272 



tional hardware to be built, and (6) an assessment of the status of 

 U.S. research vis-a-vis that of Western Europe and the U.S.S.K 



The Ramsey panel, 1962-63, may be considered a typical example. 

 Its report, completed April 26, 1963, and released to the public May 

 20, presented the views of the President's Scientific Advisory Commit- 

 tee and also the views of the General Advisory Committee of the AEC 

 However, "In its deliberations, the panel has been assisted by the rep- 

 resentatives of the Technical Committee on High-Energy Physics of 

 the Federal Council for Science and Technology, by the staffs of Gov- 

 ernment agencies supporting this research, by representatives of the 

 laboratories interested in new accelerators, and by a number of other 

 individuals."' (See participants, p. 273.) The report of the Ramsey 

 panel also called attention to the fact that "the membership of the 

 panel included specialists in several fields of physics other than high 

 energy." ^ It acknowledged that "By its very nature, the field of high- 

 energy physics is costly and any significant growth requires large ex- 

 penditures," but offered assurances that the program it recommended 

 was "* * * limited and selective in the number of new facilities to be 

 provided." Then the report established the basic scientific bona fides 

 of the field of research — • 



The principal unanswered questions about elementary particles lie today in 

 high-energy physics, the study of particles in the subnuclear domain, (p. 1695) 

 Study of the elementary particles is central to the quest for a more profound 

 understanding of the structure of matter, (p. 1696) 



The leadership and prestige of the United States in the field was 

 applauded — 



Over the last decade, most of the major inventions and discoveries in high- 

 energy physics have been made in U.S. laboratories. Several of these have been 

 recognized by the award of the Nobel Prize. 



This U.S. leadership was identified as the direct result of generous 

 Government sponsorship — 



* * * Based primarily on the willingness of the U.S. Government to sup- 

 port * * * construction and operation of accelerators of many different character- 

 istics, and also the support of extensive high-energy physics programs using such 

 accelerators, (p. 1696) 



The "teclniological byproducts" of this sponsored research were 

 enumerated : 



Tabic of high-energy physics byproducts 



H.E.P. item Commercial input 



Cyclotron High power transmitting tubes. 



Linear accelerator Klystron. 



Van de GrafC generator Use of same in radiology and radi- 

 ography. 



Alternating gradient principle Electron tube applications. 



General technology required Advances in — 



high vacuum techniques, cryogenics, 

 superconductivity, solid state appli- 

 cations, ultra-high-speed electron- 

 ics, computer data processing. 



"> Report of the Panel on High Energy Accelerator Physics of the General Advisory Com- 

 mittee to the Atomic Energy Commission and the President's Science Advisory Committee 

 Apr. 26, 1963. [Ramsey panel]. In U.S. Congress Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, AEC 

 Authorizing Legislation, Fiscal Year 1965, Hearings * • • 88th Cong., 2d sess., 3 parts 

 (Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1964), p. 1695. 



8 Id. 



