Rapporto Su Cominicazione Sopra i Millenni

8/8/2019 Rapporto Su Cominicazione Sopra i Millenni

1/46

!

CMHz02

E

03

IC) .Y.IL

Yv.n

Ec

I

DSCME

Tse

wapeeaaa

owokspoebaa

ohUneSae

GonmeNehhUneSaeGonmenaa

henaoh

empo

maawaayeeormpeoaumeae

ayoep

byohaacmpee

ouunoanomaoaaupo

o

po

dsooeeshsuwodnnnpveyowngsRe

ehenoaspccmmecapo

po

oservicebanmeamak

maaueoohwisdnn

yc

ueompyse

meem-

me

ooanbhUneSaeGonmeoaa

heTvew

aonooahee

hendnn

ysaeoeehoh

UneSaeGonmeoaa

he

YL0eaeI

rnUE.sUaJc


2/46

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by anagency of the United States Government. Neither the United StatesGovernment nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legalliability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, orusefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or processdisclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privatelyowned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, orotherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or anyagency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed hereindo not necessarily state or reflect those of the United StatesGovernment or any agency thereof.


3/46

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible inelectronic image products. Images are producedfrom the best available original document.


4/46

.... .:. * c . ,Sebeok, Thomas A., 1984. Communication Measures to Bridge Ten Millennia, BMI/ONWI-532,prepared by Research Center for Language and Semiotic Studies, Indiana University, for Officeof Nuclear Waste Isolation, Battel!e Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH.

NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the Uni ted StatesGovernment. Neither the Uni ted States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of theiremployees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, o r assumes any legal l iabi l i ty orresponsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus,product, or process disclosed, or represents that i t s use would not infringe privately ownedrights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by tradename, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply i t sendorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Uni ted States Government or a ny agencythereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflectthose of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

Printed in th e Uni ted States of AmericaAvailable from

Nationa l Technical Inforrnat ion ServiceU S . Department of Commerce5285 Port Royal RoadSpringfield, V A 22161

NTlS price codesPrinted copy: A03Micr ofic he copy: A01


5/46

A B S T R A C T

The Department of Energy created the Human Interference Task Force (HITF)in 1980 to investigate the problems connected with the postclosure, finalmarking of a filled nuclear waste repository.devise a method of warning future generations not to mine or drill at thatsite unless they are aware of the consequences of their actions. Since thelikelihood of human interference should be minimized for 10,000years, aneffective and long-lasting warning system must be designed. This report is asemiotic analysis of the problem, examining it in terms of the science ortheory of messages and symbols. Because of the long period of time involved,the report recommends that a relay system of recoding messages be initiated;that the messages contain a mixture of iconic, indexical, and symbolicelements; and that a high degree o f redundancy of messages be employed.

The task of the HITF is to


6/46

V

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1 I N T R O D U C T I O N ........................................................ 12 SOME B A S I C PRINCIPLES OF S E M I O T I C S .................................. 33 T Y P E S OF MESSAGES ................................................... 154 SOME PROBLEMS OF I M A G I N G ............................................ 1 75 CHANNELS ............................................................ 196 W R IT T E N RECORDS AN D D E C I P H E R M E N T .................................... 207 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S (AND RELATED C O N S I D E R A T I O N S ) ........................ 22a SUMMARY ............................................................. 289 GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS ......................................... 29

10 R E F E R E N C E S .......................................................... 3 1LIST OF F I G U R E S

F i g u r e 1. Ba s ic E lements o f Communica ti on ............................... 9F i g u r e 2. Example o f Se miosis ........................................... 10F i g u r e 3. An Ambiguous Image ............................................ 17F i g u r e 4. Engrav ing by G i u l i o Bonasone. "Man ' s Open ingt h e Fa t e f u l Vesse l " ( Be tw een 1531 -1574 ) ....................... 22F i g u r e 5. Gouache by Max Beckman. "P an do ra 's Box"

(Begun i n 1936. b u t t h o r o u g h l y r e p a i n t e d i n 1 94 7) ............. 23


7/46

1 INTRODUCTION

Any viable strategy for radioactive (hazardous) waste disposal, in whichthe cepository would be situated in a rock mass beneath a blanket of sedimen-tary rocks whose physical characteristics are well understood, entails thepossibility of human intrusion, which must and can be minimized. For any re-pository situated in a geological medium, all sorts of natural and engineeredbarriers can be brought into play to act to prevent migration o f the wastes,such as "(i) the waste form and its capsule; ( i i ) engineered barriers withinthe repository, such as low-permeability, highly sorptive backfill; and ( i i i )the migration path back to the biosphere through the ground-water flow system"(Bredehoeft and Maini, 1981:296); and others (e.g., Winograd, 1981). A"barrier" is commonly defined as a mechanism or medium by which the movementof emplaced radioactive material i s stopped or retarded significantly.

potential consequences of radioactive material releases. Human interferenceis one of the potential mechanisms that could lead to such releases. Onemechanism to decrease the likelihood of human interference is a requirement bythe Nuclear Regulatory Commission in its regulation, 10 CFR 60 (U.S. NuclearRegulatory Commission, 1983), which requires permanent markers and records forwaste repositories to warn potential intruders o f what is there. The U.S.Department of Energy, anticipating the final closure of a completedrepository, and recognizing the requirement for a warning system, has set upthe Human Interference Task Force through the Office of Nuclear WasteIsolation. This paper is part of the study of the Task Force. It deals withsemiotic techniques designed to restrict, if not altogether prevent, access tothe material. Since the objective is to minimize the possibility of futurehuman intrusion at the site, a disposal strategy needs to be developed thattakes cognizance of the soundest knowledge currently available in the field ofGeneral Semiotics.

Semiotics is the name of the discipline which brackets the conjoint

Those barriers will be effective in decreasing both the likelihood and

scientific study of both verbal and averbal systems o f communication. It isthus focally relevant to the problems of human interference and messageexchanges involving long periods of time, over which spoken and writtenlanguages are sure to decay to the point of incomprehensibility, making it


8/46

2

necessary to utilize a perspective that goes well beyond linguistics (the for-mal study of verbal messages), which, traditionally (mainly in the 19th cen-tury), has dealt with the relatively brief diachronic past, or (mainly in the20th century) the synchronic present. Workers in semiotics, or in its nar-rower branch called linguistics, have very seldom been called upon to makeprojections into the short-range future, let alone the long-range future,which, in the case at hand, must take into account up to 10,000 years, or(according to current actuarial calculations), the span of 300 generations tocome.

It is generally believed that the "social function of communcation is theensuring of continuity in society through access to the experiences and ideasof the past, expressed in [loosely speaking] symbols for transmission acrossspace and through time. This is the 'time-binding' function of social commun-ication" (Neelameghan, 1979:103). The time-binding ability of human beingsarises from their usage of "language, number, gesture, picture, and othersymbolic forms" (loc.inherited characteristics and the seemingly insurmountable barrier of "time".It should be noted, in passing,.that an era will come when messages vitallyimportant to the race, affecting its survival, will be transmissible by micro-surgical intervention with the human molecular blueprint, but the technologyrequired for this form of temporal communication is far from available as yet.Therefore, in what follows, this theoretical possibility will not be furtherconsidered.

cit.) enabling them to transcend the limitations of


9/46

3

2 SOME BASIC PRINCIPLES OF SEMIOTICS

*Semiotics,l the pivotal branch of the integrated science of communi-cation (Jakobson, 1970:33), is concerned with the formulation and encoding ofmessages by *sources, the transmission of these messages through *channels,the *decoding and *interpretation o f these messages by *destinations, andtheir *signification. The entire transaction, or *semiosis, takes placewithin a *context to which the system is highly sensitive and which thesystem, in turn, affects. Any living entity, or its products, can be eithermessage sources or destinations.

messages. Semiosic acts are monitored by *feed mechanisms (Bogart, 1980) ,which can variously function to fine-tune performances. Differences betweeninput and output are due to *"noise", which can, however, be counteracted by*"redundancy". The process of message interchanges, or *semiosis, is held bymany to be an indispensable characteristic of all terrestrial life forms. Itis this capacity for containing, replicating, and expressing messages, ofextracting their significance, that, in fact, distinguishes them more consis-tently from the nonliving - - except for human agents, such as robots, that canbe programmed to engage in quasi-semiosis -- rather than other traits oftencited, such as the ability to reproduce (e.g., mules or neutered cats do actas message sources and destinations, but none can reproduce).

All human messages fall into two distinct categories: *verbal messagesand *averbal messages. *Language - - as the array of verbal messages is col-lectively referred to - - has, so far, been found only in our own species; bio-logists would thus say that language constitutes a "species-specific" trait.The study o f this unique yet "species-universal'' ttribute o f human beings,their language, is the subject matter of *linguistics, which is one of themost sophisticated, partially formalized branches of semiotics. The richrepertoire of averbal messages of human beings-- by sharp contrast with theirlanguage - - has not comprised a unified field o f study, and therefore lacks a

Humans are unique in being able to process both verbal and averbal

1Expressions preceded by an asterisk are defined in Section 9, "Glossary o fTechnical Terms."


10/46

4

positive integrative label.tic.manifoldly compounded when the multifarious message systems employed by themillions of speechless creatures are additionally taken into account.

Averbal messages can be distinguished from one another according toseveral criteria of semiotic relevance. Let me briefly illustrate this pointby going back to a classic discussion found in the Hippocratic writings onmedical semiotics, where semeion - - from the same root as both *"semiotics"and *"semiology" - - is used to refer to the observable "symptoms" by which aphysician identifies a disease ("makes a diagnosis") and forecasts its outcome("makes a prognosis") (Miller, 1979:44). This standpoint of Hippocrates (ca.460 - ca. 377 B.C.) - - whom historians have sometimes reverentially regardedas "the father and master of all semiotics" - - hinges on an ancient but stillwidely prevalent distinction drawn between two kinds of messages:tional" vs. "natural".

Averbal messages are, by definition,-ot linguis-This negative delineation has led to terminological chaos, which is

"conven-

*Conventional messages are those whose power to signify is thought todepend on some prior agreement, presumed to have been reached at some temporaljuncture, and thereafter accepted as a matter o f custom - - such as, mostimportantly, messages cast in spoken or written utterances, but also fre-quently messages that are embodied in the shape of a parochial gesture, a tra-dition exercised and understood by one group o f persons but not necessarily bytheir neighbors.not - - is invariably circumscribed to a time and place.

So-called *natural messages, on the other hand, have the power to signifythe same things at all times and in all places, precisely because their inter-pretation does not presuppose a familiarity with the conventions of a partic-ular group. For this reason, "natural messages", as here defined, are partic-ularly pertinent to the present responsibility of the Human Interference TaskForce.

The meaning of a conventional message - - whether verbal or

After describing certain averbal symptoms (semeia), Hippocrates does goon to say, in his treatise on Prognostic, that these "prove to have the samesignificance in Libya, in Delos, and in Scythia". Given the q u a s i -universality of the class of averbal messages physicians call symptoms, hedoes not deem it "strange that one should be right in the vast majority ofinstances, if one learns them well and knows how to estimate and appreciatethem properly" (ibid:45; after Hippocrates's Prognostic xxv).


11/46

5

By contrast, what is sometimes designated as being a *"multimessage",(i.e., a conventional gesture), is one that has a number of totally distinctmeanings, the choice of interpretation depending on the time and the place.Thus all Americans are familiar with the raised hand gesture, performed insuch a way that the thumb and forefinger form a circle.signifies that something is " O K " . In other countries, however, the sameconfiguration may mean something totally different: for example, in Japan,"money", in the South of France, "zero" or "worthless"; in many places it mayconvey an obscene comment or an insult, as it did in Greece more than twothousand years ago; again, in some other areas it may betoken nothing at all(Morris, 1977:39-40).

messages are distinguishable in terms of their temporal or spatial distribu-tion. Many others can be adduced.

It is convenient to begin a general preliminary consideration of messageswhere they are assumed to originate. Their inception can be pictured as beinga box (see Figure 1, page 9), which 1 have already designated the *source.message can now be provisionally defined as a selection out of a *code by asource. The concept of a code will be explained later, but it should immedi-ately be noted that many of the rules of probability governing this selectionare unknown.

The source box is nothing more than a formal model used for erectinghypothetical constructs: given a certain input, one must guess, more or less,at what takes place to account for the output."black box", they assume that nothing is known about what is inside theorganism or about the functioning, say, of the central nervous system. How-ever, the correlations between input and output may enable certain inferencesto be made, not about the mechanism inside the box but about how it works.

This essentially

These examples illustrate a single feature by which human averbal

A

When psychologists speak o f

In semiotics, it is more accurate to postulate a source box that is notaltogether black but falls in a twilight zone between ignorance and knowledge:that is, in some cases, we do know something about its workings, althoughobviously far from enough. In schematic terms, these complex operations canbe divided into two successive processes: an early one so murky as to behardly more than a vacuous label, and a later one gradually dawning into moreor less sharp scientific focus.


12/46

2The Human Interference Task Force can be considered as the "source" that ischarged with the obligation to collectively formulate the message, or set ofmessages, for a future destination, i.e., a would-be intruder, or group ofintruders, to the repository site.

b

The first process is referred to as the *formulation (or generation) ofthe message.does so is not known and will remain enigmatic until the electrochemicalmachinery of the human and animal minds, in their immense complexity, is farbetter understood. Human beings, it seems reasonable to postulate, follow, byand large, generative rules to create an enormous number of novel messagesappropriate to an indefinite variety of contexts, but how they are able to dothis is still an utter mystery. Detailed charting of the highly intricate andcontinuously readapting pathways within the three-and-one-half-pound globe o ftissue under the skull known as the human brain remains a task for the future.It is conceivable that other animals store in advance separate internalrepresentations for each message produced for use in a limited set ofenvironments, but this is also uncertain.Were we to picture an organic source, as in Figure 1, we would have todarken the leftrnost portion to reflect our ignorance; here the box is opaque.If the source were engineered, say, a general purpose computer, we would beable t o specify exactly how the mechanical system formulates its messages,since a human programmer has imperatively prescribed the action by a specialcoding operation: mapping the human multidimensional language into some arti-ficial unidimensional language. However, the primary concern here is withtenebrous living primary sources, and only incidentally with translucentinorganic secondary artifacts.2

tinuous. A discrete source produces messages ("letters") selected out of anenumerable set of possibilities ("alphabet"); such a source might produce, forexample, written English. A continuous source is one that is not discrete - -say, one that produces spoken English or music.

In the communication disciplines, as throughout the life sciences, it

A source "formulates" a message, but precisely how any organism

Engineers sometimes speak of two kinds o f sources: discrete and con-

is both legitimate and necessary to raise questions teleonomic in aspect.Accurdingly, it is now proper to ask: for what purposes do sources formulate


13/46

7

messages? The functions of messages are various.the same objective sense in which all animal behavior has a goal: an animalingests food to gain materials and energy; its digestive apparatus and enzymesexist and operate as they do in order to promote this goal of survival.Messages embody information biologically or socially important for organisms;they are formulated, among other reasons, in order to be "transferred" toanother entity, here named the *destination.

It is convenient to think of the destination as a second box (or opera-tional concept, or a model), the area at which the message f;ow initiated bythe source terminates. Its workings can be segmented into two temporally suc-cessive processes, the reverse of formulation: an early one, characteristicsof which are more or less understood, and an ultimate one - - usually referredto as the *interpretation of the message - - the manner of which shades offinto unfathomed dusk; in this case, the rightmost portion of the diagram(Figure 1) would have to be blackened.

They are end-directed in

The source is normally incapable of launching its message in the neuro-electro-chemical shape in which we surmise that it was initially formulated.The reason for this is that there is ordinarily no direct neuro-electro-chemical passageway to the destination; each source is linked with each des-tination via some sort of medium, or *channel, a passageway through which thetwo are capable of establishing and sustaining the exchange. An example of achannel is the link postulated between a pair of communicating AmericanIndians, in such a way that one, the source, moves a blanket over a fire,while the other, the destination, observes the resulting message cast, orcoded, in smoke (a form of electromagnetic energy).

Any form of energy propagation can, in fact, be exploited for purposes ofThe point to remember i s that the message-as-formulatedessage transmission.

- - conceivably, in sinusoidal pattern components -- must next undergo succes-sive transformations while progressing on its journey toward the destination.The transmissions are "handed on" from one relay station to the next, and,before reaching the primary projection area, they need to be rearranged - -filtered and adjusted - - to suit the chosen channel. It is not known, specif-ically, how one part of the brain communicates with another, how the messagesare constructed and stacked in a hierarchy, or how their meanings are "agreedto" (coded). Neurophysiologists surmise that, no matter what a messagr vay


14/46

acorrespond to in the external world, internally it is likely to be representedby nerve impulses linked by chemical exchanges, probably functioning synchro-nously in various regions, which may be closely adjacent to or quite remotefrom one another in the two-dimensional cortical sheet of higher animals,including humans.

externalized serial string, as in speech, or writing, or gesturing, must beeffected by surface organ systems -- in humans, e.g., the so-called organs ofspeech - - and this crucial *transduction is called *encoding.the interface between internal and external message systems, which, in a broadsense, stand in a specular relationship, in a homology of spatial and temporaltransition probabilities.another transduction, followed by a series of further transformations, must beeffected before this message can be interpreted; the pivotal reconversion iscalled *decoding.

"Transduction" refers to the neurobiological transmutation from one formof energy to another, such as a photon undergoes when impinging on the verte-brate retina: we know that it entrains impulses in the optic nerve thatchange rhodopsin (a pigment in the retinal rods of the eyes), through fourintermediate chemical steps, from one state to another. A message is said tobe "coded" when the source and the destination are "in agreement" on a set oftransformation rules used in the exchange. Because of entropy (a measure ofdisorder in the system; see Rifkin, 1980), the message-as-encoded can never beidentical with the message formulated and launched by the source.

sensory equipment at its disposal. It would be abortive for an animal that isdumb - - as the great majority of them are - - to broadcast acoustically codedmessages to its own kind that may be deaf.registering only a small portion of ambient acoustic stimuli:normally cope only with frequencies between "16 and "22,000 hertz, and are, inthis respect, surpassed by the smallest bat, every dog, many rodents, andcountless other animals.

The range of seeing likewise differs considerably in various animals:humans, who are incapable of perceiving ultraviolet bordering on the X-rayregion to about 100 Angstroms, which is readily distinguishable by the

The transformation from this unconscious parallel processing to an

It happens at

When the destination receives the encoded messages

The kind of code selected by the source depends crucially on the total

Human sense organs are capable ofthus we can


15/46

9

honeybee and other insects, will scarcely encode their messages in the - - tothem -- invisible spectrum, which could be decoded by other humans only withspecial enhancing instrumentation. The same is true of infrared, which cer-tain nocturnal mammals, possessing a special organ (the tapetum lucidum) caus-ing reflected night eye-shine, can manage to communicate by "in the dark", aswe cannot, save with the aid of recently developed technology.

stand the wide variety o f codes utilized in the animal world and by humans toinsure that reciprocal understanding is achieved. Messages are transmitted,through acoustic and optical channels, as well as through more or less unfami-liar ones; even the best known channels may play a crucial role in communica-tion in ranges beyond the limits of normal (i.e., cognizant) human perception,and thus beyond normal awareness.The following very general diagram (Figure 1) illustrates the main points

An excursion into the field of sense organs will be necessary to under-

made so far. This model is not to be regarded as a piecemeal assemblage ofconstituents that can be represented as the sum of the properties of its sev-eral parts; on the contrary, the process of semiosis indispensably requiresthat each constituent be conceived of as functioning in relation to everyother.

/ SOURCE/ CHANNEL DESTINATION \ \/ Formulates \/ \

1Context MESSAGE Context0 I\ Interprets ,

/\ /0.---,--, Context I

Figure 1 . Ba s i c Elements o f Communication


16/46

O


17/46

11

management wanted to convey to the public, chiefly, that segment likely toengage in shallow digging. The meSsage as a whole consists of a judiciousmixture o f verbal and averbal elements, which are meant to be mutuallyreinforcing, or, if the destination is assumed to be illiterate, at leastpartially significant by virtue of the pictorial element.design incorporates not only the message intended to be conveyed but also themetamessage (message about the message) that further information can be andshould be obtained, without cost, according to such-and-such a procedure.

or setting, in which the entire transaction takes place. The context in whichany message is emitted, transmitted, and admitted decisively influences itsinterpretation, and vice versa: the context of transactions is continuallymodified by the messages being interpreted; messages, in brief, are alwaysmore or less context-sensitive. This much is well known, but just how anorganism takes its environment into account remains unclear.

The notion of "context" has been employed differently by various investi-gators, but, broadly speaking, the term refers to the organism's cognizance ofconditions and manner of appropriate and effective use of messages.includes the whole range of the animal s cognitive systems (i .e., "mind"),messages flowing parallel, as well as the memory of prior messages that havebeen processed and, no doubt, the anticipation of future messages expected tobe processed. Some semioticians have consigned the study of contexts to anebulous subdivision of the field called "pragmatics" (complementing "syntac-tics" and "semantics"; see Morris, 1971, and Cherry, 1978, Appendix, pp. 339-343). In the case of the telephone company's emblem (Figure Z ) , whatevercontext General Telephone's management deemed necessary for potentialintruders to know is incorporated, in part, in the English legend printedunderneath, and, in part, averbally, in the drawing itself.

Context is often the crucial factor in resolving the significance of amessage. Thus messages encoded in the chemicals isovaleric acid and methylmercaptan are components, respectively, of human body malodor and halitosis.This notwithstanding, the same chemicals and, consequently, the same odors,are responsible for some of the bouquet and flavor of cheese - - contextsaccount for the difference in interpretation.

Note that the

A very important component pictured in Figure 1is the message *context,

Context


18/46

12

The verbal context may subtly yet decisively affect memory, as was shownin a remarkable experiment by Loftus (1980) and Palmer. These two psycholo-gists showed a movie of an automobile accident, and questioned two differentgroups of "witnesses" about it in two slightly different ways. One group wasasked, "How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?" Theother group was asked, "How fast were the cars going when they hit eachother?" A week passed. Then all "witnesses" were asked: "Did you see anybroken glass in the accident?" Although there was no broken glass, those whowere cued with the verb "smash" were more than twice as likely to erroneouslyreport the presence of broken glass than those originally cued with the verb'Ih it ' .

The context often determines whether the destination will believe or dis-be-ieve the message received.to r;is mother, exclaiming: "Mummy, Mummy, there is a tiger in the backyard."More likely than not, his mother will reply: "Johnny, stop making u pstories!"tically next door to the Winter Quarters of a famous circus which, the motheris fully aware, features a "Big Cats" act.more likely to be given credence than not.

The diagrams pictured in Figures 1and 2 misleadingly suggest that thesystems represented are static. All semiotic systems are, to the contrary,not only dynamic, but adaptive, that is, self-regulated to adapt both to theexternal context (conditions of environment) and the internal context (circum-stances inherent within the system itself). At successive points, intelli-gence mechanisms come into play about system conditions which can, accord-ingly, activate and shape coping responses; their flow is commonly describedas a *"feed process" (Bogart, 1980). Feed processes typically move, inmutually complementary fashion, forward as well as backward, forming loops.Thus the source normally checks whether the launched message stream reachesthe destination according to expectation (*"feedforward"), whereas the destin-ation tends to continually confirm or disconfirm this (*"feedback") to thesource. *Feedforward is like a trend forecast that biases perception andenables the source to adjust its performance in anticipation o f changefulhappenings; in the favorable case, it may facilitate the avoidance o fmistakes. *Feedback brings into the frame information about the working

For instance, imagine a little boy running up

Suppose, however, that the family lives in Venice, Florida, prac-

The little boy's exclamation is


19/46

13

efficiency of the system itself - - information which is then "fed back" intothe system, thus enabling adjustments on the basis of results accomplished.

An example of feedforward, taken from familiar organizational surround-ings, is budgetary planning: the Vice-president for Research and Engineering(the source) tells a department manager (the destination) by a memo (themessage) how much money the department, say, of the Apex Corporation, mayspend during the coming year, and he then designs, or redesigns, the depart-ment's activities on the basis of this "foreknowledge".Many predators (the source) - - including various raptors, bats, wolves, lions,polar bears -- capture their prey (the destination) by a maneuver called"interception" ( o f the message).where the quarry -s, but where it is most likely to be at the moment ofimpact, that is, a precise point ahead of the quarry in its calculatedtrajectory.

As I (the source) deliver a lecture (my message) to my class (the destina-tion), I unintermittently monitor the students' fluctuating level of engross-ment or tedium by way of their acoustic and optic messages broadcast to me,wittingly or unwittingly, via a feedback loop; conscientiously, I endeavor toattune my presentation in conformity with their expressions.example:neural and humoral factors (the message) by the vagal and sympathetic cardiacefferents (channels); changes from the normal rhythm -are reported (fed back)by sensitive interoceptors (other channels) to the brain (the destination),specifying factors such as timing, volume, and pressure of each pulse. Thisfeedback loop between heart and brain provides an oscillatory input to mycentral nervous system on the basis of which vital readjustments can beeffected.

A different example:

This means that the predator aims not at

A common example o f feedback comes from a habitual university setting.

A differentmy heartbeat (the source) is slowed or speeded by a complex of

The message received (and finally interpreted) by the destination is, inpractice, seldom identical with the message sent (after being formulated) bythe source; in other words, the output of the channel generally does not agreewith its input.disturbances that variously intrude into the system and obscure the clarity orquality o f the message or, in extreme cases, obliterate its comprehensionentirely. A channel might also, say, for secrecy, contain a cryptographic

Ii1

, - . AThe discrepancy Ms#Ma, may be due to random and persistent1


20/46

14

scrambling device.even when the input is known, are called *noise. To circumvent noise andthereby to decrease the probability of transmission errors, the sourcehabitually introjects *redundancy.techniques for overcoming it, but always at a price -- as, for instance,slowing the source (and thus the entire transaction) down, or in other ways.

ing to convey precise landing instructions (the message) to a pilot (the des-tination) by radio (the channel) during the electric storm (noisy environ-mental context). One means -- perhaps the simplest -- whereby the controllercan introduce redundancy to insure reasonably error-free reception in such ahigh-risk situation is to reiterate all or parts of his original message, evenat the expense of slowing him - - and the process of landing -- appreciably.After the delivery of every message-instance, the controller might ask (feed-forward): "Do you copy?" The pilot will repeat what he understands his in-structions to be (feedback). If he judges that a satisfactory consensus hasbeen reached, he might so acknowledge with the code "Roger...", and concludewith ' I . . .out".light, I simultaneously engage in a wide array of other bodily movements,M 2 C n , ome of them audible (as well as averbal).welcome fact which, under noisy conditions, reduces the degree of misunder-standing between the communicants.appreciated by turning off the sound on your television set, or, alterna-tively, by leaving on the sound but masking the image. Incidentally, gen-eticists have found that the relation between the nucleic acid code (a four-letter code) and the protein code (a twenty-letter code) - - the geneticcode -- is replete with natural redundancy, since several groups of threenucleotides, or triplets, along the nucleic acid chain, define the same aminoacids along the protein chain (i.e., these groups are synonymous).acids have as many as six codons; Jacob (1965:25) has commented on theirabundance in the inventory of synonymous triplets: "...redundancy gives acertain suppleness to the script of heredity.''

Such disarrangements, which make the output unpredictable

There are many kinds of noise and many

Imagine, for example, an airport traffic controller (the source) attempt-

A different example: When I utter a sentence, M T, in the Presence ofaraphonetic"), most of them visible (avocalxM1 and M233.*.n are always partially redundant, aThe force of this everyday example can be

Some amino


21/46

15

the Colonies that originally formed the Union (Sebeok,important point here is that their iconic relationsthose already informed of the code, or conventionbeing used.symbolic; the aspect that predominates is always a

An indexical message is one which "points to"

There are other aspects of our flag which

it. Verbal indexes are, for one set of examples, all

3 TYPES OF MESSAGES

1976:lZl). Thecan be grasped only by

(viz., American history)are indexical and

function of the context.an object or is a sample of

pronouns: " I " means


22/46

16from a nuclear power plant, this would (in that context) be an index of a largequantity of waste resulting from reprocessed spent fuel in the vicinity --say, encapsulated in a canister sunk far beneath the surface sample.

that it purports to represent is arbitrary, that is, understandable because ofa preexisting social convention which specifies that the message will, to allwho concur, stand for thus-and-so. For instance, the spoken word "dig" willbe understood by all who are privy to the code known as "modern spokenEnglish" as, roughly, equivalent to "excavate" (and associated notions), giventhe right context; (in other contexts, the same morpheme might mean "thrust","reside", "poke", "apprehend", "enjoy", and so forth -- derivative extensionscommonly called "metaphoric meanings").various other modalities. The American flag is also a symbol triggering deepemotional responses -- say, in the context of a burial at Arlington NationalCemetery.

The technical word used for highly formalized symbols in the visual modeis *"emblem"; examples of emblems are the international symbol used to informof the presence o f radiation hazard in the vicinity, the trefoil; or theabstract wheelchair design making it known that there is a facility nearbysuitable for the use of handicapped persons.

Each mode of communication - - iconic, indexical, symbolic (or emblem-atic) -- has a set of advantages and a corresponding set of disadvantages,which are both context-bound (see further Sebeok 1976, Ch. 8). Since thecontext is far from predictable at any stage over the next 10,000 years, and,with the passage of time, is bound to become increasingly equivocal, it willbe recommended that all signs be constructed of a mixture of the three modes.While this intermingling will still not be fail-safe, it is certain that themore redundancy is built into the system, the more this will tend to ensureaccurate decoding by any destination.further developed below.

A symbolic message is one whose relationship to the "state of affairs"

Symbols, of course, can be encoded in

The implications of this statement are


23/46

Figure 3 . An Ambiguous Image (after Kennedy, 1974, p . 70)(Reprinted by permission o f Jossey-Bass Inc.)

What is intimated here is by no means that images should not be used, butrather that they be selected with extreme forethought, and that they always be

17

4 SOME PROBLEMS OF IMAGING

At this point, some comments are in order about certain predictableproblems involving iconic, specifically, image-based coding. Two standardbooks on this subject are by Kennedy (1974) and by Hagen (1980); see alsoCabe's compendiary yet comprehensive account (1980), for a recent review ofthe most critical issues. It should be stressed that there is substantialdisagreement on the extent to which pictorial perception depends on specificcultural experience, certainly a major source for human individual differ-ences. Obviously, pictures give some humans some information on someoccasions; but the "how" and "when" are complicated questions, and the answersare neither obvious nor should be taken for granted in circumstances asdelicate as our project demands.a host of other possibilities for pictorial representation, with varyingdegrees o f accuracy; the perceptior! of all depictions, moreover, varies acrossspecies, cultures, and times. For example in the crowd scene in Figure 3 , arethe people fighting, dancing, or engaged in some other activity?

There are stick-figures, cartoons, sketches, paintings, photographs, and


24/46

18

incorporated into a framework that judiciously intermingles icons withsymbols, supplementing the pair with indexes whenever that, too, i s feasible.

The best guess of informed scientists, based on terrestrial cases, isthat the "greeting cards" carried on the Pioneer and Voyager probes would morelikely than not be devoid of meaning to "extraterrestrial intelligence",because o f a lack of common context as well as distinct wiring of perceptualapparatus. Even i f "intelligent" life beyond earth were to exist, "the weightof evolution stresses the unlikelihood of the appearance o f humanoid formselsewhere in the Universe" (Feinberg and Shapiro 1980:409-4101) and it istherefore wholly unreasonable to expect that a creature possessing a compar-able apparatus for decoding and interpreting information has been produced byindependent biological processes on another planet. Even here on earth everyspecies carries a different Umwelt, or "cognitive map", of its environment(UexkU11 1980:291-388), no one of which can be considered "more real" than anyother.


25/46

195 CHANNELS

Every form of physical energyconveying messages. To mention on

propagation can bey the most common

used as a channel forinks used in one corner

or another o f the animal kingdom, these are: chemical, optical, acoustic,tactile, electric, temperature-based, different combinations of the aforemen-tioned, and others. It is important, furthermore, to appreciate that humansenses register only a small portion o f ambient stimuli.optically, for example, as already pointed out, we are dependent upon a narrowrange of hearing and seeing; i.e., we can register only restricted frequen-cies. It is very difficult to foretell what sensory prostheses will be at ourdisposal in future decades and centuries, and one must further allow for thepossibility - - indeed, in the opinion of many, likelihood - - that "human

Acoustically and

tly by humans, through the medi-ly by unpredictable bioniclation of channels to store thein, thus assumes considerable

importance. Here, once again, redundancy offers the best hope; all channelsthat seem technically feasibly should be utilized. For instance, if the sitecan be rendered repulsively malodorous for-a lengthy period, that would be, atleast provisionally, a deterrent against casual exploration; no one, however,would advocate exclusive reliance upon the olfactory channel as a "finalso luti on".

interference" will be carried out only indireation of programmed robots equipped perceptuadevices. The problem of choosing what consteinformation t o be transmitted into the future


26/46

206 WRITTEN RECORDS AND DECIPHERMENT

Excellent historical surveys o f written records and decipherment werepublished by Gelb, among other works of his, under the above title (1973),with an extensive bibliography on the subject; and, more recently (Gelb,1980), with an emphasis on the semiotic aspects, especially within the frameof visual communication. The geographical scope includes the long stretch ofland extending from Gibraltar to the Yellow Sea. All types of records, theirfrequency and variety, epigraphy and paleography, are discussed. In allinstances, the time-depth is perhaps a third of the time-span o f 10,000 yearswe are concerned with here.leading authority seem to have but marginal bearing, for they deal with:

The problems of decipherment discussed by this

1. Decipherment of unknown writings and languages (e.g., hieroglyphic

2. Decipherment of unknown writings used for known languages (e.g.,Egyptian, cuneiform Akkadian, and hieroglyphic Hittite);

Phoenician and Ugaritic writings, cuneiform Old Persian, Cypriote,and Old [runic] Turkish); and

Etruscan).3 . Interpretation of unknown languages written in known writings (e.g.,

The general rule that applies is that the degree of difficulty o f therecovery of extinct languages is linked directly to the degree of relationshipbetween the language to be recovered and comparable languages (Gelb,1973:270).are briefly but cogently discussed by Gelb.general discussion of the methodological problems involved, see the outstand-ing book by Kahn (1967).

Methods of decipherment, and the steps involved in this processFor a much fuller as well as more

Kahn's consideration of the Rosetta stone (ibid.:905-910) is especiallyilluminating. Although the stone's importance was instantly recognized as apossible key to a solution o f the mystery of hieroglyphics when it was foundin 1799, the important point to keep in mind is that its "mere existence... idnot make solution automatic" (ibid.:906), as is popularly believed. Jean-Franqois Champollion resolved the riddle only in the Fall of 1822. For thisand other more technical reasons, the "lesson" of the Rosetta stone is notrelevant to the matters at hand.

Gelb (1980:19-20) lists the various systems and devices available tohuman beings. His initial division is between (a) Momentary, and (b) Stable.


27/46

21

The first categorythree sets of subcategories, to wit:

s not applicable here. The second category enumerates

1.

2.

3.

The

"Semasiographic devices or forerunners of writing by means ofmarkings on objects or- on any more or less durable material or bymeans of shapes or color of objects . . I 'descriptive-representational devices, which include both pictorialcommunication and pictorial art, magico-religious representation andnarrative representation, as well as seal iconography. For theproblem at hand, some sort of narrative representation will,undoubtedly, be required, although it will not be sufficient."Phonographic systems or full writing, by means of markings charac-terized by close correlation with [some] ral language." This groupincludes logo-syllabic systems, syllabic systems, and alphabeticsystems."Para-graphic devices or systems, by means of markings occurringwithin and in addition to writing proper characterized by loose cor-relation with oral language." Here belong comic strips and cartoonson the one hand, and emblems of the sort advocated by variousmembers of the Task Force.important point is that the principle of redundancy advocated here

Some of these are

requires that as many stable systems and devices be utilized as imaginationsuggests and technology permits.

date only from 3000 B.C., although it is theorized that people may have begunto record tax recipts, in the form of clay balls, cylinders, and cones - - in aWord, tokens - - perhaps as far back as 8500 B . C .Schmandt-Besserat, ancient Sumerians kept the tokens which were used to stamptablets to keep some sort of record, probably each representing a specificamount of a specific commodity, and, by about 3500 B.C., began storing thetokens inside hollow clay balls, indexing the tokens by making an impressionof each token on the outside of the ball. Her view is that, by 3100 B.C., i twas realized that the actual, material tokens need not be inside the ball, butthat the "indexical" impression on the outside o f the ball would suffice.Herein may lie writing's true origins (Anonymous, 1981 :4 ) .

For the record, it should be added that the world's oldest clay tablets

According to Denise


28/46

227 RECOMMENDATIONS (AND RELATED CONSIDERATIONS)

(A) The opening sentence o f Harrison's classic survey of Pandorals Box(1900:99), on the changing aspects o f this celebrated mythical symbol, begins:"There is a strange fascination about a mythological character that hasretained its vitality up to our own day . . ' Ioccurs in endless verbal and pictorial (Figures 4 and 5) variants since

This familiar myth - - which

Figure 4 . Engraving by G i u l i o Bonasone, "Man's Opening the Fateful Vessel"(Between 1531 - 1 574 )


29/46

23

Hesiod's famous account of the Pandora story in his Works and Days (Panofsky,1962) -- deals with the first woman, the beautiful mischief, who opens aforbidden box, o u t o f which comes every evil the flesh i s heir to. Pandoraand her proverbial box (or jar,3 or cask, or vase) appears as an emblem ofmisery and destruction, as in Figures 4 and 5.

Figure 5. Gouache by Max Beckman, "Pandora's Box"(Begun in 1936, but thoroughly repainted in 1947)

3The original Greek word pithos, commonly mistranslated as "box", referred toa huge earthenware storage jar, "often large enough to serve as a receptaclefor the dead...", i.e., that either stands on or is partly buried -n theearth (see Harrison, 1900:100, and Panof kyF1962: ) .


30/46

24

These persistent and widely diffused mythological and iconographicresonances of the assignment to which the Task Force is seeking a resolutionlead to the first recommendation, to wit: that information be launched andartificially passed on into the short-term and long-term future with the sup-plementary aid of folkloristic devices, in particular a combination of anartificially created and nurtured ritual-and-legend. The most positive aspectof such a procedure is that it need not be geographically localized, or tiedto any one language-and-culture (although, clearly, when 1 inguistic and ethnicboundaries are crossed, both the verbal component and the associated set ofrites are likely to undergo changes and an attenuation of the originalrational ) .

"fdlse trail", meaning that the uninitiated will be steered away from the haz-ardJus site for reasons other than the scientific knowledge o f the possibilityof radiation and its implications; essentially, the reason would be accumu-lated superstition to shun a certain area permanently.

The legend-and-ritual, as now envisaged, would be tantamount to laying a

A ritual annually renewed can be foreseen, with the legend retold year-by-year (with, presumably, slight variations). The actual "truth" would beentrusted exclusively to - - what we might call for dramatic emphasis - - an"atomic priesthood", that is, a commission of knowledgeable physicists,experts in radiation sickness, anthropologists, linguists, psychologists,semioticians, and whatever additional expertise may be calledthe future. Membership in this "priesthood" would be self-setime.

The best mechanism for embarking upon a novel tradition,suggested, is at present unclear. Folklore specialists consu

for now and inective over

along the linested have advised

that they know of no precedent, nor could they think of a parallel situation,except the well-known, but ineffectual, curses associated with the burialsites (viz., pyramids) of some Egyptian Pharaohs, e.g., of the Lqth dynasty,which did not deter greedy grave-robbers from digging for "hidden treasure".

( B ) Although the problems of waste storage are being studied in othercountries--among them, Canada, France, Sweden, and West Germany - - and demon-stration projects under way abroad are, in some places and some respects,technically further along than those in the U.S., the human intrusion factori s scarcely studied abroad (cf., however, Johansson and Steen, 1981). This


31/46

25

means that planning should begin immediately to internationalize the kinds ofcommunication measures discussed in this paper, and other Task Force reports.The ultimate design adopted should enjoy the benefit of world-wide thinkingabout the problems we face and their world-wide implications.

(C) Consideration should be given, at least in passing, to communicationin artificial languages, which are mainly. of two kinds, general purpose langu-ages, and languages restricted to the communication of some specified subjectmatter. The use of mathematical formulae is an old and conspicuous specialpurpose language, and may safely be assumed to embody the physical laws of theuniverse, understandable throughout the cosmos. Usually, mathematical commun-ication consists of formulae surrounded by bits of vernacular. While theexclusive use of mathematical communication is not recommended, especially notfor rite-bound messages, it is reasonable to anticipate a limited use in (a)metamessages and (b) technical messages to be "permanently" stored inarchives, libraries, computers, and other long-term repositories. On thissubject, see further Freudenthal (1974), and the same author's earliertreatise, Lincos: Design of a Lanquage for Cosmic Intercourse (1960).

notion of *redundancy. In information theory, this term refers to a propertyof an information source whose *entropy (cf., Rifkin, 1980), -, is less thanthe maximum entropy, %ax, that could be obtained with the same string ofmessages. Redundancy (or one minus the relative entropy of the source, i.e.,the ratio of the actual entropy to %ax) is an extremely important matterbecause it reflects the extent to which the efficiency of a communicationsystem can be brought up to the desired standard by improvements in theencoding source (i.e., in our present time).

When the channel is noisy -- as most often it i s bound to be - - so thatsome messages are received erroneously, containing certain distortions, cer-tain extraneous material, the introduction of redundancy will make it muchmore probable that some or all of the errors may be corrected. Therefore, thepurpose of error-correcting codes is to intromit redundancy in a known mannerso that corrections can be made at the receiving point -- i.e., by the destin-ation (i.e., in a future era) -- without any further reference to the messagesource (which, by the nature o f the case we are considering, would beimpossible).

(D) One of the pivotal concepts undergirding this whole paper is the


32/46

26(E) Finally, a carefully considered over-all recommendation is urged

about the entirety of the communication system under deliberation.based on the conviction that all human thinking must be in continuity with thepast, but also an ineluctable corollary o f this proposition, namely, thatinformation tends to decay over time (i.e., the entropy continues to increase,eventually resulting in total incomprehensibility). This is not merely anempirical observation - - witness the evolution of Modern English from Anglo-Saxon, through Middle English -- but a consequence, more generally, of theSecond Law of Thermodynamics. These related concepts are authoritatively dis-cussed, in layman's language, in Wiener (1950); the fact, he says (ibid.:88),that information may be dissipated but not gained is one form of the SecondLaw of Thermodynamics, which also states that (in an isolated system) theprcbability that the entropy shall decrease is zero (ibid.:22).

This is

What to do to counter the passage from negentropy to ultimate entropy?What is being proposed here is a so-called "relay system" of information

transmission, which rests on a very simple scheme: to divide the 10,000-yearepoch envisaged into manageable segments o f shorter, and presumably, reason-ably foreseeable periods. Assuming that 10,000 years is equivalent to "300generations of humankind, it i s recommended that the messages at the burialsite be designed for only three generations ahead, to wit, our children,grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. A clear advantage of any such systemwould be that the verbal portion could be Modern English, while the averbalportion could easily be extrapolated from existing and universally understoodpictorial emblematic strings (e.g., cartoons, stick-figures, or the like).

This message, however, would have to be supplemented by a metamessage --coded in the same combination o f familiar verbal/averbal signs -- incorpo-rating a plea and a warning that the object-message at the site be renewed bywhatever coding devices seem to be maximally efficient, roughly, 250 yearshence. That future object-message should, in turn, incorporate a similarmetamessage for the generation 500 years from now to act comparably, and soon, and on, u p to 10,000 years ahead.

As for the more permanently stored, elaborated, and scientifically accu-rate information in archives o f the future, a similar set o f instructionsshould make it clear that, as the information begins to decay, it should beupdated, and also expanded in the light of improved science, engineering, andtechnology.


33/46

27

T h e d i s a d v a n t a g e o f t h e r e l a y s y s t e m i s , o f course, t h a t t h e r e i s noa ss ur an ce t h a t f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s w o ul d o be y t h e i n j u n c t i o n s o f t h e p a s t ." a t o m i c p r i e s t h o o d " w o uld b e c ha rg ed w i t h t h e added r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f s e e i ngt o i t t h a t ou r behes t , as embod ied i n t he cumu la t i ve sequence o f metamessages,i s t o be heeded - - i f n o t f o r l e g a l re a so n s, t h e n f o r m o ra l r ea s on s , w i t hp e rh a ps t h e v e i l e d t h r e a t t h a t t o i g n o r e t h e m andate wo uld be ta n ta m o un t t oi n v i t i n g some s o r t o f s u p e rn a tu r al r e t r i b u t i o n .

The


34/46

288 SUMMARY

The generalization that all natural languages - - and, by extension, allhuman communications systems -- change over time is widely accepted.semiotic systems, moreover, tend to undergo progressive changes so that theirsignificative functions become unrel iable (e.g., Middle English to us), oreven totally incomprehensible (e.g., Old English to us), when future genera-tions attempt to comprehend them.forms as well as of speech.

It follows that no fail-safe method of communication can be envisaged10,000years ahead.recoded, and recoded again and again, at relatively brief intervals. For thisre.?son, a "relay-system" of communication is strongly recommended, with abuilt-in enforcement mechanism, for dramatic emphasis here dubbed an "atomicpriesthood", i.e., a commission, relatively independent of future politicalcurrents, self-selective in membership, using whatever devices for enforcementare at its disposal, including those of a folkloristic character.

Such

This is true, in varying degree, of written

To be effective, the intended messages have to be

In any event, all messages should be as redundant as possible -- ajudicious mixture of verbal and averbal components, preferably containing amixture of iconic, indexical, and symbolic elements.

Finally, the international aspects of the task should be kept in view, sofar as feasible, from the outset.


35/46

29

9 G L O S S A R Y OF T E C H N I C A L T E R M SA V E R B A L : not linguistic.C H A N N E L :CODE:are converted from one representation to another.C O N T E X T : broadly, the environment of a message; narrowly, all precedingand/or following messages that bear on their significance.C O N V E N T I O N A L M E S S A G E :thought to depend on prior agreement.D E C O D I N G : a transformation, whereby, by operation of code rules, a destina-tion alters an incoming message from one representation to another.D E S T I N A T I O N : where a message ends, i.e., is successively decoded and inter-preted.E M B L E M : a highly formalized symbol, usually in the visual modality.E N C O D I N G : transformation, whereby, by operation of code rules, a sourcealters a message from one representation to another.E N T R O P Y : a term strictly used in statistical thermodynamics, and loosely usedin semiotics to refer to the information rate of a message source.F E E D B A C K : kind of feed mechanism that functions to detect an error in a com-munication system after the error has already occurred.FEEDFORW ARD: source checks to see if message received as expected.F E E D P R O C E S S : see Feed Mechanism.F E E D M E C H A N I S M : a cover term f o r three types of self-regulated control

a medium wherein a message travels from source to destination.an agreed transformation, or set o f unambiguous rules, whereby messages

a sign or a string of signs whose power to signify is

systems: feedback, feedforward, feedwithin.F O R M U L A T I O N : an electro-chemical precoding process assumed to occutebrate's central nervous system prior to the recoding of a messageexternally communicable representation; generation.I C O N : a sign is said to be iconic when there is a topological simibetween the signifier and its denotata.

in a ver-in an

arity

I N D E X :with its signified, or is a sample of it.I N T E R P R E T A T I O N : an electrochemical postcoding process assumed to occur in avertebrate's central nervous system after the recording o f the message asreceived.

a sign is said to be indexic in so far as a signifier is contiguous


36/46

30

LANGUAGE: a uniquely human modeling system, such that signifiers (commonly,sounds or their graphic representation) and signif-ieds meanings) are coupledover an infinite domain; verbal communication.L I N G U I S T I C S : the academic discipline devoted to formal studies of languageand of natural languages.MESSAGE: in communication, a sign or string of signs.M U L T I M E S S A G E :interpretation depending on the time and/or the place.N A T U R A L M E S S A G E :all times and in all places.N O I S E :specified source; unwanted signs.P R A G M A T I C S : that branch of semiotics which studies the uses and the effectsof messages; a term para1 le1 to "Syntactics" and "Semantics".REDUNDANCY:whereby it becomes increasingly likely that mistakes and reception will beminimized.S E M I O L O G Y : one common synonym for "Semiotics".S E M I O S I S : the action of a sign, involving three subjects--a sign, its object,and its interpretant.S E M I O T I C S : the doctrine, science, or theory of signs; the subject matter ofsemiotics i s the exchange of any messages whatever and of the system of signswhich underlie them.S I G N I F I C A T I O N : the meaning, or sense, of a message.SOURCE: where a message begins, i.e., is successively formulated and encoded.SYMBOL:ventional link between its signifier and its denotata, and with an intensionalclass for its designator.T R A N S D U C T I O N : transformation from one form of energy into another.V E R B A L : linguistic.

a signifier that has a number of distinct meanings, choice of

a sign or a string of signs signifying the same things at

disturbances which do not represent any part of the messages from a

a property assigned to a source by virtue of an excess o f rules

a sign without either similarity or contiguity, but only with a con-


37/46

Anonymous, 198

31

10 R E F E R E N C E S

. "First Impressions", The Sciences, No. 23, p. 4.Bogart, Dodd H., 1980. "Feedback, Feedforward, and Feedwithin: StrategicInformation in Systems", Behavioral Science, No. 25, p p . 237-249.

Bredehoeft, John D., and Tidu Maini, 1981. "Strategy for Radioactive WasteDisposal in Crystalline Rocks", Science, No. 213, pp. 293-296.

Cabe, Patrick A., 1980. "Picture Perception in Non-Human Subjects", ThePerception of Pictures, Vol. 2, M. A. Hagen, ed., Academic Press, New York,NY, pp. 305-343.Cherry, E. Colin, 1978. On Human Communication: A Review, a Survey, and aCriticism, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Feinberg, Gerald, and Robert Shapiro, 1980. Life Beyond Earth: The Intelli-gent Earthling's Guide to Life in the Universe, William Morrow, New York, NY.

Freudenthal, Hans, 1960. Lincos: Desiqn o f a Lanquaqe for Cosmic Inter-course, North-Holland, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Freudenthal, Hans, 1974. "Cosmic Language", Current Trends in Linguistics,No. 12, pp. 1019-1042, Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., Mouton, The Hague, Netherlands.Gelb, Ignace J., 1973. "Written Records and Decipherment", Current Trends inLinquistics, No. 11, pp. 253-284, Thomas A. Sebeok, ed., Mouton, The Hague,Nether1 ands.

Gelb, Ignace J., 1980. "Principles of Writing Systems Within the Frame ofVisual Communication", Processing of Visible Lanquaqe, Vol. 2, pp. 7-24, PaulA . Kolers, Merald E. Wrolstad, and Herman Bouma, eds., Plenum, New York, NY.


38/46

32

Hagen, Margaret A., 1980.York, NY. ,

The Perception o f Pictures, Academic Press, New

Harrison, Jane E., 1900. "Pandora's Box", The Journal o f Hellenic Studies,NO. 20, pp. 99-114.Jacob, Fran ois, 1965. +on Inaugurale, College de France, Paris, France.kJakobson, Roman, 1965. "Quest for the Essence of Language", Diogenes, No. 51,pp. 21-37.

Jakobson, Roman, 1970. Main Trends in the Science of Language, Harper & Row,New York, NY.

Johansson, Thomas B., and Peter Steen, 1981. Radioactive Waste from NuclearPlants, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Kahn, Davis, 1967. The Codebreakers: The Story o f Secret Writinq, MacMillan,New York, NY.

Kennedy, John M., 1974. A Psychology of Picture Perception, Jossey-Bass I n c . ,San Francisco, C A .

Loftus, Elizabeth F., 1980. Eye Witness Testimony, Harvard University Press,Cambridge, MA.

Miller, Eugene S. , 1979. "Hume's Reduction of Cause to Sign", The NewScholasticism, No. 43, pp. 42-75.

Morris, Charles, 1971. Writings on the General Theory of Signs, Mouton, TheHague, Netherlands.

Morris, Desrnond, 1977. Manwatchinq: A Field Guide to Human Behavior, HarryM. Abrams, New York, NY.


39/46

35DlSTR I BUT ON LIST

A S BURGESSRO B E RT H CURT I SR STRUBLEBARRETT R FRITZ

B I A N A S S O CI A T ESCHRISTOPHER M ST JOHNC A M E RO N M C D O N A L DB A M A DE P T O F E NE RG YB A M A S T AT E G E O L O G I CA L S URVE Y

- SWEDENI CA N NUCL E A R I NSURERS

T H O R N T O N L N E A T H E KY

D O T T IE S H E R M A NL Y SI S A N D T E C H N O L O G Y I N C

G R A H A M G MLJSTOEhr A T I O N A L L A B O R A T OR Y

T M A L O U K

D A V I D F FENSTtKW S M A N H A K R I S ON1 H O W A R D K IT TF LM A K l I N S tI TZM A R T I N 1 S l F l N D L t RH P HI M P L E KC RE S E A RCH CO RP

A P U B LI C S ER VI CE C O M P A N YD. LITTLE I N C

HE NRY W R IL E Y J RA V I V A HK E CHEKC H AR L ES K H A D L O C h

& DE V E L O P M E NT - U N I T E DK I N G D O M

T W B K O Y DO M I C E N ER GY C O N S U L T A N T S

D O N A L D C A N D E R S O NM I C E NE RG Y C O N T R O L B O A R D -

C A N A D AK E N S H C I I T ZM I C E N ER GY O F C A N A D A L T DI C H A NA N N QCllNNt P SAKCENT

- U N I TE D K I N G D O MD P I tODCKIN\ON

C IN D US T RI AL F O R U M N C M AN U EL C O R D O N

A T O M I C E NE RG Y C O M M I S S I O N& W l L C O X

I N F O R M A T I O N S E RV IC t5SANIORD C H L O O h lIOHN T M C C I N N I 5I E I F R t Y I M E A N SNEIL t MIL1 ER\ T E P HF N N I CO L O S Ih F N N t l H K Y AT FSJ A M E S DUCUIDK I C H A K D S T R I C K tK T

T TE LL E M E M O RI A L I NS T IT UT E

I N Ck 1 A N D E R S O N

CHTE L G RO U P I N CT O M 5 H AEKDON H C R A N D A L LLESLIE I I A K D I N IK C L O V I N G T O N

N A NORhlANG E R A L D 1.PALA \ 'Ci . YOCNG P.4RhR I C H A R D . TOSETTIN0 EL V A N DENBE RCHBILL CR.4H.4hlDONALD L I V I N G S T O Nh, l lCHAEL H. h l O H L L SIOHN C. PACER

BELCISCHE CEOLOGISCHE DIENST - BELGIUMBEYDIX F IELD ENGINEERING CORP

BERKELEY GEOSCIENCES/HYDROTECHNlQUEASSOCIATES

H K I A N h A N E H l R OB HA B HA A T O M I C RES E ARCH CE NT ER - I N D I AB L A CK & V E A T C HB O E I N G E N G IN E E R IN G A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N

V S l ; h l ' h l O K A Nhl ) O F IN K O H I N S O N

C O M P A N YK H C.4 lKNS

BRENK SYSTEMPLANUNG - W . G E R M A N YH. D H K l N h

B R I G H A M Y O U N G U N IV ER S IT YH:\KOLII 13 L l I I . IHKAKI 'b \ l l l . l ~ \ , h l hl l lh l , \ l lK\M 5 I ) A V I \P 1v. I L V SC I A1,'DlO 11 X J T O K IPE1 R SO0tiEI.EN T O I ) O W b \ (? I

B R O O K H A V E N N A T I O N A L L A B O RA T O RY

BUNDESANSTALT FUR GEOWISSENSCHAFTENUND ROHSTOFFE - W . G E R M A N Y

hl IC HA I L ?\N G RH t L M I ' l \ ' I N % L A F F

B U N D E S M I N I S T E R IU M F U R F O R S C H U N G UNDT E C H N O L O G I E - W . G E R M A N Y

ROL f PI. 1 t .K KANDLB U R E A U DE RECHERCHES GEOLOC'QUES ET

M l N l E RE S - F RA NCEP l l K K L I 1'1AI:DtCERf

B URNS A N D RO E I NDUS T RI A L S E RVI CE S CO RPC.F.H.F.CA L I F O RNI A A S S E M B L Y CO M M I T T E E ON

j O t t N I 'I K KOHILL D I ' I IN L

NATURAL RESOURCESCEXt \ ' A K A N I N I

C A L I F O R N I A D EP T O F C O N S E R V A T I O NC A L I F O R N IA D I V I S I O N O F MINES& G E O L O G YC A P I T A L A R EA G R O U N D W A T ER

Pt K K S Ahl lMI lOK O HL K T H S Y O N O K

C O N S E R V A T I O N C O M M I S S I O NA X . I I ' K C A h . ) K.

CA RNE G I E - M E L L O N UNI V E RS I TYC A Y U G A L A KE C O N S E R V A T I O N

IB UI K . 4 X A IKA S S O C I A T IO N I N C

D.S K I E I I KCENTE R F O R E NV I RO N M E NT A L

I N F O R M A T I O N I N CFKEDLK1C.K \\ . S l O S S

CENTER FOR INTERDISC IPL INARY STUDIESDA VI0 o 1 A K h l S TK0X(;

CENTRE D I N F O R M A T I Q U E G E O L O G I Q U E -F RA NCE

(;t i I$ I AlN [) I l . 4 K \ l l I

CHA L M E RS UNI V E RS I T Y OF T E C H N O L O G Y -SWEDEN

H f K l 4 LI I K OCIT IZENS INSTITUTE FOR A POSIT IVE ENERGY

POLICYL I N U S A I \I Dlh

C IT Y O F M O N T I C E L L OCLARK UNIVERSITYCL E V EL A ND E L ECT RI C I L L UM I NA T I NG

K I C H 4 K D 1 K R 1JtANNt4 h A \ P t K \ O h

C O M P A N Yf'4C'l C h L 4 h h

C O L O R A D O O U T W A R D B O U N D S C H O OLD A V I D I H I K L I KP FI k K 4 N T t l O N I ON1 I1

C O L O R A D O S C H O OL OF MINESM W l J \ l K I I D

C O L U M B I A U N IV E RS I TYC O N G R E S S I O N A L I N F O R M A T I O N S ER VI CE

A1 l \ l I K 4 f hl IIII t 311hl)l ' 1 < hl ( O K I \ \

C O N N E C T I C U T D E PT O F E N V I R O N M E N T A LP RO T E CT I O N

h l \ l \ 21(( I K I t I ICO NN E CT I C UT S T AT E DE P A RTM E NT OF

HEALTH SERVICESh l 4 K C t K I 4 ( O l l f h

C O N R O Y E N G I N E E R IN GP I IIK ( O N K O I

C O N T IN E N T AL G R O U P I N C(,IOK H I 1D A W C O N M A N A G E M E N T C O N SU L T IN GSERVICE

D A V I D A h l H \ I t KD E AF S M I T H C O U N T Y L IB R A RYD E L AW A R E C U S T O M M A T E RI E L I N C

H O W A K I ) NO\I IC I1DEPT OF ENERGY, M I N E S A N D RE S O URCE S -

C A N A D A4 \ JI:ucl

D U G O U T R A N C HD Y N A T E C H R / D C O M P A N Y

5 I t P W t N t \MIIHE.I. DU P O N T DE N E M O U R S & C OE.L.H. PUBLICATIONS - T HE R A D I O A C T I V E

K O H I R I R Ilt1l)l K I [ ) D

0 H II KNOE X CHA NG E

H t l M l h \ K I R \ \ l l h l hE.R. JOHNSONA S S O CIA T E S I N C

E A 1 C O R PE A RT H SCI ENCE A N D E NG I NE E RI NG I NC

l l ( l \ l l \ l h 1 t 1 4 11 0 1 HL4NC h


40/46

E AS T C O M P A N Y I N CEAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVE RSIT Y

R A Y M O N D P EREZALBERT F . I C L A RV AY A . R O D M A NZUBAIR SALEEMR A Y M O N D H. SHUMROSS VINCENTR. E. L . STANFORDC . S U N D A R A R A I A NL O W-L E V EL R A DI O A CT I V E WA S TERO G E R A . M A Y E SROBERT M. NEILSON. I RC H A l M B R A UN

EBASCO SERVICES IN C

E C O L O G Y C E NT ER O F L O U I S I A N AEDISON ELECTRIC: INSTITUTEE DS NUCL E A R I N CEG & G I D A H O I N C

ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTEELEKTRIZITAETS-GES. LAUFENBURG -

S WI T Z E RL A NDH. N. .4T4K

ELSAM - D E N M A R KA . V . JOSH1ARN E PEDERSEX

ENERGY FUELS NUCLEARG E O RG E .4 JOhESENERGY FUELS NUCL EAR I N CD O X M. P l L l h l O R E

E NERG Y RES E ARCH G RO UP I N C.\1.4 RC COLDS , \ l IT H

E NGI NEE RS I NT E R NA T I O NA L I N CF R A C I S S K E X D O R 5 h IC L A C D E E 4 R R . A L DD 4 \ I D 1. B E RI ChFRED \ l ILL \R

E NVI ROS P HE RE CO M P A N YRO G E R C . 4 \ DE RS O XK E I I \ D - H O L \ E

E N V I R O N ME N T C A N A D AE NV I R O NM E N T A L P O L I CY I NS TI T UTE

E X X O N NU C L EA R C O M P A N Y I N C

E XX O N N UC L EA R I D A H O C O M P A N Y I N CG E R 4 l D L RITTER\ 4 T H 4 \ 4. CHI P \ l . 4 \R O G E R \ H E \ R lG 4 R l \\ 4 ) 'S l IRE

FENIX & S CI SS O N I N CjOSE A . \ 1 . 4 C H 4 D OC H 4 R I E t E C . S P 4 RK \ 1 4 \

r L O R l D A D E PT O F E N V I R O N M E N T A LRE G UL A T I O N

H.4 \1 ILTO\ O\ EXF L O RI DA I NS T IT UT E O F T E CH NO L O G Y

IOSEPH 4 4 X C E L O . I RF L O RI DA P O WE R & L I G H T C O M P A N Y

] M E ) R T O & l O \ T O"LOR IDA STATE UNIVERSITY

I O 5 E P H F. D O A O G H L EF O N T A N A C O R R O S I O N C EN TE R

D I C E Y ,blA C DOX .ALDF OR D , B A C O N & D A V I S I N CROBERT D. B I R DD A R R E I I H. C A R DROBERT F. O\ 'ERMYERE L R T O X 1. THA?ERNO RB E RT P A A S

FOSTER-MILLER ASSOCIATES I N CF O U R C OR NE RS C O M M U N I T Y M E N T A L

HEALTH CENTERBO B GREESEERC

36F O X C O N S U L T A N TS I N C

M I K E E B R A Z I EF RI ENDS O F T HE E A RT H

L O U I S B U C K L I NRENEE PARSON S

G A B I E BE TT S B U RT O N M E M O R I A L L IB RA RYGARTNER LEE ASSOCIATES LTD - C A N A D A

RO B E RT E J LEECHG EN ER AL A T O M I C C O M P A N Y

M I C H A E L S T A M A T E IA T O SG E NE RA L CO UR T O F M A S S A CHUS E T TSG E O L O G I C A L S UR VE Y O F C A N A D A

T I M O T H Y I BURKEIEFFREY HUMEj O H N S CO TTL I ANDERSEND A V I D SNOWM E I L I Nb CARTERGEOFFREY C E I C H H O I L41FRED SCHNEIDERCHARLES E WE A L E R

G E O L O G I CA L S URV EY OF D E N M A R KGEORESULTS IN CG E O R G I A I N ST IT U TE O F T E C H N O L O G Y

G E O T E CHNI CA L E NGI NEE RS I N CR O N A L D C H I R S C H F E I D

GEOTH ERMA L ENERGY INSTITUTEG E O T RA NSGESELLSCHAFT F. STRAHLEN U.

D O h A I D F X FINN14klES M E RCF K

UM WE L T F O RS CHU NG M . B. H . - W.G E R MA N YL1OLFCA\C EODFH \ lOSERt K 4 \Z PER L I

G I L B E R T / C O M M O N W E A L T HJERK) I l L I 5

COLDE R ASSOCIATESD O \ 4 l D 21 C 4 l D 1 2 l l lk lEL ISS4 414T10 \J \z LOSSCLEblE\T h l h \ I I Lh

COLDER ASSOCIATES - C A N A D AG R A N D C O U N T Y P U B LI C L IB R AR YGSE NUCLEAR

\ lOHSt\ \ I K O O \ l A \ D R A DG T C G E O L O G I C T E S TI NG CO NS UL T A NT S L T D -

C A N A D A]OH\ F PlChL\fIHOZ145J H I I LF I[\\K A P t K

GULF INTERSTATE IN CGULF STATES UTIL IT IES CO MP AN YH & R TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES INC

Mlt I14\1 R R t i \ I \ fHA HN- M E I T NE R- I NS T I T UT F UR

K E RNF O RS CH UNG B E RL INh 1 4 1 5 FChAKT M A A 5 5

HA NF O R D ENG I NE E RI NG DE V E L O P M E NTL A B O RA T O RY

K O H I RT t I \ / I C l Rb t R O A h l

HA R V A RD UNIV E RS IT YCHA RL L 5 M H I K \ H A MD A D f M b l O t L l t R

HATTIESBURG PUBLIC L IBRARYHI G H CO U NT R Y C I TI Z E NS A L L I A NCEH I G H P L AI N S U N D E R G R O U N D W A TE R

DO h H A C H M A hDISTRICT

T RO ! S L HL F I l

H I G H P L A I NS WA TE R D I S T RI CTDON M C R E Y N O L D SDON D S M I T HM A K O T O K l KU C H l

H l T A C H l W OR K S, H l T A C H l L T DH O U G H - N O R W O O D H E A LT H C A RE CE NT ERILL INOI S DEPT O F NUC LEAR SAFETY

GEORGE H BROWN M DTERRY R LASHM I L T O N Z U K O RRO B E RT E E E RG S T RO MK E RO S C A R T W R I G H T

I L L I NO I S S TA TE G E O L O G I C A L S URV EY

I M P E RI A L CO L L E GE O F S C IE NCE A N DT E C H N O L O G Y - E N G L A N D

E K A T h l N S O NI N D I A N A S TA TE B O A R D O F H E A LT H

H A L S S T O C K SINSTITUT FUR T IEFLAGERUNG - W . G E R M A

WERNT EREWIT/H GlESK L A US K L HNt R 5 O L T t K

I NS TI T UTE F O R CHE M I C A L T E C HNO L O G YG E R M A N Y

R f I N H A K D O D 0 1

R O N G l N GE R l C HINTER/FACE ASSOCIATES IN CI N T ER A E N V I R O N M E N T A L C O N S U L T A N TS I

F 1 PEAR5ON I KL A R R Y RICKEKTSt lUK O HE RT M I L E M 5I NT E R NA T I O N A L A T O M I C E NERGY A G ENC

A US T RI AF R A h h 4 O H A K A

INT ERN ATIO NAL ENERGY ASSOCIATES LTDINTERNATIONAL ENERGY SYSTEMS CORPI N T E R N A T I O N A L E N G IN E E R IN G C O M P A N Y

HI) I H t h l Y O X 5J O H h 4 t3OM I

INCl E RK \ I I 5 1 t I \ H O R hM4 X / A 5 I A M 5 h Y

I NT E R NA T I O NA L RES E ARCH A N DE V A L U A T I O N

K D A N f O K DI O W A S T AT E UNI V E RS I T Y

M A K 1 1 \ C tDf IWI\ .H L K h A K D I ( P l k K A D

I RT CO RPJ 5 l O h t \

ISMES - ITALYt C L K 4

I A C K S O N M E T R O P O L I T A N L IB R AR YJAC KSO N STATE UNIVERSITYJA CK S O N- G E O RG E RE G I O N A L L I B RA RYJAY 1.S M I T H C O M P A N Y I N C

J A Y \ M I T Hj G C C O R P O R A T I O N - J A P A N

MA5A t l l k O M A h I N OJOHNSHO P K I NS UNI V ERS I TY

J A R I DI Ot1Ohl O l N T S T U DY C O M M I T T E E ON ENERGY

I h IDMARD5 I KKAISER ENGINEERS IN C

M J D O D 5 O Ntk I I I L I t N

K A L A M A Z O O C OL LE GEK A L P H M 111 A I

1511 5 ~ M I T H

K A NS A S DE PT O F HE A L T H A N DE N V I R O N M E N T

G F R A I D W A l l t N


41/46

GEO LOG ICA L SURVEYW I L L I A V W H A b l B L E T O N- S WE DE N

K A R L S RU H E

LARS B N I L S S O NF R A N K W R E A T H

G M B H - W . G E R M A N YK D CLOSSR KOESTERH A R R Y hlHNB C E O R C F K N I A Z E W Y C Z

HN A S S OCI AT E SM E N G IN E ER I NG I N C

O F E NE RG Y A N DRESOURCES (KIER)

CHOO S EU N C H W A NCHONC SU K I M

O T O U N IV E R SI T Y - J A P A N& ASSOCIATES INC

S UP ERI OR RE G I O N RA DI O A CT I V E

Y O RI T E K U INOUED O U G L A S E H A N S E N

WASTE PROIECTC D l X O NI A M E S I G R AN TJ O H N A A PPSE UG ENE B I NNA L LT H O M A S DOEN O K M A N M EDELSTEINJ A N E L O N GI W A N C

L A B O R A T O R Y

E N G I NE E R I N G T ES TI NG C O M P A N YB ERKE LE Y L A B O RA T O RY

L I V E RM O R E N A T I O N A LD A E H CHUNCE D N A M D I D W t L LF K A N C O I S E HCU/tT H O M A S t M C K O N EL A W K t N C t I) R A M S P O T I ( 2 )W C 5 U T C L l l l rT EC H NI CA L I N F O K M A l l O N ) t P A K l M L h l

L -53IESSE L Y O W JKP A U L A M A D S t N

G U E O F W O M E N V O T ER S OF U T A H& M A N A G E M E N T

C O M P A N YSTEVE NACHTP L BUSSOLINIW A Y N E R H A N S E NC L A U D t H l K R l C hW C M Y E RSDONALD T O A h L E YK K 5 P I L I A Y

s A L A M O S N A T I O N A L L A B O R A T O R Y

S T E C H N I C A L A S S O C IA T ES I N CR I K l NCS B l JRY

D EP T O F T R A N S P O R T A T I O N &DE V E L O P M E NT

CEOKCt H C R A M C R IIP E GG Y K O O N E Y AUr lNK F N WI C K DF V IL L FCHARLES C C R O A TSYED HAQUE

N U C L E A R E NE R GY D I V I S I O NI A L L H O H l I N C t R ( 3 )S I A N A S TA T E UNIV E RS I TY

I IMMlt H H O O V E R

G E O L O G I C A L S UR VE Y

37L O UI S I A N A T E CH UNIV E RS I TYL O UI S I A NA T E CHNI CA L UNI V E RS I T YL U B B OC K C O U N T Y S O I L A N D W A TE R

LI B K A R YR. H T H O h l P S O N

CO NS E RV A T I O N D I S T RI CTDON L A N C S T O N

M A I N E B U R E A U O F H E A L T HD O N . 4 L D C. H O S l E

M A R T I N M A R I E T T A A ER O SP AC E - DENVERD I V I S I O N

R C-HA R D H ISSEC C ERM A R Y L A N D D EP T OF H E A L T H & M E N T A L

HY G I E NEh l A X E IS E NB E RG

M A S S A CHUS E T T S DE PT O F E NV I R O NM E NT A LQ UA L I T Y E NG I NE E RI NG

I O S F P H S I N N O T 1M A S S A CHUS E T T S HO US E O F

REPRESENTATIVESL,VI IA h l R0 HI NSON

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OFT E C H N O L O G Y

JOt INDCI'lC-HIFD C K F I N L \ ' O O I )K I C H A R D h. LCSlLKhl.4KSHA L t V l N t

M A T E RI A L S RE S E A RCH L A B O RA T O R Y L T D -C A N A D A

S 5 I N G HM C D E R M O T T I N T E R N A T IO N A L

K A K L N L F I i K L O WM CM A S T E R UNI V E RS I TY - C A N A D AM E M B E RS OF THE GENERAL PUBL IC

L \,\ St1Chlll.TL R O H E K l A N D E R S O Kh I i K 1 H A I L IN GH K t 1 Hl.OSS1 KK O C L K H H R O O h SH K l J C l A H Y I KSH A L 1 C t - i A P h l A N . PH.1).I A L V K I N C I C- t l ) \ \ l , Pti.1)1Oht x 5L:SAN ( LAK\Ohs1 I \'I (0x1 W A Yhl. \ 'AI l):\l I O Xh l h N l I t 1 ,AL l ( . l h l. I)KO(;lXK O H I K U l I l lhJ I AN f A K D I IT t i A L ; A l A S P . l . H K.AK1 FORANHOH G:\hlh.lFI IN( A R I . A . CIFSIS H I K I I M . (;I1 I O K I )r M I CHA F I . C;II.HI K 1S l t V l 8 $:I G l l . \ l l C ) K lO S M ' A L D 11. G K IAGI KI3OI:GLAS tl . CKLINI 1K I N N I T H (;11\(-0I IK l l I A M K . I I A A S IK O H t K T HICGIN \l)A\'Il) M . OIINSOhK l X X C l I i 5 j O I i N W X(KAIC M:. I O N 1 SJ O S C P H K r s s i KIHOMAS H. ?\NCIV l hi hl AX h l C D O W I .Lj k t f th1CADOM'SA A L A N h ~ l O C I i lS S 1I3A KH A K A h . 10K KA11114 NOKDI.INGC A K O I l N t P I IT 1

h t 4 K l l h K 4 l t l h lK I P C t I A K I ) \ K l 1 ) l )l O h l P, \ 1 4 K \ K l l $ O \ \ \ l \ A \ C ) l lOM1 \ \ l \ l KI\(N O K k 1 4 1 C \ h l l l t lP \ l K I C I \ \ \ \ I ) l KP I \ I K A I I \ O K t( ,\h 1 4 K L l I K l l I \ M l l h l \1 0 1 1 \ M I \ t + t Khl J \/L I l h \ h lh l 4 K h I I I ) A I L( ,4Kk M 4(,1Lt Kh l 4 K I I N X I L A l N l L Z A l I I KJ lh th l \ M t l l l lI I N I IA M l l l h O P l\ I ~ \ h M O O l I l \\ I I l ' t I l N ( ~ I M H A

M I CH A E L B A K E R. I R . I N C( 1 1 0 l ~ t 1 1 1 1

M I C H I G A N DE PT OF NA T U RA L RE S OURCESK 1 l 1 0 h l A \ 5 1 ( , 9 1 I

M I C H I G A N DE PT OF P UB L I C HE A L T H( , I O K ( . I L4 H K I ( l l h 1 4 1 hI l l I 14( ,IKK O O h l 105

C O M M I T T E E

M I C H I G A N E N V I R O N M EN T A L C O U N C I LM I C H I G A N E N V l R O N M t N T A L P R O T EC T IO N

D A V I ( I I A P h l A hM I C H I G A N G E O L O G I C A L S U RV EY

K O H l K l C K I l DM I C H I G A N P U B L I C S ER VIC E C O M M I S S I O N

K O h C A I I INM I C H I G A N S TA TE U N I V ER S IT Y

M ' l l l l A h l C I A k I O KM I N N E S O T A E N V I R O N M E N T A L Q U AL I T Y

B O A R DK I ( I i A K I l P A I O N

M I N N E S O T A G E O L O G I C A L S UR VE YI NI I A I 1 I i M A NM A 1 1 \ M A 1 10 h

M I NN E S O T A S T AT E E NERG Y A G E NCYMINNESOTA STATE SENATE

( O N K A I ~ \ I O AMISSISSIPPI ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICEM I SS IS S IP P I B URE A U O F G E O L O G Y

h l A ( h ( A V l K O hhll( l l .Zl I 13 I HC) ( , K4 I )

M I S S I S S I P P I CI T I ZE NS A G A I NS T NUCL E A RDISPOSAL

\ l A h l l \ l ) I A h I I I N IMISSISSIPPI DEPT O F ENERGY A N D

T R A N S P O R T A T I O NK O N A l ) I O K \ ) I t 1 1A L V I N K HI( h l K JKC I I A K L I 5 I( I , K l l \ M S I O V I K

MISSISSIPPI DEPT OF NA TUR AL RESOURCESHI A l O C h

M I SS I SS IP P I EM E RG E NCY M A N A G E M E N TA G E NCYI A M I I A l i l K

5 A K A TOHHM I SS I SS IP P I L I B RA RY CO M M I S S I O NMISSISSIPPI MI NER AL RESOURCES INSTITUTEM I SS IS S IP P I S TA TE B O A R D O F HE A L T H

L D D I t \ FI I h l tCl i k R Wll


42/46

38MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSIT Y

T R O Y I . LASWELLVICTOR L . Z ITTA

M I T R E C O R PLESTER A. ETTLINCER

M I T S U B I S H I M E T A L C O R PT AT SU O A R I M A

M O A B N U C L EA R W AS TE I N F O R M A T I O NOFFICE

M I CHA E L E NE P E NDL E T O N ( 2 )M O N T A N A B UR EA U O F MINES A N DG E O L O G Y

E D W A R D C . B I N C L ERM E DI A CE NT E R

M O N T I C E L L O HIGH S C H O O L L I B R A RYM O NT I CE L L O NUCL E A R WA S T E

I N F O R M A T I O N O F FI CEC A R L E I S E M A N N (21

N A G R A - S WI T Z E RL A NDH AN S ISSLER

N A T I O N A L A C A D E M Y O F S CIE NC ESj O H N T. H O L L O W A YH A R O L DI.A M E S

N A T I O N A L A E R O N A U T I C S A N D S P AC EA D M I N I S T R A T I O N

M I CH A E L R . HE LF ERTM CHA EL Z O EN SK Y

N A T I O N A L H Y D R O L O G Y R E S EA RC HINSTITUTE - C A N A D A

D E S N I S J. B O T T O M L E YNA T I O N A L P A RK S E RV ICE

D O h 4 L D F. CILLESPIECECIL D. L E K I S . J R .

N A T I O N A L P A R KS & C O N S E R V A T I O NA S S O C I A T I O N

T. DESTRY JARV IST ER RI M A R T I X

N A T I O N A L S CI EN CE F O U N D A T I O NN A V A L W E A P O N S S T A T I O N E A RL EN E W E N G L A N D N U C L E AR C O R P

R O Y A L E R O S T E h B A C HCEX X A R O M E L IKERRY BEXXERTCHARLES 6 . KlLL l .4XBE\ STE\'E\SOX

M I N E RA L RE S OURCES

NE W JERSE Y I NS T IT UT E O F T E C HN O L O G YN E W M E X I C O B U R E A U O F MINES A N D

F R 4 X K E K O T T l O M S h IN E W M E X I C O E N V I R O N M E N T A L E V A L U A T I O N

G R O U PROBERT H. \ElLL

NE W Y O RK DE PT OF H E A L T HNE W Y O RK E NE RG Y RE SE A RCH &

D E V E L OP M E N T A U T H O R I T YD A V I D . A X EL R OD . M D

JO H X P . S P. 4T H 181ROBERT H. F A K L X D I S Y

N E W Y O R K G E O L O G I C A L S UR VE YN E W Y O R K L EG IS LA TI VE C O M M I S S I O N ON

S C IE N CE & T E C H N O L O G YJ A M E ST . M C F A R L A h DA h C E LO O R 4 L I O

NEW YOR K STATE ASSEMBLYNEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERALS

OFFICEEZRA I. B l A L l K

NE W YORK STATE ENERGY RESEARCH A N DD E V E L OP M E N T A U T H O R I T Y

JOHNC. DEMPSEYNE W Y O RK S T AT E G E O L O G I CA L S URVE Y

I A M E S R . A L B A NE 5E

NE W Y O RK S TA T E HE A L T H DEP TNE W YO RK STATE PUBL IC SERVICE

JOHNM A T U S Z E KC O M M I S S I O N

F RE D H A A CNEW YORK STATE SENATE RESEARCH SERVICEN O R T H C A R O L I N A S TA TE S E NA TEN O R T H D A K O T A G E O L O G I C A L S U RV EYN O R T H

Rapporto Su Cominicazione Sopra i Millenni

Documents

Transcript of Rapporto Su Cominicazione Sopra i Millenni