004

✶✶✶“What they provided us was a

lovely insight, and a surprising one,into the fundamental nature ofmatter.”—Sylvester James Gates, University ofMaryland, USA Today, October 6, 2004

See MEDIA on page 7

Patent drawing for Ledley’sfull-body machine.

November 2004 3NEWS

Editor’Editor’Editor’Editor’Editor’s Note:s Note:s Note:s Note:s Note: Please send ethical questions for Jordan Moiers orcomments to: ethics@aps.org, or by mail to Jordan Moiers, c/o APS News,One Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740. Contributors should identifythemselves, but their names and addresses will be held strictly confidentialunless they request otherwise. The opinions expressed in this column are notnecessarily those of either the APS or APS News.

✶✶✶

The recent APS Task Force on Profes-sional Ethics recommended that APSwork with physics departments toimprove education on ethicalissues that affect the physics commu-nity. If you have experience or interestin developing materials to helpstudents understand and confront suchissues and would be willing to helpwith this task, please contact Ken Cole,Special Assistant to the ExecutiveOfficer, at cole@aps.org.

Help on Ethics Needed

In the past year, a colleague posed the following ethical question tome. We discussed it at length but never felt that we reached asatisfactory conclusion. Perhaps you can help.

When a student takes a course and part of the requirements for thecourse is to write a paper, I think that most people would agree that thepaper written by the student for the course belongs to the student. If afaculty member wanted to keep the paper or use it for some purpose,they would need to obtain the student’s permission.

When research is supported by a grant from the federal governmentor a foundation to an institution, it is typical for the institution to haverights to the results from the work. Typically a faculty member will ac-knowledge funding for the project but the rights to the work will remainwith the faculty member (unless the foundation has specifically statedthat they own the work).

So, the conundrum arises when a student performs research FORCREDIT, not for pay, and writes a paper for the course that he or she gotcredit for, to whom does the paper belong? In one sense, it belongs to thestudent, who paid for the course he or she enrolled in and completed. Inanother sense, if any of the research was funded by a grant, it belongs tothe faculty member in whose lab the results were obtained, even if thestudent was not paid from the grant to do the research. A corollary to thequestion posed above is, who has the rights to the results obtained by thestudent? That is, could the student publish the results without the per-mission of the faculty member or could the faculty member publish theresults without the permission of the student?

Thanks, NNNNN

Science and Art Flow TogetherIn Upcoming ConferenceBy Ernie Tretkoff

Many scientists recognize theartistic quality of their images, andmany artists are inspired by sci-ence. As part of a growingmovement to bring those twogroups together, the fourthScience and Art symposium(ScArt4) will be held June 9-12,2005 in New Brunswick, NJ.

The ScArt4 meeting will focuson fluids and waves, includingwaves in engineering, geophysics,astrophysics, and biology. Artistswill present creations that use orwere motivated by fluid and wavescience. “It turns out that asidefrom fractals, fluid dynamicsmakes the nicest pictures—thatand astronomy,” said conferenceorganizer and fluid physicistNorman Zabusky.

Engineers and scientists willemphasize the imagery of theirwork, and try to answer ques-tions such as how they visualizetheir discoveries, and how theyproduce “art” from visualizations,observations and numerical simu-lations. Visual artists will discusshow they use aspects of fluid andwave motion in their creativework, and how science and tech-nology motivated and aided them.

The scheduled keynote speak-ers include artists Ned Kahn,Donna Cox, and June Wayne,astrophysicist Michael Norman,and historian Peter Galison.

This interdisciplinary meeting

will be the fourth meeting in theScArt series, and is the first time theScArt conference has been held inthe United States. Zabusky hopes theconference will especially attractyoung people whose interests liesomewhere between art andscience.

In addition to talks, there will bean exhibition room, where contribu-tors’ works will be displayed. Allforms of visual art, including paint-ing, sculpture, photographs,animations, and installations may beexhibited.

In association with the WorldYear of Physics, there will also be avisual art contest, with monetaryprizes. The year 2005, in addition tobeing the anniversary of Einstein’smiraculous year, is also the 50th

anniversary of Fermi, Pasta, andUlam’s study of nonlinear oscillators.Works submitted for the visual artcontest must be associated withsome aspect of the Einstein or FPUanniversaries. “It would be nice toget people to submit artworks thatsymbolize the essence of 2005,” saidZabusky.

Zabusky is a computational fluidphysicist who became interested inthe imagery of his work. “As I wasworking, I noticed that the things Iwas making had a certain kind ofbeauty, so I started asking, “what isart?” I decided after many years thatwhat I was doing was art, if I extendedit a little bit.”

He found that he could con-verse with artists, and “within thiscertain group, there was a verystrong rapport, and now it’s awhole movement.” There are nowmany conferences, in addition toScArt, that bring together scien-tists and artists, said Zabusky.

Zabusky believes that scientificimages can be considered art, butthat the motivation for creatingthem is usually different from thatof an artist. “Usually when an art-ist creates art, he’s not doing it totry to understand nature, whereaswhen a scientist is creating an im-age, he’s trying to understand somephenomenon, and trying to bringout the essence of that phenom-enon in the image. The question is,‘is that art?’ The motivation is com-pletely different, but the end resultcould be beautiful, could be strik-ing, or could be absorbing, andtherefore I think it qualifies as art.”As an example, Zabusky men-tioned the pictures taken by theHubble space telescope. “Some ofthe pictures are so striking thatyou might want to hang them onyour wall. Is that art? Well, nobodypainted it, but it has an uncannybeauty, a mystery,” he said.

He points out that there is awhole range from science to art.For many artists, said Zabusky,science is an important part ofhow they create their images.

The White House announcedon September 17 that PresidentGeorge Bush intends to nominateArden Bement Jr. to be the direc-tor of the National ScienceFoundation.

Bement became Acting Directorof the NSF on February 22 followingthe unexpected resignation of RitaColwell. Bement is also thedirector of the National Institute ofStandards and Technology (NIST).

Bement’s nomination will comebefore the Senate Health, Education,Labor and Pensions Committee. Thiscommittee is chaired by Judd Gregg(R-NH); Edward Kennedy (D-MA) isthe Ranking Democratic Member.There is an outside chance that thecommittee might consider the nomi-nation before this Congressadjourns. If this does not occur, thecommittee will consider it early nextyear.

Bement came to Washington inNovember 2001, after being nomi-nated by President Bush to be NISTDirector. Before then, Bement wasthe David A. Ross Distinguished Pro-fessor of Nuclear Engineering andthe head of Purdue University’sSchool of Nuclear Engineering. Heholds a PhD in metallurgical engi-neering from the University ofMichigan, and is a member of theNational Academy of Engineering.He also served on the NationalScience Board for six years.

First reactions to the announce-ment were quite positive. House

President Bush Names Arden Bementto be Director of the NSF

Science Committee ChairmanSherwood Boehlert (R-NY) stated,“I’m delighted that the Presidenthas nominated Arden Bement tobe the Director of the NationalScience Foundation. Arden knowsthe agency well and brings a wealthof experience in industry, govern-ment and academia to the job. Hiscalm, soft-spoken, steady, open-minded and firm leadership hasalready left its mark on NSF. Witha permanent appointment, he willbe able to be an even more force-ful, effective and inventivedirector.”

“Dr. Bement has had a long anddistinguished career in industryand academia, and as Director ofNIST,” said Bart Gordon (D-TN),the Ranking Democratic Memberof the Science Committee. “TheNSF, by culture and constituency,is very different from NIST, but Iam confident that he will excel inhis leadership of this importantresearch agency.”

Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) alsocommented on the expected nomi-nation, pronouncing Bement“an excellent choice for the Direc-tor of the National ScienceFoundation. Arden is a respectedscientist with a wealth of manage-ment experiences in academia,industry and government—anunusual combination that willenable him to lead NSF withstrength and vision.”

Bement sent a message to NSF

staff following the White Houseannouncement, praising thefoundation’s “rich history of strongand independent Directors,” andemphasizing the staff’s importanceto realizing NSF’s goals and objec-tives. “Although NSF facessignificant challenges in the nearfuture due to Federal budget issues,I am committed to the policies andoperations that have stood the testof time and have helped make NSFan extraordinary agency,” he said.

“Our pursuit of research andeducation at the frontiers of sci-ence and engineering, ourcommitment to broadening par-t icipation both within andwithout the Foundation, and ourdesire to ensure that we have theresources to carry out this visionwill be among my top priorities.”

—Audrey Leath

Arden BementArden BementArden BementArden BementArden Bement

Jordan Moiers replies:Jordan Moiers replies:Jordan Moiers replies:Jordan Moiers replies:Jordan Moiers replies:Dear N,Intellectual property policies vary from university to university. Most

schools consider the results of a student’s academic efforts to be theproperty of the student, and any results of work paid for by the univer-sity to be university property. (Although I’ve read a few intellectual propertypolicy statements that are framed so broadly that a university couldclaim copyrights to anything produced with the aid of universityresources such as laboratory equipment, buildings, furniture, and black-boards. This suggests a love poempenned in a dormitory stairway ispotentially university property,although I imagine few universi-ties are going to attempt to enforcetheir policies that strictly.)

Students buy their educationsfrom universities, and they shouldown the rights to the work theyproduce. The academic credit astudent earns is not payment tothe student because the studentpays for the credit. A student whoperforms research for creditdeserves to share in the rights tothe resulting paper. An unpaid stu-dent becomes part of the research collaboration and should be includedas a full-fledged coauthor on published works, and has the same rightsand obligations as every other coauthor. The student also could poten-tially own a portion of any patent rights associated with the research.

As I see it, you have three, basic options: pay the student in additionto giving credit, have them sign over all rights in advance, or be preparedto share rights to publications and patents with them. It’s probably worthtalking to your university’s lawyers, whichever option you choose.

Luong. He told the group that heunderstands the importance of scienceand is committed to dedicating aportion of his budget for researchand development, said Quinn.

Physics in Vietnam is developing,said Quinn, but scientists need bet-ter access to information aboutcurrent research, such as APS jour-nals. “One of the things that becomesclear is it’s very difficult for people incountries like Vietnam to knowwhat’s available to them,” said Quinn.“They’re always looking for what-ever help they can get. Informationis their biggest deficit.”

The opportunity to come work

or study in the US is also helpful toscientists in developing countries likeVietnam. Quinn said she and thegroup discussed visa problems ofstudents and researchers who wantto study or work in the US. The Viet-namese also expressed the concernthat when they send people over-seas for training, those people don’toften return to Vietnam. Korean andTaiwanese physicists at the meetingsaid that their countries had been insimilar situations recently, but thatas their countries’ science and tech-nology developed, more scientistsbegan choosing to return homeafter receiving education abroad.

See ART FLOW on page 7

QUINN from page 1

4 November 2004 NEWS

LETTERSMy father is a member of the

American Physical Society andforwarded me the July 2004 issueof APS News which featured a shortarticle about Les Triplettes deBelleville. I am a graduate studentat NYU and recently wrote a paperon the animated film for a VisualLiteracy class and may be able toprovide an answer to why Einstein’sfield equations of general relativ-ity are featured at the beginning ofthe film.

It may not be immediatelyapparent to the general public, butLes Triplettes de Belleville is muchmore than a cartoon about agrandmother’s adventure to saveher grandson. Instead, it is anexpression of Sylvain Chomet’sideas about many topics, particu-larly American consumerism andcorporate domination taking overthe world and crushing the smalland individual.

In the film, that dominance is over-thrown and Chomet’s opinions areeffectively expressed through visualparallels and many tiny visual details.

Einstein’s field equations ofgeneral relativity are amongst thosedetails and can be seen as a meta-phor for the purpose of the film itself.The effects of gravity on space-timecan be interpreted as a parallel forthe effects of the film on the view-ers. Gravity can be seen as arepresentation of the film’s messagewhile space-time represents reality.

Field Equations are a Metaphor for Film’s PurposeThe effects of gravity on space-timeare parallel with the effects of thefilm’s message on the viewers and soaffects the level awareness in reality.

The film itself also includesmany details and references fromgreat icons of world history andculture such as classical music(Bach) and fine art (Salvador Dali).Perhaps the simpler answer is justthat Einstein is the appropriate iconfor science.Cheryl S HarkNew York, NY

James Clerk Maxwell PrizeVVVVValeraleraleraleralery Godyaky Godyaky Godyaky Godyaky Godyak

Osram SylvaniaNoah HershkowitzNoah HershkowitzNoah HershkowitzNoah HershkowitzNoah Hershkowitz

University of Wisconsin-Madison

CitationCitationCitationCitationCitation: “For fundamental contribu-tions to the physics of low-temperatureplasmas, including radio frequencywave heating, sheath physics, poten-tial profiles, diagnostic probes, and theindustrial applications of plasmas.”

GodyakGodyakGodyakGodyakGodyak is a corporate scientistat Osram Sylvania. He received hisPhD degree in plasma physics fromMoscow State University in 1968.He joined the Laboratory ofFusion Engineering at the Instituteof Electro-Physical Apparatus inSt. Petersburg, where he con-ducted research on high-current

Physicists Honored at November Division Meetings

relativistic electron accelerators,particularly on field emission andelectron optics. He returned toMSU’s physics department in 1972,but was expelled eight years laterand forbidden to hold a profes-sional job, working as an electricianin a Moscow hospital. He emigratedto the US in 1984 and joined GTECorporation, now Osram Sylvania.Godyak has made many contribu-tions to rf discharge physics andrevolutionary products, includinglong life and compact rf lamps.

HershkowitzHershkowitzHershkowitzHershkowitzHershkowitz is an experimentalplasma physicist with currentresearch interests in plasma-aidedmanufacturing, plasma physics,plasma diagnostics, and in fusionplasmas. He received his PhD in phys-ics from Johns Hopkins University See DIVISION MEETINGS on page 7

in 1966, and is currently director ofthe Center for Plasma-Aided Manu-facturing (C-PAM), which providesimportant input to US industry. Healso heads the Phaedrus Laboratoryfor Plasma Science, which investi-gates plasma applications.

Excellence in PlasmaPhysics AwardLiu ChenLiu ChenLiu ChenLiu ChenLiu Chen

University of California, IrvineChio Z. ChengChio Z. ChengChio Z. ChengChio Z. ChengChio Z. Cheng

Princeton UniversityWilliam HeidbrinkWilliam HeidbrinkWilliam HeidbrinkWilliam HeidbrinkWilliam Heidbrink

University of California, IrvineEdward StraitEdward StraitEdward StraitEdward StraitEdward Strait

General AtomicsKing-Lap WKing-Lap WKing-Lap WKing-Lap WKing-Lap Wongongongongong

Princeton University

Eleven physicists will receive six APS prizes and awards at two division meetings in November. The Excellence inPlasma Physics Award, the James Clerk Maxwell Prize, and the Marshall Rosenbluth Award will be presented at thefall meeting of the APS Division of Plasma Physics, to be held November 15-19 in Savannah, Georgia. The FluidDynamics Prize, the Lars Onsager Prize, and the Andreas Acrivos Award will be presented at the meeting of the APSDivision of Fluid Dynamics, November 21-23 in Seattle, Washington.

Who’s the Youngest ofThem All?

Please permit me to make twocomments on your article on C. D.Anderson in your APS News ofAugust/September 2004.

The parents of Carl DavidAnderson were Swedes, not Swiss.

When Anderson (born 3 Septem-ber 1905) shared the Nobel prizewith Victor Hess in 1936 he was notthe youngest so honored. WilliamLawrence Bragg (born 31 March1890) who when he shared with hisfather, William Henry Bragg, the1915 physics Nobel prize was onlytwenty-five years old. Heisenberg(born 5 December 1901) was aboutthree months younger than Ander-son, when he won (alone) the 1932Nobel prize in Physics.Ibrahim AdawiIbrahim AdawiIbrahim AdawiIbrahim AdawiIbrahim AdawiRolla, Missouri

CERN in 1977 and moved to En-gland and then, in 1990, toVancouver, British Columbia. Shedied June 13, 2004, at age 93.

Blewett had always been goodat mathematics and physics, saidher brother, Talmage Hunt. Her fa-ther, an engineer who became aminister, supported her interests.

Few women went into physicsat the time, and those who did of-ten faced discrimination, butBlewett was a strong woman whoalways did what she wanted to do,said Hunt. But she felt she was be-ing kept down in her careerbecause she was a woman, and thisfeeling may have been one of thereasons she wanted to set up ascholarship specifically for women,said Hunt.

Another factor that may haveinfluenced her decision was thatat one point she had to take a yearoff from college because she didn’thave enough money, said Malinka.“She didn’t have any money to keepgoing to school, and she had to dis-continue her studies, which washer absolute passion. So she wouldlike to see that that doesn’t happento women these days,” saidMalinka.

Having grown up with littlemoney, Blewett always accountedfor her every penny, and lived mod-estly throughout her life. “Until thetime she died she could tell youexactly how much change she hadin her purse,” said Hunt.

Though she was married forsome time to John Blewett, anotheraccelerator physicist, the pair

BLEWETT from page 1

divorced in the 1960s, and HildredBlewett never remarried or hadchildren.

Aside from physics, she lovedtraveling, opera, and reading. “Shewas an avid reader, even after los-ing most of her eyesight. She hadto read large print books. Shewould read a couple dozen booksa month,” said Hunt. In her will,

Blewett also left about $20,000 tothe Vancouver Public Library Out-reach Service, which deliveredboxes of books to her home eachmonth.

Blewett left the rest of hermoney to APS. “She really felt thatwhat she had should go back tophysics. It was really important toher,” said Malinka.

Over the years, many APS members have thoughtfully included the AmericanPhysical Society in their bequest intentions. These generous gifts help provideneeded funding for key Society programs and initiatives that our physics commu-nity has launched and strengthened since the Society’s founding in 1899.

In recognition of individuals and families remembering the Society in theircharitable estate plans, APS is pleased to announce the formation of a BequestSociety. The development of this Society is intended to thank past and currentdonors and encourage others to consider making such a gift through their will.With the permission of donors, APS will honor these individuals in publications ofthe Society and through other Development office means.

Gifts from one’s estate can be made in an unrestricted manner, for use by theSociety as it deems appropriate, or designated to a particular program oractivity. These gifts may take the form of a percentage of the estate or a fixeddollar amount. As APS is a 501(c) (3) organization, these gifts can providesignificant estate tax savings.

The American Physical Society invites those who have made arrangements fora contribution to APS through their will to become charter members of the BequestSociety by contacting Darlene LoganDarlene LoganDarlene LoganDarlene LoganDarlene Logan, Director of Development, using the contactinformation below. In addition, individuals considering a designated gift areencouraged to discuss the terms and wording of the gift with the Developmentoffice to assure that their future intentions can be carried out exactly as they wish.

The American Physical Society is extremely grateful to past and future donorswho remember the Society in their legacy plans and we look forward to being ableto provide appropriate tribute to them through this new Bequest Society.

For further information, For further information, For further information, For further information, For further information, please contact:Darlene LoganDarlene LoganDarlene LoganDarlene LoganDarlene Logan

Director of DevelopmentAmerican Physical Society

One Physics EllipseCollege Park, MD 20740-3844

(301)209-3224

APSANNOUNCES FORMATION OF

BEQUEST SOCIETY

See LETTERS on page 7

The August/September APSNews highlighted a June resolutionof the APS Executive Board, urg-ing review of the Moon/Marsproposal and NASA’s recent redi-rection. Calling the 10-15 yeartimeline for a return to the Moon a“rapid pace”, the statement indi-cated concern about the impact onscience and budgets.

Given that the most immediatescientific impact of the new “vision”is a termination of physical scienceresearch on the space station, thereis certainly reason for this concern.But coming from APS the newstatement is ironic in light of thestill unrevoked 1991 APS Council“Statement on the Manned SpaceStation”: “The United States needsa vigorous space science program,but such a program can be imple-mented for the foreseeable futurewithout the proposed mannedspace station.”

Science was never a good justi-fication for the space station.Former APS Public Affairs direc-tor Robert Park is widely knownas an outspoken critic of humanspace flight. Park is absolutely cor-rect that human spaceflight is stillfar too expensive to justify any sci-entific returns. So far.

With a limited budget, hardchoices have to be made on whichprograms will benefit society more.The money spent to make the agingspace shuttles safer, since theColumbia accident, is taking awayfrom science programs at NASA rightnow. The space station still has bil-lions of dollars worth of committedfunding before it can be declaredeven minimally complete. Bush, inannouncing the new Moon/Mars

Moon/Mars Offers Physics Opportunitiesdirection, called for an end (by 2010)to the wasteful space shuttle, andthereafter a phasing out of spacestation commitments as well. This willboth protect the substantial continu-ing science programs at NASA, andleave room for the new program aswell. Whatever your views on ourpresident, it’s a logical way toproceed.

The reason we need humans inspace is not for science. It is tolearn how to do things better inspace. Robots don’t have the intel-ligence and insight that humansbring. The problems are basic: inour laboratories on Earth we takefor granted simple things—shelterfrom the outside world, a steadyinternal climate, access to substan-tial electric power, and of coursean abundance of graduate studentsto put the equipment together,twiddle the knobs, and fix it whenit breaks. Fixing things in low grav-ity isn’t so simple—even solderingdoesn’t work. Small-scale bench-top science that could bring great

The National Cancer Insti-tute of the National Institutes ofHealth announced in Septembera $144 million dollar, five-yearinitiative for developing andapplying nanotechnology toimprove the detection, diagno-sis, and treatment of cancer.

The new initiative is amultidisciplinary effort thatcombines physical science, en-gineering, chemistry, and

NIH to Attack Cancer Using NanotechnologyBy Ernie Tretkoff

medicine. “This is a comprehensiveand multisector initiative that isdesigned to really develop andensure the application of the bestof nanotechnology to cancer.” saidAnna Barker, NCI DeputyDirector.

As part of the initiative, NCI plansto fund about five “centers of can-cer nanotechnology excellence,”which will be collaborations of labo-ratories and research centers See NIH on page 6

cancer detection and treatment.Richard Smalley, professor of

chemistry, physics, and astronomyat Rice University, and winner ofthe 1996 Nobel Prize in chemis-try for the discovery of fullerenes,said, “What’s new is the notion thatwe can actually build newnanoobjects that have neverexisted before.” These objectscould be coated with antibodies

designed to integrate nanotechn-ology development into basic andapplied cancer research. Theinitiative will also supportmultidisciplinary research teams anda nanotech-nology characterizationlaboratory that will developstandards for nanoscale devices.

At the announcement onSeptember 13, several scientistsspoke about the potential fornanotech to dramatically improve

November 2004 5NEWS

Magnetorheological (MR) mate-rials comprise magnetizable particlesdispersed in a nonmagnetic host. InMR fluids, the particles are usuallymicrometer-sized carbonyl ironpowders in a host medium such asnatural or synthetic oil; in magneticpowders, the fluid medium is air.These materials transform fromfreely flowing to weakly solid underan applied magnetic field, a dramaticphenomenon that is the basis for avariety of commercial applicationsof these controllable or ‘smart’materials. In MR elastomers, the par-ticles are locked into viscoelasticsolids, but these composites exhibitsubstantial magnetostriction. WhileMR fluids are similar to ferrofluids,nanometer-sized colloidal disper-sions of single-domain magneticparticles, the two materials possessrather different behaviors: ferrofluidsdisplay only small increases in viscositywith field, unlike MR fluids, because themagnetic forces in ferrofluids are ordersof magnitude smaller.

BackgroundBackgroundBackgroundBackgroundBackgroundThe development of MR applica-

tions has had an intriguing andinstructive history, undergoing sev-eral cycles of scientific discovery,technological ‘hype,’ waning interest,rediscovery and, finally, commercialutilization in the late 1990s.

Developments in MR materialshave often paralleled those inelectrorheological (ER) fluids, disper-sions of electrically polarizableparticles that exhibit field-inducedsolidification under high electricfields. These were extensively inves-tigated by Willis Winslow in hisbasement laboratory in the 1930s.

Winslow inspired Jacob Rabinowof the National Bureau of Standardsto develop their magnetic analogs inthe late 1940s, demonstratingproofs-of-concept for many MRdevices that would finally becomefeasible to produce and use fivedecades later, enabled by develop-ments in chemistry, physics, materialsscience, and mechanical and elec-trical engineering.

The remarkable field-inducedchanges in MR materials are drivenby dipolar magnetic attractive forceswhich form “pearl chains” of particlesaligned with the field. These chainsstore magnetostatic energy andresist mechanical deformations thatwould reduce the energy. Particlechaining is relevant in a remarkablevariety of systems, from magnetictoys and animated displays to natu-ral “compasses” formed fromnanoscale ferrite particles inmagnetotactic bacteria. While realstructures are often complicated dueto the broad particle size distribu-tion and high volume fraction f inpractical MR materials, our under-standing of magnetorheology hasbeen greatly enhanced by studyingparticle chains.

Magnetic ForcesMagnetic ForcesMagnetic ForcesMagnetic ForcesMagnetic ForcesMuch of the scientific research

in magnetorheology has focused onquantifying the interparticle mag-netic interactions, understanding the

Magnetorheological MaterialsJohn M. Ginder

dynamics of structure formation,and characterizing the resultingfield-induced mechanical properties.

While the interparticle magneticinteractions are approximately dipo-lar, multipole and many-particleeffects, as well as magneticnonlinearity and saturation, areimportant. Analytical solutions thataccount for nonlinearity and satu-ration are difficult, so my coworkersand I used a finite-element numeri-cal approach to solve for the spatialvariation of the magnetic field H andflux density B in a uniform chain ofmagnetically saturable particles.

The particles were assumed to becontinuous, since each micrometer-sized particle can contain ~103 ormore magnetic domains. Using sym-metries appropriate to an isolatedchain to reduce the problem size,we demonstrated that magnetic satu-ration controls the local fields andforces even in applied fields well be-low M

s/3 (M

s is the saturation

magnetization of the particle and isroughly 1.7 x 106 A/m for iron), thefield at which isolated spherical par-ticles saturate. The high relativepermeability of the particles causesmagnetic flux to be channeled intotheir polar regions, (Figure 1.)Because the material comprising theparticle is magnetically nonlinear, themagnetization at the poles saturatesat relatively low fields; the saturatedzone grows in size as the field is

increased, eventually engulfing theentire particle.

From these solutions and theMaxwell stress approach, weestimated the mechanical stressrequired to deform the chains by agiven tilt or shear angle. We

focused on the magnetically-con-trolled portion of the yield stress,defined as the maximum stressencountered as the shear angle isincreased; the modeled yield stress

compares quite favorably with mea-surements made on 50 volumepercent MR fluids, (Figure 2.) Themodel reveals that the stress variesas B2— the behavior expected froma dipole model —only at very lowfields. At applied fields sufficient tosaturate the particle locally, the stressincreases roughly as B3/2, as con-firmed by many experiments. Thenumerical model predicts a slightpeak in the stress followed by a pla-teau signifying complete and uniformsaturation of the particles. The maxi-mum stress attainable at saturationvaries as M

s2.

Indeed, yield stresses of 100-200kPa are routinely achieved in realMR materials, with a consistency ofstiff putty. While they are much softerthan most solids, MR fluids and mag-netic powders are useful in a numberof applications because the zero-field stresses they support are ordersof magnitude smaller. Even higherstresses can be achieved by usingparticles with higher M

s, like iron-

cobalt alloys. Other routes tohigh-stress materials include using abimodal distribution of magnetizableparticles, as implemented by RobertFoister and coworkers. One mayregard the larger particles as embed-ded in a magnetic fluid comprisingthe smaller particles. Because theeffective permeability of the sus-pending fluid is enhanced, theinterparticle forces and resulting

stresses increase.

Structure and MechanicsStructure and MechanicsStructure and MechanicsStructure and MechanicsStructure and MechanicsThe evolution and

dynamics of the structuresin MR materials have beenof great interest. One keyquestion is the responsetime required to formchains or agglomerates inquiescent conditions.Mark Jolly and coworkersused a magnetic inductiontechnique to detect theformation of chains ontime scales of the order of

milliseconds. If the magnetic fieldcan be introduced rapidly, thestresses generated by MR materialsalso appear on this time scale.Except in highly viscous hostmaterials, the ubiquitous chains ofparticles eventually aggregate into

multichain columns orstripes. Groups led byAlice Gast, Jing Liu, andothers have used opti-cal microscopy andlight scattering to studythe evolution of thesechains in quiescent con-ditions. The aggregatestypically grow in apower-law fashion withtime. These observa-tions are consistent withmodels of coarseningdeveloped by ThomasHalsey and coworkers,in which lateral chain

aggregation is driven by thermal fluc-tuations and chain defects. Insheared ER and MR fluids, large-scaleoriented aggregates or “stripes”emerge over seconds or minutes, as

observed by Frank Filisko,Georges Bossis, and oth-ers. Dan Klingenberg andcoworkers have devel-oped a continuum modelof stripe formation thatqualitatively predicts thegeometry of these featuresand their dependence onshear rate.

The short range ofthe magnetic force domi-nates both themicroscopic and macro-scopic mechanics ofmagnetized MR materi-als, which act as brittleviscoelastic solids underdynamic mechanical loading,exhibiting mechanical nonlinearityeven at very small strains ~10-3.Rongjia Tao and coworkers havecompressed magnetized MR fluids,enhancing the shear yield stress—reaching almost 1 MPa—perhapsby inducing both structuralchanges and enhanced frictionalforces between particles.

ApplicationsApplicationsApplicationsApplicationsApplicationsMR fluids are ideally suited to

applications in which dampingforce must be controlled rapidlyand over a wide dynamic range.The first commercially availableMR fluid linear damper was devel-oped by Lord Corporation toimprove vehicle seat dynamics forlong-haul and off-road driving.Delphi’s MagnerideTM, an automo-tive shock absorber, can bemodulated electrically to controldamping force on a several milli-second time scale necessary toimprove vehicle ride. MR damp-ers have also been used tominimize vibrations in cable-staybridges and to produce a morenatural gait for amputees inabove-the-knee prostheses. QEDTechnologies uses the magneticallytunable rheological properties ofabrasive-doped magnetic disper-sions to enable a computer-controlled optical polishing system.

MR fluids and magnetic pow-ders are also used intorque-transfer clutches andbrakes. Magnetic powder clutchescontrolled the torque transfer be-tween the engine and thetransmission on several 1950s-eraminicars, and were also used tocontrol main engine attitude on theApollo Service Module in the1960s. Potential automotive ap-plications include clutches tocontrol engine accessories like theair conditioner and cooling fan.

Magnetostriction in MRelastomers is manifest both in field-dependent length changes andviscoelastic moduli. Mark Nichols,myself, and coworkers exploredautomotive suspension bushingsusing these materials for controllingthe ride and handling of automotivevehicles. Several groups have devel-oped MR-elastomer-based tunedvibration absorbers—mass-springsystems—to absorb vibrations at me-chanical frequencies that changeover time. The mechanical non-lin-

earity inherent in filled elastomersand exacerbated by the short-rangemagnetic interactions has sofar prohibited successful commer-cial applications of these materials.

Applications of MR materialsare enabled by a number of tech-nologies, including additivechemistries to stabilize the sus-pended particles againstirreversible settling or agglomera-tion, modify viscosity and lubricity,and inhibit oxidation and wear.Delivery and control of magneticfields is obviously required in MRcomponents; wire-coil electromag-nets are often used. The design ofan efficient magnetic circuit thatdoes not add excess weight isessential. Required flux densitiesare of the order of 1 T—compa-rable to that utilized in most electricmachines like motors. Controlalgorithms designed to minimizevibration amplitude have beendeveloped for various MR devicesand applications.

OpportunitiesOpportunitiesOpportunitiesOpportunitiesOpportunitiesA few groups have used

nanoparticles as a primary or sec-ondary particulate in MR fluids.Nonetheless, the growing availabil-ity of nanoscale particulates hasyet to be manifest in vastlyimproved MR materials; they mayenable more stable, less abrasiveMR fluids or MR elastomers withenhanced mechanical properties.Opportunities also exist to explorethe effects of magnetic domainstructure, which is particularly rel-evant as the particle size shrinks.The deformation and flow behav-ior of MR fluids and their couplingto applied field and other externalfactors has not been definitivelymodeled or explained. Forexample, little is known aboutinstabilities in MR fluid flows. Thebehavior of MR fluids at shortlength scales, such as inmicrofluidic channels, has not beenwidely studied. While the pastdecade has seen much progress inunderstanding MR materials and inusing them in commercial prod-ucts, the field is still laden withopportunities and challenges forinterested physicists.

John M. Ginder is the technicalleader of the Physical and Environ-mental Sciences department of FordResearch and Advanced Engineering.

Figure 1:Figure 1:Figure 1:Figure 1:Figure 1: Left: electron micrograph of particle chainsformed by solidifying carbonyl iron particles in a naturalrubber matrix in a flux density of 5 kG. Right: spatialvariation of magnetic flux density (color contours) andflux lines (lines) in an idealized particle chain asobtained by finite-element analysis.

Figure 2:Figure 2:Figure 2:Figure 2:Figure 2: Increase in shear yield stress with appliedflux density in iron-based MR fluids with volumefraction ø=0.5 and comparison to a FEA magneto-static model.

Figure 3:Figure 3:Figure 3:Figure 3:Figure 3: Cross-section of a MR elastomer bushing,showing the wire coil that produces a magnetic field,the low-carbon steel magnetic circuit that delivers thefield, and the MR elastomer material that responds tothe field. The flux path is shown schematically in red.

6 November 2004 NEWS

what is physics constantly changes,”Orel said in her candidate’s state-ment. She herself holds degrees inchemistry, is a professor in anapplied science department, yet sheidentifies herself as a physicist. “Thisis not unique, but now becoming thenorm for physics, multidisciplinaryand multi- application. Yet the coreof physics is the same. We areengaged in the search for truth, nomatter if we are looking in differentplaces.”

Slusher is director of the Quan-tum Information and OpticsDepartment at Lucent Technolo-gies, Bell Laboratories. He receivedhis PhD in physics from theUniversity of California at Berke-ley in 1965. His present researchinterests include nonlinear photo-nic crystals, nonlinear opticalwaveguides and fibers, quantumoptics and quantum computation.

During the mid-1970s and early1980s he worked at Princeton andMIT using CO

2 laser light scatter-

ing from Tokamak plasmas to studyturbulence near their edges andradio frequency heating processes.He and his collaborators were thefirst to observe squeezed light in1985, a new quantum state of lightwith uncertainties in one field com-ponent below the standardquantum limit.

In the early 1990s he and hiscollaborators demonstratedmicrodisk lasers in semiconduc-tors as well as nonlinear optics andlasing in organic materials. Hereceived the 1995 APS ArthurSchawlow Prize in laser spectros-copy.

In his candidate’s statement,Slusher identified increased fund-ing for physics, public awarenessof the tremendous value of phys-ics education and physicsapplications in our daily lives, andenhanced interdisciplinary activi-ties and cooperation amongphysicists around the globe as toppriorities for the APS.

Furthermore, “Applications ofphysics for long-range advances inenergy, homeland security and re-storing the environment should behighlighted and encouraged by thesociety in imaginative ways,” hesaid. “All of this is based on a foun-dation of fundamental physicsresearch and the inspiration we allfind in the study of physics. Wemust preserve these values.”

turned east to Princeton as a profes-sor of physics. His research interestshaving turned toward the interfacebetween physics and biology, heresigned his Higgins Professorshipin 1980 to go to Caltech as theDickinson Professor of Chemistryand Biology in order to help buildthe multidisciplinary interface. In1996, he returned to Princeton

Hopfield’s PhD thesis formulateda field-theoretic description of theinteraction of light withexcitons in solids. He continuedresearch on the interaction of lightwith solids, and the interpretation ofabsorption and emission spectra,receiving (with experimental chem-ist co-worker D. G. Thomas) theBuckley Prize from the APS in 1969for this work. In 1970 hisinterests turned toward understand-ing biology. His researches inmolecular biology described“kinetic proofreading” which greatlyenhances the selectivity of biochemi-cal reactions by proofreading at themolecular level. In 1980 his interestsin biology began to focus on how anervous system carries out its “com-putations”. He received the APSBiophysics Prize in 1985.

“I’m looking forward to theopportunity to put something backinto an institution so important tothe healthy state of American phys-ics, and an institution that behind thescenes has helped me to have afulfilling professional life,” Hopfieldsaid of his successful bid. “Theinstitutions essential for physics toprosper do not function wellunless serious scientists are enthusi-astic about taking leadership roles.”

CHAIR-ELECTCHAIR-ELECTCHAIR-ELECTCHAIR-ELECTCHAIR-ELECT, NOMINA, NOMINA, NOMINA, NOMINA, NOMINATINGTINGTINGTINGTINGCOMMITTEECOMMITTEECOMMITTEECOMMITTEECOMMITTEE

Rosenbaum is the James FranckProfessor of Physics and the VicePresident for Research and forArgonne National Laboratory at theUniversity of Chicago. His researchinterests center on the quantummechanical nature of materials at lowtemperature, where the mix of stat-

ics and dynamics leads to a new classof phase transitions and to states withunusual excitation spectra.Rosenbaum conducted research atBell Laboratories and at IBM WatsonResearch Center before he joined theChicago faculty in 1983. He directedthe NSF Materials Research Labora-tory from 1991 to 1994 and theJames Franck Institute, an interdis-ciplinary research institute focusedon problems at the intersection ofphysical chemistry and condensedmatter physics, from 1995 to 2001.Rosenbaum received his PhD inphysics from Princeton University in1982.

In his candidate’s statement,Rosenbaum identified three majorchallenges confronting the APS:

1. Reestablishing balanced fund-ing for basic research inthe physical sciences, with anemphasis on the benefits of inter-disciplinary endeavors;

2. Educating policy leaders andthe general public to think quanti-tatively and critically so that publicpolicy decisions can be technicallyinformed; and

3. Communicating the excite-ment of physics to our students sothat physics can continue to attractto our profession the brightest menand women from all backgrounds.

GENERAL COUNCILLORSGENERAL COUNCILLORSGENERAL COUNCILLORSGENERAL COUNCILLORSGENERAL COUNCILLORSOrel attended the University of

California, Berkeley, receiving herPhD in chemistry in 1981. Sheworked in the Laser Program atLawrence Livermore NationalLaboratory as a staff scientist from1981 to 1985. She was thenemployed at the Aerospace Corpo-ration as a member of theTechnical Staff. In 1988 sheaccepted a position in Berkeley’sDepartment of Applied Science.She currently chairs the depart-ment and is the Edward TellerProfessor of Applied Science. Herresearch interests are in the areaof theoretical molecular physics,particularly the study of low-energy collisions between elec-trons and molecules andmolecular ions. She is particularlyinterested in systems where thereis a strong interplay between theelectronic and nuclear degrees offreedom, for example dissociativerecombination and attachment.

“The face of physics is alwayschanging. Even the definition of

ELECTION from page 1

Science in the AftermathBy Michael S. Lubell, APS Director of Public Affairs

INSIDE THE BELTWAY:Washington Analysis and Opinion

How would the outlookfor American science bealtered if voters had chosendifferently? If you believethe published answers toquestions posed to bothcandidates by Physics Today,Science, and Nature, probablynot much—with a few notableexceptions: stem cell research andthe Moon-Mars Program. Kerrymade Bush’s opposition to the firsta centerpiece of his campaign, andhe pledged not to pursue the sec-ond, which he said had “no clearobjectives or cost estimates.”

But even here, the differenceswere starting to narrow in the run-up to November 2nd. With publicsupport for stem cell research deepand widespread, Republican insid-ers predicted privately—a fewmonths before the election—thatBush’s opposition would have tosoften. As for Moon-Mars, early inthe summer Congress had alreadybegun to balk at the apparent megaprice tag, and by September theAdministration’s own Office ofManagement and Budget was alsobeginning to question whether theprogram was at all realistic, giventhe river of federal red ink.

On other issues—missile defense,climate change, energy policy andsupport for science research andeducation—you would have beenhard pressed to find more than anuanced difference. Whether eithercampaign was being honest is quiteanother matter. When needed,skilled spinmeisters—and both sideshad plenty of them—can carefullycraft wording that masks the truepositions of a candidate.

So Bush was an advocate forreducing greenhouse gas emissions,and Kerry was a supporter of missiledefense. Bush’s handlers also saidthat he opposed developing newnuclear weapons, in spite of well-known White House pressure oncongressional appropriators to funddevelopment of the Robust NuclearEarth Penetrator. And Kerry’s spokes-men said that their candidatesupported nuclear power, although

his track record on the issuemight have suggested other-wise.

Looking ahead, eachcandidate agreed that fund-ing for the physicalsciences, mathematics andengineering had shriveled

as the NIH budget thrived. Theyagreed that more spending wasneeded.

But between Iraq, the war onterrorism and tax cuts, the Bushfolks said the cupboard was bare.And with Kerry committed tospending more money on home-land security, expanding health carecoverage, enlarging the army andkeeping Social Security reform offthe national agenda, even hisstaunchest supporters couldn’tmake the numbers work. Rollingback the tax breaks for the wealthywouldn’t provide enough revenueto cover all the expenditures.

In the first two years of hispresidency, Bush portrayed him-self as the great reformer: on taxes,on trade, on prescription drugs,on regulations, on education, onglobal projection of Americaninterests. You might not have likedthem or agreed with them, butthey represented significantreforms of American policy. Kerry,by contrast, throughout his Sen-ate service was more wedded tothe status quo, acting more like a“New Deal” or “Great Society”Democrat” than a Clintonian“New Democrat.”

Morton Kondracke, for whom Ihave great admiration as a politicalanalyst—and, incidentally, as astaunch supporter of science—hadthis to say in his September 27Roll Call column, as he pondered hischoices on November 2nd, “So whomto vote for? A would-be reformerwho can’t pay, or a willing payer whocan’t reform? It’s a hard one.” Timewill tell in the next few years if wechose wisely.

About the only prediction that Iwill make is that the federal budgetwill remain a mess for quite some

or other targeting agents that willfind cancerous cells, and could carrydrugs to kill those cells.

Smalley also envisioned that in 10to 20 years, nanotechnology willmake possible blood tests that willbe able to determine the concentra-tion of 30,000 different proteinswithin half an hour, significantly im-proving the detection and diagnosisof disease.

Mauro Ferrari, a special advisorto the NCI and professor of biomedi-cal engineering at Ohio StateUniversity, discussed severalexamples of nanotechnology beingapplied to cancer. He pointed outthat some nanotech applications,including liposomes, tiny capsulesthat deliver drugs, are already clini-cally available. “As exciting as thosedevelopments have been, they arethe tip of the iceberg,” he said.

Other technologies are beingdeveloped. For instance, nanowirescould detect cancer markers insamples flowing throughmicrofluidic channels. Similarly,nanoscale cantilevers could becoated with molecules that attractand bind specific cancer markers,and could be used as part of a di-agnostic device that could quicklyand sensitively detect cancer-related molecules. Also being de-veloped are nanoparticles thatwould enter the body and attachto cancerous cells, making it pos-sible to image malignant cells thatcould not be detected throughconventional imaging. Similarnanodevices could also deliverdrugs directly to cancer cells whilesparing healthy cells, thus reduc-ing the side effects of treatment andimproving quality of life.

NIH from page 4

hensive plan to address the visa-pro-cessing quagmire in the wake ofheightened security concerns follow-ing the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The statement received muchattention, including front page cov-erage by the Financial Times, andarticles in the Wall Street Journal,New York Times, and Science.

Since then, the Departments ofState and Homeland Security havereportedly taken action on anumber of the statement’s recom-mendations. According to informalreports from State and DHSofficials, additional steps are alsobeing considered to extend theduration of the Visa Mantis secu-rity clearance, although the timingof this change also remains unclear.

While the State Department’sresponse indicates some positivechanges, many scientists remainskeptical about the reportedimprovements. As Quinn said in aresponse to Harty, “A considerablenumber of our colleagues have had,or know others who have had, badexperiences with visa applicationsand it will take some time period ofbetter results before many have faiththat the system is working well.”

Samuel Wickline, professor ofmedicine, physics and biomedicalengineering at Washington Univer-sity, said that one of the advantagesof the NCI initiative is that it facili-tates the interaction of scientistswho work in different disciplines.“This is essentially a multi-disciplin-ary activity. You have to understandthe language of chemists, physi-cists, biologists, immunologists, andgoing further, you have to under-stand the regulatory language thatis required to get something done.”

Though nanomaterials showpromise in detecting and treatingdiseases, some people worry aboutpossible unpredicted heath or en-vironmental effects. Vicki Colvin, achemist and director of the Centerfor Biological and EnvironmentalNanotechnology at Rice University,has investigated the safety of some

nanoparticles. She said that thesurface of the particle, more thanits composition, determines howit interacts with a biological envi-ronment, so the key to makingsafe nanoparticles is controllingtheir surfaces. Colvin added thattesting the structures early on inthe process is essential. “A lot ofnanostructures behave in ways wehave predicted. Some don’t.” shesaid.

Janet Woodcock, Acting Direc-tor Commissioner for Operationsof the FDA, said, “We’ll have to bevigilant because there might benovel or unanticipated reactions.”The FDA will work to assess thesafety and effectiveness of newnanodevices. Nomenclature andclassification of the devices willalso have to be worked out, saidWoodcock.

VISA from page 1

See INSIDE THE BELTWAY on page 7

November 2004 7NEWS

“What they do is they draw theirinspiration from something scien-tific, but the final product may notbe very close to science. There’s awhole spectrum.”

For more information on theScArt4 conference and the visualart competition, visit http://mechanical.rutgers.edu/scart4

“It sorted out our ideas on howall of the nuclear matter is heldtogether and how the protons andneutrons are built. And it’s as beau-tiful a theory as exists, and thatincludes electrodynamics, gravity,

HubrisHubrisHubrisHubrisHubrisTheoreticalPhysicist am I. MortalsTremble before me.

Irresistible ForceIrresistible ForceIrresistible ForceIrresistible ForceIrresistible ForceTripped. Fell on my ass.Awesome demonstration ofF = ma.

—Celia Elliott✶✶✶

Newton’Newton’Newton’Newton’Newton’s Laws of Motions Laws of Motions Laws of Motions Laws of Motions Laws of Motion A body maintains

Its rest, or straight-line motionUnless net force acts.

F equals p-dot.That is all you need to know.Use it with wisdom.

To ev’ry actionThere’s an equal reactionCounter-directed.

E is m c-squared!Mass, energy – the same stuff!One makes the other!

QuarksQuarksQuarksQuarksQuarksA quark is a quark—There are no smaller pieces;Or so I believe.

Two ups and a down—(What other virtual quarks?)—Dwell in a proton.

—Frank R. Paolini✶✶✶

Ed. Note:Ed. Note:Ed. Note:Ed. Note:Ed. Note: In the May issue of APS News, we announced a physics haikucontest, with a deadline for submissions of October 1. We received a largenumber of entries, most of them either just after the announcement in Mayor just before the deadline in October. We are now proud to announce theresults. Every entry was considered on an equal basis, except for those thathad nothing to do with physics or that didn’t scan properly (three lines of 5,7, and 5 syllables respectively).

Our overall winner is Celia Elliott of the University of Illinois. Wereprint two of her entries below. She will receive a copy of the covetedcoffee-table book “Physics in the Twentieth Century” and a World Year ofPhysics t-shirt.

In addition to the winning entries, we reprint several more that qualifyas “honorable mentions.” These were selected by our dedicated haiku-evalu-ation team. Each of the authors will receive a World Year of Physics t-shirt.We regret that we don’t have room for even more of the excellent contribu-tions that we received. In due course, we intend to post all the entries on ourAPS News online web site.

Quantum paradoxesQuantum paradoxesQuantum paradoxesQuantum paradoxesQuantum paradoxesI’ve had it to hereWith quantum paradoxes;My wave functions ache.

— Edward O. Stejskal✶✶✶

Quantum UncertaintyQuantum UncertaintyQuantum UncertaintyQuantum UncertaintyQuantum UncertaintySchroedinger’s cat isDead or alive, they tell usI can’t bear to look!

—J. D. Jackson✶✶✶

Tell me, did the sunJust burn out? I guess we’ll knowEight minutes from now.

—Jed Brody✶✶✶

Wither dynamics?There is chaos in my soul.Poincaré is proud.

—Mason Porter✶✶✶

Leptons have needs, too…Leptons have needs, too…Leptons have needs, too…Leptons have needs, too…Leptons have needs, too…A lonely muonmeets SUSY at the H Bar,leaves as a slepton.

In the darkIn the darkIn the darkIn the darkIn the darkBehold the cosmos:dark matter and energy,playing hide and seek

Kids these days… !Kids these days… !Kids these days… !Kids these days… !Kids these days… !Like grumpy old men,Inductors tend to opposeAny current change

Pivotal momentPivotal momentPivotal momentPivotal momentPivotal momentTeaching r x Fr x Fr x Fr x Fr x FPuzzled class does not know whatI’m torquing about

—C. J. Chiara

anything you want to mention.”—James Bjorken, Stanford Univer-sity, (NPR), October 5, 2004

✶✶✶“The history of understanding

matter is taking things apart. Howcould it be that they are made ofquarks and you can’t get them out?It was a deep conundrum.”—Michael Turner, NSF, Los AngelesTimes, October 6, 2004

✶✶✶“How often do you get to

explain one of the four fundamen-tal forces of nature?’’— Lawrence Krauss, CWRU, NewYork Times, October 6, 2004

ART FLOW from page 3

MEDIA from page 2

APS CONGRESSIONAL SCIENCE

THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY is currently accepting applica-tions for the Congressional Science Fellowship Program. Fellows serveone year on the staff of a senator, representative or congressional com-mittee. They are afforded an opportunity to learn the legislative processand explore science policy issues from the lawmakers’ perspective. Inturn, Fellows have the opportunity to lend scientific and technical expertiseto public policy issues.

QUALIFICATIONS include a PhD or equivalent in physics or a closelyrelated field, a strong interest in science and technology policy, and, ideally,some experience in applying scientific knowledge toward the solution ofsocietal problems. Fellows are required to be US citizens and members ofthe APS.

TERM OF APPOINTMENT is one year, beginning in September of2005 with participation in a two-week orientation sponsored by AAAS.Fellows have considerable choice in congressional assignments.

A STIPEND of $50,000 is offered in addition to allowances forrelocation, in-service travel, and health insurance premiums.

APPLICATION should consist of a letter of intent of approximately twopages, a list of key publications, a two-page resume, and three letters ofreference. Please see the APS website (http://www.aps.org/public_affairs.fellows.html) for detailed information on materials required.

ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS MUST BEPOSTMARKED BY JANUARY 17, 2005 AND SHOULD

BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:APS Congressional Science Fellowship Program

c/o Jackie Beamon-KieneAPS Executive OfficeOne Physics Ellipse

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Citation: Citation: Citation: Citation: Citation: “For the theoretical discoveryand experimental identification oftoroidicity Induced Alfven Eigenmodes.”

ChenChenChenChenChen received his PhD from theUniversity of California, Berkeley, in1972, and is presently a professor ofphysics and astronomy at theUniversity of California, Irvine. Hismain research interest is in the areaof instabilities excited by energeticparticles in magnetically confinedplasmas. These instabilities couldexplain not only observed electro-magnetic wave perturbations, butcould also lead to enhanced trans-port coefficients, which could impactfusion ignition conditions. He is cur-rently developing particle simulationtechniques to describe self-consistentnonlinear wave-particle interactions.

ChengChengChengChengCheng received his PhD in phys-ics from the University of Iowa in1975, and has been at PrincetonUniversity’s Plasma Physics Labora-tory ever since. He is currently thehead of energetic particle physics andspace plasma physics research areas.He has made significant contribu-tions to fast ion physics, Alfven waves,ballooning modes, trapped electronmodes, and disruption in tokamaks.In particular, he discovered thetheory of Toroidicity-Induced AlfvenEigenmode (TAE) in toroidal plasmas.He has also studied solar flares andmagnetosphere substorms.

After receiving his bachelor’s de-gree from the University ofCalifornia, San Diego, HeidbrinkHeidbrinkHeidbrinkHeidbrinkHeidbrinkspent two years performing indus-trial research in pulsed power atMaxwell Laboratories before pursu-ing graduate studies at PrincetonUniversity. He received his PhD inphysics in 1984, and worked atPrinceton’s TFTR tokamak and at theDIII-D tokamak at General Atomicsbefore joining the physics depart-ment at the University of California,Irvine in 1988. He studies energetic

ions in magnetic fusion experiments,as well as diagnostic developmentand measurements of fast-ion con-finement.

Strait Strait Strait Strait Strait bio not available at presstime.

WWWWWongongongongong received his PhD fromthe University of Wisconsin, Madi-son in 1975, and after one year asa research associate at ColumbiaUniversity, he joined the PrincetonPlasma Physics Laboratory. Hisresearch involves linear and non-linear wave physics associated withplasmas, and their effects onplasma current generation, heat-ing and transport. Most recently,he has investigated MHD activityand density modification by high-power electron cyclotron waves,and current density profile modi-fication due to redistribution ofenergetic ions induced by Alfveninstabilities in the DIII-D tokamak.

Fluid Dynamics PrizeGeorge M. HomsyGeorge M. HomsyGeorge M. HomsyGeorge M. HomsyGeorge M. HomsyUniversity of California, Santa Barbara

CitationCitationCitationCitationCitation: “For many important con-tributions in multiphase flows,interfacial phenomena, polymericflows, and convection, including thestability of fluidized beds, viscous fin-gering in porous media, and thin filmbehavior.”

HomsyHomsyHomsyHomsyHomsy received his PhD in phys-ics from the University ofIllinois in 1969 and spent one yearas a postdoctoral fellow at ImperialCollege in London, England, beforejoining the faculty of Stanford Uni-versity, where he remained for muchof his career. In 2001 he joined thefaculty of the University of Califor-nia, Santa Barbara, as a professor ofmechanical and environmentalengineering. His research hasspanned numerous areas related to

DIVISION MEETINGS from page 4

the physics of fluids, includingmultiphase flows, porous media; thinfilms; viscoelastic flows; and most re-cently chaotic advection.

Marshall Rosenbluth AwardKiyong KimKiyong KimKiyong KimKiyong KimKiyong KimUniversity of Maryland

CitationCitationCitationCitationCitation: “For his development andapplication of intense laser pulses withnovel plasmas, including those pro-duced in nanoscale clusters.”

KimKimKimKimKim received his B.S. in 1995from Korea University, and his PhDin physics from the University ofMaryland, College Park, in 2003. Hisdissertation detailed the develop-ment of ultrafast optical diagnosticsand their application to the measure-ment of ultrafast dynamics in theinteraction of intense laser pulseswith gases, atomic and molecularclusters, and plasmas. He is currentlya postdoctoral fellow at Los AlamosNational Laboratory, pursuing thestudy of coherent Terahertz radia-tion from intense laser-producedplasmas.

Andreas AcrivosDissertation AwardJacqueline AshmoreJacqueline AshmoreJacqueline AshmoreJacqueline AshmoreJacqueline AshmoreHarvard University

Citation:Citation:Citation:Citation:Citation: “For elegant theoreticaland numerical analyses of coating andfree-surface flows’’

AshmoreAshmoreAshmoreAshmoreAshmore received her PhD inApplied Mathematics fromHarvard in 2003, working withHoward Stone. She is currently apostdoctoral associate in theDepartment of Applied Mathemat-ics and Theoretical Physics at theUniversity of Cambridge, workingon the analysis of transport indirectional solidification of multi-component fluids, and cavitationin lubrication flows.

1.

2.

3.

INSIDE THE BELTWAY from page 6time. The increasing demands onscant federal resources will causeCongress to miss budgetary dead-lines more often than not. (This year,we could well be stuck with a Con-tinuing Resolution throughFebruary.) And it will tie policy mak-

ing up into such knots that it couldturn the “do-nothing” 108th Con-gress into a fashion trendsetter.

If I had a solution, I would haverun for the White House this year.After all, if Ralph Nader had thechutzpah to do it, why shouldn’t I?

breakthroughs in space requires allof these, and we don’t know how todo any of them cost-effectivelyyet—and we’ll never learn by justsitting in our armchairs and think-ing about it.

If the APS is interested in havingany real impact on NASA’s future, itshould make an effort to under-stand the changes under way. Is it agood idea to turn NASA centers intoindependent research centers morelike the DOE labs? Are there physi-cal science areas that cancontribute significantly to the newprogram, and should receive newfunding?

Can we imagine any science wewould like to do if the more robustand inexpensive private and federalspace infrastructure expected actu-ally comes to pass?

The Moon/Mars decision doesn’thave much to do with science—anddespite its political origin, has an in-evitable logic that a newadministration would be hard-pressed to reverse. NASA people areenergetically tackling the new chal-lenges they’ve been given - there arereal opportunities here for physicistsand physics research, if we are will-ing to be a part of it.Arthur SmithSelden, NY

LETTERS from page 4

8 November 2004 NEWS

APS News welcomes and encourages letters and submissions from its members responding to these and other issues. Responses may be sent to: letters@aps.org.

The Back Page

APS News welcomes and encourages letters and submissions from its members responding to these and other issues. Responses may be sent to: letters@aps.org.

I was enrolled as a graduatestudent in the UC-Berkeley physicsdepartment from August 1938 toJanuary 1942. When I arrived, I knewpractically nothing about J. RobertOppenheimer beyond his name. ButI immediately became wellacquainted with him via the courseshe taught. In each, he manifested thesame distinctive teaching style.

Oppenheimer gave no finalexams or any other tests. He didassign numerous homework prob-lems, many of which were highlyinstructive and non-routine. He didnot designate a textbook for any ofhis courses. If we students desiredalternative or otherwise clarifyingpresentations, we had to locate themon our own.

His reluctance to designate text-books was rational. In his electro-magnetic theory course, forexample, much of the material hepresented was intended to serve asan introduction to the newly formu-lated, and still developing, quantumtheory of radiation; such hyper-modern material simply could notbe found in any of the then availableelectromagnetic theory textbooks.

Similarly at the time, barely adecade after Schrodinger’s formula-tion of his wave equation, thereweren’t any English language textsfor him to assign in his quantummechanics course.

Each class hour was a lecture,delivered at high speed, accompa-nied by numerous equations writtenon the board at correspondinglyhigh speed, along with rapidlyperformed, rarely erroneous calcu-lations. The only way I possibly couldgrasp the material was to take hast-ily scribbled notes as he spoke. Fromthese scribblings I would preparemore complete notes as soon as pos-sible after the lecture, while it stillwas fresh in my mind. I am quite cer-tain that every other serious studentdid the same. There were numerousoccasions when several of us wouldargue at a blackboard about pre-cisely what he had imparted. Eachof Oppenheimer’s courses requiredfar more of my time, but taught mefar more physics, than any of theother non-Oppenheimer courses Itook in graduate school.

I have no memory of him everinitiating any sort of Socratic dia-logue with the class, nor do I recallhim pausing in any calculation to askthe class for suggestions on what todo next. If there was something astudent didn’t understand, said stu-dent could feel free to interrupt witha question. Oppenheimer wouldanswer patiently unless the questionwas manifestly stupid; then hisresponse was likely to be quite cut-ting. Unfortunately his patientanswers often were not illuminating;Oppenheimer did not have the giftof putting himself in a student’s placeand recognizing that what wasevident to him might not be evidentto the student. A student who per-sisted with questioning could expectto find himself on the receiving endof sarcasm. But Oppenheimer never

Remembering Oppenheimer: The Teacher, The ManBy Edward Gerjuoy

bore any grudges against studentswho momentarily had taxed hispatience.

Perhaps the most distinctivefeature of his lectures was his chainsmoking. When one cigaretteburned down to a fragment, heextinguished it and lit anotheralmost in a single motion. I still cansee him in his characteristic black-board pose, one hand grasping apiece of chalk, the other handdangling a cigarette, and his headwreathed in a cloud of smoke.

Although his primary interestwas research, he neverthelesstook his classroom teachingduties very seriously. He deservescredit for his painstaking effortsto construct unhackneyed coursesthat would lead students into pro-ductive physics research as rapidlyas their native talents would allow.

Even more vivid are my recol-lections stemming from my timein his group of PhD students. Ijoined in the spring of 1939. Hedidn’t immediately give me aresearch problem; I had been atBerkeley less than two semesters.I just showed up at the weeklytheoretical physics seminar he ran.Although Oppenheimer could befearsome, he did not put on airs.He didn’t mind being called Oppie,and I have done so ever since.

Quantum mechanics was devel-oped in Europe and remainedessentially arcane until 1926, whenSchrödinger’s formulation of hisfamous equation made quantumtheoretical research accessible tonon-geniuses like myself.

Oppie was one of the very fewAmerican theoretical physicists whowas both lucky enough to havelearned quantum mechanics inEurope right around 1926, andtalented enough to usably bring thislearning back to the United States.

He received his PhD in 1927from the University of Göttingen,having studied with Max Born; hejoined the Berkeley physics depart-ment only two years later.

In the years between 1929 and1935, before so many great Euro-pean physicists fled Hitler and beganto establish their own modern theo-retical physics research groups inthis country, students who wantedto do research at the forefront oftheoretical physics without goingabroad enrolled in the Berkeleyphysics department to work withOppie, because there really werevery few other professors in the USactively engaged in such research.

Oppie was tall and absurdly thin.He rarely was motionless; if nothingelse he would be puffing on hiscigarette or waving it around as hetalked. He was well educated andwell read; we all have heard of hisability to quote from the originalSanskrit. His face was mobile; howhe was reacting was no secret. WhenI knew him he was between 35 and40, and doubtless still at the peak ofhis physical and mental powers.

His relations with his studentswere surprisingly informal. He

allowed his students to drop into hisoffice at any time to consult physicsbooks in his personal library. Hisoffice was deep, moderately wide,and quite bare, except for the book-shelves and a blackboard running thelength of the room. He did not haveregular office hours. He could bemoody; if I found him alone, hisdemeanor instantly made it apparentwhether or not I should dare speakto him. But if he was willing to talk,there was no need for an appoint-ment. Assuming one did catch himwilling to be disturbed, this didn’tmean that a graduate student wouldtoss physics questions at him with-out forethought. His reaction to aquestion he deemed stupid tendedto be very caustic; one was likely todepart his company quite depressed.

The seminar was Oppie’s domain,his fiefdom. He selected the speak-ers; except on rare occasions hetotally dominated its proceedings. Incomplete contrast to his classroompractices, Oppie almost neverallowed himself to be the seminarspeaker. He preferred instead to sitin the front row and interrupt thespeaker with questions. Unless heformally had scheduled a speakerfrom outside his group, Oppie’s firstchoice for speaker always was whom-ever prominent theoretical physicistmomentarily happened to be visitingthe Berkeley physics department; ascheduled talk by any member ofOppie’s group obviously could beand would be postponed.

In those years the Berkeley cyclo-tron was one of the seven physicswonders of the world. Famous physi-cists flocked to Berkeley from allcorners of the globe. Enrico Fermigave an extended series of lecturesin 1940, and Wolfgang Pauli visitedin 1941. Oppie managed to convincesuch visiting theorists to speak in hisseminar. We were able to hear aboutresearch at the forefront of theoreti-cal physics right from the horse’smouth.

Mostly, students would speak onresearch they had completed andwere about to write up; occasionallyOppie would assign someone to talkon a published paper he thoughtworth discussing. When studentspeakers in such categories could notbe mustered, the duty of speakingwould fall back on Oppie’s researchassociate. It was Oppie’s practice eachyear to assign his research associatea broad subject, almost the equiva-

lent of a course, which said associ-ate would speak on in a continuingfashion whenever no other speak-ers were available.

Tossing questions at the speakerwas Oppie’s preferred seminar rolewith visiting and homegrown speak-ers alike. If a question was notanswered to Oppie’s satisfaction hewould furnish his own answer, andhe was not averse to brushing thespeaker aside and going up to theblackboard if he felt the occasionwarranted the intrusion.

Unfortunately, his answersoften did not always clarify theissues at hand. I well remember themany occasions when, after one ofOppie’s answers, the cry “ButOppenheimer!” uttered in aGerman accent, welled up fromStanford Professor Felix Bloch whoapproximately once a month droveto the seminar from Palo Alto. Westudents reveled in Bloch’s discom-fiture and were fond of saying thatBloch was Oppie’s most advancedstudent. It was not until after thewar that I realized Bloch was a dis-tinguished physicist; he won aNobel Prize in 1952.

Oppie’s seminar performancesavoided disconcerting any of hisvisiting speakers; he was a politeman. But with his students, his ques-tioning was fierce, often cruelly so.

I do not believe Oppie was in anyway sadistic; he legitimately could betermed kindhearted. And I feel con-fident that the questions Oppie putto his student speakers weredesigned not to embarrass but toelucidate, more often for the benefitof the audience than for himself. Iwouldn’t be surprised if Oppie’spersistent questioning was nothingmore than an automatic attempt toremedy the discomfort he clearly feltwhen hearing any theoretical phys-ics statements he thought wrong oreven imprecise; it could have beenlike scratching an itch.

Sadly, Oppie lacked the empathythat would cause him to draw back,once his previous questions hadreshaped the student speaker into aquivering hulk incapable of profit-ing from, much less answering, anyfurther questions.

Nor, when Oppie’s researchassociate Leonard Schiff gave a semi-nar, did Oppie treat Leonard anymore kindly than he treated his stu-dent speakers. On more than a fewoccasions Oppie had Schiff visiblyon the verge of tears. As with Bloch,Oppie’s treatment of Schiff left hisstudents with no real appreciationof Schiff’s talents. Certainly we wouldnot have predicted that Schiff wouldhave a distinguished career.

I cannot refrain from contrast-ing Oppie’s treatment of Schiff withhis treatment of Julian Schwinger,who in 1940 replaced Schiff asOppie’s research associate. We wereeagerly anticipating Julian’s first semi-nar. But whereas the other studentswere wondering how long it wouldtake Julian to shrivel under Oppie’squestioning, I was wondering howOppie would react to Julian’s refusal

to shrivel. I had been exposed toJulian’s talents during my under-graduate years at City College inNew York.

Julian’s first seminar wentexactly as I expected. Julian startedtalking and very soon Oppie askedJulian a question, which Juliananswered. Another questionfollowed, and Julian answered.More questions came; more ques-tions were answered. After abouta dozen questions, answered byJulian with no visible sign of dis-tress whatsoever, Oppie stoppedfiring questions and let him finishhis seminar without further inter-ruption. Nor did he ever againunduly interrupt during any suc-ceeding seminar of Julian’s. Oppiestopped asking questions becauseit became apparent that Julianalways knew what he was talkingabout and would sufficientlydiscuss any subtleties inherent inhis seminar subject withouthaving to be prodded.

With the bulk of his students,Oppie was closely involved with theirPhD researches. He was interestedin many of the problems they wereworking on, and in not a fewinstances himself worked on theproblems alongside his students.

Even if he wasn’t terribly inter-ested in the outcomes of some ofthose researches, the problems allwere nontrivial and fully involvedmodern physics; any student whocompleted one of those assignedresearch problems was trans-formed thereby, into a significantlymore competent theoretical physi-cist than when he had begun thework.

Of course, I would expect that indiscussing their mentors my wordswould be echoed by the students ofany of our great modern theoreticalphysicists, e.g., by Oppie himself asa Max Born student.

Oppie did his physics, talkedabout his physics, lived his physics,with a rarely duplicated passion,which had to inspire his students; hecertainly inspired me.

Despite his sometimes overlyferocious questioning, despite thesarcasms that Oppie really shouldhave suppressed, we his studentsrespected him and felt indebted tohim; knowing that Oppie so obvi-ously passionately loved doingphysics, that he so obviously alwayshad physics in the forefront of hismind, helped us believe that becom-ing a competent theoretical physicistwas worth the fairly enormouseffort required, especially in thoseprewar economically depresseddays when the word physics had nopopular resonance and jobs for theo-rists were very hard to come by. And,for imbuing me with this belief, Irespect and feel indebted to him still.

Edward Gerjuoy is professor ofphysics emeritus at the University ofPittsburgh. This article is adapted froma talk presented at a Los Alamossymposium on “Oppenheimer and theManhattan Project”, June 26, 2004.

J. Robert OppenheimerJ. Robert OppenheimerJ. Robert OppenheimerJ. Robert OppenheimerJ. Robert Oppenheimer

Ph

oto

Cre

dit

: L

os A

lam

os N

atio

nal

Lab

orat

ory