analyses of results obtained in the Canadian Rocky The session participants were Mountains indicate that the observations of deflection Chairman U. A. Uotila, Ohio State University: Introduc­ differences along the same line can be repeated with a tion and overview; precision of about 0.5", but there are systematic devia­ J. C. Harrison, CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, tions between the forward and the backward running of and L. J. LaCoste, LaCoste & Romberg, Inc., Austin, the same line. A comparison with the available Texas: Surface gravity instrumentation; astronomically determined deflections also shows J. A. Hammond and Robert L. Miff, Air Force Geophysics systematic differences of 2-3". Those discrepancies Laboratory, Bedford, Massachusetts: The AFGL are most likely due to the 'overshooting' of the Kalman Absolute Gravity Program; procedure at gradient changes. It appears that with cer­ A. B. Watts, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory of tain software changes deflection differences between Columbia University, Palisades, New York: Present stations not more than half an hour of travel time apart status of marine gravity; can be determined by the inertial system, with an D. L. Turcotte, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York: accuracy of better than ± 1". Interpretation of geoid anomalies; In the discussions it was brought up that we should M. C. Roufosse, Smithsonian Astrophysical Obser­ have gravimeters with measuring accuracy ± 1-3 vatory, Cambridge: Interpretation of altimeter data; /uGal. In order to fully use this accuracy, we must com­ R. H. Rapp, Ohio State University: Comparison of sur­ pute accurately the effects of earth tides, have good face and satellite data; and models of effects of ocean tides and tidal loadings, and K. P. Schwarz, University of New Brunswick, Frederic- include different environmental effects into our model­ ton: Accuracy of vertical deflection determination by ing. We should also improve national and continental present day inertial instrumentation. gravity standardization nets, by adding new absolute gravity measuring sites at appropriate locations and encouraging intercomparison of absolute gravity apparatuses. For calibrations of gravimeters, good This meeting report was prepared by U. A. Uotila, who calibration lines should be established, which include a is with the Department of Geodetic Sciences at Ohio sufficient number of absolute measurements to control State University. the scale throughout the calibration line. As an end result of gravity anomaly determinations, we wish to have mean anomalies representing 100-km- The proceedings of the Ninth Geodesy/Solid Earth and Ocean wavelength field. Physics (Geop) Research Conference are available on microfiche. Order from American Geophysical Union, 2000 Florida Avenue, N.W., This report is based on one of the sessions at the Washington DC. 20009. Document E79007; $1.00. Payment must Ninth Geop (Geodesy/Solid Earth and Ocean Physics) accompany order. They are also available as a report. Order from The Research Conference, Columbus, Ohio, October 2-5, Ohio State University, Department of Geodetic Science, 1958 Neil 1978. Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210. Price: $10.00. g$ Geophysical Union were especially gratified therefore by President Cartels remarks when he was introducing AGU Press on the occasion of his swearing-in ceremony in the Rose Garden. The President commented that Defense Secretary Harold Brown Is well-qualified in physics, and I particularly wanted someone to help how The William Bowie Medal: Citation and has a broader scope of understanding.' He certainly Acceptance picked the right man. We all know how effective Frank has been in his Citation present job and how the President, along with all of us, has learned to trust his advice. The Bowie Medal, The forty-first presentation of the William Bowie however, is given for scientific achievement. Frank can Medat goes to Frank Press for outstanding contribu­ look back with immense satisfaction at his scientific tions to fundamental geophysics and for unselfish accomplishments and at the number of people in this cooperation in research. Frank Press joins the ranks of room who are his scientific family and close friends. I the distinguished seismologists who have received the hope tonight he can put aside some of his weightier Bowie Medal. Reading the list of medalists takes one policy concerns and be immersed in good memories. through almost the entire history of seismology. Pre­ There are some interesting historical coincidences vious medalists include James B. Macelwane, Harold between Frank Press' career and the timing of previous Jeffreys, Beno Gutenbert, Maurice Ewing, Hugo Benioff, awards. Beno Gutenburg of Cal Tech received the Louis Slichter, and Inge Lehmann, and it is appropriate award in 1953, which may have been an element in that Frank Press is now a member of this distinguished Frank's decision to join the Cal Tech faculty in 1955. group. You may know that Frank has worked with many Just after Press left Columbia, Walter Bucher and of these people. As much as anyone, Press built the Maurice Ewing received the award. The Bowie Medal bridge from their classical tradition to what we look on stayed on the East Coast for some years, so in 1965 today as modern seismology. Frank moved to M.I.T.; whereupon Hugo Benioff back at Sometimes one gets the impression that science Cal Tech received the award. This was followed by a consists of physicists, for physicists, by physicists. series of West Coast medalists. Finally, Frank Press Some physicists look with disdain on a field that puts saw a Bowie Medal in 1976 when his colleague Jule geo- in front of physics/Members of the American Charney at M.l.T. was the recipient. Frank then left, of course, to go to Washington to become the President's Much of modern seismology was started by Frank Science Advisor and Director of the White House Office Press and the group that grew up around him; syntheti­ of Science and Technology Policy. cal seismograms, use of computers in earthquake loca­ Frank Press was born in Brooklyn in 1924 and tions and dispersion calculations, digital seismometers, received his B.S. from the College of the City of New array studies, use of nuclear sources, lunar and plane­ York in 1944. He obtained his Ph.D. in 1949 from Co­ tary seismology, free oscillations, radiation from moving lumbia University, and started a historic collaboration faults, detailed source theory, partial derivatives and with Maurice Ewing at Lamont Geological Observatory. inversion, studies of anelasticity, dislocation theory and This collaboration resulted in a classic series of papers mobile seismic arrays. Many modern seismologists also that started the present era of seismology. The theoreti­ grew out of this group. Frank Press' students and their cal and observational basis for surface waves and free students now permeate the geophysical scene. oscillations was laid at that time. This work culminated During his Cal Tech years, Press authored 72 scien­ in the discovery of the earth's free oscillations after the tific papers. These included studies of the crust around great Chilean earthquake in 1960. Interestingly, three the world, the viscosity of the core, development of the Bowie Medalists, independently and at separate institu­ Press-Ewing seismograph system, model seismology, tions, were involved in this discovery: Benioff at Cal the low-velocity zone, development of a lunar Tech, Slichter at U.C.L.A., and Ewing at Lamont; and, of seismometer, discovery of the free oscillations, release course, Press then at Cal Tech. of tectonic strain by nuclear explosions, discovery of Press came to the Seismological Laboratory at Cal acoustic-gravity waves, diagnostic techniques for Tech in 1955, joining Beno Gutenberg, Hugo Benioff, seismic discrimination, seismic wave attenuation, static and Charles Richter. His impact was felt immediately. changes at teleseismic distances, and earthquake pre­ He initiated a wide variety of projects which have had diction. lasting impact, including crustal and surface wave He also did a few things later at M.I.T., but it is too studies, model seismology, seismic discrimination, and early to judge the significance of these. His number of earthquake prediction. He soon had a large collection of papers and books is now over 150. This is pretty good graduate students who went off to populate the univer­ for someone who has been an administrator for 20 sities, government laboratories, and industry, both here years, including 11 years as chairman of the Depart­ and abroad. Frank is not only an innovator in science; ment of Earth and Planetary Sciences at M.l.T. Monte he is also an innovator in how to educate scientists. Carlo inversion, lithosphere studies, and pattern recog­ While at the Seismological Laboratory, Press pur­ nition applied to prospecting and earthquake prediction sued his surface wave studies and also discovered were important breakthroughs he made during this body waves. He instigated the now common procedure period. He also found time to write what has been called of jointly considering all available geophysical data in the best geology text in 50 years. I can attest from per­ his construction of models for the crust and upper man­ sonal experience that freshmen love it. Even though tle. His crustal models of California are still used in Frank is temporarily out of academia, his role in educat­ routine locations of earthquakes. Moving on to even ing students continuesthrough the vehicle of this book, longer periods, Press showed that large earthquakes coauthored with Raymond Siever of Harvard, and lead to measurable changes in the static displacement named after his second love, Earth. fields at teleseismic distances. He founded the science Press has, of course, served on many committees, of D.C. seismology. I never understood this term; direct councils, panels, working groups, and boards. Most current doesn't seem to have anything to do with scientists have. The difference is this. When Frank seismology.