Engineering Science N1 Question Papers Images: Fill & Download for Free

Who’s the most badass scientist ever? How about someone who mindf#cked “the greatest living scientist” of his time…… as well as the most powerful political force of his time (pre-WW2)…… as well as the ideas that formed the very foundation of physics itself (and by extension the foundation of our industrial civilization)?Someone who made a key contribution in the creation of the first atomic bomb, and also foretold, in stunning precision and long before any political leader realized it, of the unprecedented promise of global peace and international cooperation that our ability to harness nuclear energy brings, and also the unprecedented threat it poses to our existence if nations don’t come together.And someone who didn’t just stop at theorizing or philosophizing the idea that nations that have fought each other for centuries could coalesce for a greater good but actually made it happen, when he led an effort that brought twelve European countries together to create the first truly international research organization, which today operates the world’s pre-eminent particle physics laboratory, and also is the birthplace of a little thing called The World Wide Web:One of the greatest theoretical physicists of all time, a philosopher who pondered some of the most inscrutable aspects of the very nature of reality itself, but also a prescient realist and a connoisseur of international politics who could influence leaders of nations to do good! Almost a mythical hero, from the land of Hans Christian Andersen, his name was Niels Henrik David Bohr.Badassery Exhibit A: At age 20, refined Lord Rayleigh’s theory and methods of measuring surface tension of liquids. To quote Wikipedia:In 1905, a gold medal competition was sponsored by the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters to investigate a method for measuring the surface tension of liquids that had been proposed by Lord Rayleigh in 1879. This involved measuring the frequency of oscillation of the radius of a water jet. Bohr conducted a series of experiments using his father's laboratory in the university; the university itself had no physics laboratory. To complete his experiments, he had to make his own glassware, creating test tubes with the required elliptical cross-sections. He went beyond the original task, incorporating improvements into both Rayleigh's theory and his method, by taking into account the viscosity of the water, and by working with finite amplitudes instead of just infinitesimal ones. His essay, which he submitted at the last minute, won the prize. He later submitted an improved version of the paper to the Royal Society in London for publication in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society.Badassery Exhibit B: Gave birth to a new physics. In the 1880s, physicists Johann Balmer and Johannes Rydberg discovered that the wavelengths of the emitted light in the spectrum of hydrogen follow a simple pattern:where R(H) is a constant, called the Rydberg constant for hydrogen (approximately 10967758 m^−1), and n1, n2 are just natural numbers (n2 > n1).For decades, no one could explain why this happens. Then, in 1911, Ernest Rutherford put forth his solar-system-like model of the atom: negatively charged electrons orbiting a positively charged nucleus. The main issue with this model was that it violates classical electrodynamics, which says that in such a system the electron would gradually lose its energy and spiral into the nucleus, thus making the whole system unstable. At this juncture, in 1913, Bohr had the seminal insight that the fixed wavelength values of hydrogen spectrum found by Balmer and Rydberg can be simply explained as energy emitted by electrons jumping from a higher-energy orbit to a lower-energy orbit. Applying Max Planck’s quantum theory to define the energy of the electron, he was able to calculate the value of the Rydberg constant for hydrogen which matched the experimentally observed value. Thus Bohr proposed a refined version of Rutherford’s model which stated that even though electrons are negatively charged and they do orbit the positively charged nucleus, they do so in specific orbits of quantized energy levels in which they do not gradually lose energy, but only do so when they jump from a higher quantum level to a lower quantum level, by emitting radiation with energy equaling the difference of energy between the levels.The implication of such a finding was momentous! It meant that classical mechanics, which had been successfully describing the motion of heavenly bodies (mostly) to the movement of most everyday objects, is woefully inadequate in explaining processes at the subatomic level, and must be superseded by a new physics — which is what we today call the Quantum Mechanics.Badassery Exhibit C: Transformed our understanding of the periodic table of elements. The German chemist Johann Döbereiner made the first known attempt to classify elements on the basis of similarity in their physicochemical properties, when he grouped 12 elements into 4 “triads” (chlorine-bromine-iodine, lithium-sodium-potassium, sulfur-selenium-tellurium and calcium-strontium-barium) in the 1820s. (It’s interesting to note that such triads actually do exist in the modern periodic table taking only naturally occurring elements into account, e.g. zinc-cadmium-mercury, copper-silver-gold, etc.!!) He also noted that the atomic weight of the middle element in a triad was somehow very close to the mean of those of the other two! Then, as a lot more elements got discovered and their atomic weights measured, multiple chemists started noticing (in the 1860s) that if ordered by increasing atomic weight, elements display similar properties at regular intervals, and not just in groups of threes! The most notable among them, Dmitri Mendeleev, was able to classify all known elements into 8 Groups, in what he called Periodicheskaya Tablitsa Elementov, Russia’s single biggest contribution to science!But of course, there were problems with this arrangement, for example, it was found that iodine is actually lighter than tellurium, even though it has to be placed after tellurium in order to group them with similar elements! Also, Mendeleev placed iron-ruthenium-osmium in the same group with copper-silver-gold (Group VIII) even though there are significant differences in their properties – in fact, he got a bit confused and suggested that copper-silver-gold might belong to Group I instead! In the end, the discovery of isotopes was this periodic table’s final death knell because it meant that two atoms of the same element can have different weights (and two atoms of different elements can have the same weight, for example, an atom of carbon can have the same weight as an atom of nitrogen), hence the atomic weight is not at all something that defines an element in the first place!At this juncture, the team of Bohr, Rutherford, Henry Moseley and others at Cambridge made some major discoveries that unwrapped many of the remaining mysteries of the atomic constitution, including the discovery of the proton, the concept of the Atomic Number as the unique identifier of an element as opposed to the atomic weight, and the fact that the atomic number is nothing but the number of protons in the atom, which is equal to the nuclear charge of the atom, which is then equal to the number of electrons in the atom (in neutral state). These discoveries made it clear that instead of atomic weight, the elements should be arranged by the atomic number in the periodic table, which did resolve questions such as how tellurium precedes iodine, etc. but couldn’t offer a solution for the other issues, let alone explain what really causes the periodicity…At this time, Bohr, working with Arnold Sommerfeld, Wolfgang Pauli and others, turned his attention to using quantum physics to understand how electrons are distributed in different orbitals in atoms of different elements, and formulated what became known as the Aufbauprinzip or “building-up principle”. They realized that the electrons don’t just exist in the primary orbitals but in various sub-shells within the orbitals, which they called s, p, d and f, and defined the order of increasing energy of these sub-shells, which determines (along with Pauli’s Exclusion Principle and other laws), when we move from one element to the next, where the new electron is added.Using these principles, they worked out the electron configurations of various elements, which looked like this:The pattern was unmissable! Bohr realized that the “similar” elements in the periodic table are similar simply because they have the same electron configurations in the outermost sub-shells of their atoms! For example, alkali metals like lithium, sodium, etc. always end with ns1, alkaline earth metals (beryllium, magnesium, calcium, etc.) with ns2, boron-aluminum-gallium-… with np1, carbon-silicon-germanium-… with np2, and so on. Although there were some exceptions (mainly the “transition metals” like chromium, copper, and the series from niobium to silver), based on overall similarities, all elements could now be classified into 18 groups (32 if including lanthanides and actinides)… and thus the modern periodic table was born.This fact that an element's physicochemical (macro) properties are nothing but manifestations of the arrangement of electrons in its atom (micro) is one of the most supremely important discoveries in the history of science, the ultimate confluence of physics and chemistry, and a triumph of quantum theory!! If it were to happen today, Bohr would immediately win his second Nobel prize, possibly in chemistry, but in an age where new elements and isotopes were being discovered and created almost on daily basis, he missed out!!!Badassery Exhibit D: Stood up to Einstein to defend own theory, and prevailed. Between 1925 and ‘27, Bohr, along with Werner Heisenberg, Max Born and others, developed what came to be known as the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics, centered around Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, Born’s Born Rule of the probabilistic wave function, and Bohr’s Complementarity Principle of wave-particle duality. This interpretation essentially proposed that:physical systems generally do not have definite properties prior to being measured, and quantum mechanics can only predict the probability distribution of a given measurement's possible results. The act of measurement affects the system, causing the set of probabilities to reduce to only one of the possible values immediately after the measurement.While many physicists were in a state of dismay and awe at the mathematical ingenuity of this theory, Einstein came out with strong disagreement. He simply refused to accept that physical realities could be just statistical probabilities and couldn’t be measured beyond a certain degree of accuracy, summed up in his famous remark “God doesn’t throw dice”. The Solvay Conference of 1927 brought this bitter conflict out in the open.Over dinner, during after-dinner discussions, and at breakfast, Einstein debated with Bohr and his followers on the question whether quantum mechanics in its present form could be called complete. Einstein illustrated his points with increasingly clever thought experiments intended to prove that position and momentum could in principle be simultaneously known to arbitrary precision. For example, one of his thought experiments involved sending a beam of electrons through a shuttered screen, recording the positions of the electrons as they struck a photographic screen. Bohr and his allies would always be able to counter Einstein's proposal, usually by the end of the same day… By 1928, the consensus was that Einstein had lost the debate, and even his closest allies… conceded that quantum mechanics appeared to be complete.But 3 years later, at the next Solvay Conference, Einstein came prepared for a smackdown…He proposed another thought experiment, known as Einstein’s Box.Einstein considers a box containing electromagnetic radiation and a clock which controls the opening of a shutter which covers a hole made in one of the walls of the box. The shutter uncovers the hole for a time Δt which can be chosen arbitrarily. During the opening, we are to suppose that a photon, from among those inside the box, escapes through the hole. In this way a wave of limited spatial extension has been created, following the explanation given above. In order to challenge the indeterminacy relation between time and energy, it is necessary to find a way to determine with adequate precision the energy that the photon has brought with it. At this point, Einstein turns to his celebrated relation between mass and energy of special relativity: E = mc^2. From this it follows that knowledge of the mass of an object provides a precise indication about its energy. The argument is therefore very simple: if one weighs the box before and after the opening of the shutter and if a certain amount of energy has escaped from the box, the box will be lighter. The variation in mass multiplied by c^2 will provide precise knowledge of the energy emitted. Moreover, the clock will indicate the precise time at which the event of the particle's emission took place. Since, in principle, the mass of the box can be determined to an arbitrary degree of accuracy, the energy emitted can be determined with a precision ΔE as accurate as one desires. Therefore, the product ΔEΔt can be rendered less than what is implied by the principle of indeterminacy.This challenge shell-shocked Bohr, “who, at first, could not think of a solution. For the entire evening he was extremely agitated, and he continued passing from one scientist to another, seeking to persuade them that it could not be the case, that it would have been the end of physics if Einstein were right; but he couldn't come up with any way to resolve the paradox”, remembers fellow attendee Leon Rosenfeld, “I will never forget the image of the two antagonists as they left the club: Einstein, with his tall and commanding figure, who walked tranquilly, with a mildly ironic smile, and Bohr who trotted along beside him, full of excitement.” (Below is an actual photo of this!)However, the next morning, Bohr dealt the knockout punch, using the relativistic time dilation principles of Einstein himself (also called Gravitational Redshift):1. After emitting a photon, the loss of weight causes the box to rise in the gravitational field.2. The observer returns the box to its original height by adding weights until the pointer points to its initial position. It takes a certain amount of time t for the observer to perform this procedure. How long it takes depends on the strength of the spring and on how well-damped the system is. If undamped, the box will bounce up and down forever. If over-damped, the box will return to its original position sluggishly.3. The longer that the observer allows the damped spring-mass system to settle, the closer the pointer will reach its equilibrium position. At some point, the observer will conclude that his setting of the pointer to its initial position is within an allowable tolerance. There will be some residual error Δq in returning the pointer to its initial position. Correspondingly, there will be some residual error Δm in the weight measurement.4. Adding the weights imparts a momentum p to the box which can be measured with an accuracy Δp delimited by ΔpΔq ≈ h. It is clear that Δp < gtΔm where g is the gravitational constant. Plugging in yields gtΔmΔq > h.5. General relativity informs us that while the box has been at a height different than its original height, it has been ticking at a rate different than its original rate. The red shift formula informs us that there will be an uncertainty Δt = c^-2gtΔq in the determination of t0, the emission time of the photon.6. Hence, c^2ΔmΔt = ΔEΔt > h. The accuracy with which the energy of the photon is measured restricts the precision with which its moment of emission can be measured, following the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.Einstein never attacked the basics of the Bohr school of quantum mechanics again!Badassery Exhibit E: Outmaneuvered the Nazis over and over. Unlike many Jewish academics who left Europe in the wake of Nazi aggression, Bohr stood his ground till the very end, and put considerable effort to get a number of Jewish scientists out of Germany and Nazi-occupied parts of Europe to the relative safety of his Institute For Theoretical Physics at Copenhagen, and later used his connections with the Danish resistance to dispatch them to Sweden and other safe countries. Those that he helped include Guido Beck, Felix Bloch, James Franck, George de Hevesy, Otto Frisch, Hilde Levi, Lise Meitner, George Placzek, Eugene Rabinowitch, Stefan Rozental, Erich Ernst Schneider, Edward Teller, Arthur von Hippel and Victor Weisskopf.Now, one of these guys, James Franck, had kept his Nobel prize medal with Bohr for safekeeping, and so had the non-Jewish but vehemently anti-Nazi physicist Max von Laue. As German tanks finally rolled into Copenhagen (April 1940), keeping the two medals out of German hand was Bohr’s primary concern (he had donated his own medal to an auction for the benefit of a fund helping the war-affected Finns a few weeks before this). And just losing the medals was not the only worry! In Hitler’s Germany it was almost a capital offense to send gold out of the country. Since the names of the laureates were engraved on the medals, their discovery by the invading forces would have had very serious consequences for Bohr (and also for von Laue who was in Germany). Bohr knew that the Germans knew that certain Nobel laureates had kept their medals with Bohr and were determined to find them, hence he decided he couldn’t risk the medals being discovered intact. With no other alternative and the Gestapo almost at doorstep, he, with help of George de Hevesy, decided to science his way out!They went to the chemistry lab, grabbed the supply of hydrochloric acid and nitric acid and mixed a deadly cocktail that was first mentioned by Arab alchemists a thousand years ago, called Aqua Regia — “regal water” — the only known liquid that can dissolve gold! Hurriedly dissolving the medals in the acid, they kept the flask in an ordinary place in the lab, amidst dozens of similar-looking flasks containing sundry chemical solutions! The Germans came, and ransacked the entire Institute for years looking for the medals, as Bohr stayed put at Copenhagen.The reason he could stay there, however, was because the German occupation of Denmark was by far the most peaceful of all Nazi-occupied countries. German propaganda even referred to Denmark as the "model protectorate". The king retained his throne and the Danish government continued to function…… and the Danes managed to exact an extraordinary price for this cooperation:Danish officials repeatedly insisted to the German occupation authorities that there was no "Jewish problem" in Denmark. The Germans recognized that discussion of the "Jewish question" in Denmark was a possibly explosive issue… the German Reich relied substantially upon Danish agriculture, which supplied meat and butter to 3.6 million Germans in 1942. As a result… even ideologically committed Nazis… followed a strategy of avoiding and deferring any discussion of Denmark's Jews.In mid-1943, however, having seen German defeats in Russia and North Africa, Danes began to show their displeasure with the occupation, in form of nationwide strikes and increased sabotage activities by the Danish resistance. Finally the German authorities gave the Danish government an ultimatum on August 28, demanding a ban on strikes, a curfew, and the punishment of sabotage with the death penalty. The Danish government rejected this demand and resigned the next day, resulting in direct administration of Denmark by the German authorities, who immediately drew up plans to start rounding up the Jews from early October. In response, the Jews started going into hiding, but that would not save them for long. The best way out was to get Sweden to offer them asylum till the end of the war but the Swedes refused to officially announce anything, in order to avoid increased confrontation with the Germans.In this situation, Bohr decided to throw his weight behind the issue. He contacted Danish resistance and planned an escape to Sweden. (Somehow the Nazis got wind of it and went after him at his home. As they entered through the front door, the 58-year-old Bohr ran out the back, with Danish resistance laying down cover fire, allowing him to slip out and get on a fishing boat!) As he reached Sweden, the government representatives told him that an aircraft was waiting to take him to United States where his expertise was needed in some “special government projects”. Bohr responded that he would not be going anywhere until the fate of his country’s Jews was secure, and requested an audience with the King to discuss the matter. King Gustaf V granted the audience on the afternoon of October 2, it’s said, after a persuasive call from Greta Garbo, who knew Bohr! A few hours later, the Swedish radio broadcast that Sweden was ready to receive the Jews!A massive rescue operation then began to smuggle the 7800-strong Danish Jewry across the Øresund, through the prying eyes of German patrol, and ultimately an estimated 7220 (plus 686 non-Jewish spouses) were able to reach the Swedish shores, making Danish Jews, out of the Jewish populations of all Nazi-occupied countries, the least affected by the Holocaust.Having secured the safety of the Danish Jews, Bohr finally decided to leave for the United States, via Britain. Stockholm was crawling with German agents, and there was a credible threat that he could be assassinated. To fly him to Britain over the dangerous North Sea, the British sent an unarmed Mosquito bomber, a light, fast aircraft that could fly high enough to avoid the German anti-aircraft batteries. At the opportune hour, Bohr donned a flight suit, strapped on a parachute, took delivery of the flight helmet with built-in earphones for communication with the cockpit, and lay on his back in the bomb bay. The pilot also supplied him with a stick of flares — in case the plane was hit and couldn’t make it to British mainland, the pilot was to open the bomb bay doors and drop Bohr into the sea; a following sea plane was then to pick him up… if he survived the fall using his parachute and was able to signal his location using the flares!Ultimately, although those scenarios didn’t unfold, something did go wrong during the flight — the helmet given to Bohr turned out to be quite small, and he couldn’t wear it (“The Royal Air Force was not used to such great heads as Bohr’s”, quips Robert Oppenheimer!), hence when the plane reached high altitude and the pilot instructed Bohr to turn on the oxygen supply, he didn’t hear anything, and soon passed out due to lack of oxygen. Thankfully the pilot realized what had happened, and descended to a lower altitude, saving Bohr’s life!By the way, what happened to the two Nobel prize medals dissolved in aqua regia at Bohr’s Institute at Copenhagen? After the war, as Bohr and de Hevesy returned to the institute, they found that flask exactly as they had left it! They carefully extracted the gold from the solution and sent it to the Swedish Academy, with a letter explaining the situation — the Nobel Foundation then recast the medals from the same gold and re-presented them to Franck and von Laue!!!!!Badassery Exhibit F: Saved America’s plutonium bomb project. Ok, “saved” may be a slight exaggeration but he did make a critical contribution without which the project would get delayed by many months, consequently delaying the Japanese surrender and causing countless more loss of life. The scientists at the Manhattan project were working on two types of bombs. One was straightforward: it consisted of two sub-critical masses of U-235, one containing a neutron source. When the bomb is to be detonated, one of the masses will be inserted into the other, resulting in criticality, and thence the explosive chain reaction. The other approach was to build an implosion device, in which a number of high-explosive charges will go off at the same time imploding a hollow sphere of plutonium (with neutron source at center) to a critical mass. There were serious challenges with both approaches. Even though the uranium bomb was straightforward, the supply of U-235, which is present in uranium in very small amounts, was not adequate for mass production. On the other hand, plutonium was being produced in the nuclear reactors abundantly but building a properly functioning implosion device turned out to be a formidable engineering challenge, the most complex aspect of which was designing that neutron source, called the “modulated neutron initiator”: a device that would produce a burst of neutrons to initiate the chain reaction at the optimal moment when the configuration is “prompt critical”! “The device remained a stubborn puzzle”, noted project director Oppenheimer, which he needed Bohr to crack. Finally in February 1945, under Bohr’s guidance the team succeeded in building the device, and within 5 months the first plutonium bomb was successfully tested.Badassery Exhibit G: Realized the far-reaching consequences of the atomic bomb, sought to bring the Russians in confidence “before there could be any question of use of atomic weapons” and proposed formation of an international body governing the use of nuclear energy, before anyone else. Whereas most scientists at Manhattan project regarded building the bomb as dealing with an existential threat i.e. the (possible) Nazi-made atomic bomb, one wonders if Bohr had some insider information that the German nuclear bomb project was a dud, which made him worry less about the immediate use of the bomb and ponder more about the future, in which “means will be found to simplify the methods of production of the active substances and intensify their effects to an extent which may permit any nation… to command powers of destruction surpassing all previous imagination… Quite apart from the role atomic weapons might come to play in the war [meaning WW2], it was clear that permanent grave dangers to world security would ensue unless measures to prevent abuse of the new formidable means of destruction could be universally agreed upon and carried out.”(Or perhaps, as an ardent believer in the philosophy of complementarity, Bohr could see more clearly than others how the promise of a lasting global peace and international concourse and even cleaner environment went hand in hand with the specter of utter ruin, in the context of unlocking the limitless energy of the atom.)Furthermore, whereas no top-level scientist or official in Britain/America could imagine that the Russians could get the bomb any time soon, Bohr happened to know better.In April 1944, he received a letter from [Russian Nuclear Physicist] Peter Kapitza, written some months before when Bohr was in Sweden, inviting him to come to the Soviet Union. The letter convinced Bohr that the Soviets were aware of the Anglo-American project, and would strive to catch up. He sent Kapitza a non-committal response, which he showed to the authorities in Britain before posting. Bohr met Churchill on 16 May 1944, but found that "we did not speak the same language". Churchill disagreed with the idea of openness towards the Russians to the point that he wrote in a letter: "It seems to me Bohr ought to be confined or at any rate made to see that he is very near the edge of mortal crimes."In America, however, Oppenheimer did see Bohr’s point, and suggested him to speak to POTUS!In that meeting (August 1944), Bohr submitted to Roosevelt what Churchill had failed to grasp: “the very necessity of a concerted effort to forestall such ominous threats to civilization would offer quite unique opportunities to bridge international divergences... early consultations between the nations allied in the war about the best ways jointly to obtain future security might contribute decisively to that atmosphere of mutual confidence which would be essential for co-operation on the many other matters of common concern”.Roosevelt was more understanding than Churchill and advised Bohr to return to Britain to get their approval, as he could not take this decision on his own. However, in 3 weeks’ time, Roosevelt and Churchill had a meeting, where they discussed Bohr’s proposals, and unfortunately, Churchill succeeded in convincing Roosevelt to outright reject them (further noting: “enquiries should be made regarding the activities of Professor Bohr and steps taken to ensure that he is responsible for no leakage of information, particularly to the Russians”). As a direct result of this, for next 7 decades (and likely to continue for untold more decades to come) America and Russia spent trillions of Dollars building, safeguarding, modernizing and also partially dismantling an arsenal of over a hundred thousand nuclear warheads, some of which are kept on hair-trigger alert, ready to snuff out humanity in a nuclear winter.Even after being snubbed by short-sighted, xenophobic, jingoistic politicians, Bohr kept trying. Between 1945 and ’48, he wrote several memos to US statesmen, and even met the Secretary of State, but all his warnings/suggestions were summarily ignored.And then… everything changed.On September 1,1949, the US Air Force Office of Atomic Energy found the first evidence of a Soviet nuclear test (actually conducted, in utter secrecy, 3 days earlier), sending shockwaves (figuratively speaking!) through Truman administration, from which they took 3 weeks to recover in order to announce the news to public! With the people in power finally forced to pay attention, Bohr decided to put together all his thoughts about how to deal with this most extraordinary crisis in the history of our species, in an “Open Letter”, presented to the United Nations on June 9, 1950. The letter was not just “open” in name but also in spirit, and substance! In it, he candidly talked about his own failure to convince the British/American leaders about the dangerous consequences of them unilaterally developing nuclear weapons and then using them in war without sharing any information with the Soviets and greater international community, and also alleged that this discretion was a key reason behind the deepening divide between the wartime allies despite conciliatory efforts of the UN:When the war ended and the great menaces of oppression to so many peoples had disappeared, an immense relief was felt all over the world. Nevertheless, the political situation was fraught with ominous foreboding. Divergences in outlook between the victorious nations inevitably aggravated controversial matters arising in connection with peace settlements. Contrary to the hopes for future fruitful co-operation, expressed from all sides and embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, the lack of mutual confidence soon became evident. The creation of new barriers, restricting the free flow of information between countries, further increased distrust and anxiety.He asserted that for our civilization to endure, and progress, in the nuclear age, nations must embrace a culture of “mutual openness” and “genuine cooperation”: “barriers between nations which hitherto were thought necessary for the defence of national interests would now… stand in the way of common security”. He advocated building “an open world”, where scientific information is exchanged freely between nations, noting that this “may appear utopian” but “such a course should be in the deepest interest of all nations, irrespective of differences in social and economic organization” because “the progress of science and technology has tied the fate of all nations inseparably together”.(It’s interesting to note that this letter coincided with the Stockholm Appeal initiative, which called for an absolute ban on nuclear weapon, and went viral throughout the West but ultimately failed to achieve anything substantial. Bohr was pragmatic enough to avoid any such appeal in his letter!)Lastly, he prescribed the creation of an international organization for monitoring and controlling the nuclear activities of every nation:Any arrangement which can offer safety against secret preparations for the mastery of the new means of destruction would… demand extraordinary measures. In fact, not only would universal access to full information about scientific discoveries be necessary, but every major technical enterprise, industrial as well as military, would have to be open to international control…. Detailed proposals for the establishment of an effective control would have to be worked out with the assistance of scientists and technologists appointed by the governments concerned, and a standing expert committee, related to an international security organization, might be charged with keeping account of new scientific and technical developments and with recommending appropriate adjustments of the control measures.7 years later, the world finally had to create this organization:The same year (1957), Bohr was honored with the first ever Atoms For Peace award.Badassery Exhibit H: Co-founded CERN. As Bohr got increasingly frustrated with his repeated appeals to enforce collaboration between Anglo-American and Soviet nuclear scientists falling to deaf ears, in the end he decided to do something on his own, in a place where he had a little more influence: Western Europe. Working with a few nuclear physicists still left there, he mobilized a massive effort to convince European countries to join together to build a cutting-edge research center that could help European nuclear physics rise again to its pre-war glory — an institute built along the lines of the national laboratories in the US, designed to undertake Big Science projects beyond the resources of any one country alone.In June 1950, the same month he submitted his open letter to the UN, a resolution was tabled at UNESCO to "assist and encourage the formation of regional research laboratories in order to increase international scientific collaboration". A year and half later, the first resolution concerning the establishment of a European Council for Nuclear Research (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire) was adopted. On September 29, 1954, following ratification by France and Germany (with Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and Yugoslavia to follow), CERN was born. (Bohr wanted the center to be set up in Copenhagen but in view of the future needs of the organization to scale up, agreed on the location on France-Switzerland border, in the suburbs of Geneva. The CERN Theory Group, which Bohr headed, was based in Copenhagen until their new accommodation in Geneva was ready, in 1957.)As nuclear physics research steadily declined in the US post the seventies, CERN gradually became its de facto global headquarters, achieving major breakthroughs like the discovery of neutral currents and W and Z bosons, creation of antihydrogen, and detection of the Higgs boson, the ultimate holy grail of particle physics, vindicating Bohr’s belief that in science, the best way to go faster and farther is to go together.I rest my case.Upvote if you agree!Sources:Niels Bohr - Wikipediahttps://www.gutenberg.org/files/47464/47464-pdf.pdfHistory of the periodic table - WikipediaAufbau principle - WikipediaBohr–Einstein debates - WikipediaEinstein's thought experiments - WikipediaA unique gold medalNiels Bohr’s Flight From the Nazis Was a Science DramaRescue of the Danish Jews - WikipediaBohr Letter to UN

Affordable Housing and Community DesignBOOKSAaron, Henry J. Shelter and subsidies: Who Benefits from Federal Housing Policies?. The BrookingsInstitution. 1997.Ackoff, Russell L. and Sheldon Rovin. Redesigning Society. Stanford University Press. 2003.First sentence: "The thinking we use to redesign society stems from three essential concepts:doing the right thing, focusing on what we want, and thinking systematically"Alexander, Christopher. The Production of Houses. Oxford University Press. 1985.As an innovative thinker about building and planning, Christopher Alexander has attracted a devotedfollowing. His seminal books--The Timeless Way of Building, A Pattern Language, the Oregon Experiment,and The Linz Cafe--defined a radical and fundamentally new process of environmental design. Alexandernow gives us the latest book in his series--a book that puts his theories to the test and shows what sort ofproduction system can create the kind of environment he has envisioned.The Production of Houses centers around a group of buildings which Alexander and his associates built in1976 in northern Mexico. Each house is different and the book explains how each family helped to lay outand construct its own home according to the family's own needs and in the framework of the patternlanguage. Numerous diagrams and tables as well as a variety of anecdotes make the day-today processclear. The Mexican project, however, is only the starting point for a comprehensive theory of housingproduction. The Production of Houses describes seven principles which apply to any system of production inany part of the world for housing of any cost in any climate or culture or at any density. In the last part of thebook, "The Shift of Paradigm," Alexander describes, in detail, the devastating nature of the revolution inworld view which is contained in his proposal for housing construction, and its overall implications for deepseatedculturalchange.　Atlas, John and Ellen Shoshkes. Saving Affordable Housing: What Community Groups Can Do & WhatGovernment Should Do. A National Housing Institute Study Funded by the Ford Foundation. 1997.Bauman, John F. and Roger Biles and Fristin Szylvian. From Tenements to Taylor Homes; In Search of anUrban Housing Policy in Twentieth Century America. Pennsylvania State University Press:University Park, PA. 2000.Bell, Bryan. Good Deeds, Good Design: Community Service Through Architecture. Princeton ArchitecturalPress: New York. 2004.Ben- Joseph, Eran. Regulating Place: Standards and the Shaping of Urban America. Routledge: New York.2005.Blau, Eve. The Architecture of Red Vienna. MIT Press: Massachusetts. 1999.Bosma, Koos and Dorine van Hoogstraten and Martijn Vos. Housing for the Millions: John Habraken and theSAR. Nai Publishers. 2000.Brown, David J. The Home House Project: The Future of Affordable Housing. MIT Press: Massachusetts.2004.Davis, Sam. Designing for The Homeless: Architecture That Works. University of California Press: Berkeley.1995.Ehrenkrantz, Ezra. Design in Affordable Housing: A Guidebook. Funded by the Naional Endowment of theArts.Emery, Frederic E. and Eric L. Trist. Towards a Social Ecology. Springer: 1Edition. 1995.stComplex social systems like the human body rely a great deal on the sharing of parts. Just as the mouth isshared by the sub-systems for breathing, eating, speaking, etc., so individuals and organizations act as partsfor a multiplicity of social systems. Just as there are physiological switching mechanisms to prevent uschoking too often over our food, so there are social mechanisms to prevent us having too many CharlieChaplins dashing out of factories to tighten up buttons on women’s dresses (in Modern Times). I think that itis this sharing of parts that enables social processes to grow for quite long periods without detection. If theycould grow only by subordinating parts entirely to themselves then they would be readily detectable. If,however, their parts continue to play traditional roles in the existing familiar systems, then detection becomesdifficult indeed. The examples that most readily come to mind are the pathological ones of cancer andincipient psychoses. Perhaps this is because we strive so hard to detect them. In any case, healthychanges in physical maturation, personality growth or social growth typically follows the same course. Oncewe are confronted with a new fully-fledged system, we find that we can usually trace its roots well back into apast where it was unrecognized for what it was.Source location for this excerpt: Page on members.shaw.caFeldman, Roberta. The Dignity of Resistance: Women Residents’ Activism in Chicago Public Housing.Cambridge. 2004.This comprehensive case study chronicles the four decade history of Chicago's Wentworth Gardens publichousing residents' grassroots activism. It explores why and how the African-American women residentscreatively and effectively engaged in organizing efforts to resist increasing government disinvestment inpublic housing and the threat of demolition. Through the inspirational voices of the activists, RobertaFeldman and Susan Stall challenge portrayals of public housing residents as passive and alienated victims ofdespair. Review source: The Dignity of ResistanceForrester Sprague, Joan. More Than Housing: Lifeboats for Women and Children. Butterworth Architecture.1991.Franck, Karen A. and Sherry Ahrentzen. New Households and New Housing. Van Nostrand Reinhold. 1991.Greer, Nora R. The Creation of Shelter. American Institute of Architects Press. 1988.Greer, Nora R. The Search for Shelter. American Institute of Architects Press. 1986.Hatch, Richard C. Scope of Social Architecture. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1984.Hayden, Delores, Redesigning the American Dream. W. W. Norton & Company, 1edition, 2002.stAmericans still build millions of dream houses in neighborhoods that sustain Victorian stereotypes of thehome as 'woman's place' and the city as 'man's world.' Urban historian and architect Dolores Hayden talliesthe personal and social costs of an American 'architecture of gender' for the two-earner family, the singleparentfamily,andsinglepeople.Manysocietieshavestruggledwiththearchitecturalandurbanconsequences of women's paid employment: Hayden traces three models of home in historical perspective—the haven strategy in the United States, the industrial strategy in the former USSR, and the neighborhoodstrategy in European social democracies—to document alternative ways to reconstruct neighborhoods.Source location: Page on wwnorton.comJackson, Kenneth T. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. Oxford UniversityPress. 1987.Book Description: This first full-scale history of the development of the American suburb examines how "thegood life" in America came to be equated with the a home of one's own surrounded by a grassy yard andlocated far from the urban workplace. Integrating social history with economic and architecturalanalysis, and taking into account such factors as the availability of cheap land, inexpensive building methods,and rapid transportation, Kenneth Jackson chronicles the phenomenal growth of the American suburb fromthe middle of the 19th century to the present day. He treats communities in every section of the U.S. andcompares American residential patterns with those of Japan and Europe. In conclusion, Jackson offers acontroversial prediction: that the future of residential deconcentration will be very different from its past inboth the U.S. and Europe.Source location:Amazon.com: Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States (9780195049831): Kenneth T. Jackson: BooksJones, Tom and William Pettus and Michael Pyatok. Good Neighbors: Affordable Family Housing. McGrawHill.1995.Leeuwen, Jos van and HJP Timmermans. Recent Advances in Design and Decision Support.Kluwer:Dordrecht, Boston. 2004.　McCamant, Kathryn and Charles Durret and Ellen Hertzman. Cohousing: A Contemporary Approach toHousing Ourselves. Ten Speed Press. 1993.From The Woman Source Catalog & Review: Tools for Connecting the Community for Women; review byIlene RosoffDoes the idea of not having to cook meals for yourself or family every night, deal with traffic on your block, orworry when your children are out playing in the neighborhood appeal to you? If the answer is yes, you maywant to consider exploring cohousing, a concept that originated in Denmark in the early 1970s and hasspread throughout Europe. In Cohousing, a number of European cohousing communities are profiled.Although each community is a unique reflection of its members' tastes and desires, there are some commoncomponents, such as parking lots on the perimeters of the community for pedestrian safety, a commonhouse where meals can be shared, and recreational facilities housing various community activities andservices. With all the responsibilities entailed in managing a home and/or a family, cohousing is a solution forfinding sufficient time to relax and spend with the people who are important to us. (The authors have recentlystarted The Cohousing Company, a design and development company formed specifically to assist groupsinterested in planning and implementing cohousing in this country.)Newman, Oscar. Creating Defensible Space. US Dept . of Housing and Urban Development, Office ofPolicy Development and Research: Washington, DC. 1996.Obelensky, Kira. Good House Cheap House: Adventures in Creating an extraordinary Home at an OrdinaryPrice. Taunton. 2005.The 27 homes in Good House Cheap House prove that good design doesn't have to cost a fortune. Whatgoes into making a good, cheap house? As writer Kira Obolensky discovers, there are three mainingredients: adventuresome homeowners who are actively involved; cutting-edge architects and designerswho can solve tough design challenges; and an array of innovative uses of materials. Industrial bridgewashers make for gorgeous mantelpiece rosettes, old concrete subflooring is given new life with rich-huedstain, and glass sliding doors make for windows that are oversized and affordable.From a Texas farmhouse to a loft in St. Paul, to a prefab cabin on the Wisconsin prairie, these houses, inwhich anyone would feel at home, display a wonderful mix of design smarts and budget savvy. "Good HouseCheap House is chock full of great ideas and creative solutions for those of us on a budget-but even the lessfinancially-challenged can learn a thing or two about stylish and innovative design."--Charles Burbridge, designer, HGTV's Design on a Dime "The cookie-cutter house trend has been aroundlong enough. With its outside-the-box ideas and great resources, Good House Cheap House proves you canbuild a unique space without emptying your bank account."--Amber Jones, Editor, do! MagazineSanoff, Henry. Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning. Wiley-Academy. 1999.Book Description (Source: Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning: Henry Sanoff: 9780471355458: Amazon.com: Books)Theonlyhow-toguidetocommunitydesignwrittenfromthedesignprofessional'sperspective.Inthisgroundbreakingguidetotheincreasinglyimportantdisciplineofcommunitydesign,aleadinginternationalexpertdrawsuponhisownexperiencesandthoseofcolleaguesaroundtheworldtoprovideproventoolsandtechniquesforbringingcommunitymembersintothedesignprocesssuccessfullyandproductively.Thefirstandonlyhow-toguideoncommunitydesigndevelopedfordesignprofessionals,Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning features:* Fifteen case studies chronicling community design projects around the world* Coverage of educational facilities, housing, and urban and rural environments* Design Games-a proven, culture-neutral approach to educating participants in their design options and theconsequences of their choices* Proven techniques for fostering community participation in the design process* Checklists, worksheets, questionnaires, and other valuable toolsCommunity Participation Methods in Design and Planning is an indispensable working resource for urbandesigners and planners, architects, and landscape architects. It is also an excellent resource for students ofthose disciplines.Schmitz, Adrienne, Beta Site. Multifamily Housing Handbook. Urban Land Institute: Washington D.C. 2000.Steiber, Nancy. Housing Design and Society in Amsterdam: Reconfiguring Urban Order and Identity 19001920. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago. 1998.Timmermans, Harry. Design and Decision Support Systems in Architecture. Dordrecht: Boston: KluwerAcademic. 1993.Torres, Martha. Affordable Home Design: Innovations and Renovations. Loft Publications by Harper CollinsDesign. 2005.Affordable Home Design showcases a wide array of solutions to this same architectural challenge of gooddesign and structure on a budget. The projects featured include extensions of houses and apartmentsalready in existence, ecological housing design, sustainable and structurally cost-effective homes, and newbuildings in strictly coded conservation zones. Through more than 250 full-color photographs, this essentialbook reveals how today's architects are able to adapt to the necessities of a more affordable budget whenapproaching the always exciting necessity of designing a home.Towers, Graham. At Home in the City: An Introduction to Urban Housing Design. Architectural Press/Elsevier: Oxford. 2005.Trulove, James G. Great Houses on a Budget. Collins Design, 2005.For the typical American homeowner, Great Houses on a Budget presents case studies from across thecountry that achieve high style at an affordable cost. Most homeowners can only fantasize about owning andliving in beautiful dream homes designed by top architects -- houses that are well beyond the reach ofaverage consumers. This splendidly illustrated volume promises to provide a reality check by presentingbeautifully designed houses by the same architects, but with one exception. The houses in this book weredesigned and built for clients with high standards, as well as modest budgets. Fifteen in-depth case studiesdisplay the work of some of today's finest architects in locations ranging from California and Connecticut, toVirginia and Oregon. Each project includes lavish photography accompanied by detailed discussion of theeconomical construction techniques implemented in each house. With an in-depth look at square footagecosts, design techniques, and low-cost building materials, Great Houses on a Budget will provide readerswith everything they need to plan a great home on even the smallest budget.Tucker, William. The Excluded Americans: Homelessness and Housing Policies (Ragnery) and Zoning,Rent Control, and Affordable Housing. Cato Institute.Vale, Lawrence. Reclaiming Public Housing: A Half Century of Struggle in Three Public Neighborhoods.Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Mass. 2002.Vale, Lawrence. From the Puritans to the Projects: Public Housing and Public Neighbors. HarvardUniversity Press. 2000.1. Sam Bass Warner, Jr., author of Streetcar Suburbs (Harvard) : In tracing the story of public housing fromPuritan times to the present, Professor Vale pays special attention to the spatial dimensions of povertymanagement. His is not a mechanical tale of segregation, but a careful presentation of the placement of thepoor in response to the policies of aid and discipline. This book, at once both an excellent history and anunusually thorough Boston case study, illustrates the continuing cultural and political ambivalence that playsitself out in ever-changing environments for the poor.2. Sir Peter Hall, author of Cities in Civilization: Culture, Innovation, and Urban Order : Lawrence Vale'smajor study throws new and important light on the contradictions and dilemmas of American public housingpolicy over the past half-century, as they worked themselves out in one of the nation's great cities. It has vitalmessages both for scholars of public policy, planning, and urban studies, and for urban policy-makers, bothin the United States and the wider world. This is a major contribution to the urban literature. Source location:From the Puritans to the Projects: Public Housing and Public Neighbors: Prof. Lawrence J. Vale: 9780674002869: Amazon.com: BooksVenkatesh, Sudhir, Alladi. American Project: The Rise and fall of a Modern Ghetto. Harvard UniversityPress: Cambridge, Mass. 2000.Vliet, Williem van. The Encyclopedia of Housing. Sage Publications. 1998.This multidisciplinary work, which aims to summarize and synthesize current information on housing, drawson sociology, economics, urban studies, political science, architecture, and law to provide broad coverage ofthe pertinent concepts, organizations, issues, and policies. The 600 or so entries vary in length, with longerentries containing extensive discussion as well as relevant research, critical analysis, policy information, andhistorical background as appropriate. Though the book focuses primarily on the United States, it includessome international material, and various points of view are represented. Cross references, indexes ofsubjects and cited authors, and brief bibliographies on most entries add to the encyclopedia's usefulness.About 240 academics and professionals in housing or closely related fields contributed to this volume underthe leadership of van Vliet, who has written and edited several works on housing. He notes that the languageused is comprehensible across subject specialties and internationally. A welcome addition to the housingliterature, which has lacked a general encyclopedia, this is sure to be the standard reference forprofessionals in housing and related fields as well as policymakers, students, and the educated public. Anexcellent purchase for all academic and public libraries.AMary Jane Brustman, SUNY at Albany Libs.Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc.Waldheim, Charles. Chicago Architecture: Histories, Revsions. University of Chicago Press: Chicago. 2005.Woudhuysen, James and Ian Abley, Stephen Muthesius, and Miles Glendinning. Why is Construction soBackward?. Wiley-Academy. 2004.Synopsis Location: Amazon.co.uk: James Woudhuysen, Ian Abley: 9780470852897: BooksWhyarehomessoexpensivetobuyandtomaintain?Constructionhasemergedasamainstreampoliticalissue.Yetthebuildingtradeisoneoftheworld'sweakest:itisfragmented,barelyglobalizedandbehindothersectorsinintroducingdisruptiveinnovationstoitsbasicprocesses.Themodestworldwidescaleofprefabricatedbuildingconfirmshowconstructionremainsa19th-centuryaffair,nota21st-centuryone.Drawingonthelatesttechnologiesthathaveemergedbothinsideandoutsidethesector,Whyisconstructionsobackward?formsadetailed,practicalalternativetotheconventionalwisdominbuildingdesignandurbanplanning.Itisapowerfulcallforreform,andasharpattackagainstarchitectureassocialengineeringandenvironmentalistdogma.'Verycompelling...asignificantpieceofresearchandthoughtleadership.Essential.'ColinBartle-Tubbs,UKOperationsDirector,Deloitte'Welcomeandtimely...takesonanindustrythathasreveledincomplacencyfortoolong.'BernhardBlauel,Principal,BlauelArchitects'Theauthorsarepreparedtobedaring,reframethequestionandpositnewparadigms.Reflectingeffortlesslyacrosstheliteratureofproperty,business,marketresearchandconstruction,thebook'skaleidoscopeofideas, examples and images gives it a refreshing depth of insight and breadth of vision. ' John Worthington,Founder, DEGW 'A tour de force of polemical provocation. This timely work forces one to think aboutconstruction in the broadest terms.ARTICLESAdler, Lynn. "Study warns of affordable US apartment shortage." Wired News. Mar 8. 2006.Allen, Isabel. "Exciting innovation in housing design" (book review). Architect’s Journal. v208, n19. p 68.Nov 1996.A review of "Housing: new alternatives, new systems!", by Manuel Gausa, 1998, described by this revieweras "perhaps the most comprehensive collection of architect-speak in existence..." with, however "an in-depthcompilation of contemporary housing which is breathtaking in its diversity."Anger, David. "Bleak House." Architecture Minnesota. v20, n3. p 44-45, 71-73. May/Jun 1994.Arieff, Allison. "Technology is the New Craft." Dwell. p 100-107. Nov/Dec. 2003.Atlas, John. "The Battle in Brooklyn." Shelterforce: The Journal of Affordable Housing and CommunityBuilding. p 12-15. Nov/Dec. 2005.Barlow, James and Ritsuko Ozaki. "Through innovation in the production system: lessons from Japan."Environment and Planning. v37, n1. p 9-20. Jan 2005.Borden, Lain. "Innovation in social housing in France, 1970-1990." AA Files. n23. p 94-96. Summer 1992.Symposium at the AA, 21 Nov. 1991.Bornstein, Julie. "Designed to Fit." UNITS magazine. Jun. 2005.Published by the National Apartments Association (Article Location:Page on nmhc.org)Bullard, Robert D. "Housing Barriers: Trends in the Nation’s fourth-Largest City." Journal of Black Studies.v21, n1. p 4-14. Sep 1990.Bullard, Robert D. "The Black Family: Housing Alternatives in the 80s." Journal of Black Studies. v14,n3. p 341-351. Mar 1984.Bullivant, Lucy. "Home Front: New Developments in Housing." Architectural Design. v73, n4. p 5-10. Jul/Aug2003.Cardoso, Medina. "Geometria en la vivienda." Obras. v10, n112. p 52, 55-56, 59-60. Apr 1982."Viviendas decorosas," affordable housing prototypes designed by Alfonso Cardoso MedinaColin, Berry. "Artists in residence: Reoccupying Affordable Quarters." Preservation: The Magazine for theNational Trust for Historic Preservation. v55, n4. p 12-13. Jul/Aug 2003.Collins, Timothy L. "Rent Controls on the Edge." City Limits. v23, n4. p 32. Apr 1998.Davis, Braxton C. "Regional planning in the US coastal zone: a comparative analysis of 15 special areaplans." Ocean & Coastal Management. v47. p 79-94. 2004.This article compares the regional planning of 15 very different coastal zones in the United States in attemptto understand their operation and the effectiveness of their planning. The zones evaluated did not use typicalplanning tools, and therefore it is informative to investigate their "goals, environmental and socioeconomicsettings, management approaches, land use planning tools, and keys to success for special area planningunder state and territory coastal programs."34 out of 35 coastal states have adopted the national coastal management program administered by theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management(NOAA/OCRM).Areas were evaluated based on the areas of concern to participate in the program. The Special AreaManagement Practices were then investigated to determine if comprehensive regional planning was takingplace and to what extent, or if "subject-oriented" plans were taking precedent (wetlands, ports, etc.). (DM)Davis, Howard "Learning from Vellore: low income housing project in India." Arcadia. v23, n2 p 8-10.Mar/Apr 1993.Low income housing project for bicycle rickshaw drivers in Vellore is being developed by an internationalcollaboration of three organizations: Centre for Development Madras; Pacific Architecture; and the Center forHousing Innovation of the Univ. of Oregon.Djebarni, R. and P. Hibberd. "The impact of TQM on innovation in the construction industry: a researchagenda." International Journal for Housing Science and its Applications. v21, n2. p 85-95. 1997.Total Quality Management (TQM) as an innovation in the British construction industry is studied to evaluateits effectiveness.Fairbanks, Robert B. "Reform and the Community Development Strategy in Cincinatti, 1890-1960." TheJournal of American History. v77, n2. p 689-690. Sep 1990.Ferrera, Peter J. "Federal Housing and Poverty (in letters)." Science. v248, n4955. p 538-539. May, 1990.Fletcher, Jane. "Affordable." Builder. v12, n9. p 83-92. Sep 1989.Friedman, Avi. "Ten Years Old and Growing (Grow Home, Montreal)." Canadian Architect. v46, n5, p 18-19,May 2001.The Grow Home, a demonstrative project started on the McGill campus in 1990, tapped a market withinaffordable housing. The project initially sold for $76,000, and units spread like wildfire. The attractive rowhousebuildingshaveflexiblelayouts,lowconstructioncost,lowoperatingcosts,andtheirownyards.ThearticlecomparesfinancingandconstructioncostsoftheGrowHomewithstandardconstruction.Italsotalksaboutthehistoryofitssuccess,andthebenefitsofcreating"theHondaCivic"ofhousing.　Thearticleincludesimagesofthreeplanlayouts,andphotosofgrowhomesinfillingneighborhoodsintwodifferentcitiesinCanada.(DM)　Friedman, Avi. "The Home of the 90’s-2: An Urban Starter." Canadian Architect. v35, n4. p 32-33. Apr 1990.Considers household income, level of education, and receptivity to innovation in a study of consumerpreferences.Friedrichs, Jurgen. "Affordable Housing and the Homeless." Contemporary Sociology. v19, n1. p 86-87. Jan1990.The twin issues of affordable housing and homelessness are discussed in this collection from a comparativeinternational persepctive. The central theme in the essays is that advanced industyrial societies, includingsocialist countries, are undergoing significant changes in their ability and willingness to provide affordablehousing to their citizens. Friedrichs points out that affordable housing and homelessness are interrelatedproblems in that the "new" homelessness is primarily the result of structural economic changes and ashortage of affordable housing. - By Howard A. SavageGann, David. "Housing innovation: how we live and what we might live in." Scroope: CambridgeArchitectural Journal. n11. p 55-62. 1999-2000.Ideas about the direction and pace of the changes in the way housing is designed and built in the UnitedKingdom.Gates, Gary J. "Gay America: to understand the real housing choices of the gay community, developersmust move beyond stereotypes." Urban Land. v64, n2. p 78-82. Feb 2005.Today, the gay and lesbian community signals the presence of a diverse and creative population that notonly is important to high-tech innovation but also has taken the initiative of moving to distressed urbanneighborhoods and in doing so has helped bring economic vitality to these neighborhoods.Gilderbloom, John I. and Richard P. Appelbaum. "Rethinking Rental Housing." Contemporary Sociology.v17, n5. p 644-645. Sep 1988.Affordable housing becomes a receding goal when the percentage of U.S. households paying over a quarterof their income for rent is increasing. John Gilderbloom and Richard Appelbaum show that sociologists couldmake a major contribution to debate about a housing policy designed to reverse such trends - if such adebate existed. Combining a critical review of a diverse literature with original analyses, the authors developtwo lines of argument. First, institutions and organizations affect characteristics of rental housing thateconomists attribute to market forces. Second, affordable, habitable housing is a "universal nationalentitlement," and it requires a federal housing program that creates a non-market sector. By Judith J.FriedmanGirling, Cynthia, and Ronald Kellett. "Comparing stormwater impacts and costs on three neighborhood plantypes." Landscape Journal. v21, n1. p 100-109. 2002."This paper summarizes a comparison of three alternative plans for a demonstration development site forenvironmental impacts, particularly stormwater quantity and quality, and costs of development. Two of thethree alternatives are representative of neighborhood plan types in many areas of the United States - aconventional low density pattern typical of many subdivision developments, and a more dense, mixed usenew urbanist-influenced pattern. A third less common but lower environmental impact plan represents similardensity and land use mixes to the mixed use plan with greater open space, urban forest and stormwaterfeatures." Paper presented at the joint ASLA-CELA conference in Boston, Sept. 1999.Goodno, James B. and Elisabeth Hamin. "Good Luck, Arnold." Planning. v70, n1. p 4-9. Jan.2004.Hall, Carlyle. "Carlyle Hall Joins CRA." L.A. Architect. p 7. Mar 1990.His thoughts on the goals and policies of the Community Redevelopment Agency, which focuses onaffordable housingHerszenhorn, David M. "New York Offers Housing Subsidy as Teacher Lure." New York Times. Apr 19.2006.Hoch, Charles J. and William Peterman and William C. Baer. "Homelessness and Housing." Journal of theAmerican Planning Association. v66, n3. p 328-331. Summer 2000.Illia, Tony. "Quigley SROs show affordable housing is possible in Las Vegas." Architectural Record.v189, n4. p 40. Apr 2001.Two SRO apartment developments, Kirby Lofts and L'Octaine, combine apartments with retail and restaurantspace. Architect: Rob Wellington QuigleyLadd, Helen F. and Jens Ludwig. "Educational Opportunities: Evidence from Baltimore." The AmericanEconomic Review. v87, n2. p 272-277. May 1997.Lakshmanan, T.R. and Lata Chatterjee and P. Roy. "Housing Requirements and National Resources."Science. v192, n4243. p 943-949. Jun 1976.Lang, Michael H. "Homelessness amid Affluence: Structure and Paradox in the American PoliticalEconomy." Contemporary Sociology. v20, n1. p 76-77. Jan 1991.LeFevre, Camille. "Joseph Selvaggio: Taking Pride in Housing the Poor." Architecture Minnesota. v18, n3.p 17, 74-75. May/Jun 1992.Linn, Charles. "Auburn Court, Cambridge, Massachusetts." Architectural Record. v185, n 7. p 112-113. Jul1997.Massimo, Alvisi and Kirimoto Junko. "Riken Yamamoto: dalle origini alla luce dell’innovazione: from theorigins to the light of innovation." Architectura. v 42, n17(494). p 674-680. 1995.Matheou, Demetrios. "Council opts for innovation in housing commission." Architects’ Journal. v200, n3.p 17-19. Jul 1994.Potter's Fields housing site, Southwark, London. Architects: Alsop & Sto!rmer.Miles, Henry. "Norse Code: Flats, Nesodden, Norway." Architectural Review. v214, n1281. p 95. Nov 2003.Affordable Housing built of Larch. Architects: Code ArkitekturNoero, Jo. "Red Location Innovation: PELIP Project/ Port Elizabeth." South African Architect. p 28-32.Nov/Dec 1999.Pheng, Low Sui, and Chua Hok Beng. "Promoting innovation in prefabrication for public housing: case studyof Singapore." International Journal for Housing Science and its Applications. v26, n3. p 217-226.2002.Russell, James S. "New Housing at Almere." Architectural Record." v190, n10. p 234-237. Oct 2002.It may not be as "wild" as advertised, but new Housing at Almere, by UN Studios, makes a strong case forresidential innovation.Salversen, David. "HUD announces awards for building innovation." Urban Land. v55, n7. p 22-23. Jul 1996."The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has announced a nationwide competition - theBuilding Innovation for Homeownership program - to accelerate the adoption of innovative building anddevelopment techniques that will make houses more affordable."Sapolin, Donna. "Now, the Possible Dream." Metropolitan Home. v21, n10. p 111-112, 114. Oct 1989.Schill, Michael H. "Housing and Community Development in New York City." Political Science Quarterly.v114, n4. p 708-709. Winter 1999-2000.Scott, Ralph. "Advocates for Healthy Housing." Shelterforce: The Journal of Affordable Housing andCommunity Building. p 20-23. Mar/Apr 2005.Taylor, David. "Lessons to learn from Dutch housing innovation." Architects’ Journal. v208, n1. p 24. Jul1998.Almere as a model for British housing construction.Taylor, David. "Affordable housing in Harlem." Architecture California. v8, n6. p 9-10. Nov/Dec 1986.Taylor, David. "A New Affordable House." Inform: Architecture, Design, the Arts. v11, n4. p 8-9, 11. 2000.Williams, Austin. "Movement for innovation: rethinking construction." Architects’ Journal v211, n18. p 34-43.May 2000.On the M4I, the Movement for Innovation, established to bring about a radical improvement in the way inwhich the construction industry and its clients work together.Wortman, Arthur. "Convertibility in building practice: DKV on innovation." Archis. n3. p 86-88. 2002.　　　　　　PAPERSBarrios-Paoli, Lilliam and Peter Madonia and William C. Rudin. Uniting for Solutions Beyond Shelter. TheCity of New York. Jun 2004."Uniting for Solutions Beyond Shelter is a 10-year action plan that brings together the business, nonprofit,and public sector communities to address the challenging issue of homelessness at its core, rather thanmanage it at the margins. It reflects my strong belief that every individual and family deserves safe,affordable housing –a goal we can achieve through proactive, coordinated action and investments in costeffectiveinitiativesthatsolvehomelessness."-MayorMichaelR.Bloomberg　Feldman, Ron. The Affordable Housing Shortage: Considering the Problem, Causes and Solutions. FederalReserve Bank of Minneapolis. Aug 2002.Abstract: Many observers claim that we are in the midst of an "affordable housing shortage" or, even worse,an "affordable housing crisis." The primary concern is that too many households live in "unaffordable" rentalunits. We hope to clarify the current debate by first measuring the size of the problem, then diagnosing itsunderlying causes and, finally, discussing treatments that policymakers should consider. While our review ishardly exhaustive, we conclude that a shortage of income is largely behind the housing affordability problemdespite the current focus on housing. Policymakers should recognize that government financing of newhousing units is unlikely to be a cost-effective response to low household income.Hu, Yucum and Qiping Shen. Systems Thinking in the Study of Housing Development in Hong Kong NewTowns. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Department of Building and Real Estate. 2000."In this paper, we have applied system dynamics to analyze housing development in Hong Kong new towns.Because housing development is concerned with many factors such as population growth, employment,personal income, gross domestic product and government policies, it is a complex social-economic systemthat demands system thinking for its solution. We have constructed a system dynamics model that attemptsto describe housing development in new towns. In this model, the interactions of various factors in urbanhousing development are taken into consideration. The model has been implemented in a computersimulation package named "I think". The simulation provides a trend of future housing development in HongKong new towns. These results can assist decision makers produce more appropriate plans for futurehousing development. We found that the application of system dynamics into housing development is a newand fruitful attempt."Katz, Bruce and Margery Turner, Karen Brown, Mary Cunningham and Noah Sawyer. Rethinking localaffordable housing strategies: lessons from 70 years of policy and practice. The BrookingsInstitution Center in Urban and Metropolitan Policy and The Urban Institute. Dec 2003.Efforts to provide affordable housing are occurring at a time of great change. The responsibilities forimplementing affordable housing are increasingly shifting to state and local actors. The market anddemographic changes in the country are complicating the picture, as sprawling jobs-housing patterns anddowntown revivals in some places are creating demand for affordable housing for working families andimmigrants in both cities and suburbs. To help state and local leaders design fresh solutions to today’saffordable housing challenges, The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy and theUrban Institute joined forces to examine the lessons of seven decades of major policy approaches and whatthese lessons mean for local reforms. This executive summary of the full report, funded by the John S. andJames L. Knight Foundation, finds that past and current efforts to expand rental housing assistance, promotehomeownership, and increase affordable housing through land use regulations have been uneven in theireffectiveness in promoting stable families and healthy communities. The findings suggest guiding principlesfor local action, with important cautions to avoid pitfalls.Pascale, Connie. The Critical Shortage of Affordable Housing in New Jersey: A Brief Overview. The LegalServices of New Jersey Poverty Research Institute. Jun 2003.For at least three decades, study after study has documented New Jersey’s severe affordable housingshortage. This report from Legal Services of New Jersey’s Poverty Research Institute compiles such studiesand data to present a current portrait of just how bad the housing shortfall has become. It is intended as aresource for policy makers and the public, to help energize and guide the urgent question of what should beNew Jersey’s governmental response to this crisis.The report was prepared primarily by Connie Pascale, Vice President and Assistant General Counsel atLegal Services of New Jersey, with assistance from colleagues Kristin Mateo and Anjali Srivastava. Ourhope is that armed with information, at long last New Jersey’s leaders will guide the state toward acomprehensive and effective government-wide housing policy.Pickard, Deena, et. Al. A Systematic Approach to Service Improvement: Evaluating Systems Thinking inHousing." The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: London. Sep 2005."This report provides a review of work undertaken to explore the use of systems thinking in a social housingsetting. In particular, the research considered the effects on the delivery of housing management servicesand assessed efficiency gains arising."Pickard, Deena, et. Al. Defining a National Housing Research Agenda Construction Management andProduction. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: London. Sep 2004.Soffin, Jeremy. Housing Crises Threatens Regional Economy. The Regional Plan Association and CitizensHousing and Planning Council. May 2004.High housing costs, poor housing quality and long commutes are putting the NY-NJ-CT metropolitan regionat a competitive disadvantage in attracting and retaining a talented workforce, according to a regionalhousing study released today. The report, "Out of Balance: The Housing Crisis from a Regional Perspective,"is a collaborative effort of Regional Plan Association (RPA) and Citizens Housing and Planning Council(CHPC) to survey regional housing trends and identify housing problems that pose obstacles to regionaldevelopment or diminish the quality of life.Tucker, William. How Rent Control Drives Out Affordable Housing. Cato Institute. May 1997.Cato Policy Analysis No. 274 Location: How Rent Control Drives Out Affordable HousingWhite, Lawrence J. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Housing Finance: Why True Privatization is Good PublicPolicy. Cato Foundation. Aug 2004.WEBSITES/ ADDITIONAL RESOURCESAmhearst H. Wilder Foundation Redirecting to new location...Archvoices ArchVoicesAssociation of Community Design Resources Page on communitydesign.orgThe Brookings Institute HomeThe Cato Foundation Cato InstituteCommunity Development Society Community Development SocietyCommunity Resources Directory of Nonprofit Organizations and Other Community ResourcesDevelopment Training Institute The Center for Leadership InnovationDesign Advisor Design AdvisorDesign Matters: Best Practices in Affordable Housing Landing Page | cada.uic.edu |Doors of Perception Doors of PerceptionThe Enterprise Foundation Enterprise Community PartnersHabitat for Humanity Habitat for Humanity Int'lHousing Again Page on housingagain.web.caHousing First brooklyn apartments rent‎ Resources and Information.Housing Prototypes Housing Prototypes.Inhabitat Design For a Better World!Planning a Housing development Enterprise Community PartnersProject proformas Enterprise Community PartnersThe Housing and Community Development KnowledgePlex The affordable housing and community development resource for professionalsNational Community Building Network Nuovi Bonus Casino Nazionali - bonus senza depositoNational Multi Housing Council National Multifamily Housing CouncilNational Community Housing Forum Page on nchf.org.auNew Village Building Sustainable CulturesNovogradac & Company LLP Affordable Housing Resource CenterPlanners Network Planners NetworkRose Fellowship Page on rose-network.comRudy Bruner Award for Urban Excellence Page on buffalo.eduRural Studio Welcome - Rural StudioShimberg Center for Affordable Housing The Shimberg Center at the University of FloridaSocketsite Page on socketsite.comStardust Organization Redirecting your pageStrategy Survival Guide Page on strategy.gov.uk　　　　　　Affordable Housing and Community Design: SustainabilityARTICLESArchitype. "Green Credentials: Housing in Brighton." RIBA Journal.Bone, Eugena. "The House That Max Built." Metropolis. v16, n5, p 37-42, Dec 1996.The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (Max’s Pot) built the Advanced Green Builderdemonstration house on the outskirts of Austin with only local materials. It is the place where founderPliny Fisk III and his wife "concoct environmentally sound and sustainable building technologies." BothCalcrete and Solar-Tube were conceived there. The house uses Green Forms, an "open-ended" post andbeam system as structure. The central concept is that the Green Forms provide the frame for site-specific(and therefore more sustainable) elements and finishes. This approach also leaves plenty of potential forpersonalization. Local climates are studied as well as attainable materials for cladding, insulation, andother surfaces from the area. Options may include rammed earth, adobe, straw wall, industrial by-products,and Styrofoam. The project also helps to sustain local businesses, distributors, and craftsmen byutilizing their services within their communities.The article also mentions innovative composite materials that can be used in cladding, including mixingleftover wood fiber with plastic from recycled bottles to make hardy wood-like panels. Water sustainability isaddressed with composting toilets and wetland integration.For further energy consumption reduction photovoltaic panels can be added to roofs, radiant heat can bedistributed from floor slabs, and a gas-fired water heater can double as the heat source for the floor slabs.While the house (at time of article publishing) costs about $250,000, the goal is to build for $10 to $12 persquare foot. The article includes photos of the house in Austin and images of examples of various sitespecificcladdingmaterials.(DM)　Cameron, Kristi."Rebirth: BOASE, Denmark’s Model for Sustainable Mass-Produced Housing, On Stilts."Metropolis. v23, n5. p 66-69. Jan 2004.BOASE is an innovative national competition winning concept proposed by a team of students inDenmark. The primary themes of the project are affordable housing, mass production of units, and soilremediation that occurs through phytoremediation while the housing units sit above the petrochemicallypolluted site in a network of "tree dwellings."The units stand on stilts, and therefore allow rainwater and sunlight to filter down and nourish the soilcleaningplantecology.Theprovocativenotionofdevelopingpollutedsitesisrootedinthecheapnessoflandthatnoonewantstouse-pollutedland.Theplantsareexpectedtocleanthetopsixfeetofcontaminatedsoilinaperiodoftenyears,which,bysome,maybeworthwhile"ratherthanspendingmillionshaulingthecontaminateddirttoalandfilloftreatmentfacility."Iftheclean-upprocessdoesnotoccurasexpectedthroughphytoremediation,notallislost;"evenifthetreesdon’tmanagetocleanupthesoil,theyaresuckingupwaterandevaporatingitthroughtheirleaves…(it)won’tleachintogroundwatersupplies,takingpollutantswithit."Unitsaremanufacturedfromlightweightfiberglass-reinforcedplastic,givingthemtheadvantagesoflastingstructuralstrengthwithminimalweight.Inthisproject,the"home"becomesindustrialized,aunitofmassproduction.Thethreetechnologiesusedinthisprojectare:GratzelSolarCells,FiberlinePlasticComposites,andPhytoremediation.(DM)　Couling, Nancy and Klaus Overmeyer (of cet-0). "New From Suburbia: Agro City." Architectural Design, v74,n4, p 66-71. Jul/Aug 2004.Couling and Overmeyer have produced a model for areas outlying urban centers to becomeneighborhoods surrounding farming-land green spaces, rather than arbitrary parks and green spaces,commonly ordained by local zoning codes. The theory proposes that the residents maintain and work the"farm-land" and it gives back to them, monetarily, as well as enriching a closer-knit community than atypical suburb. The article includes a model for investment and return based in its proposed operations in anarea outlying Hamburg- the location of cet-0’s Fischbek-Mississippi project. The underlying concept is a"symbiosis of land for farming and land for building…Green areas are a combination of agricultural fields anddomesticated plots, leased to an ecofarmer, or to the Mississippi Club, of which the new residents wouldideally be members"(Couling p. 69). (DM)Diamond, Richard C. "Affordable Housing Through Energy Efficiency." GSD News/ Harvard University..p 14. Winter/Spring. 1993.Ehrenzweig, Dina. "Consumer acceptance of straw-bale housing." International Journal for Housing Scienceand its Applications. v23, n1. p 69-77. 1993.Evans, Barrie. "Making housing sustainable." Architect’s Journal. v205, n2. p 48. Jan 1998.On the potential provision of housing for the 4.4 million new English households predicted for the period from1991 to 2016. Taken from presentations at the BRE 75th anniversary international conference, "SustainableConstruction: an Agenda for Innovation".Gifford, H. "Third Street: Can architects and builders work together to produce highly energy-efficient andaffordable multifamily housing without any grant support? Two New Yorkers prove that it can bedone." Home Energy. v22, n5, p 24-29 Energy federation Incorporated. 2005.Third Street considers the assemblies and methods utilized to create more energy-efficient apartmentbuildings in New York City. The buildings are located at 299 E. 3rdSt. (38-family building) and 228 E. 3St.(22-family building) in Manhattan. The project was developed by Mary Spink and the architect is ChrisBenedict.The article denotes specific building assemblies that improve thermal and acoustical insulation. Specificwall sections are shown, as well as efficiency comparisons based on energy consumption and cost.The article also implies concerns about the negative effect of funding sustainable projects through grants,relating this approach to the concept that one can only do good if funded. Another interesting issueexemplified by these projects is that buildings that may be extremely energy efficient and "green" to a greatextent will never satisfy current LEED criteria because of certain detailing that, in a sense, make them evenmore sustainable. (DM)Gregory, Rob. "Wake Up Call." The Architectural Review. p 44, Nov 2003.BedZED is a prototype for sustainable high affordable housing complexes by Bill Dunster Architects. It is anexample of high density suburban-urbanization in Sutton, England. Highlights of the project include liveworkunits,acommunityhall,southfacingspacesandterraces.Theonebedroomloftapartmentshavetheirownentrancesandopenontoaskygarden.Thearticleincludesphotographs,asiteplan,anelevation,sections,andasunstudy.(DM)Koebel, Theodore "Sustaining sustainability: innovation in housing and the built environment." Journal ofUrban Technology. v6, n3. p 75-94. Dec 1999.Sustaining Sustainability discusses a wide spectrum of issues related to spreading the desire for, andacceptance of, sustainable housing. The article theorizes the necessity for technological developments topush the viability of sustainability into mainstream construction. Koebel also articulates various circuits withinthe development and construction industries through which sustainable practices must spread if they areto effectively diffuse within our culture. Included issues are mass production, adaptability, change agents,codes, and policies (and their makers). The general message is that everyone needs the tools and the knowhow,ascollectivelyacceptedacrosstheindustry,toprogressinsupportingandencouragingsustainablehousing.　rdAn interesting theory on the method of diffusion and its characteristics is delineated and discussed.Koebel’s research designates certain "characteristics of innovations that influence adoption," (Koebel p.79)including relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability.Koebel goes further into the issue of diffusion by discussing various initiatives in sustainable housing andtheir overall performance. (DM)Makovsky, Paul. "Green Space: In the country's first green residential tower, a temporary showcase interioroffers lasting ideas." Metropolis. vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 118-120, Nov 2003Makovsky outlines various sustainable furniture and finishes used at the Solaire in Battery Park City, NewYork. The Solaire is significant in that it is the country’s first high-rise sustainable apartment building. Theinterior design of the apartments was created by Stedila Design.The article describes the innovative finishes and furniture and interesting descriptions of their origins andhow they are designated as sustainable for this project. Perhaps most helpful are the actual names,manufacturers, and distributors of many pieces.Sustainable finishes and furniture mentioned include:Uba Tuba granite from BrazilUrea-free formaldehyde fiberboard cabinetsNon-Urea formaldehyde parquet floorsReclaimed-recycled lines of carpet and furnitureAbaca fiber instead of plasticsA "less than 500 miles" philosophy, aiding in cutting embodied energy expenditure (DM)Martin, Glen and Frank Escher and Andrew Wagner. "Shades of Green: Dwell Home II."Dwell. v5, n6, p 114, 116. June 2005.Dwell Home II was constructed in Topanga Canyon, California as a test home for green design. It’sconstruction in such an isolated area prompted many questions about the true sustainability of remotenessin this modern world, since a car must be used for traveling into town for commodities. Andrew Wagnerfacilitated a discussion/ interview with the homeowner Glen Martin and architect Frank Escher, prompted byquestions written to Dwell magazine regarding the project.In the project’s defense, the convenience and viability of bus lines and telecommuting are available for usein the remote setting. Aside from those conveniences, Escher maintained that the building, when seen assiteless, is extremely efficient, performing well, and addresses "environmental questions that need to beaddressed on any site."Dwell Home II cools itself, generates its own electrical power, uses a quarter of the water ofconventional houses, and treats its own wastewater.The article brings up the interesting notion that "in the 70’s, central Europe was going through what we aregoing through in California now. There were some people who were really interested in more intelligent useof resources and sustainable design…" (Escher p.116). (DM)Shore, William B. "Land-use, transportation and sustainability." Technology in Society. v28. p.27-42. 2006.This article proposes three strategies for recentralizing the dispersed population epidemic in the UnitedStates on the grounds that regional planning is a substantial element in reaching a more sustainablelifestyle, and culture. The strategies are: "pricing goods and services to reflect sustainable needs,improving the magnetism of cities, and legislating enforceable regional plans."The article articulates the history of population dispersal away from cities and the ramifications of this trend. Itthen discusses the sustainability of a "spread city" in comparison to "traditional centers andcommunity." (DM)Solomon, Nancy B. "The Pick of the Sustainable Crop." Architectural Record. v193, n7, p 153-156, 158,160, Jul 2005.The Pick of the Sustainable Crop reviews three of the top 10 Green Projects awarded by the AIACommittee on the Environment. The article gives background on the COTE selection process and categoriesthat qualify their concept of sustainable design.With narrative, photos, diagrams and sections, the innovative design aspects of the three built projectsare elaborated.The Pittsburgh Glass Center, in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, has an innovative and effective heat recoverysystem and effective insulation and ventilation systems. It is an industrial building that houses hotshops,offices and exhibition space, designed by DGGP and Bruce Lindsey AIA.Rinker Hall in Gainesville, Florida is the home of the M.E. Rinker School of Building Construction in thedepartment of the University of Florida’s College of Design and Construction. Designed by CroxtonCollaborative Architects + Gould Evans Associates, the building utilizes enthalpy wheel technology, passivesolar design, and high-performance glazing.A connection is made between daylighting and occupants’ circadian rhythms "connecting… to nature’s owncircadian rhythm- allows occupants to experience what Croxton describes as `the most primitive, deepseatedaspectsofcomfort’."TheAustinResourceCenterfortheHomeless(ARCH)isa26,800sfbuildingthathouseshomelesstemporarilyandforthelongterm,whileprovidingsupportprogramsinAustinTexas.ThebuildingwasdevelopedconcurrentlywithAustin’sadoptionofanewpolicythatthedesignofanynewmunicipalbuildingmust follow the guidelines put forth by the U.S. Green Building Council for its LEED rating system. Theproject utilized the method of stack-cast tilt-frame construction, cutting down on the cost of formwork forconcrete. Fly-ash was substituted for 45% of the portland cement in the concrete mix. A rain-watercollection system was also developed to mediate Austin’s serious flooding problems (due to poor topsoilconditions). (DM)Zhang, Zhihui and Xing Wu, Xiaomin Yang, and Yimin Zhu. "BEPAS- a life cycle building environmentalperformance assessment model." Building and Environment. v41. p 669-675. 2006.In this journal article, BEPAS (building environmental performance analysis system) is explained and testedin a case study. It has been proposed that the system’s methodologies can be utilized on both new andexisting buildings, evaluating their facilities (operation phase consumption and pollution), location,and materials. This article seems to have been inspired by the "rapid process of industrialization andurbanization" currently underway in China. It is also in response to the relative subjectiveness ofsustainability evaluation checklist-type methods such as LEED. The BEPAS researchers responded tothese issues by creating a more objective analytical approach to evaluating building performance,building upon the in-depth model of LCA (life cycle analysis). Results of the article’s case study show the testbuilding’s environmental impact was 96.6% from the facility operation, and only 5.6% from the buildingmaterials.BEPAS attempts to include more variables than other existing analysis models of a similar genre.(DM)Affordable Housing and Community Design: Gulf Coast RegionARTICLESAllais, Lucia. "Building Dwelling, Not Thinking" Thresholds. v20. p 50-55. 2000.Allais theorizes that housing typologies can have underlying social implications that must be recognized,especially when addressing affordable housing for poor predominantly African American populations incertain areas of the country. She specifically addresses the symbolism embodied in the shotgun-stylehousing that is commonly constructed as affordable infill housing.The discussion of the possible sociological ramifications of typology arose through a competition for DelrayBeach Florida’s Redevelopment Agency to design "affordable infill housing" in the predominantly blackMount Olive community.Allais sites the works of Marylis Nepomechie and Heidegger as current and historical thinkers on the samesubject; the architects’ argument about the pride of ownership.The theories, as presented in this article, are very subjective, and tend to make difficult assumptions thatsometimes waiver on the verge of being credible. However, the concepts put forth are extremely provoking,and are frequently neglected in design of affordable housing. The relationship between form and meaningcan have great impact, and the architect needs to be held responsible for intervening in the best interest ofmediating this phenomenon, downplaying the tones of social segregation in affordable housing. (DM)Burby, R. J."Reconstruction/Disaster Planning: United States." International Encyclopedia of the Social &Behavioral Sciences. p 12841-12844. 2004.This encyclopedic entry is a good introduction to the basic elements of procedures and plans typically setup for post-disaster reconstruction in the United States.The organization of the short article is in five sections: the problem, evolution of planning for resilience, postdisasterandrecoveryplans,hazardmitigationplans,andconclusion.　Onecanimaginethattheseproceduresareeffectedbythemagnitudeofkeydisastersinthecountry’shistory,andthusdonotincludethedevastationofHurricanesKatrinaandRita,northeresultantpoliciesthatmayhavebeendeveloped.　Thearticleelaboratestheprimaryelementsofplansthataddressnaturalhazards,fallingintwocategories:post-disasterreconstructionandhazardmitigation.(DM)Kroloff, Reed and Kevin Pratt. "A Newer Orleans: Six Proposals." Artforum. v44, n7, p 266-283, Mar 2006.An overview of the current search for inspiration for hope and design for a "newer Orleans" sets theprecedent for the summary of 6 design proposals, or "six visions" to invoke a "spirit of possibility." Theintroduction mentions that the Congress for the New Urbanism (led by Andres Duany) had an extensivedesign charette to provide design guidance for Mississippi’s devastated regions, and it has now "seduced"Louisiana’s government as well. Artforum suggests that a fresh, inventive dialogue needs to commence.These proposals do not situate themselves in the realistic realm of feasibility any time in the near future, butthey are refreshing and drastically different takes on how a new city might reshape itself after a disaster ofsuch enormous destruction.The six teams were proposed by Artforum for proposals to be published, two each (one Dutch and oneAmerican team) for three segments: community (MVRDV, Huff + Gooden), urban icon (UN Studio,Morphosis), and landscape (West 8, Hargreaves Associates). The proposals did not address affordablehousing within their broad assigned categories.Recurring themes within the variety of proposals were: public space, connections (both communicationand physical), pride and dignity, high density revitalized areas, reinvigoration and symbolism. (DM)Shepard, Richard . "Refilling a Neighborhood: West Coconut Grove, Miami." Places. v14, n3, p 44-45,Spring 2002.Shepard (as director of the Center for Urban and Community Design at the University of Miami School ofArchitecture) describes a studio project that integrated students and university with a strugglingneighborhood whose population, property, and quality of life has drastically declined. The project was forstudents to design an affordable house after surveying the conditions, lifestyles and policies of itsneighborhood and jurisdiction. The project set a precedent of trust between the University and theneighborhood that could potentially lead to similar future collaborations benefiting both parties, the academyand the struggling neighborhood.The underlying concept driving the development of the project is Shepard’s assertion that "If vacant lots andabandoned buildings could be developed for low-and moderate- income families, the proportion ofstakeholders could increase and the community pride of ownership could return" (Shepard p. 44).The studio culminated in the actual approval and eventual building of a two-story shotgun housedesigned by students who saw it take shape before graduating from architecture school. A local developerhad become an enthusiast of the studio and funded the projectShepard’s concept and its follow-through becomes an exemplar for students, teachers and developerswondering how they can do more in their "own back yard." (DM)Sorkin, Michael."Will new plans for the Gulf drown it again, this time in nostaligia?" Architectural Record.New York, v194, n2, p.47. Feb 2006.This article critically expresses concerns related to the Congress for the New Urbanism’s (CNU) recentcharette and resultant design recommendations for post-hurricane redevelopment of 11 towns examinedalong the Mississippi Gulf coast. While the report calls for ample transportation (along with a virtual "concretekimono"), it is also overtly concerned with regulating every facet of architecture in a someone’s aestheticutopian ideal, it pays little attention to disaster mitigation and future damage precautions, nor sustainablestrategies and environmental conscientiousness. (DM)Voss Matthews, Sherrie. "Orlando Planners Build Energy-Efficient House." Planning. Chicago. v69, n5. p 40.May 2005.The house at 2516 East Church St. in Orlando, Florida is not, by most means "affordable at an appraisalvalue of $300,000. However, it is an example of the availability of systems, materials and labor available inFlorida to conduct sustainable construction. The house includes 9-foot tall ceilings and a floorplan thatsupports good ventilation through airflow. Since termites are often a problem in Florida, no wood was usedin construction. The house is clad, instead with wood fiber cement plank siding over steel frame. Flooringfinishes include bamboo (impregnated with borates) and ceramic tile. Energy Star criteria were met forappliances throughout the house, reducing greenhouse emissions. In terms of water conservation, low flowfixtures and toilets were installed. Water is heated with solar heat, and the house has an integratedinsulation system. The house, at 2,000 square feet, is "affordable to operate, and runs on $60 per month,for everything." (DM)PAPERSFEMA/ US Department of Homeland Security. Home Builder’s Guide to Coastal ConstructionTechnical Sheet Series. FEMA 499, Aug 2005.In August of 2005, FEMA produced guidelines for coastal construction in a technical fact sheet series. Theseries of 31 fact sheets gives guidance and recommendations for coastal residential buildings. This guidewas produced to improve building performance in high winds and flood conditions. The document includesinformation that incorporates national Flood Insurance Program regulatory requirements. Topics emphasizedand illustrated are siting, structural connections, the building envelope, utilities and additional resources onvarious subjects. (DM)

Lyndon B. Johnson helped establish NASA and kick off the Space Race, only to bring the race to an end within a decade. (credit: NASA)Without question, LBJ. And a lot of the contributions were selfish on his part in order to get the NASA Space Center in his home state.According to Alan Wasser, Few people today realize or remember, but a single man, Lyndon Baines Johnson, “LBJ”, is primarily responsible for both starting and ending “The Space Race”.In 1957 and 1958, Johnson, then Senate Majority Leader and leader of the Democratic political opposition to Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, created such a controversy over the USSR’s launch of Sputnik that Eisenhower was forced into a public space race he didn’t want. That race led to the amazing accomplishments of the next ten years, including the first human landings on the Moon.Almost a decade later, Johnson was forced to virtually shut down the program he had worked so hard to sell to the government and to the public. By 1966 and 1967, Johnson, then President, desperately needed to cut expenditures to pay for the escalating Vietnam War. So he proposed to the leaders of the Soviet Union that they agree to a treaty, which became the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, to eliminate the key prizes to be won in the space race, especially the right of either nation to claim the Moon. That allowed both sides to move expensive space development to the back burner—where it has stayed ever since.The missile race: Prelude to the Space RaceThe story really starts in the aftermath of World War 2 when the US and the USSR each grabbed half of the German rocket program and launched vigorous rocket programs of their own. The US had bases in allied countries surrounding the USSR, from which they could, if they ever needed to, launch a massive nuclear air strike. The USSR had no bases near the US, however, so it needed much bigger, longer range rockets than the US did.Few people today realize or remember, but a single man, Lyndon Baines Johnson, “LBJ”, is primarily responsible for both starting and ending “The Space Race”.While the Soviets could get all the intelligence they wanted from Communist agents in America’s open society, the US had a desperate need for intelligence about what was going on inside the USSR’s closed society. Most particularly, the US wanted to know how the Soviet nuclear and ICBM programs were progressing. The US first tried sending high altitude balloons over the USSR and then high altitude airplanes such as the U-2, but the balloons went where the winds took them so they could not be directed to collect information about specific targets. The U-2 solved that problem, but its big weakness became all too obvious on May 1, 1960 when the U-2 piloted by Francis Gary Powers was shot down. Powers was held in prison for two years until 1962, when he was exchanged for Soviet Col. Rudolf Abel in the most dramatic East-West spy swap of the Cold War.Even in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s, long before Sputnik, the RAND project, the key government think tank, was secretly recommending to the US government a major effort to design a man-made satellite that would take photographs from space—and the rockets to put such a satellite in orbit. In December, 1953, the US Air Force pulled together all its various satellite efforts into a single program known as WS-117L. In October, 1956, the Lockheed Aircraft Corp. got the first WS-117L production contract. However, a big diplomatic problem associated with aerial surveillance worried President Eisenhower and held back the spy satellite program.The Soviet Union loudly protested that US “weather research” balloons were floating across their territory even though the altitude of the balloons was a very high 25,000 meters. The protest was based on the then current “ad coelum” theory that a nation’s sovereignty extends above its territory “to the heavens”. (New York Times, September 14, 1959, pg. 1). Obviously, such objections would apply even more to any spy satellites that were to go over the Soviet Union every hour and a half, on a clearly predictable schedule.Sputnik: a Soviet blunder?But then, on October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union—as part of the “International Geophysical Year”—used one of those big ICBM rockets it had been developing to launch Sputnik 1, an 83-kilogram aluminum sphere that did little more than emit radio beeps. Eisenhower was secretly thrilled! Now the US could go full steam ahead on its top secret spy satellite project, called “Corona”. By being the first to launch a satellite, the Soviets had lost their ability to object diplomatically.At the suggestion of George Reedy, Staff Director of the Democratic Policy Committee, Lyndon Johnson started making a fuss about Sputnik and its implications for US security.Eisenhower, though, was in an awkward position. He couldn’t very well crow about what he saw as a Soviet blunder because the very idea of spy satellites was still one of America’s biggest secrets. So he just tried to brush off the launch of Sputnik as unimportant. As the New York Times put it on October 13th, (way back on page 181): “President Eisenhower expressed no alarm over the incident” and added that “this country has never been in ‘a race’”. Even the Russian leader, Nikita Khrushchev, made light of Sputnik’s significance. The same Times article reported that, when asked if he had witnessed the takeoff, Khrushchev replied:No, I didn’t see it. When the satellite was launched, they phoned me that the rocket had taken the right course and that the satellite was already revolving around the earth. I congratulated the …engineers and technicians …and calmly went to bed.The Washington Post, (October 10, 1957, pg A14), ran an article on the President’s position headlined “On Refusing to Race”.Clearly, both Eisenhower and Khrushchev expected Sputnik to have its 15 minutes of fame and then fade to a footnote in the history books.Firing up the Space RaceLyndon Johnson changed everything. At the suggestion of George Reedy, Staff Director of the Democratic Policy Committee, (who in a 1992 oral history interview with John Logsdon credited a retired senatorial aide named Charles S. Brewton for the original idea), Johnson started making a fuss about Sputnik and its implications for US security.According to Robert Divine’s The Johnson Years, Reedy sent LBJ a long memo, urging him “to plunge heavily into this one”. Besides being very good politics for LBJ and the Democrats, Reedy said, “The Russians have left the earth, and the race for control of the universe has started.” Reedy argued that the nation that could conquer outer space would dominate the world of the future. “This may be one of those moments in history,” said Reedy, “when good politics and statesmanship are as close to each other as a hand in a glove.”Johnson, recognizing the political opportunity, jumped in with both feet.The New York Times for November 23, 1957 (pg 7) headlined “Johnson Outlines Broad Agenda for Senate Inquiry on Missiles”, and “Hearing to Open Monday to Stress Need of Speed.”The article was referring to planned hearings of the Senate Armed Services Committee’s specially re-activated Preparedness Subcommittee—which Johnson, although he was the Majority Leader of the Senate, was planning to actually chair himself. “As chairman of the inquiry,” the article noted, “the Senate Democratic leader reported that it would cover such matters as ‘our record of consistent underestimation’ of the Soviet program, the Government’s ‘lack of willingness to take proper risks’”.Only a month earlier, President Eisenhower had said the US was not in a space race, and is supposed to have commented, “Lyndon Johnson can keep his head in the stars if he wants. I’m going to keep my feet on the ground.” But Johnson was going to force Eisenhower into a space race, whether the President liked it or not.Beware the “Masters of Infinity”: the Space Race is bornBy the time the hearings finished six weeks later, on January 8, 1958, even the New York Times was using the “Space Race” phrase. Their headline that day read “Text of Johnson’s Statement on Status of Nation’s Defense and Race for Space”. The Washington Postthat day headlined “Free World Must Control Space, Johnson tells Senate Group”.In his subcommittee’s detailed summary statement Johnson proclaimed that our very future depended on being the ones who first seized ownership of space. “Control of space means control of the world,” Johnson declared.From space, the masters of infinity would have the power to control the earth’s weather, to cause drought and flood, to change the tides and raise the levels of the sea, to divert the gulf stream and change temperate climates to frigid.Johnson continued:In essence, the Soviet Union has appraised control of space as a goal of such consequence that achievement of such control has been made a first aim of national policy. [In contrast], our decisions, more often than not, have been made within the framework of the Government’s annual budget. Against this view, we now have on record the appraisal of leaders in the field of science, respected men of unquestioned competence, whose valuation of what control of outer space means renders irrelevant the bookkeeping concerns of fiscal officers.Those words and that sentiment—that control of space was worth busting the budget for—led to the tremendous increase in space spending in the years ahead, and the wonderful accomplishments that spending paid for. But those words may well have come to haunt Johnson when, as we shall see, he personally led a reversal of that course less than a decade later.That sentiment—that control of space was worth busting the budget for—led to the tremendous increase in space spending in the years ahead, and the wonderful accomplishments that spending paid for.There is another point worth making about Johnson’s statement. After the space race ended, some people tried to pretend that the reason for the race had been only the question of “national prestige”. However, nowhere in his lengthy and detailed subcommittee statement summarizing the risks of Soviet dominance in space did Johnson so much as mention the question of national prestige! To him, and the Congress he led, the issue was entirely who would win and own outer space. As Johnson put it bluntly, if it weren’t for the importance of controlling space then we “might dismiss the sputniks as play toys.”Missiles from the Moon, the ultimate high groundOn its front page of January 29, 1958, the Washington Post headlined “Expert Sees Moon As Rocket Base”. It said,The Air Force’s top space expert predicted yesterday the moon will be a military rocket base for either Russia or the US within 10 years. Brig. Gen. Homer A. Boushey, deputy director of Air Force research and Development said the moon will provide a “base of unequaled advantage” for raining “sure and massive destruction” on earth.The General said “he fully supports the view that ‘He who controls the moon, controls the Earth.’”The widely-respected foreign affairs expert C. L Sulzberger wrote an analysis of General Boushey’s views in the New York Times on March 24 that concluded,Such concepts are fantastic but no longer fanciful. And their potential military implication is immense. Manned platforms in outer space or missile ramps upon the moon would give the controlling nation a seemingly overwhelming advantage from which to dictate.How could Congress not give the Space Race whatever funding it needed?The US plays some serious catch-upOn January 21, 1959, the first attempt to launch a rocket designed to carry the Corona spy satellite, (called Discoverer 1 to hide its real purpose), ended in failure 60 minutes before blastoff. Twelve more tries, generally failures of one sort or another, followed. But, perhaps spurred on by Johnson’s pressure, Eisenhower stuck with the program. Finally, on the fourteenth try, August 19, 1959, the first fully successful Corona mission, Discoverer 14, was launched, with almost no public fanfare.All these early Soviet successes prompted significant fears that the Soviets might actually claim ownership of the Moon!The returning capsule, containing nearly10 kilograms of film and suspended from a parachute, was snatched from midair by an Air Force C-119 aircraft. That first successful Corona satellite alone returned more photos of the Soviet Union than the 24 combined U-2 spy missions and the images, although fuzzier than U-2 photographs, covered areas of the Soviet Union never reached by the spy planes. On December 10, 1959, the 18th Discoverer achieved the second truly successful mission and returned 18 kilograms of film filled with images from an improved camera, the KH-2.Still, the US continued to lag behind those big Soviet ICBM rockets. On January 4, 1959, the Soviet Union’s Luna 1 made the first lunar flyby. On September 14, 1959, Luna 2 was the first spacecraft to hit the surface of the Moon. The first US spacecraft to hit the Moon, Ranger 4, wasn’t launched until April 23, 1962, two and half years after Luna 2 did it.The US fears the Soviets might claim the ultimate high groundAll these Soviet successes prompted significant fears that the Soviets might actually claim ownership of the Moon!On March 7, 1959, six months before Luna 2 actually hit the Moon, the New York Times published an article headlined: “US Bars Haste on Moon Claims”. It said: “The State Department’s legal adviser said today that the Soviet Union would have to do considerably more than ‘stick a Red flag in the ground’ to be able to claim sovereignty over the moon.” State’s Loftus Becker told the House Select Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration that “there is considerably more to establishing sovereignty than” planting a flag and that “a large body of law already existed, which, could be expected to govern man in space just as it did on earth.” Presumably, although he didn’t actually say so, this meant that the State Department believed the Soviets would actually have to put a man on the Moon to claim it. However, the legal advisor added, “the Soviet Union, so far had shown no signs of cooperation” in reaching an agreement on just what was required to establish sovereignty, and, in fact, Moscow had indicated it would boycott the upcoming UN Space Law Committee’s discussions of the subject.On September 14, 1959, when the USSR’s Luna 2 did hit the Moon, the Times ran a front page article headlined “US Rejects Any Flag-Planting As Legal Claim to Rule Moon”. Although the US believed planting a flag wasn’t enough, it said, “John M. Raymond, deputy legal advisor to the State Department said in Washington yesterday that the United States had ‘no views on how far you would have to go’ to claim moon sovereignty, as yet”.William A. Hyman, a prominent space lawyer, was quoted as saying that, although they had previously taken a different position “it would not be surprising to hear [the Soviets] say that if the satellite made physical contact with the moon, they would then claim they had extended sovereignty to the lunar sphere.” However, he added, “‘the civilized world’ has largely adopted the attitude set forth by Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes in 1924 that there must also be occupation with an intent to make it permanent.”As Vice President, then President, Johnson nurses the Space RaceLyndon Johnson campaigned for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 1960 but had to settle for the second slot behind John F. Kennedy. Their big issue was “The Missile Gap”—the charge that the Eisenhower administration had cut military spending so much that they had allowed the Russians to get far ahead of us in missiles and space. Eisenhower offered to give Kennedy a secret intelligence briefing on why that really wasn’t such a problem, but Kennedy declined—and won the election. “The missile gap” issue somehow disappeared after the election.Johnson continued Kennedy’s dedication to the Moon landing, saying “I do not believe that this generation of Americans is willing to resign itself to going to bed each night by the light of a Communist moon”.Once president, Kennedy put Vice President Johnson in personal charge of the space program. By all accounts he took the job seriously and was a very good manager. The only significant black spot was the persistent but possibly unfounded rumor that he made a personal fortune on land deals related to the establishment of the Manned Spacecraft Center (now called the Johnson Space Center) near Houston, in his home state of Texas.In May, 1961, shortly after the first American in space, Alan Shepard, finished his suborbital flight, President Kennedy, with strong support from Johnson, committed his nation to being first on the Moon. Lyndon Johnson became President on November 22, 1963, when Kennedy was shot, and won reelection on his own in 1964. Of course, as the founder and head cheerleader of the Space Race, Johnson continued Kennedy’s dedication to the Moon landing, saying “I do not believe that this generation of Americans is willing to resign itself to going to bed each night by the light of a Communist moon”.Under Johnson’s full backing as President, the space program thrived, and, nourished by the competitive space race, accomplished amazing and wonderful things for all humanity during those years.The 1967 Outer Space Treaty: the antidote for Vietnam expendituresKennedy had gotten involved in the revolution in Vietnam and left the resulting mess to Johnson, who got sucked in deeper and deeper. LBJ was in a terrible dilemma. He knew he couldn’t win in Vietnam, but he also knew he couldn’t quit, because the political consequences of losing were too great. So the stalemate in Vietnam just kept getting worse, and more and more expensive.Johnson didn’t want to give up his Great Society programs, and he didn’t want to raise taxes, so he absolutely had to cut everything else—and the space race was a big fat money pot. But, as with the war in Vietnam, the consequences of losing the Space Race were also unacceptable. Remember, to LBJ we were in a desperate race to see who was going to own space—free men or the tyrants of the USSR—and the future of the world depended on making that come out right.He had tried to negotiate a compromise in Vietnam, but couldn’t get the other side interested. So he looked for a compromise in the space race instead, and there, probably to his surprise, he succeeded. It was early 1966, and the US was gaining but still hadn’t quite caught up to the Russians in space. In one sense, it appeared the Soviets were about four months ahead. On January 31, 1966 the USSR launched Luna 9, which made mankind’s first soft landing on the Moon. America’s first soft landing came four months later, with Surveyor 1, on April 30, 1966.The administration had to assume that, if it cut space spending to pay for Vietnam, it might well lose the Space Race. The question became how to keep the other side from using that victory to gain control of space.Information that has come to light only since the end of the Cold War reveals that the Soviet’s manned lunar landing program was actually in very big trouble and on the verge of failure. Then, the ultimate disaster hit. Sergey Korolev, the Soviet’s genius rocket designer, the super-secret “Chief Constructor” who we now know was behind all the Soviet’s space successes, the one man who might have made their troubled N1 Moon rocket work, died during colon surgery in Moscow on January 14, 1966. But the US did not know that at the time. Johnson’s intelligence services were telling him the Soviets were on track to reach the Moon.Because of that lack of intelligence, the administration had to assume that, if it cut space spending to pay for Vietnam, it might well lose the Space Race. The question became how to keep the other side from using that victory to gain control of space. So Johnson offered the Soviets a deal for mutual renunciation of the prizes to be won: no nuclear weapons in space, and neither country claims ownership of the Moon, regardless of which nation gets there first. As the New York Times pointed out on May 8th, “the treaty sought by the United States would be similar to the one pertaining to Antarctica” which had effectively stopped all development there.LBJ must have been pleasantly surprised when the Soviets accepted, since he didn’t realize they too were now worried about the consequences of losing the race to the Moon. LBJ had no idea of the significance of the death of Korolev—if, indeed he’d ever heard the name—but Khrushchev certainly understood, and unlike the US, the USSR could easily keep tabs on how their opposition was doing so they knew the US was doing better than they were.The result was the “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies” (referred to simply as the Outer Space Treaty), negotiated directly with the Kremlin by Johnson’s personal representative, former Supreme Court Justice and UN Ambassador Arthur Goldberg, and only later shown to the UN in its final form to be ratified by other nations.Of course, Johnson didn’t say publicly that the reason for the treaty was to cut space spending to pay for Vietnam, so how do we know that was the reason?The smoking gun: the LBJ Library gives up its secretsI spent many hours in the LBJ Library in Austin, Texas, looking for the proof. Arthur Goldberg’s recollections provide clues, but the real smoking gun was in a 1966 State Department policy document which was secret until 1985, and then only partially declassified. A Freedom of Information Act request was required to get to the rest.The document is titled “Space Goals After the Lunar Landing“ and was written under the direction of Assistant Secretary of State Henry Owen, the then Chairman of the State Department’s Policy Planning Council.It starts out: “Even before the outcome of the moon race has been decided, we face the question of whether to commit ourselves to… proceeding with manned exploration of the moon after the initial landing.” Later: “The advanced stage of Apollo development and the lead time requirements of possible follow-on programs make it necessary to consider future space goals at this time.”“Instead of indefinitely extending the space race, it would be preferable to work toward de-fusing the space race between the US and Soviets.”The following are all selected quotes from that paper, laying out the views of a key part of the Johnson administration, and quite possibly the President himself. Note: all underlining is as it was in the original paper. I have bolded the sections I consider most significant to this discussion.“If we can de-emphasize or stretch out additional costly programs aimed at the moon and beyond, resources may to some extent be released for other objectives which might serve more immediate, higher priority interests.”“Whether our over-all space effort can prudently be conducted at a more deliberate pace in the future may depend in part on de-fusing the space race between the US and Soviets. We should consider the desirability and feasibility of this objective.”“Instead of indefinitely extending the space race, it would be preferable to work toward de-fusing the space race between the US and Soviets.”“International agreements defining rules for space, [such as] the proposed celestial bodies/outer space treaty are pointed in this direction.”“In seeking to de-fuse the space race, several types of arrangements with the Soviets might be considered: [first] Joint US-Soviet conduct of major space exploration programs looking toward eventually placing such efforts on an international basis.““Coordinating national efforts with a view to limiting pressures for racing toward new goalposts deep in space.”“For example, a Manned Orbital Research Laboratory might serve scientific purposes and also open the way for some degree of international cooperation in manned spaceflight”“The effect, although not the explicit purpose, might be a tacitly agreed pacing or slowdown of some of the more costly ventures.”How prophetic those words were, especially the last two points, written in 1966! Indeed, we did get the “Manned Orbital Research Laboratory” referred to in that memo. Now, close to four decades later, we have the International Space Station instead of real efforts to explore and settle the Moon and Mars. Just as those who wanted to de-fuse the Space Race hoped, international cooperation allowed them to “release” resources for the things they wanted instead. Although no one has ever admitted that it was the space station’s “explicit purpose”, it certainly has kept us distracted from those “more costly ventures”.The following quotes from the document illustrate the fact that the Johnson administration did not have accurate intelligence about just how badly the Soviet Moon program was actually doing in 1966:Is there any chance (before the moon race is decided) of interesting the Soviets seriously in the possibility of curtailing the race in the future? The answer to this question is probably “no”, but we can ourselves begin to do the planning needed to support that objective. Moreover, we can begin to adjust our own programmatic goals accordingly.We have to anticipate that the Soviets will not only place additional emphasis on competing in practical applications, but will also continue to view space spectaculars as a useful psychological tool. They probably do not plan to stop at the moon.[Therefore] it is difficult to see the Soviets agreeing to any such arrangements now.In that, of course, the authors of the paper were wrong. That’s why I believe they must have been very pleasantly surprised when the Soviets did, in fact, agree to “curtail the race”.Indeed, we did get the “Manned Orbital Research Laboratory” referred to in that memo. Now, close to four decades later, we have the International Space Station instead of real efforts to explore and settle the Moon and Mars.By the way, it is interesting to see now what those who declassified the rest of the report in 1985 felt was too sensitive to declassify even then, almost twenty years after it was written. The following section was completely blacked out in 1985 until I got it released in 1998 by a Freedom of Information Act request.It can be argued that this [de-fusing the space race] might prove disadvantageous — especially if Soviet resources were thus freed for military programs. Although we cannot be sure how such resources would be allocated, four considerations tend to vitiate the argument that we would be better off keeping the Soviets “diverted” into space.First, extending the space race might itself contribute to military potential; measuring this effect would be especially difficult in the Soviet case since their single space effort-covers both military and civilian purposes. Second, the Soviets can, in any event, be expected to give priority to whatever they may consider essential for defense. Third, given the strained situation of the Soviet economy, there is a good chance that at least a part of any freed resources would find its way into the civilian sector. Finally, although our own economy is far stronger, we are also confronted with problems of resource allocation. In the final analysis, we can’t really “divert” the Soviets without to some extent “diverting” ourselves.Lyndon B. Johnson publicly supported NASA in its race with the Soviets to reach the Moon, while privately he sought a way to end the race and divert funding elsewhere. (credit: NASA)Cover memo sums it upPerhaps most damning all is the cover memo for the classified document that Henry Owen sent to Walt Rostow, Johnson’s hawkish Special Assistant for National Security Affairs, the post now known as National Security Advisor. It boils down the reasons Owen and his associates felt the Space Race must end and what it would take to end it:The final draft of our space paper is being distributed to members of the Space Council — McNamara, Webb, etc. The Vice President wishes it to be discussed at the Council.It will encounter strong opposition from NASA and Ed Welsh, the secretary of the Space Council.Nonetheless, I believe it right [because] it will save money, which can go to foreign aid and domestic purposes — thus mitigating the political strain of the war in Vietnam.If the proposals in this memo are left to be fought out by the space marshals and their clients, we will lose. Therefore I urge you to get into the fight personally — let the Vice President, Schultze (Bob), and others know how you feel. Send a copy to someone on the domestic side of the White House staff to ensure that someone from that side representing the constituency whose interests are most directly affected, gets into the fight.Of course, they did win.what we didn't know then (part 2)