Minutes of the IUPAP Council and Commission Chairs Meeting

IThemba LABS
Cape Town, South Africa
October 24-25, 2005

Monday, October 24, 2005

Participants

Present: Y. Petroff (President), A. Astbury (President Designate), R. Barber (Interim Associate Secretary-General), S. Bagayev (Vice President-at-large), J. Sahm (Vice President-at-large), K. Sharma, M. Barma, P. Wenzel, H. Fukuyama, P. Ormos, M. Skolnick, M. Coey, P. Monceau, V. Lüth, S. Nagamiya, E. Zingu, G. Tibell, W. van Wijngaarden, A. Sen, R. Slusher, Y. Avron, V. Trimble, T. Takada, P. Nelson, M. MacCallum.

Participating by telephone: J. Franz (Secretary-General)

IUPAP/APS staff: Jacquelyn Beamon-Kiene, Shirley Wilson.

Regrets: B. Richter (Past President), S. Rezende (Vice President-at-large), R. Dändliker, R. Wald

1. Welcome

The director of iThemba LABS, Dr Krish Bharuth-Ram, welcomed the members of Council and commission chairs to South Africa and this national laboratory. He extended the invitation to visit the laboratories and noted that a tour had been arranged for Thursday afternoon. The president, Yves Petroff, responded with thanks for the hospitality, noting that this was the first time ever that IUPAP had held a General Assembly in Africa and also the first time a Council meeting had been held in Africa.

2. Remarks by the President

In introductory remarks, Petroff reminded the meeting that Larkin Kerwin, who served IUPAP many years as Associate Secretary-General, Secretary-General, and finally President of the IUPAP had recently passed away.

He then went on to summarize some of the recent developments and issues that were of importance to IUPAP and that would be considered at this meeting.

• A new affiliated commission on medical physics was to be approved at the General Assembly. This draws together people from very different backgrounds. It is important that IUPAP be involved.
• We need to consider areas where new commissions might be formed, e.g., global warming and climate change.
• A meeting was held by the Working Group on Nanonscience. In this meeting 8 or 9 commissions were represented in Paris.
• A new Working Group on International Cooperation in Nuclear Physics, similar to ICFA, is being proposed at this meeting.
• An improved IUPAP web site has been developed. He expressed thanks to the APS staff present, Jackie Beamon-Kiene and Shirley Wilson. The contribution of Sara Connors was noted.
• He proposed that we consider having the possibility of holding exceptional votes by e-mail. In some cases it is not desirable that we wait for the next General Assembly. Judy Franz pointed out that there are few things that have to be done by the General Assembly. Between General Assemblies, Council can do most things, with only a very few exceptions. She pointed out that the liaison committees may not understand the issues and it is difficult to have a meaningful discussion of complicated issues by e-mail. There may be a problem of availability of the liaison committees between General Assemblies. Petroff suggested that there may be cases where it would be desirable to seek endorsement of important issues.
• The establishment of IUPAP prizes for young scientists has been going slowly. Wenzel noted that C4 has been waiting for action to be taken. Franz commented that this was to go to the General Assembly for approval in principle. It was expected that specific proposals would come from the commissions.
• Petroff noted that there was a proposed increase in conference grants. IUPAP is in good financial shape, although ICSU was not. He expressed a hope that the ICSU problems would not impact IUPAP unfavourably. Franz observed that the switch in membership fees to the euro had resulted in a favourable exchange rate for the union. She recommended that there not be an increase in dues for the years 2006-2008. Petroff commented that the present reserves were larger than they should be in the long run. The long term goal has been to have reserves of about 1.5 times the annual budget. Franz said that the projected budgets for the balance of 2005 and for 2006 both showed a deficit. Given that her recommendation was to hold dues constant through 2008, it was projected that the current surplus would be corrected in that time frame.
• Potential new members were being identified: Serbia, Montenegro and Bangladesh. Nigeria has indicated that, if they do not have to meet past dues, the would like to rejoin. Greece has been slow to reply, but Petroff has been contacted by a Greek graduate student group.
• Petroff described some of the problems in the relationship of IUPAP with ICSU.
• The launch event of the World Year of Physics in Paris went well. It was held at UNESCO headquarters and sponsored by IUPAP and EPS and other sources. About 1100 people attended, including 500 students from 73 countries. Petroff commented that there were many participants still there on the last day (Saturday). IUPAP, UNESCO, the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, and the South African Institute of Physics with support from the South African Department of Science and Technology, are the primary sponsors of the World Conference on Physics and Sustainable Development to be held in Durban.
• Should we do something specific to promote membership of developing countries?
• Amongst physicists above 35 years old, IUPAP is well known. Young physicists have no knowledge of it. It is therefore important that graduate students attend IUPAP conferences. A Greek student union wanted to join IUPAP. It was noted that there are some cases where there is a national student organization. Should we consider giving grants to international conferences organised for graduate students? Franz said that we already have graduate student participation in North America and Lüth said that there is a worldwide organization called "Young Particle Physicists" for graduate students and post docs in particle and accelerator physics. C11 plans to establish more formal relations with them.

2. Preparation of Commission Slates

The meeting then considered the proposed slates that had been proposed by the commission chairs, working in collaboration with the Secretary-General. The slates were reviewed in order by commission.

In the discussion, some of the issues that were identified while composing these slates were the following.

• A balance in the areas covered by the commission was necessary.
• Female candidates were actively sought.
• It was necessary to encourage people from developing countries by adding them to commissions.
• It was observed that it would greatly ease the difficulty of establishing the slates if the number of ordinary members of a commission were increased from 10 to 12.
• It was desirable, but not always possible, to add members from small countries to the commissions.
• We need more members from Latin America.
• Some problems of representation can be solved by appointing appropriate Associate Members to commissions. Associate members will be appointed at the October 2006 meeting of Council and serve for three years.
• Some liaison committees had not sent in nominations on time.
• In some cases, a member of a commission was re-nominated by the liaison committee, but the commission reported that the member had never participated.
• It was recognised that, in a few cases, a country was over represented.
• Coincidentally, it was noted that the number of women in a commission increased with the number of the commission.
• For one commission, the liaison committees had proposed no female candidates, although suitable candidates were known.
• It was essential that scientifically outstanding individuals be proposed as commission members.

The meeting adjourned for a brief break at 10:30 a.m.

Discussion of the commission slates resumed after the break and these issues were raised.

• In some cases, such as India, the number of shares should be reviewed and increased. It should be expected that, as scientific work increases, a larger number of shares is appropriate. There should be a slow evolution over time.
• On average, it could be expected that there should be ~1.2 officers or commission members per share. In some cases this was exceeded. In other cases, nominations were late or had not been received, so members were under represented.

The final slates were recommended to the General Assembly. (The General Assembly subsequently approved the slates without further changes. A complete listing by commission will be posted on the IUPAP web site at http://www.iupap.org/commissions/iupap-commissions.html).

3. Nomination of Executive Officers and Vice Presidents

Petroff presented the proposed names for the Executive officers. The President Designate, Prof.. Ushioda, is active in nanoscience. Judy Franz will continue as Secretary-General for another term and Peter Melville of the IOP was proposed as Associate Secretary-General.

Discussion then turned to the nominations of the Vice Presidents. Since the Vice Presidents-at-Large represent broad geographical regions, it was decided that the following candidates be recommended: Cisneros (Mexico), McKellar (Australia), and Chen (China -Beijing). The following commission chairs were selected to serve as Vice Presidents:

C13 Annick Suzor-Weiner France
C14 Prathiba Jolly India
C9 Dan Dahlberg USA
C18 Pavel Exner Czech
C2 Leslie Pendrill Sweden

The meeting adjourned for lunch and reconvened at 1:20 p.m.

4. Member affairs

By phone Franz reported developments with members. Tunisia has negotiated membership and is was proposed that it become a member on receipt of its first dues. It was agreed that a resolution to this effect be presented to the General Assembly.

She reported that Bulgaria has not paid its dues for six years and has therefore ceased to be a member. Chile has not paid for three years and has lost its vote for this General Assembly. There has been no response to letters to Chile.

Ormos said that he had called people regarding Bulgaria’s membership without success.

Franz commented on the strange absence of Greece. We have been unable to make contact. Petroff thought that something should happen in the next six months. One benefit of IUPAP membership is that there is recognition for the scientific community within the country.

Franz has seen more interest in Africa now than there is in South America. It would also be nice if there were more interest shown by the small Asian countries.

5. Financial affairs (Appendix 2)

Franz led the discussion of the financial report, referring to the attachments to the agenda. The accounts were reported in US dollars because all banking was done in US dollars.

Net financial assets held at September 1, 2005 were k$ 873.

The audited statement for 2004 was reported. The large surplus in 2004 was attributed to the payment of back dues is several cases, the unanticipated increase in the value of the euro relative to the US dollar, and the fact that IUPAP expenses are on a three year cycle, with 2004 being the low year of the cycle.

The statement for 2005 showed that it is anticipated that there will be a deficit of ~ k$20. Big fluctuations occur if countries do not pay their dues on time, especially those with many shares. Expenses are high because the General Assembly is being held and more expenses associated with the World Year of Physics are expected. The final deficit could amount to k$40.

The budget estimates for 2006 were presented. It will be an expensive year because the Council and Commission chairs will meet twice. No change in dues was assumed. It was expected that conference expenses would change, probably go up from the given figure. This would be corrected according to what is decided for conference sponsorship. It was recognised that there needed to be an increase in the grants to meet the increase in the value of the euro. Further, it was noted that there could be costs for initiatives that come out of the World Conference on Physics and Sustainable Development to be held in Durban following the General Assembly. There will be costs in 2006 related to publishing the IUPAP General Report.

Franz reminded the meeting that prizes were proposed that needed to be funded. This was a good thing to do and additional proposals would be considered at the February meeting.

Petroff commented that we need to keep 1.5 times the annual budget as a reserve in order to accommodate existing fluctuations and operate without borrowing.

Franz also said that there is a lot of administrative work with new projects such as the proposed prizes. This was already the case with the work around the Women In Physics initiatives. Evaluations of programs must take place. The increase in the number of projects undertaken will lead to more administrative costs.

6. Discussion of Conferences

6.1 Conferences proposed for sponsorship

Barber had mailed the lists of conferences proposed for sponsorship separately. List A gave conferences proposed for 2006. List B gave conferences to be held in 2007 and for which early approval was requested. List C gave conferences anticipated for 2008.

Barber reminded the meeting about the criteria and practices that had been established. In particular, IUPAP has a policy that it does not sponsor annual conferences, conferences that do not move internationally, workshops and regional meetings. Some exceptions have occasionally been made for regional meetings where this was considered likely to promote countries joining IUPAP.

The conference applications were reviewed and discussed. Final approval was deferred to the Council meeting. (The list of approved conferences has been distributed separately and will be posted on the IUPAP web site. (November 7, 2005) ).

6.2 Proposed amendment of the Conference Fee Limit

Attached to the agenda was a figure showing the recent rate of inflation for the countries using the euro. The average annual rate of inflation appears to be a little larger that 2%. It was agreed that the conference fee limit should be amended from 410 euros to 425 euros (a change of ~3%), effective for the 2006 conferences. At September 20, 2005, the equivalent was ~US$ 516.

The meeting adjourned for a short break and reconvened at 3:48 p.m.

7. Request for conference funding from the Working Group on Nanoscience

Van Wijngaarden reported on the meeting of the Working Group on Nanoscience and on the proposal that a small (~ 100) conference of outstanding personnel be convened. Petroff and Ormos commended the calibre of the proposed meeting and the approach being taken in organising a small conference. After some discussion it was recommended that the conference be given a conference grant of k$10.

8. Review of resolutions for the General Assembly

Proposed resolutions to be presented to the General Assembly had been circulated with the agenda.

8.1. Working Group on International Cooperation in Nuclear Physics

This is a new working group, proposed by C12 and presented by S. Nagamiya. He described the origin of this as a subcommittee of C12 that was modeled on ICFA, and has become increasingly active in this past triennium. It is the intent that this working group monitor the landscape of key issues in nuclear physics over next 10-20 years. The field has matured to the state where this parallel function appears to be necessary.

It is envisioned that the structure may be somewhat different from that of ICFA. For example, for some labs it is not necessary to have director, but it is necessary to have an appropriate representative.

Astbury suggested that it is probably necessary to include national representatives. Nagamiya noted that there are many nuclear facilities and that world access to existing facilities is important. Petroff commented that IUPAP could perform a useful function as the nucleus of such cooperation. Nagamiya noted that OECD has a new working group to study nuclear physics. Franz said that this is a new OECD group that would want to work with IUPAP. Nagamiya pointed out that OECD is government, while IUPAP is essentially an academic group. Both approaches are useful and necessary. Some representatives of this proposed working group would meet with the OECD.

It was agreed that the proposal be approved and that the working group relate to C12.

8.2 Proposed New IUPAP Prizes

This matter was discussed at a previous meeting of Council and Commission chairs. Details of the proposal were deferred to item 10 (below). Approval in principle would be sought.

It was agreed to recommend this proposal to the General Assembly for adoption.

8.3 New Affiliated Commission on Medical Physics.

It was recommended by the Joint IUPAP-Medical Physics Committee that the International Commission on Medical Physics become an affiliated commission of IUPAP. This proposal enjoyed the support of the International Organization for Medical Physics.

It was agreed to recommend this resolution to the General Assembly for adoption.

8.4 Ethic guidelines (Appendix 2)

The Working Group on Communication in Physics proposed a statement for adoption by the General Assembly. There was some discussion about the details of the wording of these guidelines.

It was subsequently agreed, for pragmatic reasons, to present the statement to the General Assembly in its form as distributed.

8.5 Resolutions from the Second Conference on Women in Physics in Rio(Appendix 3)

Franz presented a page that summarized the resolutions from the Second conference on Women in Physics that was held in Rio de Janeiro. Care was taken that the resolutions represented things that IUPAP could actually do. Some of the statements require that IUPAP take action on specific matters. Many of the statements address factors involved in the participation by women in physics activities.

It was agreed to present the resolutions to the General Assembly in the form in which they were distributed.

8.6 IUPAP dues for 2006-8

Franz recommended that the membership dues remain constant for the years 2006, 2007 and 2008, at the level of 1850 euros per share..

8.7 Resolution regarding the membership of Tunisia

This resolution was considered previously and approved.

8.8 Approval of Energy Report

Petroff commented that the report was a status report. It has already been of interest to other organizations. However it is desirable that it be condensed into a form that is accessible to politicians (2 or 3 pages) This should include strong recommendations to be adopted at the next Council. Petroff and Astbury will prepare that. ICSU, to avoid political problems, is only focusing on renewable energy.

It was decided that the Council and Commission Chairs can approve the report and proceed to the next step.

9. IUPAP online conference proceedings hosted by India

The idea of sponsoring the archiving of conference proceedings on the web was investigated by Barma and Sen. It would be the Indian Academy of Sciences, Bangalore that would relate to IUPAP for this project.

Barma contacted the Indian Academy of Sciences who have given approval in principle. The IASc brings out a number of publications, including electronic publications. It is proposed that they build a web site to host proceedings of a IUPAP-sponsored conferences, and they have agreed to have this ready within about a couple of months. In the meantime, they have set up a simple link to the Proceedings of STATPHYS22, which were published in Pramana-J. Phys., one of the journals of the IASc. They have agreed to put up the proceedings for the World Conference on Physics and Sustainable Development. A modest budget of $5,000 per year has been suggested for this project.

At least initially, no especially broad bandwidth would be required as usage is not expected to be very high. The issue of copyright for already published proceedings would have to be discussed case by case. For the future, Barma suggested that an option that would avoid the copyright problem would be to try to publish IUPAP conference proceedings through the IASc. The possibility of using an existing journal that also has an electronic version was also noted.

Since it is expensive to produce hard copy proceedings for IUPAP conferences, it may be desirable to get IUPAP conferences published in the same place. One does not need a publisher. Lüth said that E-conf (see http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/) provides a fully electronic, Web-accessible archive for the proceedings of scientific conferences in High- Energy Physics and related fields. In its present stage, the site is maintained by Technical Information Services at SLAC as a free service to the scientific community. It provides a home for electronically published conference proceedings, with individual contributions fully searchable electronically. Through this, SLAC promotes the permanent change in the way that scientific conference proceedings are published and accessed.

E-conf is not restricted to IUPAP sponsored conferences. In fact, of IUPAP conferences, only LP-99 has been published here, but many other workshops and conferences related to HEP and accelerator science are available. Soon photon science and particle astrophysics will also be included.

Trimble suggested that IUPAP should take up the offer through the Indian Academy of Sciences. If conferences are not willing to publish in this form, they are free to consider other forms. Coey commented that publication in a recognised journal still has importance. At the same time, publishers are going electronic, even though there are problems in agreeing on copyright issues. Wenzel commented that the Cosmic Ray Conference has already gone to electronic publication.

The meeting adjourned for the day at 5:30 p.m.

Tuesday, October 25, 2005

The meeting reconvened at 9:00 a.m.

10. Requests from the Commissions for new prizes if the GA approves the resolution

Proposals for medals to be given to young scientists were made by commissions C12 (Nuclear Physics), C18 (Mathematical Physics), C9 (Magnetism) and C16 (Plasma Physics) and were circulated prior to the meeting.

It was agreed that a common framework was desirable, rather that having different guidelines and names for each commission.

It was decided that these prizes should be called the “IUPAP Young Scientist Prize”. Eligible candidates would have had up to 8 years of research following Ph.D. Time not spent in research would not be counted (e.g. for women who had taken maternity leave, etc.). The prizes would be awarded through the commissions. IUPAP will provide one medal plus $1000 to each commission annually. The frequency with which the prize is awarded would be left to the judgment of the commission (one to three years) and the total amount of money would be available. The same medal is to be used by all commissions. The selection committee will be established by the commission. Presentation of the prize is to take place at an international conference sponsored through the commission. A citation of 100 words will be provided by the commission.

It was agreed that these details of the awards would be reported to the General Assembly when the resolution was presented.

Details regarding the way that candidates will be nominated, the appointment of a selection committee, etc., were left to the commissions. It was suggested that the medal should have the IUPAP logo, the name of the award and, possibly, the commission name. On the certificate, the name of the commission should appear. The certificate should be of a standard form.

Advertisement of the awards should be promoted through the commissions.

11. Discussion of Membership from Developing Countries

Petroff pointed out the number of countries is small for Africa, for Asia and for South America. He suggested that, at the Durban conference it may be possible to see what can be done. ICSU is setting up regional offices, with the first one to be in South Africa. For first time we will have the possibility to have a good data base for Africa. The next regional ICSU office is to be one in Malaysia, followed by one in Rio.

It was clear that this is an important problem for IUPAP. It is believed that this is sometimes a money problem, but not always. In some countries it is rather a problem with the bureaucracy within government.

Some e-mails have been circulated by IUPAP, outlining a proposal to allow a limited number of countries from Asia, Africa, South America to join IUPAP under a special arrangement. In discussing this proposal, the question was raised as to whether there was a mechanism whereby several countries could work together. For example, one could have regional conferences where the countries work together. IUPAP would have to be the body that initiates this.

In some cases the commissions are in a better position to initiate contact with a particular country. The scientific contacts will be the most important.

Petroff said that, under the proposal, we would be looking for 4 or 5 countries which would be accepted for 3 year without paying. These cannot be present members and would have to be in ICSU. We would have to chose these around the world as a test for the next 6 years. Astbury suggested that we might find key physicists through the commissions who would help us chose. Franz commented that we would likely choose on the basis of existing contacts. Franz urged caution because countries that are already members want to see that they are getting a benefit. Coey suggested that the commissions should work with the president to select candidate nations.

It was agreed that this proposal would be deferred to the Council and Commission Chairs meeting to be held in February 2006.

12. Report on ICSU

Petroff gave a report on the activity of ICSU. ICSU is made up of 73 national members (plus observers or associates) and 27 scientific unions. Some of the unions are large, having budgets much larger than that of IUPAP. However many are small and do not contribute much financially. It has a constitution under which each country has one vote.

Recent meetings had improved in organization and serious efforts have been made to reorganize.

The priority item for ICSU is the environment. While this is satisfactory for the short term, it is not for the long term. Basic science has been ignored. Under pressure from IUPAP and others, it was decided to have a Working Group on Basic Science. ICSU should not give the impression that in developing countries the only thing of interest is applied science.

The finances of ICSU became a problem in 2002 when they lost on the value of stock and obtain little interest on investments. The budget ran a deficit. The total contribution from the scientific unions is about k$150. However, unions decide what they will pay, so some unions pay very little. Only IUPAP and IUPAC pay over k$15 per year. It has been decided to change the fees to euros, so there will be about a 20 % increase. Beginning in 2008 ICSU will be asking for an increase each year thereafter.

In a given country the increase to ICSU may come out of the grants to the unions. IUPAP will not accept the increase of the fees until a more realistic scenario is adopted for the contributions of the countries and the unions.

The meeting adjourned for coffee and a picture of the Council and Commission Chairs.

13. Request for student organization affiliates

Petroff had been contacted by a Greek Association of Physics Students who wished to set up a link with IUPAP. It was agreed that, since sometimes there are several student organizations, it was not a good idea to identify one graduate student organization for a formal link with IUPAP. In some countries there is a single graduate physics association, but this is not always true.

The problem is to get money to allow them to attend conferences. Allowing a student to give a paper at a conference is part of the training. Tibell noted that there is an International Association of Physics Students which might be a good starting point. Sahm suggested that we should tell the Greek students about IAPS and invite a representative of the IAPS to a Council meeting.

Lüth commented that there is little discrimination in who gives a paper. Some conferences (e.g., High Energy) arrange special support for students. The conference organizers make an effort so that the conference is welcoming to students. It was agreed that, at level of the commissions, IUPAP should ensure that some of the support goes to students.

14. Review and Reappointment of the Working Groups

14.1 Future Accelerators (ICFA)

Lüth said that there will be a report to the General Assembly. There are fewer accelerators, so they will need to consider their future. The question is what will there be on the horizon.

It was agreed that ICFA be continued.

14.2 Communication in Physics

This group has just produced the ethics guidelines. This working group will be needed for specific problems from time to time.

It was agreed that this working group be continued.

14.3 Facilities in Condensed Matter

This working group has not been active since it made its report. The subcommittee on neutron facilities is now inactive and the subcommittee on high magnetic field facilities has reported previously.

It was agreed that this working group be designated as inactive and all names in the listing be removed. It is understood that new committees may be proposed and formed as required.

14.4 PANAGIC

Wenzel reported that C4 (Cosmic Rays) had a report at a recent meeting. In Neutrino physics, PANAGIC has played a useful role. A recent proposal that they get into high energy gamma ray astronomy was not supported.

It was agreed that this working group be continued and that they must stay within their mandate. It was agreed that the President would send them a letter to this effect.

14.5 Women in Physics

It was agreed that this working group be continued, but noted that it will need a new chair.

14.6 Energy

Their report has been made. Council will produce recommendations based on the report. Further action is deferred to the February meeting.

It was agreed that the mandate of this working group be terminated.

14.7 Ultrahigh Intensity Lasers (ICUIL)

A report was scheduled to be made to the General Assembly.

It was agreed that this working group be continued.

15. Inter-Union Representatives

The following list of Inter-Union representatives for 2005-2008 was proposed:

IU.1 International Council on Scientific Union (ICSU): Yves Petroff

IU.2 Committee on data for Science and Technology (CODATA): Peter Mohr

IU.3 Committee on Space Research (COSPAR): Peter Wenzel

IU.4 Consultative Committee on Units: Leslie Pendrill

IU.5 International Council for Scientific and Technical Information (ICSTI): Roger Elliott

IU.8 Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE): Jon Samseth

IU.10 Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics (SCOSTEP): Sandra Chapman

IU.13 IUPAC Commission on Atomic Weights and Isotopic Abundance (CAWIA): Kumar Sharma

IU.14 IUPAC Inter Division Committee on Terminology and Symbols (IDCNS): Leslie Pendrill

IU.15 Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM): Andrew Wallard

IU.18 International Union of Pure and Applied Biophysics (IUPAB) : Pal Ormos

These representatives were approved without amendment.

In addition to these, Yves Petroff was named to be the IUPAP Delegate to the Executive of the International Commission for Optics (AC1). Further, Wenzel drew attention to the fact that C4 has an Associate Member who provides liaison with the International Astronomical Union.

16. New business

16.1

It was agreed that the task of providing improved national representation would be made easier if the number of ordinary members of the commissions was increased from 10 to 12. It is possible to do this soon by inviting 2 additional persons participate in commission business.

The formal change requires a change to the By-laws. Further consideration was deferred to the next meeting of Council and Commission Chairs.

16.2

It was suggested that a book surveying contemporary physics be considered.

17. Next Meeting

Petroff said that Franz would send a proposal regarding the February meeting to the new chair and members. The possible locations were London and Washington

18. Adjourn

Petroff declared the meeting adjourned at 12 noon.

Appendix 1: Budgets for 2005