Appendix: First Letter from National Science Foundation
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20550
Division of Earth Sciences
July 11, 1977
Dr. Robert V. Gentry
Dear Dr. Gentry:
This is in answer to your letter of June 27, requesting panel review comments
on your proposal (EAR7713496). The panel review comments were not included
in the declination letter because according to our rules that letter must go out
first and then be followed by the comments, if requested. What I have done below
is to give you the general nature of the panel discussion, based on my notes at
the time, my memory of the discussion, and a short (two sentence)
recommendation put on tape by the Chairman of the Geochemistry Panel. We do not
tape the whole discussion. Here it is:
Much of the panel discussion centered on the general significance of the
occurrence of "radioactive haloes" (both giant and dwarf) and the techniques the
principal investigator has used to investigate them. The panel considers the
occurrence of haloes of interest, but not of prime importance to geochemistry. One
aspect of the past research was to try to detect "superheavy" elements in the mineral
nucleii of giant haloes, and a tentative identification of superheavies was
shown to be incorrect. The panel felt that the principal investigator and his
colleagues handled the release of information concerning superheavy element
detection judiciously — i.e., in an objective and straightforward manner
with no sensationalism (which could have happened considering the potential
scientific importance of the discovery). However, the panel did fault the
principal investigator and his colleagues for the techniques used to try to detect
superheavy elements. The initial method of an X-ray fluorescence attachment on a
scanning electron microscope should have been known not to have the
sensitivity. The tentative identification of elements with an atomic number near
26 resulted from using the proton induced X-ray emission method. The signal
that resulted in the tentative identification of these elements has now been
attributed with some confidence to a Ce (p, n γ) nuclear reaction rather than
X-ray fluorescence from elements with an atomic number of around 126. The
panel felt that the principal investigator and his colleagues should have checked
out all such possible reactions before publication because monazite (the mineral
inclusion of the center of the halo) is a mineral known to contain large [p. 253] amounts
of cerium and other rare earth elements. The principal investigator proposes a
continuation of the search for superheavy elements. The panel felt that there is
little possibility of their detection by the proposed techniques.
The most important criticism of the proposal did not, however, have to do with
superheavy element detection. The criticism stemmed from the general nature of
the proposed research on haloes. The principal investigator has been collecting
specimens, examining them petrographically, and reporting their morphology
and mineral occurrence for a number of years. The panel considered that these
descriptive contributions have been of some value, but felt that more of the same
approach had little potential to contribute something new. The main difficulty
with the proposal is that (aside from the superheavy element search) there was no
hypothesis concerning the origin of the haloes that the principal investigator
proposed to test. He has already looked at and described a number of occurrences.
The panel felt that it was not justified in recommending funding of a research
project that merely proposed to make additional observations of the phenomenon.
There seems little possibility that the principal investigator could arrive at
a hypothesis by looking at additional haloes since he has not been able to propose one
at this time.
In summary, the panel considers giant and dwarf haloes to be of some geochemical
interest, but feels that the proposed research was not likely to make
significant additional contributions to our knowledge of their origin.
I hope that this outline of the panel discussion will be of use to you in your
consideration of any future proposal you may want to submit.
|
Sincerely yours,
John Hower
Program Director
for Geochemistry |
Copy to: |
Mr. Gordon E. Bullock
Business Manager
Columbia Union College |
|