properties and design of materials is clearly of urgent importance. Our activities in this area are by necessity limited. We seek to support the fundamental aspects of materials research across many areas of man's interests. For example, our activities range from understanding of superconducting materials to an understanding of welding and fracture of metals. In this area we use an attitude of broad scientific interest with the primary criteria for selection being that of quality and fundamentality. One recent program is that of submicron structures. These activities are broad, encompassing activities primarily in materials but also present in chemistry and computer sciences. These activities deal with relatively finite aggregates of molecules since a micron is approximately 1,000 times the size of a molecule.

This area lies between molecular and

macroscopic and is likely to yield very far-reaching discoveries. An example of one aspect of this area is microfabrication. Clearly, the quest for miniturizing electronics places great importance upon theoretical and practical limits on how small we can go in structure.

Although the major fraction of the planned 1981 budget in materials research is devoted to disciplinary research

projects, the need for modern, unique experimental tools is addressed by national facilities and by the central facilities of materials research laboratories. The National Magnet Laboratory and the Synchrotron Radiation Laboratories permit scientists to execute observations such as high-field magnetic resonance and extended x-ray absorption fine structure spectroscopy. We provide facilities through the Division of Materials Research although they are utilized by a wide variety of scientists in understanding biological behavior at the molecular level in addition to topics of concern in materials research.

In summary, the activities of mathematical and physical sciences are interconnected; they encompass both classical disciplines and new disciplines emerging from interdisciplinary activities.

The needs in the physical sciences are

felt most severely in the steady experimental component necessary for the understanding of the physical world. The close connection between experiment and theory is reinforced in supporting university activities where both flourish. The areas represented here are in a state of ferment and excitement. The developments hold promise for both a deeper and broader understanding of nature and with it the ability to

achieve technologies not yet dreamed of. The 1981 budget will permit us to exploit more effectively the intellectual resources of our country in this direction. Since the preponderance of the National Science Foundation effort in mathematical and physical sciences occurs in colleges and universities, these programs should influence future careers of the young. The increased effort in the physical sciences will be clearly perceived by this group; thus, really we are in many ways laying the foundation for the future by this effort. Our programs will pay special attention to the needs of young scientific investigators. Moreover, in their execution they always have depended upon the efforts of students. It is certainly through the broad modern research education of the young that progress in technology, productivity, and Innovation will be achieved over the long run. Thus, we feel that much can be accomplished directly by the requested 1981 budget.

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much, Dr. Klemperer. You do present an exciting picture of what is happening in various scientific fields within your directorate. Of course, the first thing that occurs to me is the question that we raised originally with Dr. Atkinson.

Here we have a situation of exciting-you used the term explosivedevelopment in many of these areas. Obviously, they are going to be very attractive to brilliant young minds. These brilliant young minds are going to want to have opportunities for study and research and publication and so forth.

Yet, there is a declining opportunity on university faculties to employ them in these positions. I ask you what, in your thinking, do we do to resolve this situation?

Let me postulate a numerical model. Say there are twice as many brilliant young post-docs as there are teaching positions available in universities. What do we do?

Dr. KLEMPERER. Mr. Brown, if we examine the different fields, certainly some perhaps have problems, but I tell you that in computer science today, the Bell Laboratories can use up every computer scientist. Mr. BROWN. Skip computer scientists. They are in short supply. Dr. KLEMPERER. All right. Fine. I will take materials science. Materials scientists today are in high demand. In other words, there are jobs both in universities for them and in very high technology industry. The same goes for chemistry. A lot of physics has exactly the same thing, both academic employment and industrial employment. So, I think that we really, in the physical sciences, are not experiencing, with perhaps the exception of theoretical physics and some in mathematics, this problem. It does not appear to me to be acute; it was more acute a few years ago. So, I think there is a high demand for these minds in universities, in research institutions, and certainly in industries. I think our main job is to make sure that we supply the young investigator with adequate research tools so that he can get on with a career and really be effective. I think we are trying to address that problem.

Mr. BROWN. Well, I think that I need to narrow the focus of this question. The opportunities that you suggest in computer sciences and material sciences and to a degree in certain types of physics, exist within research environments associated with industrial corporate research laboratories and other facilities which frequently are very good environments to work in, but which are basically focused on the needs of a particular corporation or industrial sector.

There is still a large number of very brilliant minds that do not look with favor upon that kind of environment, rightly or wrongly. They pursue the goal of the ivory tower, you might say, which is not directly related to the crass world of economic survival.

So, if I narrow the question just to that, what do we do with the theoretical mathematicians, the astronomers, the theoretical physicists who are working on the gravitational physics when the supply of these people far exceeds the opportunities?

Dr. KLEMPERER. If I can address mathematics, we have discussed this because there are a large number of people involved and I think the answer is that there are opportunities in universities for mathematicians. The positions available which could lead to tenure will not, in general, be in the very best schools. However, in speaking with the

mathematics advisory committee, I asked them whether a mathematician in one of these schools would be visible to the research community. In other words, will he be able to establish himself, and they said yes.

I think it's most important that we are able to support the research activities of mathematicians, perhaps at not the best schools, but still, given the support and the ability to travel to interact with other mathematicians, I think we can maintain a viability.

There is a relative mobility in the academic world. What is it called? "The cream rises to the top," or something like that. So, I think it's important that we provide the opportunities for the people which we are asking for, obviously.

Mr. BROWN. Well, you are suggesting that the present system will provide opportunities for these people, but they may be distributed in a slightly different way. They can't all go to Harvard or MIT, but there will be opportunities for them and the Foundation will be sensitive to this situation and will spread its net of financial support to these other institutions?

Dr. KLEMPERER. We are sensitive to the young investigator. We are very sensitive to quality. I don't want to imply that everyone will be supported because I don't think that's possible, but we certainly pay a lot of attention to the young. We pay attention to the track record of established people, but we pay especial attention to try to make sure that we don't nip promising scientists in the bud.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. Watkins?

Mr. WATKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have been listening with great interest. I agree we have all these creative minds. They are able to do basic research in sciences that is necessary. Why are we lagging and what do we need to do? Why haven't we bridged the gap? Why has the gap widened from the basic research to the applied research or the transfer of science and research into technology?

There is no question about that gap compared with a lot of other countries. What are we doing? I know we've got the university emphasis coming down the pike, which I think is a step in the right direction, but what are we doing to bridge the gap between these minds, what the chairman is talking about, doing our basic scientific research and the transfer Dr. Atkinson talked about in his testimony, of that science into technology?

Dr. KLEMPERER. Certainly, a lot of the applied research in the United States is executed industrially. Certainly, if I look at companies such as Bell, IBM, Du Pont, the large companies, I think they have had a good record of transferring basic knowledge into very practical devices. Now, I don't know if the speed is high enough. I really must plead ignorance on this. I think that technology does depend on broadly educated people who can cope with a changing technology. In other words, I think in that sense, the research activities in universities do provide people with a very broad education so that they can go into areas of opportunity.

Mr. WATKINS. If I could paint the picture here. You mentioned that Bell and large industries have their research and their applied sciences. In fact, most of the small businesses create and innovate more of the job or product development. That's a fact, but do you know