From Alchemy to Atomic War: Frederick Soddy's "Technology Assessment" of Atomic Bnergy, 1900-1915

Richard E. Sclove The Loka Institute

In 1915, Frederick Soddy, later a winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, no,rned publicly of theluture dangers ofatomic war. Hisloresight depended not only upon scientific knowledge, but olso upon emolion, creolivity, and many sorts of nonscientific knowledge. The latter, which ployed o role even in the content of Soddyb scientific discoveries, included such diverse sources os contempotory politics, hislory, sciencefiction, religion, andancient olchemy. Soddy's story moy olfer importont, guiding insights for today\ efforts in technology assessmenl.

As allied and German forces battled on the Continent, an eminent British scientist spoke openly of atomic war. In public lectures addressed to laypersons, he explained that while future energy shortages might be averted by using energy from the atom, the more probable result of the development of atomic power would be mass annihilation by weapons of inconceivable might. The distinguished speaker- handsome, articulate, and obviously worried-was not certain when this would occur, The British government paid no attention to the seeming breach of national security, for no act oftreason or even ofindiscretion had been committed: The German troops were those of the Kaiser, and the year was 1915. The speaker, 38-year-old Frederick Soddy, had recently

AUTHORS NOTE: This essay has benefitpd from thc generous insights and criticism of many people, including especially Peter Buck, P. Thomas Carroll, Michael Freedman, Charles Weiner, and Thaddeus Trenn.

Scicne, Technology, & Human Valucs, Vol. l4 No. 2, Spring l9E9 163-194 c 1989 Sage Publications, lnc, Richard E. Sclove ls the Executive Director of the Inko Institute, P.O. Box 355' Amherst, MA OlO04-0355, o nonprofit orgonizalion lhal explores democratic 163 involvcment in science, technology, and orchltecture. He holds a B.A. in environ' mental studies ond, from MIT, a mr.l,ter's degree in nucleor engineering ond a Ph.D. tn politicot philosophy. Vl/hen not crusoding on the world's behalf, he can oftcn bc lound lending a hand at hts wile's Amhetsl rcstauranl, Marcie's Ploce' 164 Scicncc, Technology, & Human Valucs Sclove / Alchemy to Atomic War 165

completed rese arch for which he would eventually be awarded the Nobel Graduating from oxford in r ggg Prize in Chemistry. with first-crass honors in chemistry, Soddy had difficurty finding a suitabre job in We generally imagine that awareness of the potential social impli- research or teaching. After two years of somewhat aimless postgraduate cations of atomic energy arose with the discovery of nuclear fission in research, he ventured to canada and managed to secure a position 1938 and intensified following the atomic destruction of Japanese cities as a raboratory demonstrator in the chemistry Department at McGill university, in 1945.r How was anyone in l9l5 able to forecast the social Montreal. There he encountered a junior professor of physics, consequenccs of a scientific discovery that had not yet been made? 29-year-old Ernest Ruther- ford, who invited him to join in a collaborative Soddy was able to do so in part because certain essential scientific effort to try to make sense of the recently discovered phenomenon insights-that there is energy latent within the atom and that it is of natural radilactivity.s From l90l to 1903 Rutherford and Soddy physically possible for it to be released-had been known since 1903. undertook chemical and physical investigations that resurted But it is in general not obvious how to move beyond conceiving a mere in the theory of atomic dis- integration' Their research demonstrated scientific possibility to envisioning eventual technological practicability, that the radioactive emissions of elements such as radium, thorium, a range of specific applications, and finally that certain applications and uranium occurred in- conjunction with the spontaneous transmutation are-given social circumstances-more probable than others. After all, (change) of individuar atoms of one chemical species into atoms many scientists shared Soddy's scientific knowledge, but none became of another.6 For Rutherford, these discoveries were to mean a Nobel prize as committed as he to investigating the social implications of that and one step in a long and illustrious career in science.? To Soddy they meant knowledge, much less reached conclusions of comparable power.2 more; evidently one reason he and Rutherford were the To achieve his insights, scientific knowledge and logical argument first to discover naturar trans- mutation was that Soddy had in a sense decided had, in Soddy's instance, to be supplemented by emotional involvement, beforehand that he wanted to find it. intense creativity, and social awareness. In each ofthese respects, Soddy Soddy had not been idle during was unmistakably assisted by sources of knowledge entirely outside the his two years of postgraduate research at oxford ( I 898- r'890). when not usual domain of science. These ranged from contemporary politics and working in the laboritory, ne attended chemistry lectures, tutored undergraduates, science fiction to religion, mythology, and ancient alchemy. The mark of and began to prepare a number of essays on the such elements indeed appears in the very content of his scientific work. history of chemistry. History of science was at the time a relatively neglected subject The story of Frederick Soddy thus provide s dramatic evidence for the in dngland,e and thus Soddy's interest was somewhat role of so-called "nonscientific" factors within the content and social unusual. w" spe-culate that specific prior events in his life may have ""n organization ofscience.3 But it goes further, suggesting that nonscientific contributed to his interest. Born in 1877 in Sussex, England, knowledge, social context, emotion, and imagination contribute-and Soddy had suffered trauma during his early years: His mother died in, this case fruitfully-not only to the development of scientific when he was rg months old, whire his fathe r was absent half of each week on business knowledge, but also to the interpretation of its social consequences.a I in London. Frederick,s upbringing was entrusted to a much conclude by exploring the latter insight's implications for the conduct of older half-sister, with whom he frequently fought. contemporary technology assessments. Religion played a large part in the Soddy household. His grandfather had been a missionary, evangelists were routine householdluests, and his next elder Alchemy.and Atomic Theory brother became a minister. But Soddy grew to-abhor the stern calvinist sermons he heard each week in cnurcn. Influenced Soddy initially became interested in atomic energy well before l9 15, in adolescence by the writings of rhomas Henry Huxley on Darwin while in the process of making his first important scientific discovery. and evolution, Soddy rejected the outward trappings of the family The circumstances of that discovery were unusual and help explain the religion. What remained was a strong sense of duty and uo unro-pro_iring subsequent strength and persistence of his interest. commitment to speak the truth as he conceived it.e Sciencc, Technology, & Human Values Sclovc / Alchemy to Aromic War 167

Thus perhaps havingin 1898 already suffered the triple disruptions of "Alchemy and chemistry," a short but remarkable unpublished paper in losing his mother, renouncing Calvinism, and leaving home, Soddy which Soddy reconceived chemical history. Based on evidence discussed unconsciously sought in examining history to ground his sense of identity within an alternative tradition-that of chemistry. In any case, his interest persisted. In May 1900, he was hired at McGill, and the next fall he took the initiative in delivering a series oflectures entitled "The History of Chemistry from Earliest Time."r0 As understood by chemists in 1900, the atom was by definition the immutable and indivisible fundamental unit of rnatter. Chemical laws tation, but he also argued that there had always been honest alche- described ways in which atoms combined with one another to form mists-some of them great chemists, such as Robert Boyle_whose molecules, but individual atoms could by themselves be neither changed work had been essential to the growth of science. nor decomposed. Soddy's lectures, beginning with a description of the "AIchemy and chemistry"differs from Soddy's earlier lectures in orre origins of chemistry in ancient Egypt,,culminated triumphantly in the other important respect. "The value of history," hc now averred, "lies in enunciation of this Daltonian atomic theory. the sense of proportion with which the past endows the present in its Two lectures were devoted to the practice of alchemy-the attempt to relation to the future."la with that and an allusion to Lockyer's transmute base metals into gold-which Soddy believed had arisen in hypothesis, Soddy concluded his paper with the proclamation of a the fourth century A.D., long after the origin of chemistry proper. goal-the one ultimate goal-for chemistry: Repudiating "quackery" and the alchemists' "feverish desire" for The existence of an atomic stage wealth, he asserted that "the alchemistic period" had nothing to do with of matter is unquestioned, but this in no way relieves the chemist from the necessity of penetrating deeper. "the normal development of chemistry. It is rather the result of a mental The constitution of matteris the province of chemistry, and little indeed aberration, . . ."lt can be known of this constitution until transmutation is accomplished. This is Sometime after March l90l Soddy's views changed radically. During today as it has always been the real goal of the chemist bcfore this is a the academic year 1900-1901 he became acquainted with the McGill science that will satisfy the mind.tj physicists, including Rutherford. From them Soddy learned of a new Soddy's theory of matter derived from the identification of the electron in 1897 idea of trying to transmute the by the British physicist (and Rutherford's mentor) J. J. Thomson. and audacious, for it was no small step Thomson had proposed that rather than being the fundamental unit of that transmutation might occur under conditions present matter, the atom might be composed of small electrical masses. The idea in stars (Lockyer's view), to imagining that somehow the same processes was shocking to Soddy, for an atom composed ofparts could no longer could be made to occur on earth.r6 Moreover, insofar be considered indivisible. Perhaps even more heretical was the hy- as Soddy had previously identified himself with the chemical tradition, in setting pothesis of British astrophysicist Norman Lockyer, based on spectral a long-range goal for chemistry, he was presumably setting a goal analysis of the light from stars, that within the stars heavy and light for himself. clements were evolving from one another. To Soddy that was only In the meantime he had begun to learn from Rutherford about radioactivity. another way of saying "transmutatisn"-3 notion that slnacked of Since 1899 Rutherford had been studying a mysterious "emanation" given alchemy and deception.r2 But the ide as were also tantalizing and backed off by thorium. He did not know how to interpret this phenomenon. partially by experimental evidence, and in the course of the year he was By Fall l90l he suspected that the emanation was a gas, but he won over. needed a chemist's help to be certain. The Ruthe rford-Soddy collaboration The concept of an atom composed of parts was inconsistent with began that october. A brief experiment convinced the two Soddy's lectures on the history of chemistry. Rather than overlook the researchers that the emanation was probably a gas, but what kind of gas? Soddy inconsistency, he did some more historical research. The result was found that it would not react with powerful chemical reagents and deduced that it must be a mernber of the recently (1g94- 168 Scicncc, Tcchnology, & Human Values Sclove / Alchemy to Atomic War 169

1898) discovered family of inert gases. Suddenly he believed that he Atomic Energy and knew what was afoot: The emanation was an inert gas, that is, some Practical Applications element other than thorium. Thorium, Soddy reasoned, must be (1901) "transmuting" itself into a differe nt kind of element.rT Soddy's original objective in proposing transmutation had Previous historical accounts have assumed that it was only after this been merely to advance pure scientific knowledge or, at most, in some that Soddy composed his "Alchemy and Chemistry" essay. Such a quite vague sense to control "the forces of nature."22 That such a chronology obscurcs the role of alchemy in Soddy's discovery of natural discovery might have far-reaching technological and social conse- quences transmutation, as well as in his later thought and life. dawned on him only gradually over the course ofseveral years. In contrast, I find the available evidence, while not conclusive, to Following Marie Curie's discovery of radium in 1898, scientists had suggest strongly that Soddy had by this time already completed been baffled and intrigued by the energy associated with radioactive "Alchemy and Chemistry."ls [n other words, influenced by alchemy he emissions.2r By Spring 1903, Soddy and Rutherford had persuaded proposed transmutation as chemistry's ultimate goal weeks or months themselves that the energy manifested during radioactive decay was internal the atom, and quantities energy befo r e discovering thorium transmutation. to that comparable of were The effect of realizing that he had so quickly and unexpectedly taken probably latent within nonradioactive elements as well. what seemed a major step toward achieving his goal was transcsndent: During this period, Pierre Curie and Albert Laborde obtained an accurate measure of the amount of energy released during atomic greater than joy . a kind of I was overwhelmed with something . ' disintegration, concluding that it was a million times greater than the with a certain feeling of pride that I had been exaltation, intermingled energy liberated by an equal weight of any known chemical reactant or chosen from all chemists of all ages to discover natural transmutation'le explosive. Soddy began to suspect that the goal he had proclaimed in from developing their 190 I Soddy and Rutherford were still a long way -artificial transmutation of the eleme nts-might, as an inevitable complete theory of radioactive disintegration; for that, another year and but previously unsuspected by-product, release prodigious quantities of a half of inspired research was necessarY.2o Yet to Soddy the import of energy. With Rutherford he speculated that subatomic processes might this one initial insight was "colossal."2l At the very moment of postu- even account for the maintenance of solar energy.24 All of these striking lating the natural transmutation of thorium, he was himself transmuted. conclusions were based on theory and experimental evidence obtained From a writer of chemical history and a young chemist of ambition and prior to the development of the nuclear model of the atom and to promise but no proven distinction, instantly he felt transformed into a Einstein's formulation of relativity theory (with its famous E = mc2 significant historical actor, the lineal descendant of countless past equation). generations of alchemists and scientists. Soddy returned to England in 1903 and soon reported to Rutherford , In "Alchemy and Chemistry" Soddy had, however, expressed the that their own work and that of the French had fired the imagination of hope of learning to transmute the elements at will. His creative act in the scientific community. The excitement among scientists proved discovering natural transmutation was recognizing that thorium was infectious; in 1903 and 1904 popular and semitechnical journals were transmuting itself.Thttdiscovery established that transmutation could flooded with articles, not always accurate, describing the various indeed occur, and that it could occur on earth absent the transcendental wondrous properties of radioactivo matter. Soddy, for his part, conditions present in stars. Nonetheless, the long-term goal of learning embarked on what amounted to a parallel second career as a popularizer to induce and control transmutation-a goal that Soddy came to term and public interpreter of the new science of radioactivity. Beginning in "artificial transmutation"-remained intact. 1903, when he was 25, and continuingto the end of his long life, he wrote Thus began Soddy's quest to control the internal forces of the atom. articles and books and gave lectures intended for nonscientific Evidently his interest soared early and endured long precisely because audiences.25 the goal of artificial transmutation held profound personal meaning for No doubt Soddy's interest in practicaluses of science stemmed in part him-owing to the manner in which he had set it and, shortly thereafter, from his childhood. For example, in adolescence he contrived to made what seemed a significant advance toward its attainment. illuminate his room for half-hour periods with an electric light powered Science, Technology, & Human Values Sclovc / Alchemy to Atomic War l7l by a chemical battery. Since then, however, he had to some extent The impending exhaustion of Britain's coal mincs had been debated internalized the "pure" scientist's characteristic rhetoric of disdain for since, if not before, the publication of Jevons's The Coal Question in applied science.26 Thus Soddy's first popular discussion of "Possible 1865.3r Soddy never cited the book, but the issue was in the air and he Future Applications of Radium" (July 1903) was evidently motivated alluded to it as early as 1903.34 A great boost in his interest must have partially by his simple desire to stimulate creation of an English radium come from Ge orge T. Beilby, an important industrial chemist and one of industry that would, among other things, supply scientists with greater Britain's leading advocates of efficiency in the industrial use of fuel, quantities of that rare and expensive element so vital to their research.2T Beilby was responsible for the creation of a teaching position that Soddy Near-term medical and industrial uses of natural radioactivity were occupied at the University of Glasgow in 1904; four years later Soddy stressed, and only the last paragraph alluded to artificial transmutation. married his daughter.rs By 1906 Soddy had reordered and clarified his priorities, suggesting The year 1908 was also the year Soddy completed the construction of to scientists that the most significant practical application of atomic one additional belief that seems afterwards to have played a vital role in science would be in providing a source of mechanical and electrical shoring up his conviction that artificial transmutation would eventually power.28 He popularized these views in 1908 in a series of public le cture s become possible. Using imagery drawn from religion, mythology, and, and in The Interprelation of Radium, z book that was translated into once again, alchemy, he was led to speculate that the technology needed several languages and read widely in Europe and America.2e Soddy now to release atomic energy may already have been developed-and then imagined an atomic-powered humanity able to "transform a desert lost and forgotten-in the distant past. He fashioned this idea over a continent, thaw the frozen poles, and make the whole world one smiling period of several years. Garden of Eden." To do this it would be necessary to "artificially accelerate or influence the rate of disintegration" of atoms. Success Religious Myth appeared a matter only of time, for and Rediscovery []ooking backwards at the great things science had already accomplished, and at the steady growth in power and fruitfulness of scientific method, it In the period 1903-1905 Rutherford and Soddy announced that by could scarcely be doubted that one day we should come to break down taking into account the natural release of energy from within the atom, and build up elements in the laboratory as we now break down and build the physically admissible age of the earth and of the sun could be up [chemical] compounds, and the pulses of the world would then throb extended backwards in time an order of magnitude beyond that which with a new force, physicists had previously allowed.r0 But what of the future? The Second Soddy's enthusiasm was tempered only by the sobering recognition Law of Thermodynamics, formulated during the nineteenth century, that at "present we have no hint of how even to begin the quest," and implied pessimistically that the entire universe was grinding inexorably thus fulfillment of man's "aspiration . . . to regulate . . . the primary toward a dark and chilly death. "Although," wrote Rutherford in 1905, fountains of energy . . . is, no doubt, far off."30 consideration . . . [of the internal energy of the atom] may increase our Technological Utopianism and the idea of progress were common- estimate of the probable duration of the sun's heat, science offers no place in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and Soddy had escape from the conclusion of Kelvin and Helmholtz that the sun must probably read science fiction along such lines.3r But afart from ultimately grow cold and this earth must become a dead planet moving contributing to the realization of Utopia, artificial transmutation through the intense cold of empty space.37 would, he came to believe, also become necessaty as an eventual Soddy was not so sure. Norman Lockyer's stellar observations were substitute the world's limited supplies fossil fuels: for of A "turning consistent with the hypothesis that within some stars, heavy elements point is being reached in the upward progress" of civilization, he wrote were evolving from light ones. What if atomic disintegration occurring in 1910. "Thoughts of economy and conservation will inevitably replace (with an accompanying release of energy) in some parts of the universe those of development and progress. . . ."12 172 Scicncc, Technology, & Human Valucs Sclove / Alchemy to Atomic War t73 were offset by a complementary process of atomic upbuilding (and energy absorption) occurring elsewhere?3E

The universe would then appear as a conservative system, limited with referencc neither to the future nor the past, and demanding neither an initial creative act to start it nor a final state ofexhaustion as its necessary termination.3e

Therc is at least a dawning probability that . . . the universe may be regardcd as . . . [a] system . . . proceeding through continuous cycles of evolution.4 Radioactivity itself, prior to the Rutherford-Soddy disintegration theory, had induced some doubt among physicists regarding the universal applicability of the Second Law.ar Although Soddy was not unduly eager to dispense with so powerful a generalization,42 it was, as he said in 1904, "an era of speculation . . . and the more the problem [of the origin and end ofthe universe] is regarded from independent points of view the more likely is the speculation to prove fruitful."a3 This was not thq last of his experiments with speculation. Soddy's Figure 1. Ouroboros, the Tail-Eating Serpent of the Alchemists The Interpretation of Radiurn (1908) is ungarnished laboratory science SOU RCE: Soddy, 1949, p.3. until its final chapter, in which suddenly-while still constrained by the bounds of established scientific possibility-imagination is let loose to weave a stunning cosmological tapestry from which emerges, in turn, Annihilate time. Throughout itris chapter something curious began the single fullest expression of Soddy's Utopian hopes. to happen to Soddy's writing. He appears to have lost control of his Heightened emotions may help account for this imaginative tour de verbs, alternating bizarrely from past to present tense. It is almost as force, f.or recall that 1908 was the year in which Soddy married. We though when using the past tense, he was writing a letter to the ye ar l90g cannot know exactly what was in Soddy's mind, but psychologists and from a vantage point located millions of years in the future-or in the past.r0 Is it possible that Soddy had so distended his anthropologists do tell us that during episodc. ';f major life transition, conceptions that for people experience a universal need for synrbulic immortality, "for a while he became psychologically unhinged in time? My surmise is that imagery of connection predating and extending beyond the individual Soddy may, in other words, have been in the throes of what Maslow life span."ll If so, Soddy-for whom, as a motherless child, marriage calls a "peak experience."4? But whatever its precise source, his may have held unusually acute and complex significance-appears to imaginative energy bloomed magnificently. have succeeded stupendously in establishing the requisite sense of Since l90l Soddy had been alternately captivated and mystified by connection with the past and future. Ouroboros, a favorite symbol of alchemists throughout the ages, and ln The Inlerpretation of Radium's last chapter, Soddy reiterated his one associated psychologically with the yearning for transcendence and earlier ideas regarding the possibility of a greatly extended-if not cyclic immortality (see Figure l). The meanings that Soddy publicly attributed and therefore infinite-age and duration of the universe. But now he to the serpent varied throughout his later life, presumably adapting to expressed his views novelly: shifting psychological or literary needs.as rn The Inrerpretalion of Radium the symbol seems clearly to have functioned as a source of has laboratory to the matter-of-fact Radioactivity accustomed us in the creative inspiration. If, Soddy wondered, investigation of processes which require for their completion thousands ofmillions ofyears. In one sense the existence ofsuch processes may be the world is no longer slowly dying from exhaustion, . . . what about Man? said largely to have annihilated time.as . Here again it is interesting and harmless to indulge in a little 174 Science, Tcchnology, & Human Values Sclove / Alchemy to Atomic War 175

speculation. . . , Consider, for example, the ancient mystic symbol of man as servant and master would, as now, become reversed, but with matter, known as Ouroboros-"the tail devourer" . . ' .ae infinitely more disastrous consequences. , , ,56 Soddy took an important leap. If one wished to symbolize a cyclic That myths survived the ancient holocaust could if necessary be and regenerative cosmological process, "in what better way could it be attributed to "latent collective human memory."57 done than by the ancient taildevouring serpent?"so Was it mere In later editions of the book, this chapter has been'revised. The coincidence that this ancient symbol could so tidily encompass the most section in which time was "annihilated" has itself vanished, miscon- modern scientific conceptions? jugated verbs have bcen purged, and the Fall of Man results not from a disastrous mistake but "for some unknown reason."58 Insofar as Soddy I prefer to believe it may be an echo from one of many,irevious epochs in introduced his discussion of alchemy and rediscovery as a of the unrecorded history of the world, of an age of men which have trod bit "interesting and harmless . . . speculation," why begin to suspect that he before the road we are treading today. . , .51 took it seriously? Soddy's long-standing belief in a single progressive ascent of Belief in a former atomic age was sufficiently daring that Soddy did in scientific knowledge had crumbled, permitting him to imagine possi- later years seem to waver. Yet the notion that artificial transmutation bilities that would previously have been unthinkable: may have been achieved in an earlier age reappears in his later writing with sufficient frequency and conviction-particularly during the l9 l4- Can we not read into . [ancient myths and superstitions] some justification for the belief that some forgotten race of men attained not 19l9 period-that it is impossible to dismiss it as a one time passing only to the knowledge we have so recently won, but also to the power that fancy.se Moreover, the idea apparently came to serve an important is not yet ours?52 function within the overall pattern of his thought. Quite independent of any suspicion that he and his contemporaries His mind moved naturally to consider the Biblical story of the Fall of may have embarked on a scientific voyage of rediscovery, Soddy had Man-a tale familiar from childhood and perhapb brought to mind now found plausible scientific reasons for supposing that humans would in by intuitive association of the alchemists' serPent with the serpent the future probably be able to harness the atom's energy: Natural guarding the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden:51 transmutation occurred on earth, bnd postulating some sort of ac- Scicnce has reconstructed the story of the past as one of a continuous celerated transmutation Seemed the most satisfactory way to account Ascent of Man. . . . [T]he traditional view of the Fall of Man from a higher for stellar processes. Thus he reasoned in 1906: former state has come to be more and more difficult to understand. From We are starting the prize vie our new standpoint the two points of view are by no means so twentieth century with the in full w, with every the problem accurately quantitatively known, irreconcilable as they appeared. A race which could transmute matter factor in and with the actual process in full operation under our eyes in the laboratory of would have littlc need to earn its bread by the sweat of its brow. . . . [S]uch Nature, and with nothing be accomplished the a race could transform a desert continent, thaw the frozen poles, and therefore to but familiar make the whole world one smiling Garden of Eden, Possibly they sequence of imitation, improvement, and control.@ could explore the outer realms of space, emigrating to more favorable Nonetheless, while momentous developments in scientific under- worlds...,5a standing of the atom continued to unfold during the years before the Thus when Soddy first dreamed what is unquestionably'his most first World War, not one of these harbored an obvious clue as to how, or sublime Utopian image, he was as much looking backwards as ahead' even whether, it would become possible to control atomic energy. In Only later did he transplant this specific vision firmly and unambig- succession came Einstein's special theory of relativity ( 1905), the nuclear uously into the future.s5 model of the atom (proposed by Nagaoka in 1904, extended and But if it had all been done before, what had happened in the interim? confirmed experimentally by Rutherford in l9l l), Bohr's contributions Perhaps into every atomic Utopia, a little fallout must rain: to the rudiments ofquantum theory (1913), and the invention by Soddy and others of the concept of isotopes (chemically identical elements with over Nature] may well have One can see also that such dominance [of men different atomic weights, 1907-1914). Yet it still proved impossible to been short-lived. By a singlc mistake, the relative positions of Nature and 177 Science, TcchnologY, & Human Valucs Sclove / Alchemy to Atomic War

of decay of induce transmutation artif,icially or to accelerate the rate Soddy's subsequent turnabout from prognosticator of Utopia to prophet of atomic Armageddon can in the broadest sense be attributed to World War I, but actually more specihc influences were at work. Through visits to his father-in-law's household in Glasgow, Soddy had become immersed for the first time in an atmosphere of serious political discussion. He emerged a passionate advocate of women's suffrage and Irish home rule-both burning issues of the day. Moreover, the prewar years w€re sdcially turbulent, and Glasgow in particular was a hotbed of radical agitation on the part of industrial labor unions.6a Thus in a l9l3 New York Times article-"Science on Road to Revolutionize All Existence"-Soddy reiterated his accustomed Utopian imagery in a manner that now reflected a distinct undercurrent of tension and' ambivalence.65 Yet what seemingly cinched his full change of heart were events, and in particular a genuine dialectical process, only beginning to unfold. prophetic future. So compellingwas The Interpretalion of Radium's vision that during the summer of I 9 I 3, while vacationing in Switzerland, H. G. Wells found in it the inspiration to write a novel-science fiction and Politics Science Fiction conceived on a grand scale. The dedication of Wells's The llorld Set Butwasitreallycertainthatartificialtransmutationwould,if Free reads: a tech- developed, usher in an age of peace and plenty? Essentially To assumed nological ieterminist and optimist, Soddy had so far implicitly Frederick Soddy's that once the secret was revealed, atomic technology would auto- Interpretation of Radium matically and unproblematically issue forth' The world would be this story and transformed in accordance with both scientists'benign intentions which owes long passages ineluctablephysicalnecessity.Thecourseofhumaneventssoonhelped to his eleventh chapter particulars of acknowledges and inscribes itself alter that outtoot, impressing upon Soddy the lesson that and use of a social setting can strongly ihape the design, choice' Wells's book indeed includes several near-verbatim renditions of technological sYstems. Soddy's prose. Beyond what he borrowed, however, Wells brought to a full professorship at Shorfy before World War I, Soddy accepted his task an awareness of contemporary social history that Soddy still been to continue his the University of Abe rdeen, Scotland. His plan had lacked.66 university of chemical stuiies of radioactivity, but the war depleted the The novel's prelude portrays an Edinburgh professor of physics- wsre converted into students. Throughout Britain scientific laboratories obviously modeled after Soddy-delivering in l9l0 the course of public professor of facilities for war production and research' The new lectures that Soddy had in fact given in Glasgow in 1908. Peering into manufacture of local worked nigtrt ana day assisting in the the future, Wells then described a solitary scientist's discovery of the "t.*ir,rv investigations perti- anesthetics, performing chemical and engineering means to control atomic energy in 1933, horrendous social and others'62 He nent to ,ruuul propolsion, and supervising the work of economic dislocations that attend the gradual industrial application of war-related research, thoroughly enioyeo ttre technical challenges ofhis atomic power, atomic industrial accidents, and a civilization-shattering greatness of but..thi wu, dragged on and I felt the futility of it all. The atomic war occurring in the late 1950s. Airplanes drop "atomic .''63 scientific achievements was being used for destruction' ' ' bombs"-black metal spheres several feet in diameter containing a 178 Science, Tcchnology, & Human Valucs Sclove / Alchemy to Atomic War 179 heavy artificial element, "carolinum"-destroying over two hundred dynamite. Ah! therc's the rub. Imagine. . . what the present war would bc major cities.67 The result in each case, while not quite a mushroom like ifsuch an explosive had actually been discovered. . . .t2 : cloud, is a "continuously exploding" radioactive volcano that renders Would weapons of total destruction persuade humankind to abandon the targeted land uninhabitable for decades. warfare altogether? Soddy concluded perspicaciously that they would The World Sel Free,for all that, remains fundamentally optimistic. not: The destructive shock awakens people's sanity, and from the rubble arises a Utopian socialist world government. When the real world war Some thought science had already made war impossible. As it has not, it may be concluded that no future development of science, howcvcr world- broke out in August 1914, Wells considered his prophecy vindicated. He shattering, will ofitselfhave that effect. . . . It is our duty, therefore, to became-although he later regretted it-an unabashed war pro- spend our lives and brains thinking this thing out for ourselves. It must pagandist, bequeathing to future generations his ironic promise that not be left for our successors to relearn all over again.rr World War I would be "The War That Will End War."6t Soddy read and praised the novel,6e but evidently gave it quite a In the same year he informed members of the Worke rs' Educational different interpretation. Prior to World War I, the conviction had been Association in Aberdeen that voiced in some quarters that modern weaponry made possible by science no one could pretend that in the present stage of human development such had already rendered warfare unthinkable. In 1900 Soddy met a a further advance [human control of atomic energy] would be a blessing. be professor of history who told him flatly that there would never The race is not yet fit to be trusted even with the enlarged physical powers another war.70 Wells could be read to provide an alternative hypothesis: which science has already conferred upon it. It has taken these gifts in the People would continue to fight even with the most terrible weapons spirit handed down from a bygone age, a pop-gun of predatory chieftains, conceivable. When the actual hostilities erupted, Soddy seemingly and it has made of them an abomination. witnessed these two competing hypotheses put to the test' To sum up in brief, the social effect ofrecent advances in physical science Regrettably, the Wellsian hypothesis was, in more than one respect, promises to be annihilating, unless, before it is too late, there arises an prophesied, a world confirmed. The Great War became, as Wells had equal and compensating advance, of which thcre is at present no sign, in war in which entire nations-masses, factories, and scientific elites the moral and spiritual forces of society.?. included-were mobilized. Chemists played an important role, notably in the development of toxic gases. In one case after another, tech- Even if prior to reading Wells, Soddy had on his own begun to worry nological processes that had formerly seemed benign and beneficial that atomic energy might be used destructively,T5 it seems that the novel were transformed into engines of war. Soddy was shocked particularly was important in providing him with vivid and concrete images of atomic war.76 Acknowledging the plausibility Set Free's to see artificial fixation of atmospheric nitrogen-a process used prior of The lYorld prophecy to the war to replace scarce natural fertilizers-applied in the wholesale of atomic war, but tacitly rejecting Wells's Utopian conclusion, production of bombs and explosives. Even his beloved radium, added to Soddy with his strong sense of duty was about to invent a social paint for nighttime illumination of war instruments, found destructive role-that of the atomic scientist as aspiring world-saver-that would in applications.zt another three or four decades become almost commonplace.TT In an addre ss delivered in November l9 l5 to the Independent Labour Party in Aberdeen-and published after the war-Soddy hsked his Postscript and Conclusion audience to For his contributions to the development of the concept of isotopes possible to extract the energy, which now oozes suppose that it became and to the radioactive displacement laws (which showed how to assign . from radioactive materials. . ., in as short a time as we out [slowly] . . the atomic products of radioactive decay to their correct positions pleased. From a pound wcight of such substances one would get about as within the familiar periodic table of the elements), Soddy was awarded much energy as would be obtained by burning 150 tons of coal. How the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1921.78 Accepting his prize, Soddy splendid! Or a pound weight could be made to do the work of 150 tons of in 180 Sciencc, Technology, & Human Values Sclove / Alchemy ro Atomic War lgl spoke cloquently of "the catastrophe which has recently engulfed the following Japan's surrender he produced a political analysis of atomic world," and wished energy, poignantly informing readers that to acknowledge and accept my own share of responsibility and blame for during the . . . [first] World War, the writer frequently expressed the this. . . . Scientific men can hardly escape the chargc ofignorance with fervent hope that this discovery would not be made before the nations had regard to the precise effect of the impact of modern science upon the mode learned to use and honour science for its creative rather than destructive of living of thc people and their civilization. . . . But, at least, perhaps power, not all of us are now totally blind to the dangers ahead, or to the need of , . , impersonal but remorseless re-examination of thc foundations of Indeed, thaf holocaust compclled him as a scientific man to rnake a critical society. , . .7e examination of what passes for "economics," in order to discover why beneficent inventions and discoveries produced nothing but misery, These were not idle words. By this time Soddy had become a frustration and war.sE professor at Oxford and an outspoken social critic who, almost alone Frederick Soddy died among his generation of British scientists, worked tirelessly to try to in relative obscurity in I956. avert social misuse of atomic energy and of scientific discoveries generally.to Soddy understood, among other things, that the moment atomic power became available, it might already be too late to prevent Reviewing Soddy's life, it becomes its use for destructive ends. evident that to appreciate fully the lethal social potentials inherent The impact of Soddy's many efforts at persuasion was less than he in atomic science he progressed through a series of intellectual stages-from a purely scientific interest in would have hoped, and sometimes indirect-but not inconsequential. trans For cxample, after World War I, Soddy contributed frequently to the of atomic war. journal Nature on political subjects. There other scientists took some example' Ruth dington- note, among other things, of his cautions against conducting science in took the service of "big business," or of participating uncritically in war close to a synthesis of comparable research.tr While never a socialist, Soddy contributed occasionally to power or vision, nor developed anything approaching Soddy's degree left-wing publications.E2 He gained attention in 1935 for spearheading of concern and social commitment.ic an unsuccessful effort among dissident members of the Royal Society to democratize that establishment-oriented scientific institution.t3 And, from time to time his warnings concerning atomic energy elicited a prominent public endorsement or rebuttal.s4 But Soddy's favorite ideas for social reform-a corpus of deeply imaginative but unorthodox economic and monetary theories that he pioneered during the 1920s and 1930s-never earned more than sporadic public attention.Es As he turned increasingly from scientific research to political and economic concerns, his public credibility suffered.86 Meanwhile, and with some historical irony, H. G. Wells's Soddy- inspired novel, The World Set Free, was read by-and in various ways influenced-numerous scientists who participated in developing the atomic bomb during World War II.E7 Soddy neve r knew this. But he did live to witness the realization-in the form of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Does Soddy's story have implications the nuclear arms race-of some of his darkest dreams. The week . for today's attempts to grapple with the social implications of technology and science? f offer-se#al hypotheses. lE2 Scicncc, Tcchnology, & Human Values Sclove / Alchcmy to Atomic War t83

First, and most obviously, we could benefit from further historical Notes studies of past "technology assessrnents." If Soddy's history is any L ln fact, by thc 1920s and 1930s scicncc fiction and scientific spcculation had indication, these should provide an important basis for developing introduced thc concept of harncssablc atomic energy to a rclativcly wide audicncc. See generalizations concerning promising-and unpromising-approaches Weart (1988). for undertaking future technology assessment activities.e2 Such histories 2. On Soddy's priority and cxccptionalness in cvaluating the social significance of might also provide useful role models for today's scientists, engineers, atomic cnergy, sec Weart (1985, 1988); Frcedman (1979, 259); Trcnn (1979, esp. 273 f.); students, and others. (On both counts-as well as for insight into how a Mumford (1970,233,255 f.); Muller (1935, 63). 3. For furthcr examplcs and supporting srgumcnt see, for instancc, Fleck ([l935] far-seeing technology assessment can be used-an adequate treatment 1979); Forman ( l97l); Fcyerabend (1975); Dobbs (1975); Mackod (1977); Bloor (1976); be helpful.) of Soddy's post-World War I life would Mulkay (1979); Latour and Woolgar (1979); Knorr-Cctina (l9El); Gould ( l98l); Shapin Second, today's recommended methodologies for technology assess- (1982); Keller (1985). ment often focus on fostering logical, deliberate, systematic inquiry.sr 4. In this respect I differ with Wcart (1988, e.g.,430 f.), who tends toward the view The resulting reports, while sometimes quite insightful, te nd nevertheless that mythical imagery necessarily sways emotion in a way that distorts understanding. The toward politically cautious, Iifeless, mechanical extrapolation. Yet casc of Soddy suggests to mc the need for considcrablc qualification on Wcart's position. See my succecding text. most successful prospective Frederick Soddy, who produced one of the 5. Howorth (1958). technology assessments on record, did so without ever fully divorcing 6. Trenn (1977). rigorous logic from passionate involvement, imaginative speculation, 7. Eve and Chadwick (1938). sociohistorical awareness, and complementary nonscientific knowledge. 8. Cardwcll (1972, 190). 9. Howorth (1958); Fleck (1957,203). I therefore suggest that we experiment with ways of undertaking participants not only to 10. Soddy,"LecturesonthcHistoryofChemistryfromEarliestTimes,"TSandMSS, technology assessments that may encourage Soddy Collection, Bodlcian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. 2 (Hcreaftcr cited as SCB 2). demonstrate intellectual skill and breadth, but also to respect and I L lbid., l,ccture lI, 5-E. develop their emotional, intuitive, and imaginative faculties. Perhaps 12. F, Soddy,"ChemicalEvidenccof thclndivisibilityof thcAtom,"MS,SCB l0l; likewise, people with demonstrated imaginative gifts-poets, artists, Lockycr (1900); Trenn (1977, 24-27); Howorth (1958, 79-81); Davis (1974, chap. 2), novelists, performers, and so on-should be explicitly invited to 13. F. Soddy, "Alchemy and Chcmistry,"TS, SCB 100, p. l; Berthclot(1885). For background on Berthelot see, for cxamplc, Wcart (1979, 3-59). participate,ea as should be those who have intimate knowledge of the 14. Soddy, "Alchemy and Chemistry,i 16. social contexts in which a technology promises to be developed or t5. Ibid.,19. used.e5 16. Although therc is no cvidence that Soddy was awarc of it, somewhat similar ideas Finally, consider those to whom technology assessments are ad- regarding transmutation had been propoundcd earlicr-for cxamplc, during thc prcvious decade by British chemist Lyon Playfair, Sce Crowthcr (1965, 164 f.); and also Malley dressed (a group that potentially includes all citizens). How do we (1979,215, n. l6); Trenn (1974,54 f.); Badash (1966,95). judge we become interpret and a technology assessment? Ought to 17. Trenn (1977,36a$; Howorth (195E,64-91). somewhat less impressed by the mere appearance of scientific author- 18. The chronology I suggest differs, for cxamplc, from that implied in previous itativeness, while correspondingly more receptive to evidence that an histories, including Trenn (1977, 42). Trenn-whose work is gencrally exccllcnt-here assessment reflects balanced contributions from its authors'hearts, assumes tacitly that Soddy wrote'Alchemy and Chemistry" only aftcr discovcring natural minds, intuitions, creative powers, and reasoned moral sensibilities? transmutatlon. Soddy must indced have writtcn "Alchemy and Chcmistry"somctimc after March 27, particularly that there are always likely to be a few Fiederick Suppose I 90 I , for on that datc, in formal public dcbatc with Ruthcrford, hc continucd to rcsist the Soddys among us. Can we find the wisdom, both individually and concept of a transmutable atom. (Sce Trcnn |977, 2a41; and Soddy, "Chcmical institutionally, to listen sensitively to those who may at ltrst seem under Evidence" [n. I2, abovc].) Trcnn (1977, 42) cites notes that Soddy evidently used in the sway of an overexcited imagination, without thereby forsaking the presenting a lccturc at McG ill aftcr thc discovcry of natural transmutation (ca. Oct. l90l ) as evidence that it was only at this time that Soddy began to takc a scrious interest in essential role that our critical and discriminatory faculties can play? Tcchnology, & Human Values 184 Scicncc, Sclovc / Alchemy to Atomic War 185

(Sce *Alchemy-A Chapter in the History alchcmy and practical transmutation. Soddy's 28. Soddy (1906b). SCB 99). of Scicncc," TS and accompanying 'Notcs," 29. Soddy (1908); Trcnn, cd. (1975, l0). papers alludc directly to the fact that earthly natural transmutation Thcsc do sccm to 30. Soddy (1908, 230-233, 244,2so). For examplc, *Rccent physical work' done nowhere in the had by this timc bccn found. 31. Segal (1985). Soddy (19O3c,226) alludes to having read science fiction. enablcs us to dctect changes in matter heretofore only world morc than in Montrcal 32. Soddy (1912a,246 f.). Soddy wrotc the book in 1910. gcologicalcpochs of time"(Soddy, "Alchcmy-A Chapter,"3.) Therc is, appreciablc aftcr 33. Jevons (1866). Chcmistry," in which Soddy discussed howcvcr, no such allusion in "Alchcmy and 34. Soddy (19O3c,226). thc contcxts (a) of Thomson's and Lockyer's hypotheses, and transmutation solcly within 35. Freedman (1,979,259 f.); Beilby (1899); Howorth (1958, 1321., 167). through purposive human effort. (b) of sccking to cffect it on earth 36. Rutherford and Soddy (1903, 591); Soddy (1904a, 182-186); Rutherford (1905). givcn allusions in Chaptcr, " it seems hardly likely Now, cspccially his "Alchcmy-A 37. Rutherford (1905, 396). rcfrained in and chemistry'from also at least alluding that Soddy would have 'Alchcmy 38. Soddy (1903a,719 f.); Lockyer (1900, csp. 68, 158 f.); Soddy (190344,521,646, discovcry of natural transmutation if to his own rcccnt 'world+hattering" "colossal- 724 f.); Soddy (l904b, 3E-42); Soddy (1906a, 130n.). discovcry had already occurred. (The qtloted wolds are indccd-as Trcnn assumcs-that 39. Soddy (l9Ba, 189). evidcncc hclps pcrsuadc me that in reality Soddy's in Howorth [1958, 82].) This intcrnal 40. Soddy (1904b,42). yct madc thcir discovery, and thu" that Trenn's Soddy and Ruthcrford had not 41. Pais (1977): Trenn (1977,116). later related: assumption is unwarrantcd. As Soddy himself 42. Soddy (1903d,239). I had writterr in my papcr "Alchcmy and Chemistry" that transmutation had not 43. Soddy (1904b,4l). It was indeed an "cra of speculation," particularly regarding yct bccn lound; yct whcn thc time came to investigate the phenomenon [thorium the concept of timc. See Brush (1979, l6l f.). cmanationl lhc whole thing secmcd too devastatingly simple. 44. Lifton (1973,47). 45. Soddy (1908,239). (Quotcd in Howorth fl958, 831). 46. Compare Lcssing (1979). Howorth's own chronology is somcwhat garbled, but I follow Trenn and others in 47. Maslow (1968). The significancc of a pcak cxpcricnce is subject to various seeing no reason to assumc that her dircct quotes of Soddy are unreliablc. The startling interpretations. For examplc, a Jungian might suggcst that Soddy was tapping into casc with which Soddy concluded that thorium was "transmuting," as well as the material, or wisdom, that is latent in the collective unconscious. intclligibility and cohercncc the chronology I proposc lcnds to Soddy's later life, both 48. See, for examplc, Soddy's "Alchemy and Chemistry" (note 13, above), 7; providc additional, indirect cvidcncc in that chronology's favor. (See my succeeding text, "Alchemy-A Chapter" (notc 18, above), l; Soddy (1903b); Soddy (1906a, 123); and and atso notc 56, bclow. Thc mcthod of reasoning I employ here is discussed in Taylor Soddy (1949, 2 f.). On the psychological and religious meaning of Ouroboros, and of U979,27 f.l. On thc patent nonobviousness, at the timc, of Soddy's discovery of alchemical symbolism generally, sec, for cxample, von Franz (19E0); Eliade (1978). transmutation scc, for cxamplc, Mallcy U979,215-2207; and Pais U977,124 t.'0. 49. Soddy (190E,241). Thus while thcrc is lingcring ambiguity, I find the balance ofevidence to support this 50. Ibid., 242 f. sequcnce: Insofar as Soddy does not cite it in his earlier lectures on the history of 51. Ibid.,243. chcmistry, it sed/lls to me most probablc that hc read Berthelot's book after March 52. rbid.,243 f. l90l-perhaps duringthe summer, which he spent in England-having already becn won 53. Soddy (1914, 260) mentions the tree of knowledge cxplicitly. ovcr at lcast partially to thc physicists'model of the atom. Sometime afterwards he wrote 54. Soddy (190E,244). ,.Alchcmy and Chcmistry," and shortly after that hc and Rutherford discovered natural 55. Soddy, "The Social Effect of Recent Advances in Physical Science"(1915, TS, transmutation. scB lr2,9-r2). 19. Howorth (1958,83). 56. Soddy ( I 908, 244). Soddy used essentially the same language about reversing "the 20. Trcnn (1977). respective positions of master and servant" in his 'Alchemy and Chemistry" (note 13, 21. Howorth (1958,83). above), 13. This suggests the ongoing vitality of that seven-year-old essay in his life. 22. Soddy,'Alchcmy and Chemistry"(n. 13, above), 14. 57. Soddy (1914, 260). 23. Scc, for cxamplc, Crookcs (l 898, 26 f.); Jauncey 09a6, 239); Pais (1977). 58. See Soddy (l9l2b,252); (1920d, 183). 24. Soddy (1903a,719 f.); Soddy (1903c,226); Rutherford and Soddy (1903); Trenn 59. Soddy (1914,259 f.); Soddy, Keith Lecture notes (l9l3a), TS, SCB 105, Lecture (1977, t07-t23). lV; Soddy (1920f,23,86 f.); Soddy (1945b). Soddy was also awarc ofearlier alchemists' 25. Trcnn(1977,107, lll);Trenn(1979,263);Heilbron(1979,57 f.);Badash(1979, claims to have rediscovered their knowlcdge or learned it from more ancient texts. See, for chap. 2). example, Soddy "History of Chemistry"(notc 10, above), Lecture II, 7. It sccms likely that 26. Howorth (1953, l2); Soddy, 'History of Chemistry" (n. 10, above, Lecture II)' as Soddy began to take more seriously alchemical notions of transmutation, he also began 27. Soddy (1903c,225 f.); Howorth (1958,23, 98 f'); 295); Freedman (1979)' to reconsider his earlier rejection of alchemists'claims regarding rediscovery. Soddy was, moreover, certainly not the first important scientist to believe that he might have Sclovc Alchcmy to Atomic War 187 186 Science, Technology, & Human Values /

76. Soddy continucd to makc favorable rcferenc€s to the novcl cvcn after World War embarked on a voyage of rediscovery; see, for instance, Manuel (1968, 165, 391 f') IL See, for example, Soddy, "Ir thc Dctcrioration of the Climatc Due to thc Radioactivc concerning Isaac Newton. Pollution of thc Atmosphcrc?" (1954), TS, SCB 126, 2. 60. Soddy (1906b, I47). 77. On atomic scicntists'latcr attempts to'savc the world" see, for cxamplc, Smith 61. Scc, for cxample, Soddy (1909); and, especially, Soddy (l9l2c). One factor in ( r e70). Soddy's intermittent doubts regarding atomic rediscovery was probably his interest in the 78. Soddy (1923a); Sddcrbaum (1923); Kauffman, ed. (1986, csp. chaps. I, 3-5). geological hypothesis that radioactive heating within the earth might cause cyclical 79. Soddy (1923b, 107). planetary overheating, melting and resolidification. See, for examplc, Soddy ( 1909, 57 f.); 80. On Soddy's political exceptionalncss among his British scientific generation sec, Soddy (l9l2a, 235-238); Soddy (1932, 319-322). In that case, past planetary cataclysms for example, Werskey (1978, csp.35,37); Trenn (1979,273); Marwick (1970,238); could more likcly be attributcd to natural than to human-induced atomic causes-thus Macleod and Macleod (19?9, esp. l5 f.). Among his age-cohort of prominent, contem- weakcning the argument for thc prior existcnce of an atomic civilization. porary British scientists, Soddy's only peer in political consciousness appears to have been As in his ideas regarding rediscovcry, Soddy's interest in the idea of cyclical planetary mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell. destruction and rebirth roughly recapitulatcs a belief ofNewton's. See Manuel (1968, 388)' It is possible that Soddy's active conccrn with the social impact ofscience reflccted, Apart from thcir shared familiarity with Biblical imagery, another source of this among other things, his knowledge of the ethics of ccrtain alchemists. For example, in, commonality presumably lies in both mcn's captivation with alchemical symbolism, "Alchemy and Chemistry" (note 13, above), p. 14, Soddy acknowledged the tradition including its potent unconscious involvcment with questions of individual and cosmic through which an alchemist "sougbt by all means in his powcr to prcvent the spccial death and rebirth. See Eliade (1978) and Weart (1988). knowledgc he was posscssed of falling into the hands of unworthy succcssors." 62. Page(1979);Varcoe(1970);Howorth(1958,200-205);Soddy(1917); Williamson Soddy's life after World War I has not yct received adequate historical treatme nt. The ( r956). best attempt to date is Trenn (1979). Cruickshank (1979) is informativc on some points, 63. Soddy quoted in Howorth (1958,274 f.). but misleading and far too quick to pass judgmcnt on othcrs. 64. Paneth(1957);Howorth(1958,167-169);Soddy(l9l3b),TS,SCB,l07;Marwick 81. See, for examplc, Anonymous (1920); Soddy (1920a); and letters responding to (1970,10-'12); Daiches (1977, chap. 16). Soddy by Boycott (1920), McKcnzie (1920), and Campbell (1920). 55. Soddy (19l3d). See also Soddy,'Evolution of Matter," Citizen's lecture in the 82. See, for example, three articles by Soddy (1920c and 1920b and 1928). Digbcth Institute, Birmingham, l6 Sept. (l9l3c) TS, SCB 106; Soddy (1914, 241). 83. Cruickshank(1979,283f.).ForotherinstancesofSoddy'scriticismofthepolitical 66. Wclls (1914); Dickson (1969, 22E). conservatism or elitism of scientilic socicties, sce two of his letters in Nature (1920c nd 67. I havc so far been able to discover in the scientific literature of the day (Soddyh I 938). includcd) not a singlc spcculative mention of thc concept of "heavy artificial elements," 84. Fosdick (1929, l3); Millikan (1930). much less the idea that these might one day prove a usablc source of atomic energy. Thus I 85. See Trcnn (1979); Daly (1980). Soddy's focus on thc physical basis ofcconomic continuc to bc deeply pcrplexed-virtuslly awed-by Wells's eeric anticipation of the processes-particularly on thc role of cncrgy and the laws of thermodynamics- discovery and use of plutonium. anticipatcd by decadcs some of the thinking of cconomists such as Daly and Nicholas 68. Wclls (1934, Vol. II, 664-670); MacKenzie and MacKenzie (1973, 297-303); Georgescu-Roegen. Marwick (1970,48 f.,214); Church (t928). I believc that Soddy's interest in alchemical attempts to transmutc baso mctsls into 69. See Howorth (1958, 194); Soddy (1926,28)' gold exerted a role in his becoming concerncd with the social cffects of monctsry policy. 70. Howorth(1953,41). See, for example, Soddy, "Alchemy and Chemistry"(note 13, above, 5); Soddy (1906c, 71. Soddy(1909,53);Soddy(1912a,213-239);Soddy(1920f,40,108);Soddy,(1924, esp. 59 ff.); Soddy (1926, c.g.,144,301); Soddy (1950, 3, 5). In this respcct Soddy again 9 f.); Pagc (1979, 132); Marwick (1970, 159-190); Kevlcs (1978, 102-138); Whittcmore parallels Sir Isaac Newton, whose interest in alchemy contributed to a scrious pre- (1975); Badash (1979, 146-149); Weart (1979, I I f')' occupation-as Mastcr of the English Mint-with establishing thc gold standard and 72. Soddy (1920f, 36). preventing counterfeiting. See Manuel (1968, e.g., 63, 16l-172,231). 73. Ibid.,38. 86. Russell (1961); Fleck (1957,210-213); Pancth (1957, 1086 f.); Trcnn (1979,274, 74. Soddy (1915, l3). 276); Cruickshank ( 1979). 75. Soddy, Keith Lecturc notes (note 59, above), Lecture IV (delivered'on l0 March 87. See, for examplc, Weart (1979) and Weart (1988). r9r3),45 f.: 88. Soddy (1945a,9). Yct, as might now happen anyday, if one of the [scientific] workers tomorrow were 89. See, for example, Crookcs (1910, xxiii); Evc (1939, 102); Eddington (1920, a6); to discovcr the means of liberating this [latent atomic] energy ' . . the onc sure and Aston (1923, l4). Ruthcrford's bcst known commcnt on thc aubject was: "Anyonc who immediate use to which it would bc put would be for war. . . . Last year . . . the says that with thc mcans at prcsent at our disposal . . . wc can utilize atomic cncrgy is maintcnancc of a modern war servicc ... . absorbed onc-third of the available talking moonshine" (quoted in Kacmpffcrt, 1933). revcnuc of thc country. 188 Scicncc. Tcchnology, & Human Valucs Sclovc / Alchemy to Atomic War lE9

inquiry, compare 90. on the rolc of nonscicntific knowledgc in sustaining scientilic Brush, Stephen G. 1979. Scientific revolutionarics of 1905: Einstein, Rutherford, (1969, Parts and 4); Bernstein (1983)' Habcrmas (1971, c.g.,68 f., 304-306); Polanyi 3 Chamberlin, Wilson, Stevens, Binet, Freud. ln Rutherford ond physics ot the twn of (1983); and Dreyfus (1984); 91. Sce Maslow (1968); Kcllcr (1985); Bcincr Dreyfus the century, ed. Mario Bunge and William R. Shca, l4G7l. New York: Dawson. (1979, esp' chap.4 Henry Dcikman (1982, csp. chap. 5 [on intuition]h Worster [on Campbell, Norman R. 1920. Irtter to thc editor. /Valure 106(November l8):374. empathic, Thorcau's attempt to establish a science grounded in subjective, Pelsonal Cardwell, D.S.L. 1972. The organisation of science in England,2nd ed., rev. London: involvcmentl); Salk ( 1985). Heinemann, capacity for logic and dispassion is That Soddy continued to rely importantly on his Church, A. G. 1928. An indictmen! of \tar. Natute 122:197-99. onetime mentor and madc cvidcnt by contrasting his bchavior with that of his Corn, Joseph J., ed., 1986. Imogining tomorrow: History, technology, ond the Americon in 1903, Ramsay bcgan adecade-long quest collaborator, Sir William Ramsay. Bcginning luture. Cainbridgc: MtT Prcss. deluded himself into to achicvc transmutation, in the course of which he repeatedly Crookes, William. 1898. Address. Repoil of rhe 68th Meeting of rhe BAAS,3-38. bclicving that hc had a succeeded, "So firm was his own conviction in transmutation that ---1910. Antoine Henri Becquerel, 1852-1908. hoc. of the Royal Society 83, Series hcsawitwhcrcverhelooked"(Trcnn 1974,57).Soddyrarely,if ever,succumbedtothis A:xx-xxiii. (not uncommon) sort of scicntific selfdeception. Crowther, J. G. 1965. Stolesmen ofscience. London: Cresset. 92. Forhistorialstudicsoflcssprescienttcchnotogyassessments,secCorn,ed.(1986). Cruickshank, A. D. 1979. Soddy at Oxford. Bril. J, Hist. Sci. 12:277-88. (1980). 93. Sec, for example, Joncs (197 l); Porter et al' ( 1980); Armstrong Daiches, David. 1977. Glasgow. London: Granada. 94. SeealsoSclove(1982).H.G.Wells'simaginativereworkingofSoddy'sthought- Daly, Herman E. 1980. The economic thought of Frederick Soddy. History of Political support to this and the subse4uent influence of wells's novel upon readers-lend direct Economy l2:469-88. rccommcndation. Davis, William E., Jr. 1974. hrly history of the nuclear atom. Dubuque: Kendall/ Hunt. (1978, Berger (1977); U.S. Congress, 95. See, for examplc, Henderson chap' l9); Deikman, Arthur J. 1982. The observing self: Mysticism and psychotherapy. Boston: (1985)' Officc of Tcchnology Assessmcnt (1976, 255-279); Barber Beacon. Dickson, Lovat. 1969. H. G. Wells: His turbulent lile and times. New York: Atheneum. Dobbs, B.J.T. l9T5.Theloundotionsof Newton'solchemy: Or, thehuntingof the Greene References Iyon. Cambridgc: Cambridge Univ. Prcss. Dreyfus, Hubert L. and Stuart.E. Dreyfus. 1984. From Socrates to expert systems: The I 87-188- Anonymous. I 920. Notes. Nature 106(October ?): limits of calculative rationality. Technology in Society 6:217-33, (with Harman). 1980. Strotegiesfor conducting technology Armstrong, Joe E. Willis W. Eddington, A. S. 1920. The internal constitution of the stars. ln Report of the SEth assessmenls. Boulder, CO: Westview. Meering of rhe BAAS,34-49. London: John Murray. Les Prix Nobelen I92l-22. Stockholm: Aston, F. W. 1923. Mass spectra and isotopcs. ln Eliade, Mircea. 1978. Theforge and the crucible: The origins ond structures of alchemy, Imprimeric Royale, P. A. Norstcdt & Soner. 2nd ed. Chicago: Univ. ofChicago Press. was received. Scientific American Badash, Lawrcnce. 1966. How the'newer alchemy" Eve, A. S. 1939. Rutherfurd: Being the life ond krters of the Rt. Hon. Lord Rutherftrd, 2l S(August):89-95. O. M. New York: Macmillan. and decoy of a science. Baltimore: Johns Radioacttvity in America: Growth J. Chadwick. 1938. Lord Rutherford. Obiruary Notices oJ Fellows ol the ---lg7g. Press. ---and Hopkins Univ. Roy a I Soc ie t y 2(January):395-423. Raritan 5(fall):130-143. Barber, Benjamin. 1985. The politics ofjudgment. Feyerabend, Paul. 1975. Against method: Outline ofan onorchistic theory of knowledge. the chem. Industry Beilby, Gcorge, 1899. The President's address, J. Society ol London: Verso. l8:643{53. Fleck, Alexander. 1957. Frederick Soddy. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royol judgment. of Chicago Press. Beincr, Ronald . 1983. Potitical Chicago: Univ. Sociery 3:202-16. 1977. Northern northern homeland: The report of the Berger, Thomas R. frontier, Fleck, Ludwik. [935] I979. Genesis and development of a scientiJicfocr. Chicago: Univ. Minister of Supply and Services MacKenzie Volley pipeline inquiry,2 vols. ottawa: of Chicago Press. Canada. Forman, Paul. 1971. Weimar culture, causality and quantum theory, l9l8-1927. Hist. ond relotivism: Science, hermeneulics, Bernstcin, Richard J. 1983. Beyond obiectivism Studies in the Physical Sciences 3:l-115. and proxis. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press. Fosdick, Raymond B.1929.Theoldsavageinthenewcivilizatioz. NewYork: Doubleday, Paris: G' Steinheil. Berthctot, Marcclin. 1885. Iz.r origines de I'olchimie. Doran and Co. and social imagery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Bloor, David. 1976. Knowledge Freedman, Michael J. I 979. Frederick Soddy and the practical significance ofradioactive and scientific workers. ,lVature 106(Novembet Boycott, A. E. 1920. Chemical warfarc mBtter. B/i,. l. Hist. Sci. 12:.257-60. I l):343. Gould, Stephen Jay. I 98 l. The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton. 190 Sciencc, Technology, & Human Values Sclovc / Alchcmy to Atomic War l9l

Habcrmas, Jiirgen. 1971. Knowledge and humon interests. Trans. Jeremy J. Shapiro. Maslow, Abraham. 1968. Toword o psychology of being, 2nd cd. New York: Van Boston: Beacon, Nostrand Reinhold. Hcilbron, John L, 1979. Physics at McGill in Rutherford's time. In Rutherlord and McKenzie, Alex. 1920. Chemical warfare and scientitic workers. JValure 106(Novcmber physlcs at the turn of the century, ed. Mario Bunge and William R. Shea, 42-73. New I 8): 374. York: Dawson. Millikan, Robert A. 1930. Alleged sins of science. Scribnerb Magazine 87(February): Henderson, Hazcl. 1978. Cteoting altemotivefutures: The end of economics. New York: n4-29. Bcrkley. Mulkay, Michacl. 1979. Science ond the sociology of knowledge. London: George Allen & Howorth, Muriel. 1953. Atomic transmutation: The greotest discovery ever made , . .from Unwin. memoirs of holessor Frederick Soddy London: New World. Muller, Hermann J. 1935. Out of the night: A biologistb view of the luture, New York: ---1958. Pioneerresearchontheatom:RutherfordandSoddyinagloriouschapretof Vanguard. science: The life story Frederick.Soddy. of London: New World. Mumford, Lewis. 1970. The pentogon of power. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. years Jaunccy, G.E.M. 1946. Thc early of radioactivity. Am. J. Physics 14:22641. Page, Kenneth R. 1979. Frederick Soddy: The Aberdeen intcrlude. Aberdeen University Jcvons, William Stanlcy. 1866. The cool question: An inquiry concerning the progress of Rev. No. 162(autumn):130-39. the the probable nalion, and exhauslion of our coal-mines,2nd ed., rev. London: Pais, A. 1977. Radioactivity\ two early puzzles. Trons. N.Y. Acod. Sci., 2nd Series; Macmillan. 38:l l6-36. Joncs, Martin V. 1971. A technology assessment methodology, 7 vols. Washinglon, DC: Paneth, F. A. 1957, A tribute to Frederick Soddy. .lValure 180(November 23): 1085-1087. Mitrc. Polanyi, Michael. 1969. Knowing ond being. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. Kaempffert, Waldemar, 1933. Rutherford cools atom energy hope. New York Times Porter, Alan L. ct al. 1980. A guidebooklor technology ossessmenl and impacl analysis. (Scptembcr l2):1. New York: EIsevier. (1877-1956): Kauffman, George B., ed. 1986, Frederick Soddy Early pioneer in rodio- Russell, Alexandcr S. 1961. Fredsrick Soddy. In Great chemists, ed. Eduard Farber, chemistry. Boston: D. Rcidcl. 1465-68. New York: Intersciencc. Kcller, Evclyn Fox. 1985. Reflections on gender and sctence, New Haven: Yale Univ. Rutherford, Ernest. 1905. Radium-the cause of the earth's heal. Haiper's Magazine Prcss. I l0(February):390-96.' Kevles, Daniel J. 1978. The physicists: The history of o scientific community in modern ---and Frederick Soddy. 1903. Radioactive change. Philosophicol Mogozine 5,6th Americo. New York: Knopf. Series (May):587-91. Knorr-Cctina, Karin. 1981. The manufacture olknowledge: Anessay on the constructivist Salk, Jonas. 1985. Anotomy of reolity: Merging of intuition ond reason. New York: and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pcrgamon. Praeger. Latour, Bruno and Steve Woolgar. 1979, Loborarory The sociol life: conslruction of Sclove, Richard. 1982. Decision-making in a dem ocracy. Bullelin of the Atomic Scientists scientlic focrs. Bcvcrly Hills, CA: Sage. 38(May):44.49. (Canopus Lcssing, Doris. 1979. Shikasta in Argos: Archives: L Re: Colonised Plonet 5: Segal, Howard P. 1985, Technologicol Utopionism in American cufture. Chicago: Univ. Shikasra). Ncw York: Knopf. of Chicago Press. Lifton, Robcrt J. 1973. Protcan m The psychoanalytic an.ln interpretotion of history,ed. Shapin, Steve. I 982. History of scicnce and its sociological reconstruction. History of Sci. Bcnjamin B. Wolman, 33-49. Ncw York: Harpcr Torchbooks. 20:-157-211. Lockyer, Norman, 1900. Inorganic evolution as studied by spectrum onalysis. London: Smith, Alice Kimball, 1970. A peril ond a hope: The scientists'movement in Americo, Macmillan. 1945-47, rev. Cambridge: MIT Press. MacKcnzic, Norman and Jcanne 1973. jlells. MacKcnzie. H. G. New York: Simon & Soddy, Frederick, n.d. Lectures on the history of chemistry from earliest limes. TS Nnd Schuster. MSS, Soddy Collcction, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. 2. Maclcod, Roy. 197?. Changing pcrspcctives in the social history of science. ln Science, ---n.d. Chemicol evidence of the indivisibllily of the otom. MS, Soddy Collcction, technology and society: A cross-disciplinary percpective, cd. Ina Splegel-Rosing and Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. l0l. Dcrck de Solla Pricc, 149-95. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. i Alchemy and chemistry. TS,'Soddy Collection, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Kay Macl,cod. 1979. Thc contradictions of professionalism: ---n.d. ---and Scientists, trade Catalog No. 100. unionism and thc First World War. Sociol Studies ol Sci.9:l-!2. Alchemy-achoptetinrhehistoryofsclence.TSandaccompanying"Notes," Mallcy, 1979. ---n.d. Marjorie. The discovcry of atomic transmutation: Scientific styles and Soddy Collection, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. 99. philosophics in France and Britain. /,rir 70:213-33. ---1903a. Some rccent advances in radioactivity. Conlemporury Rev. 83 (May): Manuel, Frank E. 1968. A portroit of Isaoc Newton. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. 708-720. Prcss, The disintegration theory of radioactivity. Times Lir. Supp. (June26):201. Marwick, Arthur. 1970. The deluge: British society and thefirst world war. New ---1903b. York: Possible future applications of radium. Times Lir. Supp. (July l7):225f . Norton. ---1903c. ---1903d. Radium. Prolessionol Popersof the Royal Corpsof Engineers29:237-251. 192 Scicncc, Technology, & Human Valucs Sclovc / Alchemy to Atomic War 193

Radio-activity. The Electricion 52:162 f .,322 f ., 494 f ., g5 f .,724 I. ---1903-4, Wealth, virtuol wealth and debt: The solulion of lhe economic paradox. Radio-activity: An elemcntory trcatise the standpoint of the dis- ---1926. ---19(Xa. from London: Georgc Allen & Unwin, h tegr o t l on t he o ry. London: Elcctrician, " "Thc What I think of socialism, Socialist Review(August):28-30. Tbe cvolution of mattcr as rcvcaled by thc radioactive elemcnts. The Wilde ---192E. ---19&b. The interpretation of the atom, London: John Murray. kcturc Ylll, Memoirs and hoa ol the Manchester Lilerary and Philosophical ---1932. Social rclations of science. Nature l4l(Apil 30):784 f. Society 4E(8):142, ---1938. *The moving finger writes . . ." Cavalcade (August l8):8 f. Thc cvolution of the elements. Report of the 76th Meeting ol the BAAS, ---1945a. ---1906a. The atomic age. The Scortish Field (October): l l. t22-31. ---1945b. T'fie story of otomic energy. London: Nova Atlantis. Thc intcrnal cncrgy of thc elemcnts. J, of the Instirution of Electrical ---1949. ---1906b. Dishonest money or why a larger pay-packet now buys less thon it did. btgineers 37:14041. ---1950. London: New Europe Group. The prcsent position of radioactivity. ol the Rontgen Society 2(7):45-65. ---1906c. "/. Is lhe deterioration oJ the climote due to lhe rudioactive pollution of the The interpretation of radium: Being the substance of six popular ---1954. ---1908. lree atmosphere?TS, Soddy Collection, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. 126. experimental lectures delivered at ,he Univercity of Glasgow, /906. London: John Soderbaum, H, G. 1923. The Nobel Prize in chemistry for the yezr l92l.ln l-es Prix Nobel Murray. en 192l-1922,76-9. Stockholm: Imprimerie Royale, P. A. Norstedt & Soner. The energy of radium. Harper's Monrhly 120(December):52-9. ---1909. Taylor, Charles. 1979. Interpretation and the sciences of man. ln Interpretive social Moller ond energy. London: Home University Library. ---l9l2a science: A reader,ed. Paul Rabinow and William M. Sullivan, 25-71. Berkeley: Univ. The interpretation of radium,Srd ed., rev. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. ---l9l2b. of California Press. thefuture. Scientia ll:186-202. ---l9l2c,Transmutation:Thcvitalproblcmof Trenn, Thaddeus J. 1974. Thejustification oftransmutation: Speculations of Ramsay and Keith lecturc noles. TS, Soddy Collection, Bodleian Library, Oxford, ---l9l3a. experiments of Rutherford. Ambix Zl(March): 53-77. Catalog No. 105. 1975. Radioactivity and otomic lheory: Annuol progress reporls on radio- Lectureonwomen'ssuffragedeliveredatCoxtonHall,London.TS,Soddy ----ed. ---l9l3b. activity 1904-1920 to the Chemical Society by Frederick Soddy F. R. ,S.. London: Collcction, Bodleiari Library, Oxford, Catalog No. 107. Taylor & Francis. The evolution oI matter. Citizenh lecture in the Digbeth Institute, ---l9l3c. The self-splitting atom: The history of rhe Rurherfurd-Soddy colloboration. Birmingham, Scpt. 16, TS, Soddy Collection, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog ---1977. London: Taylor & Francis. No. 106. 1979. The central role of encrgy in Soddy's holistic and critical approach to nuclear Science on the road to revolutionize all existence. New York Times, ------l9l3d. science, economics, and social responsibility, Btil. J. Hirl. Sci. 12:261-76. Magazine Scct., Part 6 (Septcmber 28):6, U.S. Congress, Office ofTechnology Assessment. 1976. Coastal effects ofoffshore energy Sciencc and lifc. Candid (February):237-260. ---1914. Quarrerly systems: An assessmenl of oil and gas systems, deepwoler porls, ond nuclear The sociol effect of recent advances in physical science. February 5, TS, ---1915. powerplontsoflthecoast olNew Jerseyand Delowcre. Washington, DC: Government Soddy Collection, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. I 12. Printing Office. llor workof the Chemistry Deportment, Univetsily of Aberdeen September ---1917. Varcoe, Ian. 1970. Scientists, government and organised research in Great Britain l914- 22, TS, Soddy Collcction, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. 15. 16: The early history of the DSIR. MinemaS:192-216. Chcmical warfare, thc universities, and scientific workers. Noture 106 ---1920a von Franz, Marie-Louise. 1980. Alchemy: An introduction ,o the symbolism and the (November 4):310. psychology. Toronto: Inner City. Economic"science"from thestandpointof science. The GuildsmanNo.43 ---1920b. Weart, Spencer R. 1979. Scientists inpower. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press. (July):3 f. The heyday of myth and clich6. Eulletin of the Atomic Scientisrs 4l(August): Irtter to the editor. JVcture 106(September 23):l I I f. ---1985. ---1920c. 3843. The interpretation olrodium,4th ed., rev. London: John Murray. ---1920d. Nuclearfeor: A.hislory of images. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press. The public support of scicntific work. ScientiJic Worker, Supplement to ---1988. ---1920e. Wells, H. G. 1914. The world set free: A story of mankind. New York: E, P. Dutton. Vol. l, no. 3(May):15-20. Experimenl in autobio'graphy: Discoveries and conclwions ol a very . Science ond life: Aberdeen addresses. London: John Murray. ---1934. ---1920f ordinory brain, London: Cresset. The origins of the conception of isotopes. ln Les Prix Nobel en I92l- 1922, ---1923a. Werskey, Gary. 1978. The visible college: The collective biography of Eritish scientiJic l-29. Stockholm: Imprimerie Royale, P. A, Norstedt & S6ner. socialists of the 1930s. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Remarks during the Nobel Banquet of 1922.ln Les Prix Nobel en l92l- ---1923b. Whittemore, Gilbert F. Jr. 1975. World War I, poison gas research, and the ideals of 1922, 106-7. Stockholm: Imprimcrie Royale, P. A. Norstedt & S6ner. American chemists. Social Studies of Sci. 5:13543. The inversion ol science and a scheme of scientific rehrmotion, London: ---1924. Williamson, W,T.H. 1956. lrtter to Muriel Howorth, November 10. Soddy Collection, Hcndcrson, Bodleian Library, Oxford, Catalog No. 15. Worster, Donald. 1979. Noture\ econom!: The roots of ecology. Garden City: Anchor.