A Reply

Sir, I just participated at the “Interna­ tional Conference” on the Applica­ tions of the Mössbauer Effect “held in Corfu (13-18 Sept. 1976), when the method of presentation adopted was the “unique session” In which only 56 papers, from a total number of 216 contributed papers, were selected for presentation. Between the Mössbauer Conference of Tihany (17-21 June 1969) with 119 participants and 95 contributed pa­ pers, and this one, with 220 partici­ pants and 216 contributed papers (and through five other conferences bet­ ween) different systems have been adopted (parallel sessions rapporteur sessions, unique session), depending on the number of participants, the technical facilities and the adoption or not of the principle of selection of papers for presentation. It is very difficult to say which, among them, is the best method, each having its own merits and demerits1) but what we can say, In my opinion, Is that : 1) any method allowing the stimu­ lation of discussions and the ex­ change of ideas between the largest possible number of participants (with­ out being limited to the presentation of some results only, even substan­ tially new), is good. These methods may be the “parallel sessions” or any other mixed system from parallel ses­ sions to poster sessions2), where the appropriate mixture for the different subjects is to be found by the orga­ nizing committees of the future Mössbauer conferences. 2) any method not satisfying the above criteria is bad. This is the case of the “unique session” (adopted at Corfu) which presents the following incoveniences a) It excludes a large proportion of contributed papers from any presen­ tation (75% excluded in Corfu) and very often, the papers from younger “unknown” scientists. The percentage of such excluded papers will be more and more important in future confe­ rences because of the continuously increasing number of participants. This certainly is not the best way to stimulate discussions and to bring to­ gether the Mössbauer people. b) It does not remedy the problem of specialization (a danger of parallel sessions1) because the specialization does exist, anyway, and becomes more and more necessary with the increasing load of the “steam roller” of Mössbauer results3). One can see this specialization in the fact that except for some papers of general Interest, the presentation of all contri­ buted papers interests only a part of the participants as witnessed from the attendance. c) It does not even help the "Möss­ bauer community” to remain members of a “universal family”1). The exclu­ sion of the majority of “participants” from any oral presentation breaks the “universality” and transforms the con­ ference into a sort of meeting where a small number of participants pre­ sent their results before two hundred spectators grouped for the occasion. The “unique session” method is thus really the worst existing method. I hope, sincerely, that the organizing committees of the future Mössbauer conferences will consider this method as dead in Corfu.