1085 



U.S. PARTICIPATION AT CERN 139 



(see above) after their Ph.D. completion, liked Europe or CERN or a 

 specific group of congenial colleagues, and therefore decided to stay on. 

 They are often supported on short-term contracts by member state 

 laboratories and will often contrive to remain in Europe as long as possi- 

 ble. They are the wandering minstrels of modem-day physics, and upon 

 returning finally to the United States bring a flair of European attitudes 

 to their U.S. institutions. Some small fraction of these will wind up in 

 permanent (mostly nonuniversity ) positions in various European coun- 

 tries, where again their presence tends to add a refreshing note. 



Remarkably, while all of these contracts and collaborative ar- 

 rangements were made after a slowly emerging pattern, never to reach 

 the level of a rigid set of rules, and often changed to suit specific cir- 

 cumstances, relations of the United States with certain other national 

 high-energy physics communities were bound up in govemment-to- 

 laboratory or govemment-to-govemment agreements, respectively. 

 This is true of U.S. -Russian, U.S. -Chinese, and U.S. -Japanese 

 agreements, setting down precise guidelines of collaboration, specifying 

 the projects involved, the support to be granted by each side, etc. 

 Similarly, protocols of cooperation exist between CERN and the Soviet 

 Union and between CERN and China. CERN also formalized its rela- 

 tions with some nonmember states by appropriate exchanges of letters 

 or of agreements of understanding, usually involving the Council. 



CERN permits physicists from other East European states col- 

 laborative activities under its mantle agreement with the Dubna 

 Laboratory in Russia. The fact that U.S. scientists have been granted ac- 

 cess to CERN and— in varying degrees— to its resources, in the absence 

 of any attempt at formalization, must be seen as a recognition not only 

 of the high quality of U.S. high energy physics and of the special "god- 

 father" role the U.S. originally played at CERN, but also as an expres- 

 sion of a special kinship between the communities of high energy 

 physicists in the United States and in Western Europe. These com- 

 munities are numerically remarkably well matched. Coincidentally, the 

 informality of the process has been invariably useful to both sides. 



In 1978, the European Committee for Future Accelerators (ECFA), an 

 advisory body set up in 1963 by the director-general and the president 

 of the SPC, which acts as an informal adviser to all of European high 

 energy physics, and HEPAP asked a small working group of two U.S. 

 and two European physicists to report on recent trends in 

 U.S. -European "interregional activity" in high energy' physics. After 

 studying available data on the 5 preceding years, they reported that the 

 use of European facilities by U.S. scientists and of U.S. facilities by their 



