CERN LIBRARIES, GENEY A CHS-39 December 1993 1111/lll llllll II llllllll Ill lllll lllll lllll lllll lllll 11111111111111 llll CM-P00043026 STUDIES IN CERN HISTORY PHYSICS IN THE CERN THEORY DIVISION John ILIOPOULOS GENEVA 1993 The Study of CERN History is a project financed by institutions in several CERN Member States. This report presents preliminary findings, and is intended for incorporation into a more comprehensive study of CERN's history. It is distributed primarily to historians and sci­ entists to provoke discussion, and NO PART OF IT SHOULD BE CITED OR REPRO­ DUCED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR. Comments and criticism are welcome, and should be sent to the author at Ecole Normale Superieure 24 rue Lhomond F-75231 Paris Cedex 05. Copyright History of CERN Project, Geneva, 1993 Physics in the CERN Theory Division John ILIOPOULOS GENEVA 1993 Physics in the CERN Theory Division J. Iliopoulos Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Birth of the Group 3 3. The Copenhagen years 3 4. Moving to Geneva 13 5. CERN, the Center of Europe 18 6. The rise of the Standard Model 31 7. Beyond the Standard Model 35 8. Conclusions 46 References 48 1 Physics in the CERN Theory Division 1. Introduction This chapter has not been written by a historian. In fact, my respect and my sympathy for historians have considerably increased in the course of this work; so has also my determination never to become one. I fully enjoyed the long hours I spent in the CERN archives reading old documents and manuscript notes, as well as the discussions I had with some of my senior colleagues, but even now, I cannot say that I really know what happened. I know several stories but I cannot reconstruct History. I think that, for the first time, I understood the wisdom of the old movie by Kurosawa 'Rashomon' which I full-heartedly recommend to everybody who wishes to study History. I discovered experimentally that human memory, including my own, is partial and selective and the more certain one feels about his recollection of a particular event, the more one should doubt about it. On the other hand, for having taken part in many committees, I know too well that the entire story rarely appears in the proceedings. Many a time, during my search, I decided, out of frustration, to drop the whole enterprise and it is only because I was reluctant not to honor my promise that I continued. However, I had to compromise. When I started, I intended to write a well-documented historical chapter, solidly supported by archives and witnesses. Yes, I was that naive! I thought that the matter would have been relatively easy since the facts are recent, I have taken part personally in a large part of them and for the others, I could rely on my contacts with the protagonists, most of whom are still active. This turned out to be an impossible task. An experienced historian, may have been able to find his way through, and solve, the various puzzles of conflicting evidence, but I could not. So this chapter, rather than being the truth, is just my version of the facts. I apologize to those who will find that my story does not correspond to the one they told me. It is not that I was not listening to one of them, but that I was listening to them all. Finally, I had to renounce to answer some of the more 'historical' questions I had asked myself. This chapter, will not tell the story of the CERN Theory Division, it will give instead my idea of the Physics that was done there. Sailing close to the shore of impersonal scientific facts has been my way to avoid being lost in endless speculations. It was an easy solution and, in fact, a rewarding one. For, during these years, we have witnessed one of the greatest triumphs of abstract theoretical thought. One often says that progress in Physics occurs when an unexpected experi­ mental result contradicts the current theoretical beliefs. This forces physicists to look for new ideas and eventually it gives rise to a New Theory. Such has been the case most of the time in the past, but the revolution that brought Geome­ try under the form of Gauge Theories into Physics had a theoretical, better an aesthetic, motivation. It is not possible to tell the story of the CERN Theory 2 Birth of the Group 3 Division without, at the same time, telling the story of this exciting achievement. This is the rewarding part. 2. Birth of the Group The establishment of CERN, its origins as well as the motivations that were behind it, have been presented more expertly and more thoroughly in the first volume of this series. There we find that the first fully operating research group that was created was the Theory Group. (There were no Divisions yet). It may sound curious that one of the first acts of the founding fathers towards an experi­ mental High Energy Center was to hire some theorists and indeed, in this respect, Europe departed from the American model. Brookhaven, the analogue and rival to CERN in these early years, never developed a large theoretical group. What was even more important was that the special role of the theorists in an experi­ mental center was clearly recognized. Although they were actively encouraged to act as consultants to the experimentalists and to participate in the establishment of the experimental programme, this has never been made a necessary condition. Excellence in research was supposed to be the first criterion. In fact, we can find among the early fellows, as well as among the staff members later, several theorists whose interests were abstract and mathematical. I do not know for sure who first suggested the establishment of a group of theoretical studies, but I suspect that its spiritual father was no lesser man than Niels Bohr, an already legendary figure in Theoretical Physics. Since the early days of Quantum Theory, Niels Bohr had run in Copenhagen the most famous and the most successful Institute of Theoretical Physics of all times. Copenhagen became intimately connected with Quantum Mechanics. The Niels Bohr Institute was the Mecca (or Jerusalem), the place where, for generations, every young theorist aspired to go. But times had changed. The Old Master was more and more absorbed in his activities for disarmament and prevention of nuclear war. Europe, divided between East and West, had not yet healed the wounds of the war. Supremacy in scientific research had crossed the Atlantic and found new homes in the flourishing American Universities. The newly created European Organization for Nuclear Research offered to Bohr an opportunity to revive his Institute. In a historical decision the Interim Council of CERN, in its first session in May 1952 in Paris, decided to create a Group of Theoretical Studies and to appoint Niels Bohr at its head. The group would be provisionally hosted by the Institute in Copenhagen. 3. The Copenhagen years What this decision meant in practice was that CERN funds were available to hire theorists from the member states in Copenhagen. Indeed, for the year 1952-53 we find the first fellows: 4 Physics in the CERN Theory Division THEORETICAL GROUP STAFF (COPENHAGEN) AS AT SEPTEMBER 1954 Names Functions Nationality Date N. Bohr Sen. Phys. DK 5.1952 Dir. TH A.O.G. Kallen Phys. TH (fellow Sw 1952 and later on member of personnel 1954 (?)) E. Abrahamsen Seer. TH DK 18.8.1952 L. Michel F J.E. Hooper UK T. Sigurgeirsson Iceland E.R. Caianiello I v. Roglic y St. Fallieros Gr A. Gamba I R. Haag D Z. Jankovic y G. Liiders Phys. TH fellow D 1952 (1.11.1953: Engineer PS Group) G.O.J von Gierke Phys. TH fellow D 1.3.1953 B. d 'Espagnat Phys. TH F Oct. 1953 K. Adler Phys. TH CH 1.9.1954 A. Bohr Sen. Phys. TH DK 1.8.1954 C. M!llller Sen. Phys. Dir. TH DK 1.9.1954 (Copenhagen) B.R. Mottelson Sen. Phys. TH USA 1.9.1954 S. Rozental Sen. Phys. Dep.-Dir. TH DK 1.9.1954 (Copenhagen) E. Jacobsen Seer. TH Copenhagen DK 1954 N .M. Hugenholtz NL 4.1954 E. Eriksen Norway 1.1954 P.O. Froman Sw 1.1954 D. Harting Phys. TH NL 1.1954 G. Fidecaro Phys. TH I 9.1954 G.R. Bishop Proposed by N. Bohr UK in Oct. 1953 to be engaged in Sept. 1954. Decision postponed by Council, its session Oct. 1953. Was never engaged: accepted research fellowship at Oxford (Ref. Weekly Report No 59, Jan. 54) The Copenhagen years 5 I assume that all of them were paid by CERN but I am not sure that at the beginning there was any clear distinction between visitors paid by CERN and those paid by the Institute. However, soon things became more formal. An agreement was signed between the CERN Council and the Danish Government specifying the privileges and immunities of CERN employees in Copenhagen. Furthermore, the fellows were appointed by the Council following a proposal by Bohr. I have not found any case in which the Council acted contrary to Bohr's proposal, either by refusing to hire somebody or by imposing another choice, although occasionally they postponed a decision, often for financial reasons. In fact, in these early years, the Theory Group represented the only scientific activity of CERN and it was only normal that the Council followed closely its performance. In the minutes of the first sessions we find many references to discussions about the work of the Group, contrary to what happens today where the activity of the Theory Division, being a higher order correction to the CERN budget, is rarely discussed by the Council.