DOCSLIB.ORG

Early Decisions in the Development of the CANDU Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Early Decisions in the Development of the CANDU Program Early Decisions in the Development ofthe CANDU Program J.L. Gray (NRC) and later AECL, with the nuclear development Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, program; and the Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB), Ottawa, Ontario the regulatory agency - all reported to Howe. I need say no more about Howe, but I suspect that without him the nuclear development program would Abstract have died in its first few years, and probably have This paper identifies about twenty mator decisions of the been reborn in the 1950s with, hopefully, but not Canadian Nuclear Power Program from its inception in 1942 certainly, heavy water reactors in the program. to maturity - the decision of Ontario Hydro to complete the One of the earliest actions that produced a key Pickering Nuclear Power Station and proceed with a major decision resulted from the war in Europe and the fall nuclear power installation program. The decisions are dis­ of France. Both the British and the French were aware cussed briefly. in 1939 of the possibility of a nuclear weapon as a result of the work of the Curies and others. Hans von This paper reflects my views of the early years of the Halban, an Austrian, was working with Frederic Joliot­ CANDU program to the point of program maturity. I Curie, along with Lew Kowarski, a Russian, and the have drawn heavily on the research work of Professor French team had advanced to the point of outlining Robert Bothwell - who is writing a book on Atomic an arrangement of uranium and a moderatorthatcould Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) - particularly for sustain a chain reaction - a reactor. The team recog­ the period up to the incorporation of AECL, when I nized the worth of heavy water and cornered the became directly involved. I certainly learned much world's supply that had been produced in Norway, from having access to Bothwell's early drafts of the 185.5kg. period 1942 to 1952. I have also found A History of the With the invasion of France some of the scientists Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB) by Gordon H.E. decided to depart, taking with them their heavy water. Sims to be a valuable reference. Halban and Kowarski arrived in England in 1941, and they were soon part of the British nuclear program. CD. Howe They joined other scientific colleagues at Cambridge The first 'key decision' was taken by Prime Minister University's Cavendish Laboratory. There was no short­ W.L. Mackenzie King when he appointed CD. Howe age of scientists, both British and from Europe, but as minister of the Department of Munitions and Sup­ Halban and Kowarski were the main proponents of a ply and, in October l~44, minister of the Department reactor system using heavy water and uranium. Others of Reconstruction - he was also the chairman of the were more involved in separating the fissile atom of Privy Council Committee for Scientific and Industrial natural uranium, U-235. They knew about plutonium Research, which, incidentally, almost never met. Howe, but seemed to feel that a nuclear weapon was more a former professor of engineering and a successful likely to be achieved, during World War II, with U-235 business man, had no trouble understanding nuclear than with plutonium, and the reactor development fission, and he was familiar with the management and program was not of the highest priority. promotion of large and expensive projects. The entry, by December 1941, of the USA into the His stature in the government and his more-than­ war, both in the Japanese and European theatres, persuasive powers allowed the nuclear program to changed the tempo of the us nuclear development obtain support during its early years, and he was able program. General Le:;lie Groves led the Manhattan to keep his finger on the three main areas of impor­ Engineering District, and by the winter of 1942 us tance: uranium, nuclear research and development, nuclear research was leading the way for the allies. and nuclear regulation and control. Eldorado, with its Hans von Halban visited the us in 1942, and recog­ uranium operations; the National Research Council nized that the effort and facilities in the us outclassed NUCLEAR JOURNAL OF CANADA / 1:2 / pp. 99-106 99 those of his group at Cambridge. It was suggested tion at the Montreal laboratory concerned not only that the British might send Halban's group to the us­ the British and Canadians, but the us as well. A or at least some individuals expert in heavy water reactor design and construction program had been developments. The British director of their program, proposed with a price tag of about $50 million. It Wallace Akers, was not too impressed with the us would be at Canada's expense. The British and Amer­ proposals, due partly to patent rights clauses, and icans were not getting on too well, partly because of Canada was considered as an alternative. But neither Halban and others of the British team in Montreal, was Akers very attracted to locating the British team but also because of personality conflicts among senior in Canada. personnel on both sides of the Atlantic. When details of the us offer were studied, Halban The British came close to abandoning the project, realized he would only be a part of a us laboratory, but instead of pulling out appointed a new director, with no overall authority. Canada had a small pro­ Professor John Cockcroft, who arrived in April 1944, gram at NRC, with Dr G.c. Laurence experimenting and things began to change rapidly. This appoint­ with uranium and coke - a rudimentary pile - and ment, leading to Cockcroft's arrival in Montreal, was Halban could expect to be placed in charge of a joint certainly a key decision. He took command and rele­ project; this was enough for him to press for a Cana­ gated Halban to head of physics. At the same time dian location, which would still have access to us Groves gave his consent to building a reactor - even information and supplies. The outcome was an agree­ though he knew it was obviously not going to con­ ment between the British and Canada, with the sup­ tribute to the supply of plutonium for the current port of the us, that moved the British Heavy Water war. So the military purpose of the Anglo-Canadian Project from Cambridge to Montreal in late 1942 - a project had disappeared. General relations with the key decision. It was to be headed by Halban, but us improved - as they had to. without Kowarski, and included among its personnel Halban eventually got himself into trouble by stretch­ several British, as well as Canadians and some 'refu­ ing security procedures to report to Juliot-Curie on the gees' from Europe, which posed a security question progress of work in North America, both Canadian IIlark fur the US; and rightly so, as we found out from and us. This action disturbed the British, the Cana­ the Gouzenko affair. This was the start of heavy water­ dians, and particularly the us. Halban was denied moderated reactor research and development in Can­ access to the labs and soon returned to England and a ada - an 'Anglo-Canadian Project' with support from post at Oxford. the us. Cockcroft was a highly respected scientist and an Hans von Halban, as director of the Montreal nu­ able leader, quiet but firm. He brought Lew Kowarski clear laboratory, had some good points to offer the to join him. project, but he also had some deficiencies. He was an Following discussions with the us and the labora­ able scientist from an aristocratic family, and he had tory staff it was recommended that a 10 MWt hetero­ strong personal ambitions to lead an important nuclear geneous reactor moderated with heavy water, fuelled program. He had a high opinion of his abilities, but it with natural uranium and cooled with light water be turned out that he lacked the personality and abilities built - NRX (National Research Experiment) - certainly of leadership and management. a key decision. The program proceeded with OIL as Halban was certainly persistent and believed in the the engineer and construction manager and Fraser heavy water natural uranium system, and knew it Brace as the contractor, in July 1944. was worth fighting for. The project faced severe diffi­ The selection of Chalk River as the reactor site was culties in 1943 and 1944. The us and Britain were a very good one, and some may view it as a key deci­ quarrelling, Groves was dissatisfied with the prog­ sion - the only 'key' I can see is that it is in the province ress of work at the laboratory, the morale of the staff where Ontario Hydro is located, a utility that might was very low, and the death of the lab a distinct be interested in nuclear power, still a dream in the possibility. Halban's work in France coupled with the scientists' minds. work of Kowarski - the foundation for the reactor In November of 1945, much to the surprise of c.J. project - was being questioned by the us Manhattan Mackenzie, president of NRC, it was learned from Engineering District, but stood up under review. Hal­ newspaper reports that Cockcroft was being appointed ban's insistence on the merits of the heavy water­ to head the new British Atomic Energy Establishment moderated natural uranium-fuelled reactor system re­ at Harwell. Attempts were made to keep him in Can­ sulted in its survival, but he was not around to see ada, at least until NRX was operating. He eventually the first reactor project committed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prehistory of CERN: the First Suggestions (1949-Jun 1950)
    CHS-3 March 1984 STUDIES IN CERN HISTORY Prehistory of CERN : the first suggestions (1949 - June 1950) Dominique Pestre GENEVA 1984 The Study of CERN History is a project financed by Institutions in several CERN Member Countries. This report presents preliminary findings. and is intended for incorporation into a more comprehensive study of CERN's history. It is distributed primarily to historians and scientists to provoke discussion, and no part of it should be cited or reproduced without written permission from the Team Leacier. Comments are welcome and should be sent to: Study Team for CERN History c/oCERN CH-1211 GENEVE23 Switzerland © Copyright Study Team for CERN History, Geneva 1984 CERN-Service d'information scientifique - 300 - mars 1984 PREHISTORY OF CERN THE FIRST SUGGESTIONS (1949 - June 1950) I The years following the war II Two proposals of European collaboration in November 1949 III The European Cultural Conference, Lausanne, December 8-12, 1949 IV Attempts to implement the suggestions a - The European Movement initiative b - The French attempts V The fifth General Conference of UNESCO, Florence, June 1950 PREHISTORY OF CERN: THE FIRST SUGGESTIONS (1949-June 1950) 1 The official date of the foundation of CERN is easily established. The convention setting up CERN, signed on July 1, 1953 was ratified by France and Germany on September 29, 1954. By then nine States had signed, and CERN came officially into being. However, the interest of this date is rather limited. It ended a process initiated several years before and understanding this process is far more interesting than having a date of birth.
    [Show full text]
  • HEAVY WATER and NONPROLIFERATION Topical Report
    HEAVY WATER AND NONPROLIFERATION Topical Report by MARVIN M. MILLER MIT Energy Laboratory Report No. MIT-EL 80-009 May 1980 COO-4571-6 MIT-EL 80-009 HEAVY WATER AND NONPROLIFERATION Topical Report Marvin M. Miller Energy Laboratory and Department of Nuclear Engineering Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 May 1980 Prepared For THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY UNDER CONTRACT NO. EN-77-S-02-4571.A000 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or useful- ness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. A B S T R A C T The following report is a study of various aspects of the relationship between heavy water and the development of the civilian and military uses of atomic energy. It begins with a historical sketch which traces the heavy water storyfrom its discovery by Harold Urey in 1932 through its coming of age from scientific curiosity to strategic nuclear material at the eve of World War II and finally into the post-war period, where the military and civilian strands have some- times seemed inextricably entangled. The report next assesses the nonproliferation implications of the use of heavy water- moderated power reactors; several different reactor types are discussed, but the focus in on the natural uranium, on- power fueled, pressure tube reactor developed in Canada, the CANDU.
    [Show full text]
  • Lew Kowarski
    Lew Kowarski 1907-1979 Avant-propos ~~~'\ John B. Adams Les textes publies dans le present document sont ceux directeur de son Departement des sciences naturelles. des allocutions prononcees !ors d'une reunion a la me­ Denis de Rougemont, comme Lew Kowarski, a done pris moire de Lew Kowarski, qui s'est tenue au CERN a une grande part a la creation du CERN et s'est trouve en Geneve le 20 decembre 1979. contact avec Kowarski, tant a ce moment-la que pendant Ces allocutions couvrent les differentes phases de la vie Jes annees ou ce dernier a travaille au CERN. Leurs rela­ et de !'oeuvre de Lew Kowarski, et chaque orateur s'est tions se resserrerent encore apres que Kowarski eut pris sa trouve en association etroite avec lui a differentes epoques retraite. de sa carriere. Jean Mussard a egalement concouru a la creation du Jules Gueron a rencontre Kowarski avant la seconde CERN car, a l'epoque ou !'UNESCO entreprenait d'ela­ guerre mondiale alors qu'il travaillait au laboratoire de borer le projet d'un Laboratoire europeen de physique Joliot a Paris. Ensemble, ils entrerent a «Tube Alloys», nucleaire, ii etait directeur adjoint de la Division pour la nom de code pour le projet d'energie nucleaire en Angle­ cooperation scientifique internationale a l'UNESCO et terre, et se rendirent au Canada quand ce projet y fut Pierre Auger le chargea de cette elaboration. C'est ainsi transfere en 1943. Apres la guerre, tous deux devinrent qu'il entra en contact avec Lew Kowarski et ii resta en directeurs au CEA, en France, puis leurs itineraires se rapport etroit avec lui jusqu'au deces de celui-ci.
    [Show full text]
  • “YOU MUST REMEMBER THIS” Abraham (“Abe”) Edel
    MATERIAL FOR “YOU MUST REMEMBER THIS” Abraham (“Abe”) Edel (6 December 1908 – 22 June 2007) “Twenty-Seven Uses of Science in Ethics,” 7/2/67 Abraham Edel, In Memoriam, by Peter Hare and Guy Stroh Abraham Edel, 1908-2007 Abraham Edel was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on December 6, 1908. Raised in Yorkton, Canada with his older brother Leon who would become a biographer of Henry James, Edel studied Classics and Philosophy at McGill University, earning a BA in 1927 and an MA in 1928. He continued his education at Oxford where, as he recalled, “W.D. Ross and H.A. Prichard were lecturing in ethics, H.W.B. Joseph on Plato, and the influence of G. E. Moore and Bertrand Russell extended from Cambridge. Controversy on moral theory was high. The same was true of epistemology, where Prichard posed realistic epistemology against Harold Joachim who was defending Bradley and Bosanquet against the metaphysical realism of Cook Wilson.” He received a BA in Litterae Humaniores from Oxford in 1930. In that year he moved to New York City for doctoral studies at Columbia University, and in 1931 began teaching at City College, first as an assistant to Morris Raphael Cohen. F.J.E. Woodbridge directed his Columbia dissertation, Aristotle’s Theory of the Infinite (1934). This monograph and two subsequent books on Aristotle were influenced by Woodbridge’s interpretation of Aristotle as a philosophical naturalist. Although his dissertation concerned ancient Greek philosophy, he was much impressed by research in the social sciences at Columbia, and the teaching of Cohen at City College showed him how philosophical issues lay at the root of the disciplines of psychology, sociology, history, as well as the natural sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • 7546K Pdf File
    FEATURE ARTICLE POWDER NEUTRON DIFFRACTION AND MATERIALS CHEMISTRY/PHYSICS RESEARCH IN CANADA (1949-2017) BY JOHN E. GREEDAN, CHRISTOPHER R. WIEBE, AND DOMINIC H. RYAN INTRODUCTION: THE EARLY DAYS (PND) studies of materials was not developed as a broader OF DIFFRACTION AT CHALK RIVER technique outside of solid state physics until much later. (1949-1969) In PND, the entire contents of reciprocal space are mapped onto one dimension, the Bragg angle, 2θ (or the momen- The story of powder neutron diffraction at Chalk River is tum transfer, Q = 4πsinθ/λ). Prior to 1970 or so, PND was inextricably linked to the history of neutron science at restricted to very high symmetry materials, say cubic or Chalk River itself. Canada’s interest in nuclear research perhaps tetragonal, due to severe Bragg peak overlap grew out of our involvement in World War II and the race since early instruments had at best moderate Δd/d resolu- to harness the power of the atom. In 1942, a joint tion and experiments were time consuming due to the use Canadian-British laboratory was built in Montreal to of “single” or point detectors. One notable interdiscipli- assist in the war effort under the leadership of the National nary pioneer of PND at NRU was Professor Osvald Knop Research Council of Canada (NRC) [1]. There were many of Dalhousie University (chemistry) [6]. Osvald, a con- Europeans working in Canada at the time, including the summate crystallographer (partially trained under Linus UK’s John Cockcroft and France’s Lew Kowarski and Pauling), completed many experiments at Chalk River Hans von Halban.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nuclear Engineer, C1940-1965
    Johnston, S.F. (2009) Creating a Canadian profession: the nuclear engineer, c. 1940-1968. Canadian Journal of History / Annales Canadiennes d'Histoire, 44 (3). pp. 435-466. ISSN 0008-4107 http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/24891/ Deposited on: 11 February 2010 Enlighten – Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow http://eprints.gla.ac.uk Abstract/Résumé analytique Creating a Canadian Profession: The Nuclear Engineer, c. 1940-1968 Sean F. Johnston Canada, as one of the three Allied nations collaborating on atomic energy development during the Second World War, had an early start in applying its new knowledge and defining a new profession. Owing to postwar secrecy and distinct national aims for the field, nuclear engineering was shaped uniquely by the Canadian context. Alone among the postwar powers, Canadian exploration of atomic energy eschewed military applications; the occupation emerged within a governmental monopoly; the intellectual content of the discipline was influenced by its early practitioners, administrators, scarce resources, and university niches; and a self-recognized profession coalesced later than did its American and British counterparts. This paper argues that the history of the emergence of Canadian nuclear engineers exemplifies unusually strong shaping of technical expertise by political and cultural context. Le Canada, une des trois nations Alliées collaborant au développement de l’énergie atomique durant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale connut une avance précoce dans la mise en application de cette nouvelle connaissance et dans la définition de cette nouvelle profession. À cause du secret de l’aprèsguerre et des buts nationaux très nets, l’industrie nucléaire fut modelée uniquement par le contexte canadien.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada and the Atom
    CANADA AND THE ATOM by Gordon Edwards, Ph.D. 2019 All rights reserved. CANADA AND THE ATOM CHAPTER ONE SHARING IN THE TRIUMPH Gordon Edwards All rights reserved. CANADA AND THE ATOM: Chapter One: Sharing in the Triumph The Glory Days at McGill Atomic research in Canada began in 1899, before the existence of the atom was fully accepted as a scientific fact. In that year, a 27-year-old New Zealand physicist arrived in Montreal from England. A Canadian tobacco merchant, W.C. Macdonald, had given McGill University a generous donation sufficient to build a brand new Physics lab and hire several new professors. This newcomer was selected to be one of them. Though no one could have guessed it at the time, he was destined to become “the Newton of atomic physics”. His name was Ernest Rutherford. Rutherford was eager to explore the mysterious new world of radioactivity. Three years earlier, in Paris, Henri Becquerel had left a lump of uranium ore in a closed drawer containing some photographic plates that were securely wrapped. Later, he found a pattern of intense light on the prints, radiating outward from the exact spot where the rock had been sitting. Becquerel was astonished. How can a rock, unstimulated by sunlight or any other external agency, spontaneously emit energy – an invisible kind of light that can’t even be blocked by thick black paper? While still in England, Rutherford had just begun to investigate these peculiar rays, given off by any and all ores containing uranium or thorium. “There are present at least two distinct types of radiation,” he wrote, “one that is very readily absorbed, which will be termed for convenience the alpha radiation, and the other of a more penetrative character, which will be termed the beta radiation.” A third type of atomic radiation, having far greater penetrating power than either the alpha or beta variety, was discovered by Paul Villard in France one year later, in 1900.
    [Show full text]
  • Enterjng the Nuclear Age by Jeremy Whitlock
    •••••Features PHOTO: ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LTD. Enterjng The Nuclear Age by Jeremy Whitlock In September 1945, a month after the end of World War II, Canadians were still getting used to the idea that the Atomic Age had begun. Two American bombs of unimagined power had ended the hostilities, followed shortly by a statement from the Canadian government that Canada had proudly played an "intimate" role in their development. Patriotism aside, it was true that the Hiroshima bombing. Canada had participated in the Anglo• For Lew Kowarski it was a moment of American atomic bomb program, and personal closure. Five years earlier the had, by accident of geology and geogra• burly Russian-born scientist had escaped phy, come out of the war with the world's France aboard a collier on the eve of Nazi second largest nuclear infrastructure. The occupation, with almost the world's time would soon come to decide what to entire supply of "heavy water"-about PHOTO: ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LTD. do with it, but for now, a month after the 200 litres in 26 cans. Three months From top: Workers use radio• war's biggest secret was out, the focus before that the precious scientific cargo was still very much on getting the job had been spirited out of Norway, just active cobalt created in the NRU done. ahead of the German invasion of that reactor at Chalk River, Ont.; Here, in a clearing on the wooded country. Once safely on English soil, nuclear research has been a Ontario shoreline of the Ottawa River Kowarski and fellow refugee scientist about two hours west of Ottawa, Canada Hans von Halban continued their experi• benefit to cancer therapy.
    [Show full text]
  • 141 Unpublished Sources and Primary Documents Chadwick
    Britain and the atomic bomb: MAUD to Nagasaki. Item Type Thesis Authors Gorman, Claire L. Rights <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-nd/3.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by- nc-nd/3.0/88x31.png" /></a><br />The University of Bradford theses are licenced under a <a rel="license" href="http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/">Creative Commons Licence</a>. Download date 28/09/2021 18:33:51 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10454/4332 Bibliography: Unpublished Sources and Primary Documents Chadwick Papers CHAD 1/12/2, Minutes of MAUD Technical Committee 9/4/41, Churchill Archives Centre (henceforth CAC) CHAD 1/19/8, Letter from Francis Simon to James Chadwick, 19/9/41, CAC CHAD 1/19/8, Letter from Pye to James Chadwick, 19/9/1941, CAC CHAD 1/19/8, Letter from Pye to James Chadwick, 16/10/41, CAC CHAD 1/19/8, Letter from Francis Simon to James Chadwick, 20/1/43, CAC CHAD 1/28/2, Relations between American and British S1 Project, CAC CHAD 1/29/2, General Policy on atomic Energy, British scientific office, 2/1/43, CAC CHAD 1/28/6, Notes of a meeting at Liverpool University, 30/6/40, CAC CHAD 1/28/6, MAUD Report on Uranium as an explosive, CAC CHAD 1/28/6, MAUD Committee Report on Uranium Fission, 26/8/41, CAC CHAD 1/30/3, 4TH Meeting of Tube Alloys Technical Committee, 23/4/42, CAC CHAD 1/30/3, 11TH Meeting of Tube Alloys Technical Committee, 13/11/42, CAC CHAD 1/30/3, 12TH Meeting of Tube Alloys Technical Committee, 11/12/42, CAC CHAD 4/4/4, French Members of Montreal staff, 31/1/45, CAC CHAD 4/4/4, Preserving Security over the French scientists working on the Canadian Project, 20/1/45, CAC CHAD 4/4/4, James Chadwick to Mackenzie King, CAC CHAD 4/6/1, Meeting of the Combined Policy Committee, 22/1/45, CAC CHAD 4/6/29, Statement on sentence passed on Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Dank an Das Kulturamt Der Stadt Karlsruhe
    1 Dank an das Kulturamt der Stadt Karlsruhe Die in den »Einführenden Gedanken des Herausgebers benannte großzügige Teilfinanzierung des Kulturamts vom Dezember 2017 basierte auf den bedeutsamen früheren Zusagen von Oberbürgermeister Dr. Frank Mentrup. Das hat die weitere Finanzierung durch die Privatpersonen beflügelt und damit letztlich die positive Entwicklung zur Veröffentlichung ermöglicht. Der Stadt Karlsruhe und ihrem Kulturamt gebührt damit hohe Anerkennung, die sich auch international auswirken wird. Remerciements au Kulturamt de la ville de Karlsruhe Le généreux financement partiel de l'Office de la culture de décembre 2017, mentionné dans »les Réflexions de l’éditeur en guise d’introduction, était fondé sur les importants engagements pris antérieurement par le maire Dr. Frank Mentrup. Cela a permis de renforcer le financement par des particuliers et a donc finalement permis le développement positif de la publication. La ville de Karlsruhe et son office de la culture méritent une grande reconnaissance, qui aura également un impact international. 2 Einführende Gedanken des Herausgebers éon ruen u (1934 – 2004) hat Ende der 1970er Jahre in Paris die geschichts- wissensch ftliche Monogr phie „Die enese der Plutoniu -Gesellschaft – Politische Konspi- r tionen und eschäfte“ in fr nzösischer Spr che verf sst, ein groß rtiges wissensch ft- und zeitgeschichtliches Dokument. Als gelernter Physiker ging er den Ursachen seiner Diskriminierung und zweitmaligen Verfolgung am Kernforschungszentrum rlsruhe heute uf den rund s entst nd ein eschichtswer er die zivile und ilitärische utzung der ernenergie und er die gefährlichen Verstrickungen der deutschen Atomforschung. Wie später noch erläutert wird, war es bis heute nicht gelungen, dieses bedeutende Geschichtswerk zu veröffentlichen.
    [Show full text]
  • 75 Years of Fission
    75 Years of Fission Jeremy Whitlock 1896-1898 … Radioactivity Discovery of radioactivity Nobel Prize in Physics, 1903 (Curies + Becquerel) Henri Becquerel (1852 - 1908) Birth of nuclear medicine Marie and Pierre Curie (starting with Radium) (1867 - 1934) (1859 - 1906) 1898-1907 … The Nucleus McGill University Describes radioactivity, half-life Coins “alpha”, “beta”, “gamma” Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1908 1910 … Nuclear structure of atoms 1919 … First artificial transmutation: 14N + α 17O + p Ernest Rutherford (1871 - 1937) Otto Hahn, 26 yrs. old (Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1944) Ernest Rutherford McGill University, 1905 “If it were ever possible to control at will the rate of disintegration of the radio-elements, an enormous amount of energy could be obtained from a small amount of matter” Ernest Rutherford, 1904 1905 … E = mc2 1930 … Uranium Gilbert LaBine (1890 - 1977) Discovery of uranium at Great Bear Lake Port Hope refinery, 1933 1932 … (April) John Cockcroft (1897 - 1967) Ernest Walton (1903 - 1995) Cockcroft and Walton’s 1932 accelerator (800 kV) First to “split the atom”: 7Li + p 4He + 4He Verification of Einstein’s E=mc2 Nobel Prize in Physics: 1951 John Cockcroft, Ernest Rutherford, Ernest Walton Cockcroft first head of Chalk River (Nuclear) Laboratories: 1944-46 1932 … (May) The Neutron James Chadwick (1891 - 1974) Discovers the neutron, 1932 Nobel Prize in Physics, 1935 Start of the Neutron Transmutation Bandwagon… England (Rutherford) France (Joliot-Curie) Italy (Fermi) Germany (Meitner, Hahn) Uranium ? 1934: the new frontier
    [Show full text]
  • PDF of Fission Teachers Guide
    Teachers Guide Note to teachers The overall goal of this exhibit is to help students to recognize scientists as people, engaged in understandable human activities. The individuals whose voices are heard in this exhibit all achieved high recognition in the history of science. Nevertheless they are similar to us and to our students, for their lives, like ours, were influenced by politics, careers, and the circumstances of the times. Listening to these scientists will help make the study of science and history a more personal experience. This exhibit aids the inclusion of science in history courses and of history in science courses. Varied attempts have been made over the past half-century to provide curricula which pay attention to the people involved in science. Many science teachers presently include some historical background in their courses, and many history teachers include some mention of modern scientific development. Many do not. This exhibit has been designed so that it will be appropriate for all these teachers. It can serve as a new resource for those teachers who currently treat history of physics while also serving as a "one shot deal" for teachers willing to give history of science a first try. This exhibit can be a tutorial for both teachers and students. Outside the classroom this unit can serve as a tutorial for teachers whose background does not include knowledge of the history of nuclear physics. This exhibit can also be an opportunity for professional development. Physics teachers can strengthen their background in the history of nuclear fission and the physics of nuclear model building through self-study of the module.
    [Show full text]