Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site oddjob.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!oddjob!sra
From: sra@oddjob.UUCP (Scott R. Anderson)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.physics,net.research
Subject: Re: Philip W. Anderson's Case Against Star Wars''
Message-ID: <1060@oddjob.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 24-Nov-85 18:51:18 EST
Article-I.D.: oddjob.1060
Posted: Sun Nov 24 18:51:18 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 25-Nov-85 07:15:30 EST
References: <131@decvax.UUCP> <330@ihnet.UUCP>
Reply-To: sra@oddjob.UUCP (Scott R. Anderson)
Organization: University of Chicago, Department of Physics
Lines: 62
Xref: watmath net.politics:12143 net.physics:3635 net.research:360
Summary: 

In article <330@ihnet.UUCP> eklhad@ihnet.UUCP (K. A. Dahlke) writes:
>> In academic physics departments,
>> which receive relatively little support from the DOD, a pledge form has
>> been circulating stating that the signer opposes SDI as unworkable and will
>> not seek SDI funds; this has had a high percentage of signers ...
>> Martin Minow
>
>Can someone post the words of this pledge?

Here is the pledge which circulated at the University of Chicago.  I am
told that it is essentially the same as the original petition circulated
at the University of Illinois at Urbana.

Here at Chicago, 70% of the physics faculty signed the petition, including
two Nobel-prize winners.  Those who didn't sign had varied reasons for
refusal, which were not necessarily due to pro-SDI sentiment (at least one
professor has had his on-going research "reclassified" under SDI).

					Scott Anderson
					ihnp4!oddjob!kaos!sra

********************************************************************************

We, the undersigned graduate students and research staff of the University 
of Chicago's science departments, believe that the Strategic Defense 
Initiative (SDI) program, commonly known as Star Wars, is ill-conceived and 
dangerous.  Anti-ballistic missile defense that is effective and reliable 
enough to defend the population of the United States against a Soviet 
attack is not technically feasible.  Efforts to develop a system of more 
limited capability will only induce a build-up of offensive missiles by the 
Soviet Union, jeopardize existing arms control aggreements, stalemate 
current strategic negotiations, and consequently accelerate the nuclear 
arms race and undermine international security.

Participation in SDI by individual University of Chicago researchers would 
lend the University's name to a program of dubious scientific validity and 
give legitimacy to this program at a time when the involvement of 
prestigious research institutions is being sought to increase Congressional 
support.  Researchers who oppose the SDI program yet choose to participate 
should therefore recognize that this would contribute to the political 
acceptance of SDI.

The likelihood that SDI funding at Chicago would restrict academic freedom 
and blur the distinction between classified and unclassified research is 
greater than for other sources of funding.  SDI officials openly concede 
that any successful unclassified project may become classified.  The
structure of SDI research programs also makes it likely that the University
of Chicago will be part of a Research Consortium with other universities
and industries who will be doing classified research.  Moreover, the
potentially sensitive nature of the research may invoke legal restrictions
required by the Export Administration Act.

The SDI program and its political acceptance depend crucially on the 
participation of individual scientists at all levels of research.
As one step towards halting this program, we pledge neither to 
solicit nor accept SDI funds and encourage others to join us in this 
refusal.  We hope together to persuade Congress and the public not to 
support this deeply misguided and dangerous program.
-- 

					Scott Anderson
					ihnp4!oddjob!kaos!sra