THE PARADOX OF CHOICE 



Freedom and Responsibility 

 in Nuclear Research 



In this matter of the relation between freedom and respon- 

 sibility of the basic research scientist, the issue of most intense 

 public concern is that of nuclear energy and weapons. Iron- 

 ically, this has left the individual scientist with the least chance 

 to maintain a paradox of choice. However, the climates attained 

 in some of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission laboratories 

 have wisely and skillfully allowed wide play for individual 

 interest and enthusiasm. This has been hard to do because the 

 great machinery and resources on the one hand and the grim 

 and viselike grip of national security and military requirements 

 on the other hand restrain freedom of choice for the free-rang- 

 ing mind. Despite the present frustrations of nuclear theory, 

 one sees the unremitting devotion of brilliant theorists to out- 

 lining and articulating the knowledge of nuclear fission almost 

 from the day it was discovered. Has this been the chief reason 

 why a great corps of brilliant workers in experimental research, 

 engineering, and further theory have been attracted to and have 

 felt their intellectual freedom was not destroyed by the atomic 

 energy and weapons programs? 



However, the very strength which unifying theories have 

 shown, even imperfect as they have been in advancing particle 

 physics and nuclear research, is likely to be threatened in the 

 future by difficulties in communication. These obstacles have 

 some time ago been lucidly described by Dr. Oppenheimer. 

 They are based on bizarrely unfamiliar concepts, too remote 

 from the experience of most scientists to couple in with the 

 knowledge and faculties they have acquired. This situation 

 in nuclear physics has been eloquently outlined by Professor 

 Gell-Mann and Professor F. Dyson, among others. We remem- 



6? 



