Taking on the Future

Harold Agnew TAKING ON THE and Los Alamos scientists discuss the potential of the FUTURE Laboratory

nuclear capability? What kinds of Project and was director of the Labo- activities are necessary to avoid sur- ratory from 1970 to 1979. He be- prises from foreign military technol- came president of General Atomic ogy? Why has basic research always Company after leaving Los Alamos been an essential part of the Labora- and is now retired. He is known for tory? What is special about the Los his candor, his enthusiasm for nu- Alamos culture? What new opportu- clear energy, his pride in Los Alamos, nities have been brought about by and his strength as a leader. Harold the end of the Cold War? How can very effectively encouraged the par- the Laboratory contribute to the eco- ticipants to express their diverse in- Harold Agnew and Paul White nomic security of the nation? terests and opinions. he occasion of the fiftieth an Last October Los Alamos Science Here we present a condensed ver- niversary of Los Alamos Na- invited Laboratory physicists, mathe- sion of the day-long discussion. We Ttional Laboratory offers an op- maticians, biologists, chemists, and thank everyone who participated and portunity to celebrate the past and computer scientists to discuss these hope our readers will appreciate the explore questions about the future. questions in an open forum. To add individuality, talent, creativity, and What is the Laboratory’s mission historical perspective and a little passionate commitment to science now that the Cold War is over? more spice, we invited Harold Agnew and the nation that characterize What responsibility does the Labora- to join us. Harold began his career these scientists and, in fact, the en- tory have in maintaining the nation’s at Los Alamos during the Manhattan tire staff of the Laboratory.

4 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993

Harold Agnew: I was asked to success in stopping Soviet expan- I’ve given just one brief example of begin this discussion of the Labora- sion certainly enabled, in the long the importance of the United States tory and its future by commenting run, what transpired in the last two weapons capabilities, hoping to il- first on the past impact of the nu- years; that is, the disintegration of lustrate how important our weapons clear-weapons laboratories. Fol- the Soviet Union. Most people don’t labs are to the stability of both this lowing World War II, the Lab’s first appreciate what transpired in the nation and the world. Clearly the big impact on world politics was in late forties and early fifties and the United States needs to maintain a 1948 when NATO was first being role the weapons labs played. We credible nuclear weapons deterrent formed. In a program called Back- actually made all the weapons at Los capability, and I think Los Alamos is breaker, Los Alamos and Sandia had Alamos and worked with Sandia on in the best position to help do that the job of producing fifty Mark V packaging those weapons in appro- job, not only because of its facilities fission weapons and then shipping priate aerodynamic shapes. People but also because most of the them over to England on a newly also seem to forget that Sandia was weapons in the stockpile were de- initiated Air Force B-47 squadron. part of Los Alamos in the early days. signed at Los Alamos. I am some- The Soviet Union had been gobbling Now there’s some talk of consolidat- what concerned about proposals to up the Eastern European countries, ing Sandia and Los Alamos under a make Los Alamos the sole nuclear- but as soon as NATO was formed, single University of California con- weapons laboratory, but if there is to backed up by the deployment of the tract as part of the plan to scale be only one, I believe it should be at Mark Vs overseas, Soviet expansion down the weapons program. It will Los Alamos. On the other hand, I came to an abrupt halt. NATO’s be interesting to see what happens. don’t like the idea that Los Alamos

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 5 Taking on the Future

may perhaps work on nothing but Los Alamos has always been a David Sharp: As I see it the need nuclear weapons. The Laboratory unique institution. Over the last for national security is going to tran- employs a tremendous group of five decades both the importance of scend the end of the cold war. The technical people who can contribute nuclear weapons and the difficulty world is going to remain an uncer- to a broad range of national needs. I of advancing nuclear technology tain place, and nuclear-weapons think your director, Sig Hecker, has have required that Los Alamos be a technology is not going to disappear. done a tremendous job of fostering We will have to live with uncertain- collaboration with General Motors, ty on the political landscape as well and with industry in general. That as with the virtual certainty of new is the sort of thing the Labs are technological challenges. So we going to have to do. Now I’d like to will need to maintain a nuclear- hear your major concerns and ideas weapons capability. One of the keys about the future of the Laboratory. to that capability is people. How are we going to retain a group of Greg Canavan: As I see it, the en- people who are smart, motivated, tire future of the nuclear-weapons and knowledgeable about nuclear program in this country is very un- weapons? The only way is to give certain. On the one hand, the mili- these people things to do that are in- tary forces are essentially walking teresting, challenging, and impor- away from nuclear weapons as fast tant. I have a couple of thoughts on as they can. On the other hand, a lot what those things might be. of senior people in the defense establishment understand that nuclear Greg Canavan First, in the present political climate weapons are a class unto themselves we need to develop the capability to and that we must maintain nuclear design simple, robust nuclear competence regardless of whether It’s clear that the size weapons, the reliability of which these weapons are currently popular and scope of the nuclear can be guaranteed in the absence of relative to smart conventional full-scale testing. We have to learn weapons. Those senior people will establishment are going to design weapons on the basis of be around for the next decade or two to contract pretty sharply better computations, better model- and will ensure that the nuclear- ing, and the testing of components. weapons laboratories maintain some over the next one or two Second, this Lab is rich in dual-use level of competence. But it is decades. The question technologies, technologies that doubtful whether the laboratories apply to both defense and non-de- will be asked to develop new nu- is: What does that fense problems, and we need to turn clear technology. If you listen to the mean for Los Alamos as those strengths in new directions. debates within the nuclear establishment, you hear some say it would be a whole? Ray Juzaitis: These are good sug- useful to develop an earth-penetrator gestions, but the political process weapon in case we have to fight a fairly broad-spectrum laboratory at may have overtaken our technologi- Gulf-type war again, but that’s about the forefront of a whole range of cal preparedness. The constraints the only new need that’s mentioned. technologies, including materials, on nuclear testing imposed by the So it’s clear that the size and scope explosives, nuclear physics, atomic Hatfield provisions will prevent the of the nuclear establishment are physics, radiation transport, and so type of deliberate and careful transi- going to contract pretty sharply over on. But nuclear weapons are not tion that you are describing. A few the next one or two decades. The going to be a catalyst for technology years ago Congress legislated a question is: What does that mean development in the next one to two Test-Ban Readiness program, but at for Los Alamos as a whole? decades. the same time, our budgets were cut,

6 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

so we could not address all the tech- now. If we wanted to respond to a fy nuclear weapons at the same high nical issues and requirements that national crisis, we’d be able to come level of confidence as the airlines “test-ban readiness” implied. Now up with a smaller, more efficient certify 747s. But unless we have a we are caught. We would like to put weapon—and do it faster—even if program that exercises our nuclear on the shelf more robust and safer we started from scratch again. So, capabilities to at least the intermedi- weapon design as well as execute what do we want the program to be ate level of contained underground some good “bridging experiments” capable of doing now? We need to testing, there will come a time when in anticipation of a zero-test envi- maintain the stockpile, but we need no one will be able to certify a ronment, but the political climate to specify what that entails. We weapon and the whole image of de- may now prevent us from doing so. must also be able to respond to fu- terrence with safe and reliable nu- ture belligerent governments. clear weapons will fall apart. Then I Gene McCall: Just yesterday, dur- think we’ll see a major political ing a private meeting, a fairly high readjustment with respect to what it political appointee in the defense Unless we have a takes to maintain our nuclear capa- department said to me, “If you think program that exercises bility. We will always be worrying we’re going to develop a new nu- about a dictator like Saddam Hus- clear weapon, you’re whistling up a our nuclear capabilities sein building up a nuclear capability drain pipe.” I think that the Lab is to at least the intermedi- or a change in politics among the going to have to adjust very quickly states in the former Soviet Union. to a new and uncertain world. We ate level of contained So this Lab should be anticipating will probably have to maintain a underground testing, what it takes to maintain a responsi- drastically reduced stockpile with a ble nuclear-weapons program that very small group of people. I sus- there will come a time will generate an effective, accept- pect the number of people in the Los when no one will be able able deterrence for the future. We Alamos weapons program will be re- should be taking the high ground on duced to half of what it was a to certify a weapon and this issue because we are the ones decade ago, which was 30 percent the whole image of who will be counted on to provide more than it is now, and that half of the capability when the need arises. our weapons work will be nuclear deterrence with safe and and half conventional. That’s prob- reliable nuclear Harold Agnew: And that capability ably a pretty good mix, and you can’t be maintained without testing. might even find people who can weapons will fall apart. Many people argue, incorrectly, that transfer from one area to the other Then I think we’ll see a we need testing primarily to main- because the design codes and the ex- tain reliability. But reliability is periments for both are similar—at major political readjust- just one part of the whole enchilada. least for the parts of nuclear ment with respect to weapons that you can test above Over the years the stockpile has ground. what it takes to maintain been extremely reliable and quite our nuclear capability. safe. We’ve had an extensive sur- As far as maintaining a nuclear-re- veillance program, and there have sponse capability, remember, Stirling Colgate: The key issue is been very few glitches. Part of that Harold, you old-timers developed the political perception of deter- confidence comes from continually the first deliverable nuclear weapon rence. Right now there’s nothing to designing, testing, and deploying in about three years. And you start- deter, but as soon as some govern- many different weapons systems. ed out not knowing whether it would ment poses a threat to us, we’ll have When we start demilitarizing and work and not having all the basic to face what we mean by an effec- cutting back, I worry that the diver- measurements needed for design. tive deterrence. My guess is that sity of systems is going to decrease But we’ve got all that information we’ll be asked by Congress to certi- and we will be in danger of having

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 7 Taking on the Future

all our eggs, so to speak, in one bas- realistic. Eventually the Army gave Paul White: Most people who ket. That could be disastrous. up on the whole concept. pause and think about what it would mean to have a complete free fall of Greg Canavan: In the strategic sit- the nuclear-weapons establishment Nobody is quite sure just uation that persisted up to the col- stop and say that we need to keep at what the right number is, lapse of the Soviet Union, we least a few hundred to a couple thought that we knew what the roles thousand nuclear weapons. Nobody but everybody starts get- of nuclear weapons were. There is quite sure just what the right num- ting uncomfortable when were credible arguments that nuclear ber is, but everybody starts getting weapons could be used in this or uncomfortable when we start talking we start talking about re- that strategic or tactical scenario. about reducing the stockpile below a ducing the stockpile The fundamental problem right now certain number. is that nobody can think of a use for below a certain number. nuclear weapons other than in the Harold Agnew: You have to keep a case of the resurgence of the Soviet large enough number so that the There is no question that the world Union. The services are denu- Kadaffis of the world don’t get the ahead is going to be one of prolifer- clearizing as fast as they can. The idea that just by having a few nu- ation. More and more little nations Navy is throwing nuclear weapons clear weapons they can become your will acquire some nuclear-weapons off their carriers, the Air Force is equal. You’ve got to have a factor capability—maybe for terrorism, or downloading them from every air- of a hundred or so above any credi- to make themselves feel good, or to plane they can, and the Army has ble number that they could conceiv- blow up a city or something. We’re gotten rid of all of theirs. Our mili- ably whomp up. going to have to cope with that fact. tary leaders don’t see any credible But, the military’s attitude is: scenario in which nuclear weapons Carson Mark: The idea of fighting “Look, we’ll never get permission to can do anything—except, perhaps, with nuclear weapons is going to re- use nuclear weapons. The rules for for using an enhanced radiation main in free fall. That’s why the their maintenance and surveillance weapon on a Sprint missile as a de- Navy can get rid of certain classes are a pain in the neck. And further- fense against theater ballistic mis- of weapons and why the Army more, they occupy a lot of ammuni- siles. Short of the resurgence of the doesn’t know what to do with the tion-storage space. I don’t want any Russians, no one in the military ser- ones they have. But still, we need part of them.” Carson, you must re- vices sees a clear need for nuclear to maintain a position of deterrence. member General Kerwin’s experi- weapons. ence with the first group of Davy Stirling Colgate: It’s worthwhile to Crocketts that were sent overseas. It’s worthwhile to consider what would happen if the These were small-yield nuclear consider what would United States renounced possession weapons that had a range of a couple of all nuclear weapons. What would of thousand meters. It was a night- happen if the United happen to Western culture? Could we mare for him to maintain command States renounced persuade the French, for example, to and control of those things on board give up their nuclear weapons? ship. He essentially had to put them possession of all under his bunk because they were nuclear weapons Harold Agnew: No way! If only short-range, tactical weapons, and France had them, then in two weeks you had to have them forward. If Harold Agnew: One doesn’t know Germany would be saying, “Mein you had them forward then you were what’s going to happen in China. Gott, we’re not going to let those worried about command and control. They are selling long-range missiles frogs do that to us.” They had to be authorized for use to other nations, and we don’t seem early, yet the probability of ever re- to be improving our relationships Stirling Colgate: Now, if it’s ab- ceiving such authorization wasn’t with China. solutely impossible for us to get rid

8 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

of all our nuclear weapons, we can bility for a long time. The real need start talking more sensibly about for nuclear tests is to validate de- what we can do. The United States, signers’ and engineers’ judgement for the foreseeable future, is going about phenomena that can’t be test- to be the custodian of nuclear power ed without nuclear explosions. It’s for the world, and that is the chal- the designers’ judgement that’s real- lenge the Laboratory and the nation ly critical. You can’t be too conser- must face. vative, and you can’t be too risky— it’ll get you either way. Gene McCall: Part of our problem is that plans for deterrence are being Gene McCall: I think you’re exact- developed by political scientists ly right. The scary part is that there who are simply throwing out num- will be no shortage of people who bers. But there are quantitative are willing to certify untested ways of estimating how many nu- weapons, especially if they are certi- clear weapons we need to maintain fying their own designs, or if they in the stockpile. You pick a possible Merri Wood want to please someone in Washing- enemy nation and ask how many ton. If the laboratories cannot con- weapons we need to destroy 80 or The real need for duct tests, the United States should 90 percent of its national wealth if nuclear tests is to consider the possibility of eliminat- we are attacked. If you do that for ing its capability to design and certi- the whole world in reasonable sce- validate designers’ and fy nuclear weapons. narios, you can come up with a engineers’ judgement number. Now, it’s probably not the Stirling Colgate: Try testifying to right number because you’ll never about phenomena that Congress about how you have certi- think of all the situations that could can’t be tested without fied a nuclear weapon’s capability occur, but at least it’s a number that without really knowing what you’re has a quantitative basis. nuclear explosions. It’s talking about. They will hammer the designers’ judge- you to pieces. Merri Wood: Any estimates you make today are going to be different ment that’s really critical. Harold Agnew: Now, if the mili- tomorrow and different five years You can’t be too conser- tary has no more future require- from now. Furthermore, there will ments, why do you need somebody always be a need to make changes in vative, and you can’t be to certify something that isn’t going the stockpile, either for strategic or too risky—it’ll get you to be used? tactical reasons or because we’re worried that elements of the stock- either way. Merri Wood: But there will always pile are turning into silly putty. very little data, or maybe no data. be future requirements as long as we Then, what Stirling said earlier be- That’s the issue. At the nitty-gritty, are required to maintain a stockpile. comes an issue, namely, that after a working level, how do you maintain while we’re not going to find any- the weapons designers’ judgement David Sharp: I always felt that the one to certify the new nuclear and experience in the absence of function of nuclear weapons was to weapons. testing? When I interviewed fifteen have them, but not to use them. If years ago for a position as a nu- we are actually forced to use nuclear But the real problem, as I see it, is clear-weapons designer, people weapons, deterrence has failed. The that we’ll find far too many people were saying there might be a com- point is not to imagine all the possi- who are willing to certify new or prehensive test ban any day, so all ble scenarios in which nuclear modified nuclear weapons based on of us have thought about that possi- weapons might be needed. Rather,

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 9 Taking on the Future

we have to maintain the capability weapons designers to do. They’re to design a weapon that works pre- bright enough to think of the prob- cisely because we cannot anticipate lem; they’re bright enough to think all those possibilities. And the only of the solution. way to maintain that capability is to have a group of people who are ac- Gene McCall: I think the military tually doing something reasonable, answer to that problem is that we go credible, and defendable that will after the doorways of those under- maintain their designer’s edge and ground bunkers with conventional that doesn’t depend solely on full- precision munitions. scale testing. I’ve heard it said how important full-scale testing is and I Stirling Colgate: Until you’ve con- personally accept those arguments, quered a nation, do you actually be- but I don’t think they are going to lieve you will know where all those prevail during the next few years. David Sharp bunkers really are?

Dual-use technology is another route Dual-use technology is Jim Smith: Another part of the to maintaining the Laboratory’s ca- another route to main- stewardship role is stockpile mainte- pabilities. We are rich in dual-use nance and weapons dismantlement. technologies that apply not only to taining the Laboratory’s If we want to reduce the stockpile conventional warfare but also to capabilities. We are rich by ten thousand warheads, who will other areas. I am concerned about take the parts and where will we put how to maintain a cadre of people in dual-use technologies those critical masses anyway? Al- who can design nuclear weapons that apply not only to though the public will say, “Make when we need them and who, in the them disappear,” Congress will un- meantime, are doing something use- conventional warfare but derstand that we need to maintain ful that will keep them intellectually also to other areas. confidence in the materials and that alive. the explosives and plastics change one else in a hostile nation saying, with time in a weak-radiation envi- Stirling Colgate: I object to this “Well, we’ve got a lot of oil rigs ronment. They also eventually be- notion that you have to find some- around here. Let’s put more of our come unavailable from the manufac- thing interesting for the weapons command bunkers and a whole batch turers That’s why you’ve got to people to do. All you have to do is of our new missiles from China bring those materials up to date. We to define the problem. The Lab has down at six kilometers.” Now what can in a short period of time go back to address the stewardship of nu- does it take to deter him from say- and re-invent the nuclear expertise if clear power. Once you’ve defined ing, “We’re now sending off one we have to. But the most important that, you have to have people here nuke just to show we have the capa- thing is that we have a collection of who are bright enough to address the bility, and we have fifty more down people here who are doing the best matter. You don’t have to tell them there.” Each time we tried to de- science they can, who can respond what to do. stroy one, we would need about a in time of crisis, and who know how 40-megaton explosion. I claim we to handle plutonium, and so forth. Here’s a technical example. With would be absolutely stymied and normal drilling rigs like those we that he could just come up and say, Gene McCall: Jim, your question use at the Nevada Test Site, it would “You can’t do it, so just do what I about what do you do with weapons be rather simple to place a command tell you.” Now, there’s a problem, parts brings up an interesting dual- post or nuclear-tipped missile about and we should be trying to solve it use technology. The Japanese, for 6 kilometers underground. I can rather than talking about what we example, are creating a program to imagine Saddam Hussein or some- are going to find for all these burn plutonium. Why don’t we de-

10 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993

Taking on the Future

sign safe plutonium reactors that tion. These are the folks who are Harold Agnew: One advantage that burn weapon parts? That’s some- going to define their own futures the Laboratory has over universities thing we can do well. based on their special disciplines, in attracting personnel is that of the types of technical problems they maintaining continuity. A universi- Many of the old-time are used to solving, and the technical ty’s primary function is to teach stu- weapons people…form culture they in which they are used dents, and students stay a while and to operating. That “culture” in- then go someplace else. So a uni- a “reserve” of talent. As volves an integration of experimental versity is a difficult place to main- time goes on, these peo- data, theory, and large-scale comput- tain continuity of a team. I agree ing. The synergies, and the diversi- with Stirling’s point that somebody ple won’t exist unless we fication that is relevant to the preser- has to be, for the world—or at least can recruit smart people vation of nuclear weapon design for the U.S.—a chief honcho of nu- competence, will not and cannot be clear capability. The Lab should from the universities … . defined by external forces but must stake out that role and make it very Our ability to attract new be defined by the designers them- clear that that’s the role it wants to selves. These people are used to play. people into the weapons working in close-knit teams. Since program must be main- the beginning, teamwork has been a Merri Wood: In the past people very important element in the nu- have been very eager to work in the tained as we attempt clear-weapons design. It’s important weapons program. You didn’t have to diversify. to keep this core team together and to twist any arms. evolving by attracting new people. Harold Agnew: The Committee on You’re always going to International Security and Arms We sometimes talk about the two Control of the National Academy of cultures at the Lab—defined by nu- find people who want to Sciences is looking into what should clear weapons work and nonweapons know, to understand, be done with returned plutonium, work. If we diversify in a way that but no one on that committee has continually isolates the core group and to contribute even if any expertise in reactors or anything of nuclear-weapons people, we will the program exists in a else of that nature. The idea of lose the capability to find the syner- using plutonium for reactor fuel has gies between the two communities. limited, controlled mode. come up, but the DOE is a basket In the past the folks in the nuclear- case on anything having to do with weapons program diffused into the Stirling Colgate: A postdoc in the nuclear reactors. Clearly Los Alam- non-nuclear culture, and vice versa, Lab’s astrophysics group who has os could get involved in that prob- but they were still familiar with the run out of his or her time and looks lem. You have a unique facilities nuclear-weapons problems. Many of around at the possibility of either for studying critical assemblies in the old-time weapons people are still staying at Los Alamos or competing the Nuclear Technology and Engi- here, and they form a “reserve” of in the university market or some- neering Division, and you have talent. As time goes on, these peo- where else will find that a position other relevant expertise as well. ple won’t exist unless we can recruit in the weapons program looks smart people from the universities to mighty attractive. Ray Juzaitis: Political support for help work on the weapons problems. the Laboratory as an ongoing insti- Our ability to attract new people Greg Canavan: Historically, the tution will ensure that the Lab itself into the weapons program must be technical challenges and the physics continues and diversifies its activi- maintained as we attempt to diversi- of the weapons program have been ties. But an important issue is to en- fy. Otherwise, the Laboratory will very exciting. When I was a gradu- sure that our core weapon-design surely lose its competence in nuclear ate student, I got interested in some folks participate in that diversifica- weapons technology. of the physics to the point that one

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 11 Taking on the Future

day I woke up and knew I was going weapons program will be more diffi- team together by doing a variety of to work on weapons physics. cult in the future. In the next related things. In the present situa- decade it may become a real prob- tion we are unlikely to have the lem to maintain confidence in the funding available to keep the team I see a world in which nuclear-weapons program. together for the primary mission people don’t regard alone. I used to be in J Division, the Gene McCall: We’ve been talking old nuclear-testing division, and I’d nuclear weapons as a mainly about weapons designers, but like to think of myself as part of that part of the solution any designers are the tip of the iceberg broader team. Some of us from that in the nuclear weapons program. division are looking at the concept more but, rather, What about the people doing the of dual-use technology and suggest- as part of the fabrication and diagnostics? ing that a very large effort be developed that would join the global en- problem. … It may Merri Wood: Even the politicians vironmental studies the Lab is now become a real problem recognize the role of diagnosticians doing with diagnostic capabilities, in maintaining the stockpile. But data integration, and so on. The ef- to maintain confidence when there’s no nuclear testing, fort would also include working in the nuclear-weapons what role do the diagnosticians with industry on sensors and other have? The physics of nuclear technologies that have dual uses. program. weapons operates in a unique regime There have been many precedents of extreme physical conditions, and for scientists working simultaneous- Stirling Colgate: The curiosity I without tests, there’s no place to ly in both the nuclear and non-nu- see among astrophysics students practice. clear areas, particularly scientists about how a nuclear weapon works, working in the testing program. We what’s going on, and what can be Chick Keller: You observe solar don’t want to lose our testing capa- done is just tremendous. You’re al- eclipses. bility because the world situation ways going to find people who want may change. But we can use those to know, to understand, and to con- Merri Wood: Those happen on a scientists in many other ways that tribute even if the program exists in much longer time scale, minutes in- relate back to testing. a limited, controlled mode. stead of microseconds, and you are flying around in an airplane or are The physics of nuclear Greg Canavan: Right now we have on top of a mountain so you can ad- good people in the weapons pro- just and calibrate your equipment weapons operates in a gram, and we’re able to recruit right up to and after you take data. unique regime of physi- more. But I see a world in which In a nuclear test you have to bury all people don’t regard nuclear weapons of your equipment in a narrow, deep cal conditions, and with- as a part of the solution any more hole weeks before the test, it must out tests, there’s no but, rather, as part of the problem. work perfectly the first time, and it Just this past year Livermore’s sym- must continue to take good data for place to practice. posium on high explosives was some period of time in the extremely viewed by some as a school for hostile environment created by the Stirling Colgate: There was a year would-be proliferators. I see a nearby nuclear explosion. Post- when seven out of nine Los Alamos growing tendency at the Lab to shot calibration is, of course, not an nuclear tests of weapons in Nevada sharpen the break between the peo- option. were designed by scientists who ple who work in weapons and those came to X Division—the Applied who work in non-weapons areas in- Chick Keller: But the physics and Theoretical Physics Division—from side the Lab. That means diffusion the diagnostics are not unrelated. I astrophysics with the assurance that of talents into and out of the suggest that we keep the testing they could work quarter-time in as-

12 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

trophysics and publish that research. just run out and transfer this tech- They have published and continue to nology. We need this technology to publish frequent and important sci- build nuclear weapons, but it will entific results. It can’t be all bad to not build a better toaster. It’s inter- be split a little bit. esting, challenging work. It’s hard work, and we think it’s important Erica Jen: How true is it that and useful work. But when it comes weapons work is something of a time to turning it into something one-way street in the sense that you else and still preventing prolifera- are unable to publish your results in tion, there are some real barriers. the open literature or present them at conferences and that you can’t easi- Harold Agnew: It would be inter- ly move back and forth between the esting if Edward Teller were at this classified and unclassified sectors? discussion because he has been on a I think that the perceived lack of binge of saying, “Declassify every- open scientific exchange, together thing! Secrecy is bad!” with skepticism as to the scientific vitality of the weapons programs, Gene McCall When I was Lab Director, I know present difficulties in attracting peo- People do weapons some people were really antagonis- ple from basic research. tic toward the weapons program. I work because that’s must say I have no sympathy with Gene McCall: People do weapons what they want those people, and if I hadn’t been so work because that’s what they want tolerant, I would have kicked them to do—not because they are trapped to do—not because out. This Lab had a mission, it still into it. And although they can’t they are trapped into it. has that mission, and it needs to be publish characteristics of a weapon, supported. That doesn’t preclude they can publish much of the basic Merri Wood: A whole lot of work the Lab from doing other things, but development work. They simply goes into solving specific nuclear I don’t think you should be ashamed choose not to publish. design problems. The work is well of or apologize for what has been documented, and we’re very proud the primary mission of the Laborato- Erica Jen: A while back there was of the documentation. So our work ry. And if you follow what Gene an effort to start a peer-reviewed is very satisfying. But if this coun- and Stirling were suggesting, that classified journal and to encourage try decides that it doesn’t want any mission still requires a rather size- people to publish classified results. more nuclear designers and we have able program, although the elements Did that ever get off the ground? to go outside the Lab to find a job, in that program may change. For then we’ll have all this wonderful example, I see the Lab making Ray Juzaitis: There is a defense classified work that we can’t show greater and greater contributions to journal and there are classified con- to anyone. I think I disagree with the intelligence field and to efforts ferences. So, those professional Gene. At least in my area of work, I to prevent the proliferation of nu- needs are met to some degree. How- can’t publish the results. And the clear weapons. ever, the peer community is small, rules for classification are right on and results are often communicated the money. I wouldn’t want to pub- Our government’s ability to draw on directly to those who are interested. lish that stuff. I don’t want any pro- people from the Lab to evaluate I would say that most people have liferators getting their information technology development and moni- not felt the need to publish in the from me. We do this kind of work at tor the activities in other nations has open literature as long as there was national laboratories for a reason. It been a real national asset and is ap- assured technical vitality in the nu- doesn’t fit in at universities or in in- preciated very much by the various clear weapons disciplines. dustries. There’s a reason we don’t intelligence agencies.

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 13 Taking on the Future

The intelligence division at Los new hardware such as tanks, mis- could be fit together in new ways Alamos has recently done some siles, or new weapons concepts are that would allow us to test almost spectacular things. Since the early created and their performance in any new weapons or sensors or com- 1960s I can remember observing battlefield situations is simulated on munication concept that the Defense overhead pictures of one particular the computer. The idea is to use Department would like to try. facility in the Soviet Union, and just high-speed computation to test ideas recently some people from the Inter- and concepts even before the hard- Gene McCall: Virtual-reality simu- national Technology Division actu- ware is built. lations are now used to simulate ally visited that facility! We what a pilot sees on the radar display thought that facility had a very dif- of his aircraft. The system detects, ferent purpose, but now we know The next decade may or captures, a radar pulse coming out that it was part of the Soviet nuclear be relatively benign, but of an airplane, processes it, plays it rocket program. They also learned back, and makes it look to the pilot of another enormous facility located the ones after that look as though he or she is flying over Al- in a huge mountain in Russia, which anything but gentle to buquerque or Baghdad, for example. was designed to test full-scale nu- The system can be both a training clear reactors and even to blow them me. There’s enormous aid and a maintenance aid. up. The Lab could start a joint pro- potential for military gram with Russia to use some of Greg Canavan: It’s not only a those facilities for nuclear research. conflict at all levels training and maintenance aid. It can around the world. And also be used for testing and evaluat- Greg Canavan: Although the role ing actual or virtual hardware in a of nuclear weapons is declining, the like it or not, the simulated battle environment. weapons business in general is not weapons enterprise, winding down. The next decade Gene McCall: Right. You can use may be relatively benign, but the particularly in the area of this capability to simulate what it ones after that look anything but conventional and smart takes to destroy a tank, for example. gentle to me. There’s enormous po- And this type of simulation is rele- tential for military conflict at all munitions, is likely vant to an even larger and more levels around the world. And like it to expand. pressing problem, namely, modeling or not, the weapons enterprise, par- the transportation infrastructure of ticularly in the area of conventional this country. How does one do and smart munitions, is likely to ex- The Lab has an enormous amount to transportation modeling? How does pand. This Laboratory has very offer in this area not just in terms of one incorporate revolutionary new strong expertise in conventional ex- its big supercomputers but also in devices like listening systems into plosives and a whole range of other terms of people in the nuclear the transportation system? These related technologies. I believe the weapons program who for most of kinds of problems are already being Laboratory should play an integrat- their careers have been working with explored, and they are well-matched ing role in the area of conventional codes of superhuman complexity. to the Lab’s capabilities. and precision weapons technology. These people have developed a I see us applying our technology to knack for the essentials of very Chris Barnes: We already have two new sensors and new means of ma- complex simulations even when they efforts in transportation along those nipulating information for the deliv- don’t understand every detail of the lines. One is aimed at simulation- ery of precision weapons. physics that is put into each code. based virtual prototyping of the en- We’ve already done such detailed tire transportation system, and the The Department of Defense is also simulations for the Strategic De- second has to do with evaluating the interested in simulations of virtual fense Initiative Organization. The design and architecture for intelli- reality in which virtual prototypes of components of those simulations gent-vehicle highway systems.

14 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

Stirling Colgate: In astrophysics sectors, we are going to see a con- we also like to model reality. One vergence of biotechnology, comput- of the emerging reality games in as- er hardware, and computer software trophysics is the development of on a time scale of thirty or forty smooth-particle hydrodynamics years from now. Los Alamos has a codes or many-particle simulations significant research component in (greater than 10 million) to model each of those three areas right now. galaxy formation or supernova ex- And we need to keep investing in plosions. We need to try this new them because they are the wave of reality game on old nuclear-weapons the future. designs and compare the results with old test data and with the results of Stirling Colgate: The Lab is in a our standard weapons codes. The position to make many kinds of con- resulting competition among various tributions to the military and the computational techniques will great- civilian sectors primarily because ly improve our confidence in we have a strong basic-research ef- weapons simulations. fort. And the strength of that effort Stirling Colgate was built on the fact that it takes Greg Canavan: I was asked by a mathematicians and physicists to general on the Joint Chiefs of Staff make a nuclear weapon. That core The Lab is in a position to write a paper about what warfare ability in math and physics interacts to make many kinds of would be like forty years from now. with other basic-research efforts at That’s so far down the line that we the Lab, whether it’s the Human contributions to the can’t predict what technologies will Genome Project or research on high- military and the civilian have emerged by then. But we do temperature superconductors or know that if we continue to improve global climate modeling. The edge sectors primarily computers by a factor of 2 every 2 that the national labs have in math because we have a years for the next 40 years—that’s a and physics is, I believe, our great- factor of 220, or about a million— est strength. It means we have the strong basic-research then the best computer will be presumption of being able to under- effort. And the strength roughly as smart as a chicken! stand almost anything and the capability to offer that understanding to of that effort was built So even over the long term, the all areas of applied research. In our on the fact that it takes smartest military machine and also interactions with the agencies in the smartest commercial planner is Washington, we need to emphasize mathematicians and still going to be a person. The trick, that we can do computing, mathe- physicists to make a then, will be to maximize the deci- matics, and physics. You can’t find sion-making performance of individ- that depth and breadth of expertise nuclear weapon. ual persons: to get information to in any other laboratory. The edge that the them, help them evaluate possibilities so they can make decisions, and Gene McCall: The experimental national labs have in get that information back to the bat- component at this Lab is also very math and physics is, tlefield or marketplace as quickly as strong. We do very good experi- possible. All the person in the loop ments, and we do them in a hurry. I believe, our greatest is going to do is make decisions. strength. Stirling Colgate: I didn’t mean to To maximize human performance in imply that physics is all theory, but both the military and non-military the unique thing that has come out

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 15 Taking on the Future

Gene McCall: And, Stirling, some- clear energy. The National Re- thing else that is quite unusual about search Council had a panel on nu- Los Alamos is the close and very clear energy, but the panel was positive association between theo- loaded with people from the estab- rists and experimentalists. lishment, and the report said everything was fine. No one was asking, Stirling Colgate: We need to move “Is this really the best reactor tech- the Department of Energy away from nology? What could we do in the fu- the idea that the Lab’s role is a rela- ture?” There’s a tremendous role for tively narrow one, that of maintain- that sort of adjudication, and as Stir- ing nuclear weapons. In addition we ling was saying, the labs have the must emphasize the value of main- expertise in the hard sciences do it taining a significant level of scientif- honestly. But I want to add that I ic expertise that can be tapped for a have a bachelor’s degree in chem- very broad range of problems. istry, so don’t forget the chemists. Harold Agnew Originally, all we could do with plu- Harold Agnew: Having people in a tonium was take a glob, cast it, and The National multitude of disciplines who can machine it. We never made any im- Research Council had a jump on problems such as using provements until the chemists and image enhancement to investigate the physicists joined together to re- panel on nuclear energy, the Challenger disaster is a tremen- ally understand how to handle these … loaded with people dous asset that the nation can use to materials and develop the alloys. great advantage. The Lab expertise from the establishment, can be applied to some really press- Paul White: At this moment, the and the report said ing problems, one of which might be Laboratory has a unique opportunity the problem of waste disposal, not to define its future, one that will be everything was fine. No just nuclear waste but chemical and more closely tied to the economic one was asking, “Is this toxic wastes of all kinds. security of the nation. Right now we are in the process of defining really the best reactor Andy White: On a visit to DuPont unique niches in the marketplace technology? What a year or so ago, I heard the sugges- that—because of our history, the cation that the national labs should pabilities we have assembled here, could we do in the play the role of referee in waste-dis- and the way we do business—are future?” There’s a posal problems and other controver- particularly suited to us. Risk as- sial issues. The labs could be the sessment, of nuclear reactor technol- tremendous role for final authority making technical de- ogy or of waste disposal options for that sort of adjudication, cisions on things like deep-well in- example, might be one area. What jection of industrial waste. are some others? and…the labs have the expertise in the Stirling Colgate: The strength of Andy White: Computational sci- our technical culture should be ap- ence is an area in which the Labora- hard sciences do plied to the entire business of risk tory already excels, and it is an an it honestly. assessment. The national labs are important component for the Lab’s particularly situated to participate in success in the future. Our Advanced this area. Computing Laboratory, or ACL, is of the nuclear weapons program is designed to provide an integrated physics, math, and, if you want, Harold Agnew: That type of arbi- computational environment with suf- computing. tration is certainly needed for nu- ficient computational power for

16 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

solving the overwhelming scientific elementary-particle physics and the folio management and for determin- problems that are critical to the na- evolution of the universe, and to in- ing future profitability of credit-card tion. These “Grand Challenge” formation processing in the market- accounts. Our work on neural nets problems relate to the environment, place. New opportunities are open- clearly falls into this category of national security, economics, and so ing up all the time, and Lab person- dual-use technologies. We are play- on, and they require computational nel have the know-how to take ing a useful role in the diversified resources significantly greater than advantage of them. weapons program as well as in the the resourses generally available public and private sectors. today. To attack these problems, we Chris Barnes: I come from X-1, a acquired a CM-5 massively parallel group in the division that designs Andy White: Massive data manipu- computer from Thinking Machines weapons. About three or four years lation is an important problem in re- Corporation and integrated this ago a few of us decided to change di- search as well. We are starting to state-of-the-art machine with appro- rections and learn about neural nets perform very large global climate priate networking, storage and re- and their application to information simulations in connection with the trieval, and visualization resources. processing and massive data manipu- Department of Energy’s High Per- Right now we are primarily involved lation. It was a risky thing to do, formance Computing and Communi- in three “Grand Challenge” applica- but it’s really paid off and now we’re cations and Computer Hardware, tions: global ocean modeling, mul- developing new kinds of neural nets Applied Mathematics, and Model tiphase flow in porous media, and and applying them to a whole range Physics programs. Soon one simula- molecular dynamics simulations of of problems. One relates to prevent- tion will produce as much data as novel materials. ing proliferation of nuclear weapons we’ve stored on the Common File through export control. System over the last sixteen years! Working with others at Caltech, Jet The first problem is where do you Propulsion Laboratory, and the San Preventing the export of equipment store all the data, and thesecond Diego Supercomputer Center, we are related to nuclear-weapons develop- problem is how do you analyze it part of one of the nation’s five giga- ment requires sifting through a vast and use it to understand what you’ve bit testbeds to investigate geograph- amount of data. An evaluation of done. Developing tools to store, ically distributed computing be- the global data on purchasing, ex- handle, and analyze massive tween large computational re- porting, or licensing of certain types amounts of data is a problem that sources. Another exciting project of equipment or combinations of cuts across disciplines, and the Lab- that has recently been initiated is the equipment can provide clues about oratory is now making tremendous formation of the Computational the extent of a nation’s nuclear de- strides in this area. Testbed for Industry through which velopment. Neural nets are a perfect we are collaborating with many in- tool for analyzing that data automat- Information highways dustrial firms on a variety of prob- ically. Another example relates to lems of mutual interest. the interest of the Internal Revenue are being built across Service in identifying multinational the country, and Greg Canavan: Computer simula- corporations that are shifting their tion and information processing is books around to avoid paying their Los Alamos is on the an area where the Lab has an edge proper taxes. The types of informa- freeway, the electronic not only because of our tremendous tion processing required for that computing power but also because problem is almost a perfect overlap freeway. we have the people who know how with nonproliferation problems. to harness and use that power. The Greg Canavan: Many of us worry applications are limitless. They We originally got into this type of that the cost of doing business at a range from the virtual-reality simu- information processing because a laboratory located at the end of a lations I was talking about earlier to large banking corporation wanted us road to nowhere will price us out of basic problems in fluid dynamics, to develop a system for doing port- the market in some areas of research.

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 17 Taking on the Future

But that’s not an impediment in the Gary Doolen: One of the most ex- the function of ordinary wires but area of information processing. citing new directions at Los Alamos are thousands of times smaller. On is nanotechnology, a field that in- the ends of each molecule one can David Forslund: Information high- cludes research on three very novel place chemical groups that bind ways are being built across the areas: self-assembling computers tightly to selected metal contacts country, and Los Alamos is on the with molecular components, tiny ro- normally found in miniature circuits. freeway, the electronic freeway. Ge- bots that incorporate biochemical The conducting molecules have been ographic isolation is not a serious sensors, and improved materials made in large quantities and tested problem for the Laboratory in this with very small grain sizes. for uniformity and integrity using information age. atomic-force microscopes. When Nanotechnology research spans these molecules are poured onto a Greg Canavan: Not only are we on many different disciplines and will surface containing prearranged the electronic freeway but also the require a substantial investment over metal contacts, the molecules bind value added to many products by our a number of years as well as coordi- very strongly to the contacts; in analysis can be so high that we nation and focus on a scale beyond other words, they self-assemble. could even live with the high costs. the range of normal university re- Plans are being made to design tran- search. At present the federal gov- sistor-like molecules that self-as- Gene McCall: Everyone says the ernment has taken no central-plan- semble in a similar fashion. Lab should participate in making the ning responsibility in this area. U.S. economically competitive and Some industries have initiated re- The hope is to combine these self- that we should cooperate with indus- search in nanotechnology, but they assembling molecular components try. But we need a way of develop- are currently downsizing their ef- with existing technology for elec- ing joint projects that will really forts for economic reasons. In con- tronic switching that is a thousand make a difference. One approach trast, in 1992 the Japanese invested times faster than the technology would be to send 500 people from $200 million in this area because used in today’s most advanced com- the Lab for one-year sabbaticals in they recognize the potential for puters. The combination is expected industry. That way we would wind large long-term payoffs. to yield self-assembling computing up with a cadre of people spread devices that are about the same size throughout the Lab who have some In 1991, several universities and as today’s chips but many times real understanding of current indus- large industries concluded that the faster. Similar work in the areas of try concerns. Department of Energy sould coordi- robotics and biochemical sensors nate a national effort in nanotech- also have large anticipated payoffs Harold Agnew: It’s also a good nology. Scientists at Los Alamos in both the civilian and military are- way to build up a large constituency and Sandia are now working in this nas. The Laboratory has unique re- around the country. area, and each institution has an ex- search and management capabilities perimental and theoretical research for this type of dual-use research, Chris Barnes: We recently started and development initiative funded at and many people believe Los Alam- working on a Cooperative Research the $1 million level. At Los Alam- os should play a major role in nan- and Development Agreement with os, the support comes from the Lab- otechnology. General Motors, and one of our guys oratory Directed Research and De- has already talked about doing a sab- velopment Fund. Erica Jen: Nanotechnology is an batical at GM. Since we already example of a program that originat- have a group working in this area, One major success, resulting from a ed from the efforts of a few individ- he’ll have a place to come back to. I collaboration among Los Alamos, uals who had an idea and the liberty believe it’s very important to build Yale University, IBM, and the Uni- to explore it. It’s also a program up a core group of experts at the Lab- versity of South Carolina, has been with the potential to grow quite oratory in a particular field before we the design and production of con- large, and everybody recognizes that send people on industrial sabbaticals. ducting molecules that can perform the Lab has the responsibility as

18 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

well as unique capabilities to devel- in a rather theoretical and abstract op and to support large programs. framework, and their research in- But there is also the question of sup- spired him to get involved. If that port for small projects and individ- basic research program had been at, ual researchers who are not tied to say, Berkeley rather than at Los any particular program with measur- Alamos, Chris Barnes would proba- able goals and product specifica- bly never have begun that work, and tions and who are not responding to external researchers would have had an already existing funding direc- little reason to turn to Los Alamos tive. Without such support, you as the natural focal point for related can’t expect freedom, diversity, or programs. The same is true of Los creativity. At present, individual re- Alamos research programs in appli- searchers cannot help but see that cations of chaos theory and in lat- decisions and directives at the Labo- tice-gas simulations, which grew out ratory are often governed not by the of the research work of individuals scientific health of the research ef- here at the Lab, namely, Mitchell forts but rather by short-term crite- Feigenbaum and Brosl Hasslacher, ria heavily biased toward large-scale Erica Jen respectively. So how can we contin- programmatic efforts and by fuzzily ue to support the generation of new understood funding policies. The There is also the ideas? effect on morale and productivity has been disastrous. And I would question of support for Andy White: It is a difficult prob- argue that the nurturing of small small projects and lem, and it is a national issue, not projects with as yet no foreseeable just a Lab issue. There’s a constant connection to big projects is an ap- individual researchers war between big centers and individ- proach that would enormously in- who are not tied to any ual research projects. The National crease the institution’s ability to Science Foundation is studying the make significant scientific and tech- particular program with balance at the Foundation between nological advances. measurable goals and basic and applied research and could make major changes in the current Gene McCall: The type of work product specifications mix. you describe has in the past been and who are not funded on the budget noise of the Gene McCall: That’s why I think large programs. That is why the in- responding to an already the Lab must protect the basic re- ertial-fusion program, for example, existing funding search we have by supporting that did not come out of basic research. research within larger programs; It came out of the weapons program directive. Without such otherwise we’re going to lose our and, in fact, out of the field-test di- support, you can’t basic-research capabilities. If we vision of the program. The magnet- identify basic research as a separate ic-fusion program and the accelera- expect freedom, item and hang it out there, it’s going tor division came out of the weapons diversity, or creativity. to get cut off. program. them. The work Chris Barnes is Greg Canavan: The steps the De- Erica Jen: Still, big programs are doing in applying neural nets to partment of Energy and the Lab have much more likely to succeed at the massive data-manipulation problems taken to assure Congress that they Lab if the people who had the origi- grew out of the fact that researchers are in control of the Lab’s programs nal idea are here and are communi- at the Center for Nonlinear Studies are tending to undercut precisely cating with other people around were playing with these new ideas, those things that made Los Alamos a

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 19 Taking on the Future

first-rate laboratory in the first and financial people are told, “Get in we’ve got to pay for extra security, place. In other words, accountabili- line and help make it happen. Right so plutonium workers cost $600,000 ty is tending to cut out cross-fertil- now!” Those people have no vested to $700,000 per person each year. ization and make it harder for peo- interest in our productivity. And if you want to haul a few grams ple to get together and to do innova- of plutonium down a road, you have tive projects. In the ten or eleven to close the road and bring out the years I’ve been here, I’ve seen a big machine guns. All these changes loss in flexibility. came about because somebody was worried. Nothing ever happened the Harold Agnew: Is the size of the old way. I never diverted any pluto- Laboratory part of the problem? It nium. But people in Washington de- was pretty large when I was director cided it had to be done “right.” And but not as large as it is now. In the right is unbelievably expensive good old days we had a theoretical these days. division, a physics division, and di- visions for explosives chemistry, Harold Agnew: The safety and en- weapons tests, health, and maybe a vironmental concerns are here to few more. I don’t know what the stay, although we may learn to prior- mechanism is now for gathering new itize them better. I am more inter- ideas, starting new programs, or de- ested in the ways in which the Lab ciding you are going to send five is diversifying. The era of greater hundred people out to industry to in- Chick Keller and greater funding is over. It’s crease technology transfer. In the probably going to be less. If you old days it was pretty much the divi- I think many of our want to do some of the new things sion leaders who made the deci- you’ve been talking about, I think sions. Carson Mark, the leader of problems stem from the you have to say, “Look, we think the the Theoretical Division, would de- over-regulation of the future will be much better if we do cide what he was going to do, and this, so we’re going to cut out that.” Dick Taschek, the leader of the Lab, which, in turn, You don’t necessarily have to get Physics Division, decided what he stems from the fact new money, but you do have to have was going to do. When I became di- people who are willing to give up rector, we would talk these things that we are perceived what they are doing and start some- over once a month, on a Friday. I as having no mission. thing new. provided liquor, which I guess now would be considered scandalous, but Gene McCall: I remember the story it certainly allowed people to forget David Sharp: Right now a lot of of someone once asking Harold how their inhibitions. We didn’t have the things that are costing us time many people work at Los Alamos, that many division leaders or associ- and money are being imposed on us and he said, “About half of them.” ate directors, so everybody could by people whose first interest is Well, I would say that about half the come and speak out. safety and environment not the sci- people at the Lab are willing to entific productivity of the Lab. change what they are doing as long Chick Keller: I think many of our as they perceive that the people up problems stem from the over-regula- Jim Smith: Here’s an example. the line will support them in what- tion of the Lab, which, in turn, stems Nineteen years ago I used to carry a ever they are asked to do. from the fact that we are perceived gram or so of plutonium in my car as having no mission. If you have from the CMR building down Dia- Chris Barnes: The individual has no mission, you’ve got to get some- mond Drive to DP site. It was legal. to be willing to take some risk. In thing done, and the health and safety I didn’t break any rules. Today, my section in the Inertial Fusion and

20 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

Plasma Theory Group, we had three the Spectroscopy and Biochemistry or four internal proposals for new Group. I was willing to take that directions, which were fought for position because it’s a three-year and finally agreed upon by the limited-term appointment. Histori- group. However, we had to take cally, INC Division has been strong- some risks to change fields from ly associated with the nuclear- plasma physics to neural nets. After weapons program, and until recent- four years, it’s finally beginning to ly, 70 percent of its funds came from pay off. Our section is funded, and that program. Now only 30 percent soon we’re likely to be over-funded. of the funds are from weapons pro- But there were a lot of people who grams, and the division has success- thought we were totally nuts to go fully redirected its efforts into areas off and do neural-net work. such as environmental restoration Jim Smith and basic science. That’s been done Harold Agnew: Flexibility needs to by being flexible, looking to the fu- I used to carry a gram or be built into the management as well ture, and reorganizing the Division. as the staff, especially during times The Division instituted limited-term so of plutonium in my of change. The last years when I group-leader appointments specifi- car from the CMR build- was here, I implemented a tenure cally to address the issue of flexibil- limitation for group leaders, some- ity and ensure that the Division re- ing down Diamond Drive thing that had never happened at Los sponds to changes as needed. The to DP site. It was legal. Alamos. At first it was traumatic group leaders are funded to spend 50 for this small community because percent of their time doing research I didn’t break any rules. people would say, “Gee, your daddy on programmatic efforts so that Today…if you want to isn’t group leader any more. He when they’re finished with their must have done something wrong.” three-year appointments, they can haul a few grams of But I used the analogy of academic make an easy transition back to re- plutonium down a road, departments where the position of search without the trauma of having chairperson is not coveted by most to start from scratch. It’s worth not- you have to close the people in the departments, and ing that the Division has gone from road and bring out the there’s no social stigma for not a $35 million budget for the last fis- being the chairperson any more. We cal year to a projected $45-million machine guns. All these also tried a tenure limitation on divi- budget for the current fiscal year. changes came about sion leaders, but it was a little hard- So, there are new ways of doing er for them to accept, and we didn’t things that can be very successful in because somebody was implement it completely. Are there the present environment. worried. Nothing ever such limitations here now? Gene McCall: The key to maintain- happened the old way. Basil Swanson: There’s an experi- ing the technical capability of the I never diverted any ment going on right now in the Iso- group leaders and division leaders is tope and Nuclear Chemistry Divi- to keep them involved in technical plutonium. But people in sion in which group-leader appoint- work. Years ago even the division Washington decided it ments are limited-term leaders did some technical projects. appointments. Jill can describe how Nowadays, there’s hardly even a had to be done “right.” it works. deputy group leader who does a And right is unbelievably technical project. In X Division Jill Trewhella: I just recently we’ve had three or four group lead- expensive these days. moved to INC Division as leader of ers voluntarily leave their manage-

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 21 Taking on the Future

ment positions over the last three the only area of biological research years because their jobs were so far we could justify because we were removed from the actual research. basically a weapons laboratory.

Jill Trewhella: The reason group Jill Trewhella: The biosciences leaders in INC Division can keep have grown a lot since then. We doing research is that the bulk of the have initiatives in genome sequenc- bookkeeping, administrative, and ing and informatics, structural biolo- environmental, safety, and health ac- gy, medical isotopes, medical appli- tivities are being handled by a sepa- cations of lasers, bioenergetics, and rate business and operations unit. so on, and we’re supported by funds The group leader is thereby free to from both the DOE and the NIH. be a technical group leader and stay As a biophysicist, I see the Laborato- much closer to science. ry as a glorious environment in which to work. Laser technology, high- I come from the biosciences, which Jill Trewhella field magnet technology, neutron is not a traditional area of strength scattering, and so on are all available at the Lab, so my colleagues and I But the greatest strength to me here. At other institutions, I have been forced to be very outward would never have had the opportunity looking, to band together with of the national-lab envi- to get anywhere near them. whomever we can, and to develop ronment is the opportu- joint initiatives such as the new ini- But the greatest strength of the na- tiative in structural biology. nity for peer collabora- tional-lab environment is the oppor- tion—the willingness of tunity for peer collaboration—the Harold Agnew: Biosciences and willingness of the people who are at materials science are areas that are the people who are at your level to work with you and really blooming in this country. In your level to work with share ideas. In a university you’re the San Diego area every other out- so scared, you want to get tenured, fit is a bioscience something-or- you and share ideas. In and you don’t want anybody to write other with a “tech” at the end of its a university you’re so a paper with you unless that person name. Does that make your life is a student or a postdoc—that way easier? Is it like nuclear physics in scared, you want to get you know your name will come first. 1943 when the whole world was our tenured, and you don’t oyster? Harold Agnew: You are so right. want anybody to write a I’m an adjunct professor at the Uni- Jill Trewhella: It helps and hurts at paper with you unless versity of California, San Diego, and the same time. There is new money I find that nobody talks to anybody in biosciences, but as a result, that person is a student else at that institution—even in the everybody is jumping on the band- or a postdoc—that way same department sometimes. wagon—whether it’s appropriate or not. So the quality control gets dif- you know your name will Jill Trewhella: In the career that ficult at times. The Director wants come first. I’ve had at Los Alamos, it’s not at to see biosciences dramatically in- all unusual for me to work and pub- crease at the Laboratory, but we Harold Agnew: In the olden days lish with two or three other career- have to step carefully and think very we got our finger into the bio- equivalent people. It’s wonderful. judiciously about what directions we sciences by irradiating rabbits with promote because this is a relatively neutrons and stuff like that to study Stirling Colgate: This is perhaps new area here. the effects of radiation. That was the most important aspect of the cul-

22 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

ture of the national labs. Peer col- we very carefully positioned our- affordable delivery methods, and I laboration is a way of life here, but it selves in the direction of modern bi- think we should try to initiate new happens much less at the universities ology, and for that reason, we have a projects to address the problems. because of the initial pressure to at- large, multidisciplinary human- tain tenure and the later pressure to genome center at the Laboratory Gene McCall: We should be a little obtain rewards, such as research sup- today. cautious. We should remember a port, based on individual creativity. few phrases, such as synthetic fuels, renewable energy resources, solar Larry Deaven: And at Los Alamos energy for the masses, and others your peers may be other biologists or that ten years ago were the wave of physicists, mathematicians, engi- the future but are hardly ever men- neers, and chemists. I can point to tioned now by the mainstream fund- two areas of biological analysis that ing agencies. We should build our emerged within the Life Sciences Di- own base in the biosciences, and we vision because of that kind of unique should avoid responding only to interaction. One was the develop- what looks fashionable right now. ment in the late 1940s of liquid scintillators for detcting ionizing radia- David Forslund: The unique tion. Those scintillators enabled bi- Larry Deaven strength that this Lab brings to all ologists to study metabolic processes these problems is the combination of at the molecular level and helped to It’s clear that health- ideas and talents from physics, chem- redefine biology in terms of bioscience research and istry, biology, materials science, and chemical and biophysical principles. so forth. This broad combination of The second was the development of especially preventive people and technology enables us to flow cytometers, which are instru- medicine are going to be envision new areas of research and ments for sorting and analyzing applications that are important to in- cells. Those instruments are located major agendas for this dustrial problems. That’s a strength in all major hospitals today. where country as the need for we have over some of the industrial- they are used to diagnose cancer and research facilities, which tend to AIDS. It was the interaction be- defense expenditures have a more narrow focus. tween life scientists and physicists winds down. here at the Laboratory that gave rise Larry Deaven: The Lab’s diversity to these unique technologies. It’s clear that health-science re- is surely paying off in the genome search and especially preventive project. We have a robotics effort, In the early days of the Laboratory, medicine are going to be major we have a strong informatics effort, much of the life-science research agendas for this country as the need and we have some innovative work was involved with irradiating whole for defense expenditures winds under way from the Chemical and animals to refine our knowledge of down. The kinds of discoveries Laser Sciences Division and the radiation exposure and to establish being made in the human-genome Physics Division in the direction of radiation-protection standards. project—new information on the ge- new methods for DNA sequencing. When I came to the Laboratory in netic component of disease and new You find elements of those activities 1971, we had a small group of cell diagnostic tools—will have a big at any of the other genome centers, biologists who were studying the ef- impact on medical science and the but ours is unique in terms of having fects of radiation on cells and sub- practice of medicine only if delivery all of those elements under one roof. cellular particles. Our health-re- systems can be devised to make And our center for human genome search unit was small compared with them available in a cost-effective studies could be used as a model in those in other national laboratories. manner. I believe that the Laborato- developing other new initiatives in However, during the next ten years, ry has the expertise to help develop bioscience and biotechnology.

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 23 Taking on the Future

So creating complex materials is an tronic materials, is one where the area in which Los Alamos can com- Lab can have a major impact. And pete and is competing very well due the impact will be felt on both the to our ability to bring together dif- defense and the nondefense sides of ferent disciplines. For example, I’m the laboratory. Dual-use actually a physicist, and I’m working very means something very directly in closely and effectively with Basil the area of materials science. Swanson, a chemist, and his colleagues on new materials with in- Paul White: Do we have some ex- triguing electronic and light-emit- amples where work in that area has ting properties. been reinforced by collaboration with industry? However, if you simply take people Alan Bishop out of their disciplines and put them Alan Bishop: I’ve been working into a team to solve some specific with various companies for the last Our biggest problem, you create a very short- eighteen months or so, and it has term fix, but you can easily jeopar- been educational on both sides. At challenge—perhaps dize the technology base of that dis- the beginning, high-level discus- even nationally—is just cipline, which is in fact the source of sions are usually widget-driven. our ability to tackle complex prob- The company wants some particular how to interface basic lems—the base in physics, math, device, and it wants our help in disciplines with chemistry, and so on, that Colgate making it. But after a while, the and others have emphasized. stronger industrial firms—my own application teams with- limited experience includes compa- out using up the Our biggest challenge—perhaps nies like Hewlett Packard and even nationally—is just how to in- IBM—begin to recognize that what resource that terface basic disciplines with appli- they really want is our depth of generates advances in cation teams without using up the technology, our expertise in model- resource that generates advances in ing and developing and testing new basic science and basic science and technology. Many materials, and our ability to put ap- technology. Many scientists want to belong to a disci- propriate science into large comput- pline, and they want to be able to er codes and then simulate effective- scientists want to regularly come home to that disci- ly. That’s the most positive kind of belong to a discipline, pline and feel a part of its continu- new direction. It’s taken over a year … ous growth and evolution. They can to reach that point, and I hope it and feel a part of its be effective members of interdisci- takes less time in the future, but we continuous growth plinary teams, but they should be got there, and that is encouraging. able to take the questions from those and evolution. teams back to their own disciplines Paul White: Some people in the where their greatest strengths lie and Clinton campaign proposed that the Alan Bishop: Materials science is where the questions can best be in- weapons labs devote 20 percent of another area that is intensely inter- terpreted and solved. Trying to con- their efforts to collaborations with disciplinary. In the manufacturing vert people from one discipline to industry. Where are we relative to process, for example, if you don’t another is very difficult, and the that number? have a controlled starting point and success rate is pretty low. the right material that can get you to Kay Adams: I’m the director of the the desired end point, then there The area of materials science, in Industrial Partnership Center at the isn’t a process. terms of both structural and elec- Laboratory, and one of the biggest

24 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

disappointments I’ve had is that the We have not yet determined how the Harold Agnew: Your funding DOE expects us to have an econom- national labs can truly impact the agency can argue that the reason you ic impact on a company in one to area of economic competitiveness. got ahead is because you’ve used the two years, but a more appropriate And yet the DOE expects us to goods from each of the three compa- and realistic time scale would be prove we can be outstandingly help- nies. That presents a real problem. three to five years. There are com- ful to the economy in two to three panies that view Los Alamos like years. We need more time to build grandmother’s attic where they can on our strengths and show what we find all kinds of neat things to bid can really do. on. Well, we don’t have much off- the-shelf technology, and I wouldn’t Jim Smith: I’d like to expand on want to see us emphasizing the de- some of Kay’s comments. The Lab- velopment of off-the-shelf technolo- oratory is working with American gy because then we’d be destroying Superconductor Corporation and In- our seed corn. termagnetics General, two small businesses, to manufacture wires We need to keep replenishing our from high-temperature supercon- good ideas, to build synergism be- ducting materials under a Coopera- tween new ideas and new applica- tive Research and Development tions, and to leverage the kinds of Agreement, but we also do our own long-range projects we’ve been talk- independent research. Right now it Kay Adams ing about today. We need to build looks like we’ve gotten ahead of the We have not yet up areas that are four to ten years companies, and that poses some in- away from having products. And no teresting questions about intellectu- determined how the one in Washington at this point is al-property rights, and the issues are national labs can truly ready to accept that as being a fun- very cloudy. damental need. impact the area of We’ve gotten two kinds of guidance economic competitive- Also, because of the fifty-fifty cost from the DOE. Some people want us sharing of some programs, we can to work with industry, and they say ness. And yet the DOE work only with big companies. But that the collaboration is the final expects us to prove we larger firms tend to be less innova- product. The people who have been tive and less interested in taking around longer want to see us actually can be outstandingly risks to implement new technology make the product because then they helpful to the economy than are some of the smaller compa- can judge whether we’ve performed nies. So the big firms come to the well or poorly. Just what is our mis- in two to three years. labs to look for a Band-Aid. Even sion? We need more time to though the help we offer might get us some brownie points, we lose in- Judging our success in tech transfer build on our strengths tellectual property. We also get tied is rather difficult because for now and show what we can up in knots when we try to work Washington can either ask a compa- with two or three different company if we’ve helped them, or they really do. nies on the same problem. It would can ask us about the properties of be better to have our technology the wire we’ve made. When the Gene McCall: It is not to the Lab’s open to the public so that more peo- companies begin selling products, advantage to deal with a hundred ple could just run with it. That Washington may be in a better posi- different companies even though it would probably do the economy tion to see whether we have helped may be to the advantage of the indi- more good. industry. vidual Lab researcher. The Lab

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 25 Taking on the Future

needs to work on the basis of some they are doing. So we have to show tle guy because he hasn’t gotten to overall concept, and if working with that we are willing to listen and that the stage where he’s really compet- a particular company fits into that, we can actually deliver more than ing with anyone yet; he just has a fine, do it. was originally expected. dream.

Kay Adams: The basic premise of The work on high-temperature su- Kay Adams: That’s absolutely cor- the Technology Transfer Initiative perconductors with Hewlett Packard rect. Right now there are set-asides was that we would be working on and DuPont, the work on high-per- for small business, but they tend to dual-use technologies, which would formance supercomputing with Cray be extraordinarily small. The entire build on our strengths in the defense Corporation, and the work on ad- program for the Technology Transfer arena and also have commercial im- vanced numerical methods for oil re- Initiative is going to be $141 million pact. That’s a very solid, fundamen- covery with Mobil Corporation have and only $6 million has been put tally defendable premise. The im- all been successful. We’re building aside for small businesses. None of plementation, however, has present- these alliances, and when people this money has yet been released. ed some significant problems. But start to work with us on very short- we do have some positive models. term kinds of things, they start to Paul White: Perhaps what small The Defense Advanced Research see the potential that’s here and be- business need now is the technologi- Projects Agency and many other or- come willing to take a little more cal equivalent of the Agriculture Ex- ganizations in the government have risk and work on longer-term pro- tension Service. That service was put together groups that have established in 1914 to work at the worked with the national labs and local or regional level to funnel the industries for years, and they’ve When people start to results of research done at land- been highly successful. work with us on very grant colleges into the hands of farmers. In the technology arena, a Stirling Colgate: DARPA funds re- short-term kinds of similar program might channel the search, but, in contrast, we do it. things, they start to see results of research at universities That’s why, by comparison, working and government laboratories into the with the Lab presents a conflict of the potential that’s hands of small business. interest to industry. here and become willing Gene McCall: When I look at a pos- Basil Swanson: Not just the Lab to take a little more sible future for the Laboratory, I see but the nation as a whole must iden- risk and work on half of the Lab being in defense work tify long-term industrial needs be- with half of that being in nuclear cause industry has gutted its labs longer-term projects. weapons. The nuclear-weapons part and no longer has the capability to interfaces in my mind with the eco- address long-term problems. Indus- jects. Industry will come along. It’s nomic competitiveness through the try needs access to new technology, just a matter of getting them in the design of a safe reactor for the burn- and I think this Lab can bring it to door and working with them. I’m ing of plutonium from weapons. The them. more concerned with the Department non-nuclear part of weapons work in- of Energy and the national funding terfaces with the modeling and im- Kay Adams: The reason for doing capability. We need a realistic way provement of the transportation sys- shorter-term projects is to build cred- of defining success in the area of in- tem. We ought to work on the design ibility. Right now some industries do dustrial collaboration. and building of autonomous vehicles not look on the national labs as being and the modeling of the battlefield their friends or even as being a re- Harold Agnew: It seems to me that and of defense systems. source for them. They see the labs the smaller companies really need either as competitors or as being to- you more than the larger firms. The On the more commercial side, we tally nonessential to anything that labs are not competitors with the lit- should work on solid-state lasers,

26 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

which have applications in defense, biology, surgery, compact-disc play- ers, and so on. The biotechnologies are a little bit separate but still seem to form a major thrust in the laboratory. To my mind, those areas, along with materials work, flesh out an appropriate future for the Lab. So far, we have not developed a col- lective vision for the Laboratory, like the one I just outlined, but once we establish firm priorities and say, “Here’s what we are going to do,” we can start interacting with those companies that match the Lab’s vision of itself. If we work on piece- meal applications with industry, I don’t think we will get consistently good performance from the Labora- tory staff. project, but it didn’t start that way— Now if it comes from a nonpolluting David Sharp: We do need a collec- it started with just a couple of peo- source like nuclear reactors, we’re tive vision, but we don’t need to em- ple with vision. Small thrusts, all better off. But we need to show phasize large projects to the exclu- which are only a few million dollars, people that this is a nonpolluting, sion of small ones. In this context can coalesce and reinforce each safe source of energy, and that it large means $100 or $200 million, other to become a major thrust. But will not have a negative affect on and small means $10 million or less. the attempt to start $100-million the environment of the future. Such The idea that the Laboratory’s programs from scratch will be ex- a project would be a $100-million strength is geared toward large pro- tremely difficult. Anything that big project. jects reminds me a little bit of a di- is going to be a line item in Con- nosaur’s strength being geared to- gress, and every one of the fifty Jill Trewhella: The key to a ward eating large quantities of food. states is going to claim that it should healthy organization is a balanced Focusing on finding the one large have its piece. approach. We need to pursue areas project is a silver-bullet approach to of strength and look for opportuni- planning the Laboratory’s future. Gene McCall: I don’t agree. The ties for large projects. Having a burning of weapon plutonium is thousand little one-person efforts is We have a great big problem, which something we can do. We can come ridiculous. At the same time, in the is money, but that doesn’t mean up with a standard, very safe reactor context of building on our strengths there’s one great big solution. The design, and that would be an appro- and looking for large programs, we solution is going to come in small priate large project for the Lab. need to encourage and provide an pieces from many vigorous efforts in Roughly 25 percent of the carbon environment where small projects economic competitiveness, in dioxide in the world is the result of can flourish. We can do both. biotechnology, and in the environ- power production. As we go to Moreover, we can’t just respond to ment. Efforts that start small can more electric cars and electric vehi- the national needs for the next grow and become extremely impor- cles to get away from the pollution decade and ignore what the national tant to the Lab. GenBank, the na- and environmental problems caused needs are going to be in twenty or tional database for DNA-sequence by burning fossil fuels, the electrici- forty year’s time; we have to do data, grew to be a fairly substantial ty has got to come from somewhere. both.

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 27 Taking on the Future

Robert Ecke: One big problem is Harold Agnew: In the old days we scientific community that they want the lack of a national science policy, talked to the Joint Committee on help with major problems: health, so, as Gene was saying earlier, Atomic Energy. They had grown up the economy, the environment. This we’re always in the position of re- in the nuclear-weapons business, so message has been picked up and has acting. Solar energy used to be big, they understood it very well. The bedrock support across the political and then a different administration same was true of the Atomic Energy spectrum. came in and energy was not a big commissioners, who were really a thing, so now we go off and do cut above most people in the bureau- Thus, at the national level the rele- something else that’s defined as a cracy today. Some of them even had vance of proposed projects to specif- national need. It really is important a strong technical background. It ic national needs receives greater em- for the nation to decide what it was easy to talk with them. They phasis in the overall evaluation wants, and then we can respond in a set the policies, but they relied upon process. I don’t think this means, as reasonable way. the Lab directors for advice. If we some argue, that the scientists are out had a good idea, it was easy to im- of the decision-making loop; rather, Paul White: But the nation is made plement in policy. Nowadays they have a mandate to consider the up of people with many different in- everybody in the Congress wants to broader impact of their work. terests, all of whom want different have a finger in everything, and if things, and all of whom read the anybody tries to get something ac- I review programs on applied math. newspaper and listen to the TV and complished, they get investigated, or Three, four, five years ago, a proposal the radio. as we say, Dingelled, so people hide. by an applied mathematician would state the problem and the beautiful Jill Trewhella: And that’s why we The American people theorems he was going to prove and can’t afford to be purely reactive. that would be sufficient for getting We have to, at some level, decide are sending a message funding. Today those proposals con- what we’re good at and set our own to the scientific commu- tain a description of a whole project directions. We have to be respon- all the way from the mathematics sive but not reactive. nity that they want help problems down to the applied prob- with major problems: lems where that mathematics is going Robert Ecke: But if we decide we to be plugged in. The whole proposal want nuclear reactors and the public health, the economy, is connected to a consortium with in- doesn’t want nuclear reactors… the environment. dustry or some National Science Foundation interdisciplinary center. Stirling Colgate: …then we have to I don’t think this means, A lot of people are learning how to keep leading and that’s where adver- as some argue, that the play this game of building integrated tising comes in. What percentage of programs. I don’t think they can do it industry’s budget is spent on adver- scientists are out of the quite as well as we do at Los Alamos, tising? 10 percent? We need to ex- decision-making loop; but they’re learning because that is plain the technical issues. We have the way the funding of programs is to be a leader in the technical educa- rather, they have a being conducted. tion of the general public and our mandate to consider political leaders. Leadership in Paul White: The mechanism for technology starts with managing our the broader impact of identifying national needs is differ- nuclear arsenal, and it goes on to their work. ent from what it was fifteen or twen- any other area that we might be ty years ago, but that doesn’t mean working in. We should be setting David Sharp: We have to realize we can’t influence what happens. It the new directions for ourselves, we we are working in a different politi- doesn’t mean we can’t lead. We shouldn’t be sitting around asking cal environment. The American have be active, and we have to lead for them. people are sending a message to the in different ways.

28 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Taking on the Future

physics, plasma physics, controlled thermonuclear David H. Sharp joined the Laboratory in 1974 The Participants reactors, lattice gas methods and nonlinear mathe- and now holds the position of Laboratory Fellow. matics. Doolen is a past senior scientific editor for His current research interests include the model- Defense Research Review. ing of complex fluid flows and the formulation Kay V. Adams is director of the Industrial Partner- and analysis of gene regulation. Sharp is a ship Center at the Laboratory. As manager of all of Fellow of the American Association for the the Laboratory’s industrial activities, she assists in Robert E. Ecke came to the Laboratory in 1983 Advancement of Science and the American the identification of key R&D technology areas and has worked in low-temperature physics and Physical Society. that are of interest to industry and represents those nonlinear science. He is currently in the Con- activities to industries and organizations outside densed Matter and Thermal Physics Group and James L. Smith joined the Laboratory in 1973 to the Laboratory. for the past two years has been Acting Deputy study superconductivity and magnetism in the Director of the Center for Nonlinear Studies. actinide elements. After the advent of high- Harold M. Agnew was a member of the small temperature superconductivity in 1988, he joined group that worked with Enrico Fermi to inititiate David W. Forslund is a Laboratory Fellow, the Superconductivity Technology Center as the first nuclear-fission chain reaction at the Uni- Deputy Director of the Advanced Computing Chief Scientist. He is a Laboratory Fellow and versity of Chicago in 1942. Shortly thereafter he Laboratory, and a Fellow of the American Physi- received an E. O. Lawrence Award from the joined Project Y at Los Alamos and worked on the cal Society. His areas of expertise span physics DOE in 1986. development of the atomic bomb. He became and computer science and include space plasma leader of the Weapons Physics Division in 1964 physics, magnetic fusion, laser fusion, massively Basil I. Swanson has been involved in condensed- and director of the Laboratory in 1970. Agnew is a parallel computing, and distributed computing. matter spectroscopy and advanced electronic and recepient of the Fermi Award, the highest scientific electro-optic materials since joining the Laboratory award of the Department of Energy, in recognition Erica Jen is a mathematician in the Theoretical in 1980. He is currently a Laboratory Fellow and of his “many contributions to nuclear physics and Division and Acting Deputy Director of the the Principal Investigator for Laboratory programs nuclear weaponry, and his forthright counsel to the Center for Nonlinear Studies. Her research fo- in low-dimensional mixed-valence solids and in government in the field of national security.” cuses on the mathematical analysis of discrete spontaneous self-assembly approaches to advanced dynamical systems. Other current projects in- electro-optic and nanostructural materials. Chris Barnes joined the Laboratory in 1979 to clude electronic-preprint bulletin boards and work on inertial confinement fusion theory in the educational programs in nonlinear science and Jill Trewhella joined the Laboratory in 1984 to Applied Theoretical Physics Division. Barnes has complex systems. further develop her interests in using physical tech- worked in neural network and machine-learning niques to study how biomolecular structure regu- applications for the past five years. Raymond J. Juzaitis has been with Los Alamos lates or controls biological activity. She is current- National Laboratory since 1979 and now serves ly Principal Investigator for NIH and DOE projects Alan R. Bishop has been involved in resesearch on as the Division Leader of the Applied Theoreti- in structural biology and is leader of the Spec- condensed matter and nonlinear science since join- cal Physics Division. A member of the DOE troscopy and Biochemistry Group in the Isotope ing the Laboratory in 1979. He is currently leader Verification Panel and the American Nuclear and Nuclear Chemistry Division. of the Condensed Matter and Statistical Physics Society, Juzaitis has received two Department Group in the Theoretical Division. of Energy Awards of Excellence for Nuclear Andrew B. White, Jr., is Director of the Ad- Weapons Design. vanced Computing Laboratory and Program Direc- Gregory H. Canavan came to Los Alamos in tor for High Performance Computing. He has been 1981 to build advanced lasers and to perform plas- Chick F. Keller has been involved in computer at the Laboratory since 1979. His leadership of the ma-physics experiments in inertial fusion. For the modeling of fluid dynamic processes at the Labo- Laboratory’s role in the Federal High Performance last decade he has been active in developing and ratory since 1967. He is currently Director of the and Computing and Communications Program cul- testing advanced concepts for strategic defense and Laboratory's Institute for Geophysics and Plane- minated in Los Alamos being designated as one of future strategic forces. tary Physics and a Principal Investigator on a the two High Performance Computing Research joint project between the University of California Centers. Stirling A. Colgate was a staff physicist at and Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos nation- Lawrence Livermore Laboratory for twelve years al laboratories on global climate modeling. Paul C. White is Program Manager for Special and president of New Mexico Institute of Mining Projects in the Nuclear Weapons Technology Of- and Technology before joining Los Alamos in Carson Mark came to Los Alamos from Canada fice. He acts as a liaison between the Nuclear 1976. In 1980 he became leader of the Theoretical in 1945 as part of the British Mission collaborat- Weapons Program and the Nonproliferation and Astrophysics Group. He is a Senior Fellow at the ing on the Manhattan Project. He joined the Lab- Arms Control Program, and serves as the Laborato- Laboratory and a member of the National Academy oratory in 1946 and served as leader of the Theo- ry’s technical representative to the DOE Steering of Sciences. retical Division from 1947 until his retirement in Group, which coordinates U.S. assistance to Russia 1973. He currently serves as a Laboratory in the dismantlement of nuclear weapons. White Larry L. Deaven has been involved in biology and consultant. was formerly leader of the Applied Theoretical DNA research since he joined the Laboratory in Physics Division and Deputy Director of the Center 1971. He is currently the principle investigator of Gene H. McCall has been involved in plasma, for National Security Studies. the National Laboratory Gene Library Project at laser, and hydrodynamics research at Los Alamos Los Alamos and Deputy Director of the Los Alam- since 1969. He was a founder of the Inertial Fu- Merri M. Wood has worked in the Thermonuclear os Center for Human Genome Studies. sion Program at Los Alamos and leader of the Applications Group since joining the Laboratory in Laser Division; he is now a Laboratory Fellow in 1979. Her work has included stockpile support, Gary D. Doolen has been Acting Director of the the Applied Theoretical Physics Division. He has weapons physics, and advanced development. She Center of Nonlinear Studies since 1990. His re- been an advisor to the Department of Energy and to has also been active in the Equal Employment Op- search interests span nuclear physics, atomic the Department of Defense. portunity and Affirmative Action arenas.

1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 29

30 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993