HistoryN E W S L E T T E R of Physics A F O R U M O F T H E A M E R I C A N P H Y S I C A L S O C I E T Y • V O L U M E X N O . 1 • FALL 2 0 0 6

Max Jammer Wins 2007 Pais Prize By Michael Nauenberg, Chair, Pais Prize Selection Committee

n early October, the American Physical Society and (Harvard, 1964), and Concepts of Mass in Contemporary Phys- American Institute of Physics announced that Max ics and Philosophy (Princeton University Press, 2001). IJammer has been named to receive the 2007 Pais Prize Jammer’s other books include his pioneering and com- in History of Physics “for his groundbreaking historical prehensive study, The Conceptual Development of Quantum studies of fundamental concepts in physics, including his Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, 1966), which was republished comprehensive account of the devel- in a revised edition in 1989 by the opment of quantum mechanics.” He American Institute of Physics. He joins Martin Klein and John Heilbron, knew many of the main protagonists who received this Forum-sponsored in his story personally, including Al- Prize in 2005 and 2006. He is the first bert Einstein, Paul Dirac and Werner winner of the Pais Prize — which was Heisenberg, who read substantial specifically intended to be awarded parts of his book and discussed them internationally — who is not a US with him in detail. Jammer also inter- citizen. viewed many other founders of quan- Jammer was born in Berlin, Germa- tum mechanics, including Louis de ny, in 1915. He studied physics and its Broglie, Pascual Jordan and Eugene history first at the University of Vienna Wigner. He subsequently published and then at the Hebrew University of his companion study, The Philosophy Jerusalem, where he received his Ph.D. of Quantum Mechanics (John Wiley, degree in 1942. After active service in 1974), a historically oriented book that the British Army during World War II, has also become a standard work in he lectured on the history and philoso- the field. His recent book Einstein and phy of science at the Hebrew Univer- Religion (Harvard, 1999) has also been sity. In the early 1950s, while lecturing well received. at Harvard, he wrote the first of his Max Jammer penetrating studies in the history of physics, Concepts of Space (Harvard University Press, 1954), continued on page 2 which has a foreword by Albert Einstein. While serving as professor at the University of Oklahoma, he was invited to teach at Bar-Ilan University in Tel-Aviv, where he later served as Rector and President. He also participated in the INSIDE THIS ISSUE founding of the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at Tel-Aviv University and served as president of the Israeli Association for the Advancement of Science. He Report from the Chair 2 is a member of the Académie Internationale d’Histoire des Sciences and has served on the editorial boards of several Forum Affairs 3 scientific journals. For his publications he has received many Reports from the 2006 APS Meetings 4 awards, among them the Israel Prize and the Monograph Prize of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. The Seven Pines Symposium 10 Jammer’s main field of research is the history and phi- losophy of fundamental concepts in physics. In addition New Books of Note 11 to Concepts of Space, which appeared in a revised and up- dated edition and has been translated into several foreign Officers and Committees 12 languages, he has written Concepts of Force (Harvard, 1957), Concepts of Mass in Classical Mechanics and Modern Physics Letter from the Chair: An FHP To-Do List

By Virginia Trimble, Forum Chair

Come to Our Meetings: 5-9 March March and 12 January 2007 for April. all requests, and there is some money 2007 in Denver, Colorado, and 14-17 An FHP talk can be given in addi- available to cover speaker travel to April 2007 in Jacksonville, Florida. The tion to one you give in your area of truly impoverished institutions. To usual web sites for registration, physics research (though payment of request a speaker, go to: http://www.aps.org/meet/MAR07 registration fee is then required). You http://www.phys.utb.edu/ http://www.aps.org/meet/APR07 will need to know your member num- WYPspeakers/REQUESTS/howto. are open from mid-August and mid- ber, which is included on your Physics html October respectively. At least portions Today mailing label. Incidentally, the This site can also be accessed from the of the invited session programs are monetary subvention we receive from LCO site, http://www.lcogt.net/, which advertised elsewhere in this newsletter APS depends on the number of con- might interest you in its own right. in remarks from our program chair, Bill tributed paper sessions we hold. This Or, if you are willing to serve as a Evenson (p. 3). was zero in March 2006 and only one speaker, please contact the FHP Chair You don’t like paying the registra- in April 2006. What to talk about? Well, at [email protected]. Some tion fee? There are two possible alter- unless you are much younger than the of you have already given talks, for natives. If you are retired, you can pay chair (who is thinking of an April talk which many thanks! the emeritus fee — and perhaps donate on pre-discoveries of the cosmic mi- Volunteer to Run for Office, or the difference to APS (a fine idea pio- crowave background), some of what help out with a committee. Committee neered in 2006 by Horst Meyer). Or, if you learned as current events is now volunteers please contact Bill Evenson you definitely plan to attend only the history. Or you could pick a brand new by email at [email protected]. Forum sessions, you should pre-reg- topic to explore. Volunteers for FHP elections please ister but need not pay the fee at all. Encourage a Student: We can pro- contact Virginia Trimble at the email Please tell the chair in advance if you vide partial travel support, at $600 address above. plan to exercise this option. each, for two John Bardeen students at Encourage Your Colleagues to Give a Talk: Abstracts can be en- the March meeting (a donation from Join the Forum: It is absolutely free tered at http://abstracts.aps.org, with his family) and two Rolfe Glover stu- for APS members who don’t already deadlines of 20 November 2006 for dents at the April meeting (a donation belong to two (or more) other Forums from Richard Prange). Students can and only $7 a year for those who do. join APS for free for a year (but must For a current APS member, joining do so before the abstract deadline). is as simple as sending an email to What might they talk about? It’s easy [email protected] and saying “I HistorN E W S L E T T E R y of Physics if you know students working in his- want to join FHP!”  The Forum on History of Physics of tory of physics. But Ph.D. theses in the American Physical Society pub- many areas of physics often begin lishes this Newsletter semiannually. Max Jammer Wins 2007 with a chapter of historical introduc- Nonmembers who wish to receive the Pais Prize Newsletter should make a donation to tion to the problem, and some of these would make good presentations. the Forum of $5 per year (+ $3 addi- Continued from page 1 tional for airmail). Each 3-year volume Please ask the student to send the ab- consists of six issues. stract to the FHP Program Chair (Bill. [email protected]) at the same time Editor Among his many scholarly articles, Michael Riordan it goes into the APS system, so that Jammer’s recent essay, “The Strange Institute of Particle Physics we know the person is a Bardeen or Story of the Concept which Inaugu- University of California Glover candidate. rated Modern Theoretical Physics” Santa Cruz, CA 95064 Host a History- or Einstein/Relativity- (Foundations of Physics, November [email protected] Oriented Talk at Your Institution: 2004), deserves special attention. The (831) 459 5687 Last year, FHP co-sponsored a World enthusiastic reception it received en- Associate Editor Year of Physics Speakers’ Bureau with couraged him to write his latest book, Robert H. Romer the Topical Group on General Relativ- Concepts of Simultaneity: From Antiquity Physics Department ity. It is now called the Las Cumbres to Einstein and Beyond, was published Amherst College Observatory Speakers’ Bureau, thanks by The Johns Hopkins University Press Amherst, MA 01002 to a donation from LCO director in 2006.  [email protected] Wayne Rosing. Preference goes to four-year colleges, but we try to fill

2 Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 • History of Physics Newsletter Forum Sessions at the 2007 sessions can be up to 24 minutes long instead of the usual 12 minutes. Editors’ Corner APS Meetings Your suggestions for FHP sessions for future years are always welcome. By Bill Evenson, Chair, Please send them to me at my email This issue begins Volume 10 of His- Forum Program Committee address, [email protected]. tory of Physics, the newsletter of the APS Forum on History of Physics. I will serve as Editor of the next six is- The FHP Program Committee is sues, bringing my experience to the planning several interesting sessions at Call for Fellowship job as former Editor and Contributing next year’s APS March (Denver, CO, 5– Nominations Editor of Beam Line, a quarterly journal 9 March 2007) and April (Jacksonville, of particle physics and cosmology pub- FL, 14–17 April 2007) meetings. Both of lished until 2002 by Stanford Linear these meetings include opportunities The FHP Committee on Fellows Accelerator Center. Robert Romer of for contributed papers on the history is seeking suitable candidates to be Amherst College, who long served as of physics, so we strongly encourage named APS Fellows through the Forum Editor of the prestigious American Jour- members to submit abstracts by the on the History of Physics. These nomi- nal of Physics, has agreed to serve in the appropriate deadlines: 20 November nations should be based on achieve- crucial role of Associate Editor of this 2006 for March and 12 January 2007 for ments in the history of physics and volume — and hopefully will take over April. must be sent directly to the APS office from me when I step down three years The March meeting will feature a in College Park, Maryland. The criteria hence. symposium on “Condensed Matter for fellowship and complete instruc- I plan to continue the fine traditions Physics at Synchrotron Facilities: His- tions for submitting nominations are established by my predecessor Ben tory As Prologue to the Future.” This given at http://www.aps.org/fellowship/ Bederson, and before him by current session will have five excellent speak- fellinfo.html. FHP Chair-Elect Bill Evenson. It is ers examining the enormous impact The FHP unit deadline for the re- also my fervent hope that Bob and I that synchrotron-radiation facilities ceipt of all materials at APS is May can expand the newsletter into some have had on condensed-matter physics 11, 2007. All nominations submitted interesting new directions, such as over the last few decades. An evening to APS will be forwarded to the FHP publishing brief articles on the his- session is still in the early planning Fellowship Committee for review. This tory of physics — perhaps based on stages for March. committee will make its recommenda- talks given at the Forum-sponsored The April meeting will have a two- tions to the Forum Executive Commit- sessions of the annual APS meetings. part symposium on “Nucleosynthesis tee; if approved, the nominations will Or we might include some letters and 50 Years After B2FH,” cosponsored then go to the APS Council for final correspondence. Along these lines, let with the Division of Astrophysics and approval. me solicit comments or suggestions tentatively scheduled for Saturday, Here are some specific instructions from the entire Forum membership re- April 14. We are also cosponsoring a about the nomination process, taken garding any improvements you would session on the “The Changing Role of from the APS website. Before submit- like to see in the newsletter. Please Nuclear Weapons in Foreign Policy” ting your nomination, make sure that direct them to me at my email address: with the Forum on Physics and So- the nominee is a member of the Society [email protected]. ciety (FPS), tentatively scheduled for in good standing. Obtain supporting Already we have altered the news- Sunday, April 15. Our third session letters from two sponsors, who do not letter design to use a serif typeface in in April will examine the “History of have to be APS members. Submit a the titles; this is generally considered Gravitational Physics/General Rela- complete original nomination packet more easily readable. You will see oth- tivity;” it is jointly sponsored with the (nomination form and supporting let- er incremental changes in the next is- Topical Group on Gravitation and also ters) and one copy of the entire packet sue. I hope you like what you see and tentatively scheduled for Sunday, April prior to the unit deadline, May 11, will make good use of this newsletter, 15. Finally, we have begun organiz- 2007. The nomination form may be which — thanks to the generosity of ing what promises to be an insightful downloaded from the above website. our current Chair — continues to be session on “Sputnik, 1957: Its Effect The nomination materials should be available in both paper and electronic on Science in America,” tentatively sent to: versions. scheduled for Monday, April 16. Max Jammer, winner of the Pais Prize for Executive Officer — Michael Riordan, Editor history of physics, is scheduled to ATTN: Fellowship Program speak at the Joint FHP/FPS Awards The American Physical Society Session on Monday, April 16. One Physics Ellipse We urge FHP members to plan to at- College Park, MD 20740-3844. tend these sessions as part of your par- ticipation in the national meetings—as Fellowship nominations may be sub- well as to contribute history papers at mitted at any time, but must be re- these meetings. Please note that papers ceived by the deadline for the next presented in the Forum’s contributed review.

History of Physics Newsletter • Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 3 Reports from the 2006 APS Meetings Low-Temperature Physics: A Historical Perspective By George Zimmerman

A session on the history of low- Fairbank in 1944, and together they did explored the separation phase diagram. temperature physics was held at the pioneering work on He-3 impurities in Other groups involved in similar ex- March 2006 meeting of the American He-4. At the time there was a question periments were the Ohio State group Physical Society in Baltimore. Taking about whether He-3 could be liquefied. led by Daunt and Edwards, and the place on March 16, it included Robert Their experiments showed that indeed University of Illinois group under Wheeler of Yale, Russell Donnelly of it could be, prior to the availability of John Wheatley. Those groups, together the University of Oregon, Horst Meyer He-3 in sufficient quantities. The talk with researchers at Argonne and Los of Duke, and David Lee of Cornell as ended with the contrast between the Alamos, were also instrumental in invited speakers. Their presentations initial, small liquid-helium installation establishing the Fermi-liquid character were followed by a panel discussion at Yale in 1940, in which ten liters of of He-3. This led to the observation of in which they were joined by Gerhard liquid was deemed a large quantity, the negative slope of the melting curve Salinger of the NSF and George Yn- and the present Dewars and Collins- in He-3, which enabled Pomaranchuk tema. George Zimmerman of Boston type liquefiers capable of producing cooling to occur and allowed physicists University organized the session and thousands of liters of liquid helium. to reach the milli-degree region long chaired it. The Forum on History of Wheeler, Donnelly and Fairbank all enough to make measurements and Physics sponsored the session and received their doctorates under Lane’s discover superfluidity. also the taping of the presentations tutelage. After receiving his doctorate at the and panel discussion. The tapes were Donnelly‘s talk, entitled “Rotating University of Zurich, Horst Meyer subsequently converted to DVDs with Superfluids,” concentrated on another came to Duke University in 1959. some additional materials added to facet of the studies pioneered at Yale. That was the year Bill Fairbank left complement the talks. He complemented Wheeler’s biogra- for Stanford; Meyer carried on the The well-attended session was in- phy of C.T. Lane and recounted their Duke low-temperature tradition. His tended to highlight the experimental early experiments on the hydrodynam- presentation, entitled “Fritz London’s challenges and achievements of the ics of liquid helium. Donnelly also Legacy at Duke University,” recounted times when liquid helium was a rar- gave a general overview of this fasci- London’s interest in He-3 after some of ity that was not commercially avail- nating subject and reviewed the pres- it became available. He was intrigued able. Because of time limitations, the ent state of this field of study, which by the Fermi degeneracy properties of topic was confined to the work that bears many similarities to the recently the substance, as opposed to the Bose- was done mainly in the United States, observed Bose-Einstein Condensates. Einstein properties of He-4. London although there were significant con- David Lee, who received his doc- and Walter Gordy were instrumental in tributions by, and collaborations with, torate under the direction of Henry bringing Bill Fairbank to Duke, where European and Canadian physicists. Fairbank, recounted the research on he developed the NMR technique and Wheeler’s presentation, entitled He-3 in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. experimentally demonstrated the He-3 “Low Temperature Physics at Yale in Lee, Osheroff and Richardson received Fermi degeneracy. the late 1930s through the early 1950s,” the 1996 Nobel Prize for the 1972 dis- In the panel discussion, Gerhard concentrated on the legacy of C.T. covery of superfluidity in liquid He-3. Salinger talked about the research of Lane, who received his doctorate from Lee gave a brief review of Fairbank’s the Illinois group and the intensity McGill University in 1929 and built career and then proceeded to highlight and tone John Wheatley set there. This the first Kapitza-type helium liquefier the achievements leading to the devel- historical session had representatives in the United States in 1940. To quote opment of the technology that led to mainly associated with the Yale low- Wheeler’s abstract, “In 1933, both C.T. the discovery. Those were necessary temperature group. The audience of Lane and Lars Onsager were awarded because of the low temperatures, in the about a hundred was composed of Sterling Fellowships, which initiated milli-degree region, where this transi- both young and somewhat older but a stimulating experimental-theoretical tion occurs. Some of those milestones still active physicists, who deemed exchange continuing until they both were the exploration of the properties it interesting and instructive to hear retired.” Among the many firsts at that of liquid He-3/He-4 mixtures, which about what had come before their time, time were the observations of second eventually led to the development of from physicists who had been there sound in He-II and the rediscovery of the dilution refrigerator. The separation personally. the deHaas-vanAlphen effect in zinc, of the liquid mixture into He-4 and He- which, with the insights of Onsager 3 rich phases was discovered at Duke and his students, provided a better by Henry’s brother William Fairbank, understanding of the Fermi surface of who also received his doctorate under continued on page 7 metals. Lane was joined by Henry A. C.T. Lane. Henry’s students further

4 Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 • History of Physics Newsletter Pioneering Women Astronomers By Virginia Trimble

This session, co-sponsored by the standardized photometric systems. She obvious person for whom to name our Forum and the Commission on Status did not follow up on her P-L discovery, first FHP lectureship, co-sponsored of Women in Physics (CSWP), occurred although her 1912 paper clearly out- with CSWP. For more information, see at the April APS meeting in Dallas. Its lines the steps needed to establish this Dorritt Hoffleit, “Misfortunes as Bless- premise was that the gradual incor- method as a reliable means of deter- ings in Disguise” (AAVSO, 2002). poration of women into astronomical mining distance. She worked on topics And the obvious person to be our research (not yet quite complete) had chosen by the observatory director, Dorrit Hoffleit Lecturer was Kather- four stages: (1) a time when women Pickering, and was not free to pursue ine Gaposchkin Haramundanis, who, could participate only by assisting a fa- this line of research. By all accounts, among her many other accomplish- ther, brother, or husband (Sofia Brahe, she seems to have been happy with ments, co-authored an introductory Margaret Hevelius, Caroline Herschel, this research model. According to one astronomy text book with her mother, Maria Mitchell, for instance); (2) the colleague, “her sense of duty, justice, Cecilia Helena Payne Gaposchkin. era of the “computer,” when women and loyalty was strong.” There is no Cecilia Payne attended girls’ schools were paid (very little!) to reduce data indication that she felt the lack of rec- in England, followed by Newnham collected at the telescope, following in- ognition in her lifetime, in contrast to College (also women only) at Cam- structions from the men who had col- some of the other computers. Leavitt’s bridge University, completing the lected it (beginning at Harvard in the work was a stepping stone for Harlow requirements for a degree in 1923 but 1880s, but the last Mt. Wilson computer Shapley and Edwin Hubble, who used not receiving one, since Cambridge retired only about 1970); (3) a moment the period-luminosity relation of Ce- began awarding degrees to women when women began functioning as full pheid variables to establish the size of only after WWII. Starting out in biol- research astronomers, both asking and our galaxy, the existence of other galax- ogy, she soon switched to astronomy, answering their own questions; and ies, and the expansion of the universe. inspired by a lecture by Arthur Ed- (4) the initial breaking of the glass ceil- Dorrit Hoffleit (b. 12 March 1906) dington. When she asked about the ing, with women serving in leadership began her astronomical career in 1929 possibility of completing a PhD, he roles at observatories, institutes, and at Harvard College Observatory, where responded that he saw “no insuperable universities. The computer era was she worked on photographic variables obstacle” provided she moved to the represented by Jean Turner (UCLA) and spectral classification. She took United States. This she did, hitting the talking about Henrietta Leavitt, discov- courses part-time to obtain an MA ground at HCO running, and by 1925 erer of the period-luminosity relation degree in 1932. By 1938, with strong had completed what Otto Struve called for Cepheids. Katherine Gaposchkin encouragement from Shapley and Bart the most important PhD thesis in as- Haramundanis (Hewlett-Packard), Bok, she had received her PhD in as- tronomy up to his time. It was also the daughter of Sergei and Cecilia Payne tronomy from Radcliffe College for a first at Harvard with a female author Gaposchkin (the first “true” woman thesis “on the spectroscopic determina- and the first in astronomy. In it, Payne astronomer), spoke about her mother’s tion of absolute magnitudes” (a subject reached two enormously important life and work. She also provided a closely linked to Leavitt’s work, to that conclusions: first, that nearly all stars brief introduction to Dorrit Hoffleit, of Antonia Maury, another of the com- have essentially the same chemical who bridged phases (2) and (3). And puters, and to later work by Payne- composition and differ primarily in our “ceiling breaker” was Jill Tarter, Gaposchkin). She continued to work surface temperature (applications of director of the SETI Institute. at HCO until 1956, when she became the Boltzmann and Saha equations); Turner began by explaining that director of Maria Mitchell Observatory and, second, that this composition is Leavitt discovered the correlation be- and a member of the Department of strongly dominated by hydrogen and tween pulsation period and absolute Astronomy at Yale. In her own view, helium. The first conclusion was ac- brightness of Cepheid variable stars. her most original work was an early cepted quickly by her Harvard advisor, This enables their use as the preferred paper on light curves of meteor trails, Shapley, and by Russell at Princeton. “standard candles” for measuring ga- but her best-known publications are The second was nearly suppressed lactic and extragalactic distances, with several editions of the Yale Bright Star by them. Russell only gradually came enormous impact on our knowledge Catalogue and several astrometric cata- around to her view years later on the of galactic structure, the local universe, logues. With a strong interest in vari- basis of his own solar data, but still and cosmology. Leavitt started out at able stars, she has worked closely with gave her only grudging credit. the turn of the 20th century as a vol- the serious amateur society, American Among Payne’s other firsts were the unteer at Harvard College Observatory Association of Variable Star Observers Annie J. Cannon Prize of the Ameri- and remained there as a “computer” (AAVSO). Her books include histories can Astronomical Society, the first of until her death in 1921. In addition to of astronomy at Yale, women in vari- its Russell Lectureships awarded to a the period-luminosity relation, Leavitt able-star astronomy, and the education also discovered a large fraction of the of women astronomers before 1960. variable stars known up to that time Celebrating her 100th birthday shortly continued on page 6 and was responsible for one of the first before the Dallas meeting, she was the

History of Physics Newsletter • Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 5 Pioneering Women Astronomers continued from page 5 woman, the first woman to attain full Jill Tarter, director of the SETI Insti- for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence. There professorship in the Harvard School of tute in Mountain View, California, says has been, from time to time, govern- Arts and Letters, and the first woman she learned about teams by leading ment support for using the methods chair of the astronomy department one. An undergraduate engineering of radio astronomy to try to identify there. Much of her later work con- major at Cornell (where her gender signals from other civilizations, but cerned variable stars, especially no- kept her from a scholarship reserved it has been grudging and irregular. vae, a great deal of it in collaboration for descendants of the founder), she Tarter, adopting her normal strategies with her husband, Sergei Gaposchkin. was barred from the informal student of working harder than anybody else Among the next generation of astrono- study groups held on the other side of around and focusing on the goal, not mers on whom she had great influence campus because the women’s dorms on the methods or on who gets credit, were Fred Whipple and Jesse Green- were locked at night. Thus she learned has succeeded in bringing in sufficient stein. Haramundanis drew attention more science (having to solve all the private funding to support the Institute to interesting correlations between problem sets on her own) but fewer in- and to begin construction of a purpose- Payne-Gaposchkin’s rate of publication teraction skills than the guys. Going on built facility, the Allen Telescope Array, and “life cycle events” like marriage to UC Berkeley, she completed a PhD which will scan a very large number of and the birth of her three children, thesis in infrared astronomy for which promising stars frequently, meanwhile World War II, and retirement. She also she will long be remembered, because also carrying out important projects in mentioned the reality of the “pink pay it coined the term “brown dwarf” to mainstream radio astronomy. During check,” apparently about 60 percent of describe the failed stars that never the construction phase, the SETI Insti- what men got for the same work, much quite made it to hydrogen fusion. tute team also has searches in progress as in the days of Leavitt, Hoffleit, and And then came the unique op- at existing radio observatories, where others since. For more information portunity presented by living among they operate again in parallel with see K. Haramundanis (editor), Cecilia the first generation of humans who other programs. She indicates that she Payne-Gaposchkin, 2nd edition, incorpo- can try to answer the question “Are will find equally interesting either the rating a new introduction by V. Trimble we alone?” with observations rather end of our cosmic isolation or the ac- (Cambridge University Press, 1996). than speculation. SETI is the Search ceptance of our singularity. 

Observational Cosmology: Past, Present and Future By Virginia Trimble

A pair of sessions on the history of attending. The session organizer there- in all directions naturally formed a cosmology, co-sponsored at the Dallas fore spoke in her place. sphere. Then Aristotle’s cosmos was, APS meeting by the Forum and the A Milton scholar by training, Den- in a sense, “cosmocentric” rather than Division of Astrophysics, aimed to nis Danielson (University of British “geocentric,” though the speaker ad- revise the old cliché to read “he who Columbia) opened by asking “why Ar- mitted he does not expect the term is willing to study history need repeat istotle took so long to die.” He began to catch on. In the terrestrial “lower only the good parts.” Both sessions by pointing out that, for a long time, story” of the cosmos, there is both nat- began with a talk by a credentialed Aristotle didn’t have a lot of competi- ural motion toward natural place and historian, included someone currently tion and that his ideas were a good fit unnatural or imposed motion, which active in collecting observations and to many everyday experiences. As a eventually loses, as when you throw interpreting them, and ended with a result, the earliest thinkers we today a stone upward. The celestial “upper builder of future facilities and future classify as scientists (Bacon, Galileo, story” had only natural motion, always theories—with just one glitch. Among Newton) cut their teeth trying to show circular and undying. By temporar- six speakers there ought to be a young how Aristotle was wrong, but it wasn’t ily becoming Aristotelians, we can see person or two and at least one woman. easy. His four elements—earth, water, why Copernicanism took a hundred Physics demographics are such that air, and fire—are widely known. Less years to catch on. The heliocentric the woman is likely to be young. well known is that earth included all celestial machine demanded new phys- And young women sometimes decide solids, water all liquids (including ics, which nobody (until Newton) had to have children. Thus, about two blood) and air all gases. The idea of yet provided and for which everyday weeks before the start of the meeting, “natural place” meant that earth fell Elizabeth Barton (“Observational Cos- downward through water, while water mology Today”) reported that minor would rise up through earth and fall continued on page 7 complications would prevent her from down through air. Earth falling equally

6 Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 • History of Physics Newsletter Observational Cosmology: The Aristotelian part is the claim be the case from the first-year WMAP that quite of lot of this information is data). He described upcoming obser- Past, Present and Future actually in good shape, especially the vational facilities: the European Planck continued from page 6 parameters and inventory. Indeed, space mission planned for launch early some of it could have been said a long in the next decade, and the ground- while ago, for instance the case for based Atacama Large Millimeter Ar- dark matter and its contribution to ray (ALMA) under construction in the experience gave no evidence, to replace total mass density, using only obser Chilean desert), among others. These the natural circular motion peculiar to - vations published before World War measurements will focus on charac- quintessence. II. Among the residual problems she terizing the CMB temperature anisot- Danielson credited Tycho’s limit remarked on are some that probably ropy on finer angular scales and the on the geocentric parallax of the nova belong to theory (details of small-scale polarization anisotropy on all angular stella of 1572 (placing it in trans-lunar structure; the nature of the dark matter scales. They have the potential to tell space) as the critical event. He attrib- and dark energy), but observations are us (a) the mass of the heaviest neutrino uted the discovery to Wolfgang Schuler particularly relevant to the “how we (through its influence on small-scale of Wittenberg (although a case has also got here” phase. structure), (b) the equation of state of been made for Francesco Maurulyco). Barton’s research focuses on finding the dark energy and whether its pres- Examining Aristotle’s long monopoly and characterizing the first proto-galax sure/density ratio changes with time, on physics—based on what had grown - (c) much about the structures in our to look like common sense—can also ies and evaluating how they changed own Milky Way and in intervening help us to gain perspective on present with time, by observing objects at space and time that are the foregrounds habits of thought, and perhaps even to different redshifts. She is currently to the CMB radiation but are important find that those habits, as exemplified pursuing a search for very early star- in themselves, and, most exciting of all, by modern astrophysics, still conceal forming regions at a redshift z ~ 8 (the (d) the energy scale at which inflation unpurged remnants of Aristotelian- most distant known galaxies are at z = occurred. If this is near 1016 GeV, then ism. 6.5). She is looking through a window there should be structure in the polar- Inevitably, Virginia Trimble (UC in atmospheric opacity at z = 8.3 where ization maps at about 1 percent of the Irvine and Las Cumbres Observatory) the Lyman alpha line is red-shifted to scattering-induced part, which Planck took over the microphone and gave the 1.2 micrometers. Young stars ionize should be able to observe. If the energy most Aristotelian-as-possible overview hydrogen, which emits this radiation were much larger than that, we would of current observational cosmology. as it recombines. And the emissions already know about it from WMAP. She pointed out that cosmology is a can actually reach us if there are small  “hot topic,” making up only about 5 star-forming gas clouds inside regions percent of recent published papers, but already ionized by the first large star- attracting 10 percent of the citations. forming regions. Her current upper Fifty years ago, cosmology meant (ac- limits already rule out some of the cording to Allan Sandage) “a search most optimistic estimates of early star- for two numbers”—the Hubble con- formation rates. stant and the deceleration parameter. John Carlstrom (University of Chi- Low-Temperature Physics: cago) looked from present observations It progressed 25 years ago to “large A Historical Perspective scale structure and evolution of the toward future ones. Observations of universe,” and now includes the de- the cosmic microwave background continued from page 4 sire to have precision values for many (CMB) radiation with the WMAP more numbers (Sandage’s two, the satellite have provided better values age of the universe, spatial curvature, of almost all of the dozen numbers My regret was that we were not the cosmological constant, normaliza- Trimble mentioned: 4 percent baryons, able to feature other groups, although tion of the fluctuation spectrum that 23 percent dark matter, and 73 percent some of their achievements came out evolved to galaxies, temperatures of dark energy, in a universe 13.7 billion in the presentations. The DVDs contain photons and neutrinos, the current years old, and so forth. The March comments of one of the first salesmen amplitude of density inhomogeneities, 2006 release of three-year results from for the Collins Helium Liquefier sold and the optical depth back to the time WMAP has particularly improved on by A. D. Little and a brief summary of reionization). Also being sought is a the slope of the spectrum of density of the NBS Low Temperature group complete inventory of matter and en- fluctuations to values ranging from by R. Hudson. I hope to gather some ergy in all forms, the initial conditions 0.93 to 0.95 (versus a naive value of more reviews of other groups’ achieve- coming out of inflation that lead to all 1.00) and on the amount of electron ments and edit a CD to supplement these numbers, and how we got from scattering of the CMB radiation since the DVDs. I already have a summary those initial conditions to everything recombination. of the Los Alamos work from William we can see today. The “how we got Scattering, Carlstrom reminded us, Keller. I also hope that in the near here” phase includes formation and polarizes radiation, and the WMAP future we will be able to organize his- evolution of galaxies and clusters, first observations of polarization now in- torical sessions in similar subjects so lights and reionization, and the growth dicate that reionization began near z = that younger physicists can learn more of perturbations and mergers. 12-15, rather than earlier (as seemed to about their past. 

History of Physics Newsletter • Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 7 Theoretical Cosmology: Past, Present and Future By Virginia Trimble

The second of two sessions on the than Aristotle, who eventually lost! answered the questions Spergel had history of cosmology held at the Dal- (See Observational Cosmology, p. 6.) left hanging. He pointed out that there las APS meeting focused on theory. For more on this subject, see H. Kragh, are many well-motivated candidates Helge Kragh (the J. Robert Oppen- Cosmology and Controversy (Princeton for dark matter, some of which could heimer lecturer, sponsored by Robert University Press, 1996). be produced in laboratory experiments Christy and the late Philip Morrison) David Spergel (Princeton) carried and others observed astrophysically. opened the session by pointing out the story forward, pointing out that On the other hand, the only well-moti- that the Big Bang was proposed three cosmology now has a standard model vated candidate for dark energy is vac- different times over 30 years, almost that describes the large-scale distri- uum energy, which leads to an energy independently, and yet came to domi- bution of galaxies, detailed observa- density larger than what is observed nate cosmological thinking only slowly tions of the microwave background, by a factor of 10120, or 10120 times the before 1965. Although Alexander Fried- observations of supernovae, and the observed density of 10-8 erg per cubic mann referred to “the creation of the abundances of the light elements, as centimeter. It is not clear that any labo- world” in his 1922 paper, it was only well as a host of other astronomical ratory experiments presently contem- in a mathematical sense. In spite of the observations. In this model, the uni- plated can shed light on dark energy, great importance of Friedmann’s paper, verse is spatially flat, homogeneous but there are possible astronomical it did not lay the foundation of modern and isotropic on large scales. It is com- footprints. Inflation, which plays an Big-Bang cosmology. A much better posed of ordinary matter, dark matter, important role in our understanding of candidate is Georges Lemaitre, who in and radiation and has a cosmological the origin of the universe, is also being 1931 presented the first example of a constant. experimentally tested. However, there universe with an initial-state, primeval- Spergel highlighted two results are important conceptual questions atom model, which he likened to an from the recently released WMAP remaining about the onset of inflation exploding super-radioactive atom. He three-year data. First, the spectrum and its connections to particle physics. suggested that the presently observed of primordial fluctuations is not quite Better understanding of the underlying cosmic rays were the fossil remnants of scale-invariant (i.e., Harrison-Zeldov- physics of inflation has the potential to the explosion. ich). It is tilted a bit in the direction of put this idea on a firmer footing and Big-Bang type models remained smaller-scale structures, which agrees may lead to a concrete picture of the controversial during the 1930s and with some inflationary predictions and early universe beyond what we can were sometimes associated with Ed- may help with some details in model- observe. ward Milne’s cosmology rather than ing structure formation. Second, the The evolution of the universe from with general relativity. Basically, what optical depth to electron scattering of primordial fluctuations to current was lacking was a connection between the CMB radiation since reionization structures requires numerical simula- nuclear physics and the early uni- began seems to be a bit less than in tions. Here is where we can confi- verse. This was precisely what George the earlier data, meaning that “first dently predict revolutionary changes. Gamow provided with his renewal of lights” and the beginning of this phase Computers will be immensely more big-bang cosmology in the late 1940s. become a bit easier to model. While powerful in 100 years, perhaps with His research program with Ralph Al- this simple model has had many suc- the aid of quantum technology. And pher and Robert Herman was in many cesses, we still want to know more the type of computation will be quali- ways progressive, but in the end no about what happened during the first tatively different. Computers will not more successful than Lemaitre’s. It moments (nanoseconds or less) of the simply be running simulations; they led to detailed calculations of the he- Big Bang, more about the dark energy will be functioning as theorists them- lium abundance in the universe and (and dark matter), and about how star- selves. We can only hope there will still predicted the existence of microwave formation began. Future observations be some place for human cosmologists background radiation. Yet the theory and modeling of the large-scale distri- 100 years from now! was almost entirely ignored, with only bution of galaxies, properties of distant There is also, Carroll noted near the a single paper on the subject appear- supernovae, and the CMB radiation end of his talk, an important philo- ing between Gamow’s last in 1953 and its polarization at finer scales can sophical issue. Any theory is likely to and the revival by Yakov Zeldovich, help to address these questions. For make some untestable predictions, but Robert Dicke, and others beginning more information, see D. Spergel et al., we judge it by its testable ones. The in 1963–64. Why? Generally speak- Astrophysical Journal, in press, www. multiverse concept is not a theory, ing, there were sociological as well arxiv.org/astro-ph/0603449 he said, but rather a prediction of as scientific factors, among them the Sean Carroll (University of Chicago) some as-yet unborn theory! For more existence of a strong rival theory, the then leapfrogged into the future, ask- information, see the series of “Early steady-state universe. It is interesting ing what the universe might look like Universe” papers in Nature, 27 April that the Big Bang, which eventually to astronomers 100 years hence, when 2006, especially S. M. Carroll, “Is Our triumphed, had stronger competition advances in technology should have Universe Natural?” pp. 1132–36. 

8 Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 • History of Physics Newsletter FHP Session on Contributed Papers at Dallas By Robert H. Romer

A well-attended session (chaired by between the two theorists, and delved thors apparently became aware of the Robert H. Romer) of five 24-minute into the reasons each came to embrace pioneering 1930 work of Leon Rosen- contributed papers occurred on Mon- and abandon the idea of the fifth feld only after they had made substan- day afternoon, 24 April 2005, during dimension. He discussed the advice tial progress in deriving and interpret- the Dallas APS meeting. Harry Lustig and support offered by Paul Ehren- ing phase-space constraints. Rosenfeld of CCNY led off with an interesting fest, George Uhlenbeck, and Heinrich had indeed written down an expres- talk titled “Was Nazi Germany on the Mandel and showed how Pauli played sion for the Hamiltonian for general Road to an Atomic Bomb after All?” a major role in the decision of both relativity in terms of tetrad fields. He Historians generally agree that the Einstein and Klein to give up on five- could easily have displayed this object Germans were not close to a bomb by dimensional unification. Finally, he in terms of tetrad fields and conjugate 1945. But why did they not succeed? commented on the reasons why Ein- momenta, anticipating by almost 30 Some have argued that Heisenberg did stein pressed forward with determin- years the gravitational Hamiltonian not understand the physics sufficiently istic unification models as a substitute invented by Dirac in 1958. Rosenfeld well, others that the German scientists for probabilistic quantum mechanics also sought and obtained a correct deliberately failed in order to save the long after Klein had embraced the phase-space generator for infinitesimal world from Hitler having this awe- Copenhagen school of thought on this general coordinate transformations. He some weapon, and others have claimed issue. may have realized that commutators that the Germans suffered from poor Benjamin Bederson (NYU) gave an of these phase- space generators did organization and lack of facilities. In a interesting talk about his WWII ex- not reproduce the correct Lie algebra provocative new book from Germany, periences at Los Alamos. As a young of infinitesimal transformations. One Hitlers Bombe, Rainer Karlsch asserts draftee with two years of undergradu- indication that he may have grasped that in 1945 the Germans actually did ate physics, he was contacted by a the problem is his decision to confine make and test a primitive fission and recruiter for the Manhattan Project. his group-theoretical analysis to a fusion bomb! But Lustig pointed out As a New Yorker, Ben jumped at the realizable subgroup of the full group that they surely had very little U-235 chance. “Manhattan, that’s for me!” of general coordinate transformations. and probably no plutonium at all. he said to himself, “It has to be better Bergmann and Arthur Komar took Nothing in the “Farm Hall transcripts” than a foxhole.” And so he soon found the first steps in 1972 by recognizing supports the claim that they made and himself in New Mexico, still in the US the true nature of the canonically re- tested a bomb or were anywhere close Army but now a member of the “Spe- alizable general coordinate symmetry to it. Karlsch argues that Kurt Diebner cial Engineering Department” (SED), group. Analyses of both Rosenfeld’s and Walther Gerlach, rather than Wer- along with a number of other young and Bergmann’s early work, includ- ner Heisenberg, were the leaders of the soldiers with some technical back- ing a translation of Rosenfeld’s 1930 German bomb project, at least in its ground. Fellow members of the SED paper, will soon be available as online later phases. In spite of these dubious included such future scientists as Val preprints of the Max Planck Institute claims about a successful bomb, this Fitch, Murray Peshkin, Peter Lax, John for the History of Science in Berlin. information about the German project Kemeny, and Richard Davisson. Once For the finale, Virginia Trimble make Karlsch’s book worthy of atten- they had obtained security clearance, (UC, Irvine) gave a talk titled “His- tion. SED soldiers were informed about the toric Patterns in Astronomical In- Paul Halpern (University of the nature of the project, worked side-by- comprehension.” To those of us who Sciences in Philadelphia) gave a talk side with senior scientists, and attend- lived through them, she began, the entitled, “Einstein and Oskar Klein: ed all the technical lectures. Thus the 23 years from the 1973 discovery of The Fifth Dimension as a Bridge across SED became, as Ben put it, a “breeding gamma-ray bursters (GRBs) to their Quantum Chasms,” in which he ex- ground” for future scientists. definitive 1996 identification with the plored conceptual, philosophical and Donald Salisbury of Austin Col- formation of massive, rapidly rotat- historical connections between Ein- lege presented a talk on “Rosenfeld, ing black holes (so rare that a typical stein’s and Klein’s attempts to unify Bergmann, and the Invention of Con- galaxy has one about every million gravitation and electromagnetism in strained Hamiltonian Dynamics,” a years but so powerful that we can see a single five-dimensional set of equa- subject that, he said, constitutes the them throughout the visible universe) tions. Halpern began by outlining the theoretical foundation for the canoni- seemed like a very long time. But 23 early attempts by Gunnar Nordström cal quantization of all modern gauge years is far from a record for the time and Theodor Kaluza to accommodate theories, including general relativity, between an observed phenomena be- Maxwell’s equations within unified quantum chromodynamics, and brane ing regarded as puzzling and its final, five-dimensional models. He then theory. According to conventional consensus explication. While the in- analyzed the similarities and differ- wisdom, this approach was developed ences between Einstein’s and Klein’s independently by Paul Dirac and Peter theories, examined the correspondence Bergmann, beginning in 1949. Both au- continued on page 10

History of Physics Newsletter • Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 9 FHP Session on Contributed Papers at Dallas continued from page 9 terval was, at most, a few months for on old, nearby neutron stars for the by assorted Greeks more than 2000 pulsars and a few years for quasars, it GRBs. Another parallel set of patterns years before its nearly simultaneous, was 259 years for pulsating stars like in astronomical incomprehension can independent measurement by three Cepheid variables and also many de- be seen when someone has taken a nineteenth-century astronomers. There cades for the source of stellar energy, theory (or model or scenario) seriously are, of course, incomplete stories in the nature of the emission lines from enough to work out some predictions, both classes (spiral arms of galaxies the solar corona, and the precession of and efforts to verify or falsify the among many puzzling phenomena the perihelion of Mercury. In two of predictions have gone forward. Again and gravitational radiation among the these cases (the GRBs and the Cepheid there have been short intervals (21 cm predictions). Trimble had time for de- variables), the community was for radiation from hydrogen) and long tails of only the Cepheid-variable and many years in almost universal agree- ones (fluctuations in the temperature GRB sagas but ended with a long list ment about a model that later proved of the cosmic microwave background of current astronomical research topics to be totally wrong—eclipsing binary on the sky), with the record surely that audience members were invited to stars for the variables and star quakes held by heliocentric parallax, predicted sort into the two classes.  The Seven Pines Symposium By Roger H. Stuewer

The tenth annual Seven Pines Sym- outlined its goals in his opening re- speaking on “New Concepts” and posium was held from May 3rd to 7th, marks. Daniel L. Stein (NYU) on “Probability 2006, on the subject of “Probability and Each day the speakers set the stage in Disordered Systems.” That afternoon Improbability in Science.” This meeting for the discussions by addressing the the topic was “Probability and Improb- brings leading historians, philosophers, major historical, philosophical, and ability in the Evolution of Life,” with and scientists together for several days scientific issues pertaining to the sub- Michael Travisano (Houston) speaking to probe and clarify significant foun- ject of the Symposium. Thus the morn- on “The Importance of Rare Events.” dational issues in science, as they have ing of Thursday, May 4, was devoted Lee Gohlike concluded the afternoon arisen in the past and continue to chal- to the general topic of “History of session with a fascinating talk, “Barney lenge our understanding. It was held Probability and Statistical Inference,” Oldfield and Ralph de Palma: Ameri- in the Outing Lodge at Pine Point near with Jos Uffink (Utrecht) speaking on ca’s Most Famous Racers.” The closing Stillwater, Minnesota, a beautiful facil- “History of Probability” and Stephen discussion on Sunday morning, May 7, ity surrounded by spacious grounds M. Stigler (Chicago) on “History of was chaired by Roger H. Stuewer. with many trails for hiking and bird- Statistical Inference.” That afternoon The eleventh annual Seven Pines watching. Its idyllic setting and superb the topic was “Problems in Statisti- Symposium will occur May 2–6, 2007, cuisine make it an ideal location for cal Inference,” with Allan Franklin on the subject “Emergence: From Phys- small meetings like this. (Colorado) talking about “Bayes- ics to Biology.”  Unlike in typical conferences, talks ian Methods” and Teddy Seidenfeld are limited to 30 minutes, with 45 min- (Carnegie Mellon) about “Alternatives utes devoted to the subsequent discus- to Bayesian Methods.” The Friday, sions, and long midday breaks permit May 5, morning session addressed the We Hear That . . . small groups to assemble at will. As topic “Interpretations of Probability preparation for their talks, the speakers in Quantum Mechanics,” with Itamar Chair Emeritus Nina Byers has prepare summarizing statements and Pitowsky (Hebrew University) speak- alerted us about a book of essays on background reading materials that are ing on “Subjective Probabilities” and the much-ignored (until recently) phys- distributed to participants in advance. Geoffrey Hellman (Minnesota) on “Ob- ics contributions of women, which she Twenty-one prominent historians, phi- jective Probabilities.” That afternoon edited with Gary Williams. Titled Out losophers, and scientists participated in the topic was “Probability and Improb- of the Shadows: Contributions of 20th this year’s symposium. They had been ability in Cosmology,” with Alan H. Century Women to Physics, it contains a selected by an advisory board consist- Guth (MIT) speaking on “How Prob- foreword by Freeman Dyson and was ing of Roger H. Stuewer (Minnesota), able is Our Universe?” and Robert M. just published by Cambridge Universi- Chair; Michel Janssen (Minnesota), Wald (Chicago) on “Use of Probability ty Press. “This wonderful book beauti- Vice Chair; John Earman (Pittsburgh); Arguments in Cosmology.” The morn- fully illustrates that scientific talent has Geoffrey Hellman (Minnesota); Don ing of Saturday, May 6, was devoted absolutely nothing to do with gender,” Howard (Notre Dame); and Robert M. to the topic of “Probability and Im- says Nobel laureate Jerome Friedman Wald (Chicago). Symposium founder probability in Statistical Physics,” with of MIT. We hope to review this book in Lee Gohlike, owner of Outing Lodge, David Ruelle (IHES, Bures-sur-Yvette) a future edition of this newsletter. 

10 Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 • History of Physics Newsletter New Books Of Note J. Robert Oppenheimer: A Life by Abraham Pais, with supplemental material by Robert P. Crease Oxford University Press, 2006, 353 pages. which the denial of Oppenheimer’s se- curity clearance was a forgone conclu- sion—once again gives readers an op- Reviewed by Benjamin Bederson portunity to fume over Oppie’s treat- ment at the hands of the “prosecution” This is the long-awaited book that and over the behind-the-scenes actions Pais had been working on before his of his nemesis, Lewis L. Strauss. Here death, which prevented him from readers will find no surprises, for this completing it. It has been eagerly an- hearing has been examined previously ticipated, not only because Pais was a in great detail. masterful writer but also because he Pais was most familiar with Op- was a friend of Oppenheimer, notably penheimer during the latter’s tenure at during the latter’s years as director the Institute for Advanced Study, and of the Institute for Advanced Study it shows. We encounter many inside at Princeton. We had reason to expect stories and much gossip about the an illuminating, personal portrait that Institute, a subject that both Pais and would provide new material about Crease cover in delicious detail. Those his thoroughly explored, though still readers with academic backgrounds not fully revealed, character. We are will be surprised—and amused—to not disappointed. The book is both discover that the halls of the lofty Insti- personal and revealing. Pais makes no tute house the same kinds of academic attempt to hold back his own opinions struggles, trivial quarrels, and deep and feelings, and as a result the book immense knowledge animosities that we know all too well paints a new portrait of Oppenheimer and wisdom, offering honest apprais- from personal experience. that, despite the voluminous literature als of Oppie’s strengths and (quite sub- I was greatly taken by Pais’ informal already existing on the subject, adds stantial) flaws that present yet another writing style. Had he lived, I think, new insight into this “enigmatic” perspective on this iconic figure. he would have edited and polished physicist. Much of the material in this volume the book, thereby removing much of The strictly biographical aspects covers well-plowed ground. I include its informal charm. As one example, of this book reveal little that has not here Oppie’s postdoctoral experiences the title of the chapter describing the already been exhaustively covered, in the great European centers of phys- beginnings of Oppenheimer’s security perhaps even more thoroughly, in ics where quantum mechanics was problems is “In which the excrement previous books, though with a few born, followed by his enormously hits the ventilator.” One juicy tidbit anecdotal surprises. No principal of productive years at Berkeley and Cal that was new to me was Pais’s state- the scientific-political scene of the past Tech—where he not only did his best ment, gleaned from a conversation half century has endured more probing work, but also became the young but with Francis Ferguson, one of his sub- and poking than has J. Robert “Oppie” effective father-figure for an impres- ject’s early friends, that Oppy visited Oppenheimer. In the past several years sive group of graduate students—plus prostitutes in London. alone, a slew of fine books about him the Los Alamos days and his service as In summary, Pais’s portrait (which has appeared, including the 700-page Institute director. Pais delivers some he actually calls an essay) presents a biography by Kai Bird and Martin pungent personal opinions on all this, balanced view of this iconic physi- J. Sherwin, American Prometheus; the including valuable material on the sci- cist. He clearly exhibits ambivalence David J. Cassidy volume, J. Robert Op- ence that Oppenheimer produced dur- regarding his own feelings about Op- penheimer and the American Century; the ing the early days. But I experienced penheimer. Every expression of ap- short but insightful study by Jeremy a feeling of great frustration because proval or admiration about his science, Bernstein, Oppenheimer: Portrait of an Pais’s contribution to this volume ends charisma, and leadership qualities is Enigma; and an interesting synthesis of on the fateful day that the AEC secu- tempered by a darker appraisal of his a recent conference about him, Reap- rity hearings began. Robert P. Crease character. After reading this volume, praising Oppenheimer—Centennial Stud- takes over for the final 82 pages and I emerged with the final impression ies and Reflections, with contributions by thoroughly describes these infamous that Oppenheimer was a deeply flawed Oppenheimer scholars and colleagues. hearings, finishing up the narrative near-genius whose impact upon society Notwithstanding all this recent litera- on Oppenheimer’s life afterwards. was truly important, but not in a com- ture, Pais brings to the subject his own Crease’s description of the trial—in pletely positive way. 

History of Physics Newsletter • Volume X, No. 1 • Fall 2006 11 History of Physics Presorted N E W S L E T T E R First Class US Postage PAID American Physical Society Bowie, MD One Physics Ellipse Permit No. 4434 College Park, MD 20740

OFFICERS & COMMITTEES 2006-2007

Chair: Virginia Trimble Chair-Elect: William Evenson Vice Chair: David Cassidy Secretary-Treasurer: Thomas Miller

Other Executive Committee Members Paul Halpern, J David Jackson, Priscilla McMillan, Peter Pesic, John Rigden, Robert Romer, Roger Stuewer, Catherine Westfall, Michael Riordan (ex-officio), Spencer Weart (ex-officio)

Program Committee Chair: William Evenson David Cassidy, Thomas Miller, Virginia Trimble, Kameshwar Wali, Catherine Westfall

Nominating Committee Chair: Robert Romer Alanna Connors, Guy Ernery J David Jackson, Harry Lustig, Elizabeth Paris, Catherine Westfall

Membership Committee Chair: Thomas Miller Ron Mickens, Dan Durham Paul Halpern

Fellowship Committee Chair: David Cassidy William Evenson, Noemie Benzer-Koller

Pais Prize Selection Committee Chair: Michael Nauenberg Vice Chair: Daniel M. Siegel John Heilbron, Roger Stuewer, Spencer Weart

Historic Sites Committee Chair: John Rigden Gordon Baym, Katharine Gebbie, Gerald Holton, Spencer Weart, Steven Weinberg

Editorial Board/Publications Committee Chair: Michael Riordan William Evenson, Benjamin Bederson, John Rigden, Robert Romer, Spencer Weart