The task of drawing conclusions from the proceedings of this conference is not as simple as that of the little judge in the Pickwick Papers, who in his summing up directed the jury to find for the plaintiff if they felt she had made her case, or for the defendant if the plaintiff's evidence was not conclusive. We have in fact been presented with plenty of evidence, some of it conclusive, most of it less so, in favour not of one model of the nucleus, but of several such models. We have even heard the same piece of evidence adduced in favour of two models whose characteristics appear at first sight contradictory. However, we know that we have to view things in the spirit of complementarity and ought not to be alarmed by contradictions, at least not by deep contradictions. Indeed, it seems that in the realm of nuclear models we have gone a long way already towards a satisfactory synthetic view-point, from which apparent contradictions between different pictures are eliminated by suitable limitations of the validity of these modes of description.
*) Drawn from the proceedings of the Amsterdam Nuclear Reactions Conference on