Europe has taken some of the important discoveries. We have only 

 relatively few machines for the future, and there is a great danger 

 that we lose the young generation, and that would be the death of 

 the field. 



Now, there is also a Western European project of a similar kind 

 only on a smaller scale, the so-called LEP hadron collider. In the 

 tunnel of the electrons, you could build a hadron collider, which is a 

 lot cheaper but, of course, with much less energy— the tunnel and 

 the infrastructure are already there. 



Now, here is a kind of difficult competition. From the physics 

 pomt of view, it probably would be good to have both machines 

 one after the other, but financially, I just don't believe it can 

 happen, for the following reason— and this is why I am not very 

 optimistic about number four; namely, a large participation of 

 Europe in the building of SSC or the United States in the building 

 of this European program. 



Why? Because Western Europe is, in a way, overexpanded. It has 

 a tremendous program for the near future, up into the 1990's- 

 namely, the HERA in Germany and LEP, the electron-positron ac- 

 celerator, which is an enormous affair of 27 kilometers' circumfer- 

 ence. This will keep them busy, both the construction and the 

 science, way into the 1990's, and they haven't got enough money 

 thrSSc'"'''' '^ ^^^ '* '^ doubtful that they can invest in 



Now, of course, the same in a way is true here. United States' 

 high energy physics is suffering from not fully being able to exploit 

 what we have at the Fermilab, and we, of course, are all concen- 

 trated here for the SSC which would be the future of American 

 high-energy physics and, therefore, do not want to support plans 

 intermediate plans, in Europe. 



However— and this is the last thing I want to say— we should 

 never forget that the construction of a machine is not the most ex- 

 pensive part. The exploitation of a machine, if we have the usual 

 litetime of l5 to 20 years, costs at least three, four, or five times as 

 much as the construction. And here, I think, international collabo- 

 ration IS probably most hopeful. 



fu^"?QS?^' £!5 ^x?"^Ple> that the SSC is constructed.and finished in 

 the 1990 s Then I am sure it is obvious that the Western Europe- 

 ans and the Japanese would be interested in commonly exploiting 

 It, and then one should have some kind of international exploita- 

 tion organization. This is, I believe, the most hopeful international 

 activity. 



So I can only say, before I end, the field is in an enormous state 

 of development with the most interesting things coming up; a new field 

 of natural phenomena opening up like the nuclear phlnomenaTn the 

 w' /®^- ^^®''® ^""^ ^^^""^ *° ^° ^h^s- The plans cost much money. 

 Western Europe and America are in a very leading position, and 

 we must do what we can so that this country does not lose this 

 leading position. 



This is why I think construction of the SSC is so important, even 

 It It IS done nationally, and I am quite sure that it will be exploited 

 in an international way. Thank you. 



[The prepared statement of Dr. Weisskopf follows:] 



