DOCSLIB.ORG

Declassified Files Reopen “Nazi Bomb” Debate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Declassified Files Reopen “Nazi Bomb” Debate Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ISSN: 0096-3402 (Print) 1938-3282 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbul20 Declassified Files Reopen “Nazi Bomb” Debate Stanley Goldberg & Thomas Powers To cite this article: Stanley Goldberg & Thomas Powers (1992) Declassified Files Reopen “Nazi Bomb” Debate, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 48:7, 32-40, DOI: 10.1080/00963402.1992.11460100 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00963402.1992.11460100 Published online: 15 Sep 2015. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 3 View related articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rbul20 Download by: [Purdue University Libraries] Date: 08 November 2017, At: 05:53 Professor Otto Hahn (left) as he was taken into custody by "Aisos," an Allied mission to collect German physicists and their research. DECLASSIFIED FILES REOPEN "NAZI BOMB" DEBATE Downloaded by [Purdue University Libraries] at 05:53 08 November 2017 By STANLEY GOLDBERG and THOMAS POWERS Did leading n the race to build an atomic bomb, Ger­ actor vessel. By July 1945, with the war in many had some strong advantages-a Europe over, ten German scientists (see German year's head start, some of the world's pages 36-37) had been incarcerated by the physicists I leading scientists, and access to critical Allies in Farm Hall, a stately British home. materials. But when World War II ended, They were captured and interned as part of choose not the Germans had come up empty. All that re­ "Alsos," a special mission to uncover the mained of their efforts were a five-foot shelf state of German uranium research. to "know" of basic research materials and an empty re- On the evening of August 6, 1945, the Ger­ man scientists were astounded by a short re­ how to build Stanley Goldberg, a historian of science in port on the news. The United States had oblit­ anA-bomb? Washington, D.C., is writing a biography of erated the Japanese city of Hiroshima with an Gen. Leslie R. Groves. Thomas Powers is the atomic bomb. For a time that night, Werner author of Heisenberg's War: The Secret Histo­ Heisenberg, the chief theoretician of the Ger­ ry of the German Bomb (forthcoming). man bomb program, believed that reports of a 32 The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists bomb were a hoax. But as further details con­ ports-the American copy still bearing vinced the imprisoned Germans that the news Goudsmit's marginal notes in pencil-provide "If the was true, they began to speak of how their a vivid, intimate portrait of the German scien­ Americans own program had gone wrong. Even now, tists who failed to build a bomb for Hitler.3 after nearly 50 years of acrimony and muddled Whatever triggered Goudsmit's angry charges have a debate, there is still no answer to the funda­ against Heisenberg is there on paper-in the uramum• mental question: Why was there no German conversations reflecting deep ambivalence by bomb? Heisenberg and three friends regarding build­ bomb, you're The post-bomb arguments of Samuel Goud­ ing a bomb. The reports are not the whispers smit and Heisenberg represent the heart of of conspirators who figuratively poured sugar all second­ this debate. Goudsmit, a Dutch-born physicist, into gas tanks while colleagues slept; but nei­ raters." was scientific director of the Alsos mission ther do they reflect second thoughts or special that seized the German scientists and research pleadings from men who tried but failed to reports near the end of the war. Allied scien­ build a bomb. The Farm Hall reports expand tists and intelligence authorities considered and illuminate the history of the German Heisenberg "the most dangerous possible bomb program, and no future attempt to ex­ German in the field because of his brain plain that history can ignore them. power." 1 The two most significant reports, numbers Goudsmit had known and respected Heisen­ four and five, cover the period bracketing Hi­ berg before the war, but later his judgment roshima, from the first terse BBC announce­ turned harsh. He said he had seen secret re­ ment at 6 p.m. on August 6, through Heisen­ ports proving that Heisenberg had bungled berg's full-scale bomb physics lecture deliv­ important scientific questions and had lied ered to the assembled company on August 14. about his wartime role in the project. Indeed, The information from those reports illumi­ in books, articles, and private correspondence, nates what Heisenberg knew or quickly man­ Goudsmit insisted that Heisenberg had con­ aged to deduce about bomb design. From a cocted phony claims of moral compunction as historical viewpoint, the information is impor­ an explanation for the humiliating German tant because it confronts Goudsmit's charge failure to produce the bomb.2 that Heisenberg failed to build a bomb be­ The dispute centers on Heisenberg. The cause he simply didn't know how. But for the Germans thought of Heisenberg as first general reader, most striking is the attitude of among equals, though he never commanded the German scientists-their instinctive emo­ anything like the line authority that J. Robert tional response at hearing the news of the U.S. Oppenheimer had at Los Alamos. Albert success. (This response helps to explain Speer, Germany's economic czar, remembered Heisenberg's pessimistic report in 1942 to Heisenberg's technical pessimism as decisive Speer and other German officials on the at a June 1942 meeting in Berlin that more or prospects-or lack of them-for a successful less ended serious German hope of a bomb. If German bomb. Was Heisenberg giving his Heisenberg said it couldn't be done in a war­ honest opinion in 1942-or deliberately prick­ torn economy, that was the end of it. ing the official balloon?) There can be little question that the record­ ed responses are authentic. The Farm Hall "guests" believed that they were talking only Historians have long sought one particular to each other, not for the benefit of some un­ batch of classified files-the 270-odd pages of seen eavesdropper. On July 6, hidden micro­ Downloaded by [Purdue University Libraries] at 05:53 08 November 2017 reports from Farm Hall, the British home phones picked up the following conversation: where Heisenberg and nine other German sci­ Kurt Diebner: "I wonder whether there are entists were held from July 3, 1945, through microphones installed here?" the end of the year. The weekly reports, com­ Heisenberg: "Microphones installed? (laugh­ piled by British intelligence officers, were ing) Oh no, they're not as cute as all that. I based on transcripts of the scientists' secretly don't think they know the real Gestapo meth­ recorded conversations via microphones con­ ods; they're a bit old-fashioned in that respect." cealed in every room. Goudsmit hinted at the On the evening of August 6, the first ques­ files' existence in his 1947 book, Alsos, and tion in the minds of all ten scientists was, is it Gen. Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan true? Have the Americans really built a Project, dipped into them freely for his own bomb? "If the Americans have a uranium 1962 memoir, Now It Can Be Told. But British bomb then you're all second-raters," said Otto authorities sealed the files for the next 30 Hahn. "Poor old Heisenberg." years. Last fall the physicist Nicholas Kurti The question of morality arose. Carl Fried­ orchestrated a noisy public campaign for their rich von Weizsacker, Heisenberg's close friend release. and protege, said in the first few minutes, "I Declassified in February, the Farm Hall re- think its dreadful of the Americans to have September 1992 33 he could not get away from the fact that he was working for Germany. Hahn replied that he too loved his country and that, strange as it might appear, it was for this reason that he had hoped for her defeat.... They continued to discuss the same theme as before, that they had never wanted to work on a bomb and had been pleased when it was decided to concen­ trate everything on the engine [reactor]. Heisenberg . feels himself that had they been in the same moral position as the Ameri­ cans and had said to themselves that nothing mattered except that Hitler should win the war, they might have succeeded, whereas in fact they did not want him to win .... They then went on to discuss the feelings of the British and American scientists who had per­ fected the bomb and Heisenberg said he felt it was a different matter in their case as they considered Hitler a criminal." In later years, sometimes in nearly identical words, Heisenberg often repeated these re­ The Gennan done it. I think it is madness on their part." marks-save one. So far as we know, he never physicists were Heisenberg did not let the remark go un­ again said, "they might have succeeded" if detained at Fann Hall, challenged. "One can't say that," he respond­ they had wanted Hitler to win the war. a country house near ed. "One could equally well say, 'That's the '1\vo others discussed the moral issues as Cambridge, England, quickest way of ending the war.' " well-Weizsacker and Karl Wirtz, who had that was seeded with "That's what consoles me," said Hahn. been a student of Heisenberg's at Leipzig. microphones. Hahn needed consoling. He had contemplat­ Heisenberg, Weizsacker, and Wirtz, in fact, NATIONAL AACHWES ed suicide in 1939 when he first realized that had been in charge of the principal German ef­ his December 1938 discovery of fission might fort to build a working reactor.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Samuel Goudsmit
    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES SAMUEL ABRAHAM GOUDSMIT 1 9 0 2 — 1 9 7 8 A Biographical Memoir by BENJAMIN BEDERSON Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. Biographical Memoir COPYRIGHT 2008 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES WASHINGTON, D.C. Photograph courtesy Brookhaven National Laboratory. SAMUEL ABRAHAM GOUDSMIT July 11, 1902–December 4, 1978 BY BENJAMIN BEDERSON AM GOUDSMIT LED A CAREER that touched many aspects of S20th-century physics and its impact on society. He started his professional life in Holland during the earliest days of quantum mechanics as a student of Paul Ehrenfest. In 1925 together with his fellow graduate student George Uhlenbeck he postulated that in addition to mass and charge the electron possessed a further intrinsic property, internal angular mo- mentum, that is, spin. This inspiration furnished the missing link that explained the existence of multiple spectroscopic lines in atomic spectra, resulting in the final triumph of the then struggling birth of quantum mechanics. In 1927 he and Uhlenbeck together moved to the United States where they continued their physics careers until death. In a rough way Goudsmit’s career can be divided into several separate parts: first in Holland, strictly as a theorist, where he achieved very early success, and then at the University of Michigan, where he worked in the thriving field of preci- sion spectroscopy, concerning himself with the influence of nuclear magnetism on atomic spectra. In 1944 he became the scientific leader of the Alsos Mission, whose aim was to determine the progress Germans had made in the development of nuclear weapons during World War II.
    [Show full text]
  • Wolfgang Pauli Niels Bohr Paul Dirac Max Planck Richard Feynman
    Wolfgang Pauli Niels Bohr Paul Dirac Max Planck Richard Feynman Louis de Broglie Norman Ramsey Willis Lamb Otto Stern Werner Heisenberg Walther Gerlach Ernest Rutherford Satyendranath Bose Max Born Erwin Schrödinger Eugene Wigner Arnold Sommerfeld Julian Schwinger David Bohm Enrico Fermi Albert Einstein Where discovery meets practice Center for Integrated Quantum Science and Technology IQ ST in Baden-Württemberg . Introduction “But I do not wish to be forced into abandoning strict These two quotes by Albert Einstein not only express his well­ more securely, develop new types of computer or construct highly causality without having defended it quite differently known aversion to quantum theory, they also come from two quite accurate measuring equipment. than I have so far. The idea that an electron exposed to a different periods of his life. The first is from a letter dated 19 April Thus quantum theory extends beyond the field of physics into other 1924 to Max Born regarding the latter’s statistical interpretation of areas, e.g. mathematics, engineering, chemistry, and even biology. beam freely chooses the moment and direction in which quantum mechanics. The second is from Einstein’s last lecture as Let us look at a few examples which illustrate this. The field of crypt­ it wants to move is unbearable to me. If that is the case, part of a series of classes by the American physicist John Archibald ography uses number theory, which constitutes a subdiscipline of then I would rather be a cobbler or a casino employee Wheeler in 1954 at Princeton. pure mathematics. Producing a quantum computer with new types than a physicist.” The realization that, in the quantum world, objects only exist when of gates on the basis of the superposition principle from quantum they are measured – and this is what is behind the moon/mouse mechanics requires the involvement of engineering.
    [Show full text]
  • Bringing out the Dead Alison Abbott Reviews the Story of How a DNA Forensics Team Cracked a Grisly Puzzle
    BOOKS & ARTS COMMENT DADO RUVIC/REUTERS/CORBIS DADO A forensics specialist from the International Commission on Missing Persons examines human remains from a mass grave in Tomašica, Bosnia and Herzegovina. FORENSIC SCIENCE Bringing out the dead Alison Abbott reviews the story of how a DNA forensics team cracked a grisly puzzle. uring nine sweltering days in July Bosnia’s Million Bones tells the story of how locating, storing, pre- 1995, Bosnian Serb soldiers slaugh- innovative DNA forensic science solved the paring and analysing tered about 7,000 Muslim men and grisly conundrum of identifying each bone the million or more Dboys from Srebrenica in Bosnia. They took so that grieving families might find some bones. It was in large them to several different locations and shot closure. part possible because them, or blew them up with hand grenades. This is an important book: it illustrates the during those fate- They then scooped up the bodies with bull- unspeakable horrors of a complex war whose ful days in July 1995, dozers and heavy earth-moving equipment, causes have always been hard for outsiders to aerial reconnais- and dumped them into mass graves. comprehend. The author, a British journalist, sance missions by the Bosnia’s Million It was the single most inhuman massacre has the advantage of on-the-ground knowl- Bones: Solving the United States and the of the Bosnian war, which erupted after the edge of the war and of the International World’s Greatest North Atlantic Treaty break-up of Yugoslavia and lasted from 1992 Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP), an Forensic Puzzle Organization had to 1995, leaving some 100,000 dead.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Cincinnati
    ! "# $ % & % ' % !" #$ !% !' &$ &""! '() ' #$ *+ ' "# ' '% $$(' ,) * !$- .*./- 0 #!1- 2 *,*- Atomic Apocalypse – ‘Nuclear Fiction’ in German Literature and Culture A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.) in the Department of German Studies of the College of Arts and Sciences 2010 by Wolfgang Lueckel B.A. (equivalent) in German Literature, Universität Mainz, 2003 M.A. in German Studies, University of Cincinnati, 2005 Committee Chair: Sara Friedrichsmeyer, Ph.D. Committee Members: Todd Herzog, Ph.D. (second reader) Katharina Gerstenberger, Ph.D. Richard E. Schade, Ph.D. ii Abstract In my dissertation “Atomic Apocalypse – ‘Nuclear Fiction’ in German Literature and Culture,” I investigate the portrayal of the nuclear age and its most dreaded fantasy, the nuclear apocalypse, in German fictionalizations and cultural writings. My selection contains texts of disparate natures and provenance: about fifty plays, novels, audio plays, treatises, narratives, films from 1946 to 2009. I regard these texts as a genre of their own and attempt a description of the various elements that tie them together. The fascination with the end of the world that high and popular culture have developed after 9/11 partially originated from the tradition of nuclear fiction since 1945. The Cold War has produced strong and lasting apocalyptic images in German culture that reject the traditional biblical apocalypse and that draw up a new worldview. In particular, German nuclear fiction sees the atomic apocalypse as another step towards the technical facilitation of genocide, preceded by the Jewish Holocaust with its gas chambers and ovens.
    [Show full text]
  • A Selected Bibliography of Publications By, and About, Samuel A
    A Selected Bibliography of Publications by, and about, Samuel A. Goudsmit Nelson H. F. Beebe University of Utah Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB 155 S 1400 E RM 233 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090 USA Tel: +1 801 581 5254 FAX: +1 801 581 4148 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] (Internet) WWW URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ 10 January 2020 Version 1.03 Title word cross-reference $3.50 [Bar30, Rid47]. 136 [Cha72]. 138 [Cha72]. 140 [Cha72]. 142 [Cha72]. g [Gou25g]. Sa [Ive10]. Z [LHLT64]. Za [Ive10]. -dependent [LHLT64]. -Werte [Gou25g]. 1947 [Hen48, Whi48]. 1952 [Gou53b]. 1953 [Gou53a]. 1964 [Gou65a]. 1978 [Bed08b, Dre79]. 1983 [Moy84]. 1987 [Lug69]. 1988 [DGS89]. 3d [Tho97]. A-Bomb [Rec91, LRD+91, Bro93, Mac85]. Abides [Gla00]. Abraham [Bed08a, Bed08b]. Absorption [ZHG36]. Abstracts [GT66a, GT68, Gou69a]. Academy [Coc77, Jew77]. accept [Ano54a]. Acceptance [Gou72b]. Account [Lan54]. Ad [Gou72a]. Affirm [ACU+54]. 1 2 Again [GT66c, Gou73e, Rai85]. Age [Lan48, Sul78, Lan59a, Lan59b, Lap59]. AIP [Ano75]. Alamos [Bet91]. Alan [Gou78b]. Alfred [Hol93a, LH93]. Allies [Hol93b]. Alsos [Gou48c, Ano12, Gou47g, Gou47h, Gou47e, Gou48c, Gou51, Gou62, Gou83, Gou96, Pas69, Pas80, Ano48a, Gue50, Hen48, Moy84, Tre83, Whi48]. ALSOS. [Rid47]. Am [Gou74b]. amend [NG70]. American [EBU+52, Gou47b]. Americans [Lan54]. Among [Tre83]. Analyses [BG32, BG68]. Analysis [Gou74a, Wer10]. Analyzed [Gou47c]. Ancient [Gou81]. Angeles [Moy84, Tre83]. Angeles/San [Tre83]. Angewandte [Gou50a]. Angle [Win89, Win87]. Angry [Gou63]. Angular [BL96, NLCS05]. Announcement [Gou58c, Gou58d, Gou58e, Gou68d]. Anomalies [GB33]. Anomalous [Ben38]. anonymity [WG67]. antiquities [RG82]. Application [Hei47a, Hei47b, MU56]. applications [Ike17]. Applied [Gou50a]. Appraisal [Hei49]. Arbeiten [Hei46].
    [Show full text]
  • Rice University General Announcements
    fju.<JLu!^]iA^.^uSo^ THE RICE INSTITUTE HOUSTON, TEXAS ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR BEGINNING SEPTEMBER EIGHTEENTH NINETEEN HUNDRED AND FORTY-ONE THE RICE INSTITUTE A UNIVERSITY OF LIBERAL AND TECHNICAL LEARNING FOUNDED IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON, TEXAS BY WILLIAM MARSH RICE AND DEDICATED BY HIM TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF LETTERS SCIENCE AND ART OPENED FOR THE RECEPTION OF STUDENTS IN THE AUTUMN OF NINETEEN HUNDRED AND TWELVE THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES JAMES ADDISON BAKER: CHAIRMAN WILLIAM MARSH RICE, JR.: VICE-CHAIRMAN JOHN THADDEUS SCOTT: VICE-CHAIRMAN BENJAMIN BOTTS RICE: SECRETARY-TREASURER EDGAR ODELL LOVETT ALEXANDER SESSUMS CLEVELAND ROBERT LEE BLAFFER Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from Lyrasis members and Sloan Foundation funding http://www.archive.org/details/riceuniversityge194142hous — CALENDAR 1941 September 15-18 Entrance Examinations September 18 . Registration of Academ- ic Students September 19 . Registration of Students of Architecture and Engineering September 22 . Opening of Courses September 24 . Matriculation Address November 26 . Beginning of Thanksgiv- ing Recess at 5:00 p.m. December i Resumption of Courses at 8:00 A.M. December 13-20 December Examinations December 20 . Beginning of Christmas Recess at 5:00 p.m. 1942 January 2 . Resumption of Courses at 8:00 A.M. January 26- February 5 February Examinations February 22 Washington's Birthday (Monday February 23 — a holiday) March 2 Texas Independence Day April 21 San Jacinto Day May 11-16 Entrance Examinations May 25-June 5 . Final Examinations June 6-8 . Twenty-seventh Annual Commencement THE RICE INSTITUTE OFFICERS OF ADiMlNISTRATION EDGAR ODELL LOVETT, Ph.D., Sc.D., LL.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Tsetusuo Wakabayashi, Revealed
    Tsetusuo Wakabayashi, Revealed By Dwight R. Rider Edited by Eric DeLaBarre Preface Most great works of art begin with an objective in mind; this is not one of them. What follows in the pages below had its genesis in a research effort to determine what, if anything the Japanese General Staff knew of the Manhattan Project and the threat of atomic weapons, in the years before the detonation of an atomic bomb over Hiroshima in August 1945. That project drew out of an intense research effort into Japan’s weapons of mass destruction programs stretching back more than two decades; a project that remains on-going. Unlike a work of art, this paper is actually the result of an epiphany; a sudden realization that allows a problem, in this case the Japanese atomic energy and weapons program of World War II, to be understood from a different perspective. There is nothing in this paper that is not readily accessible to the general public; no access to secret documents, unreported interviews or hidden diaries only recently discovered. The information used in this paper has been, for the most part, available to researchers for nearly 30 years but only rarely reviewed. The paper that follows is simply a narrative of a realization drawn from intense research into the subject. The discoveries revealed herein are the consequence of a closer reading of that information. Other papers will follow. In October of 1946, a young journalist only recently discharged from the US Army in the drawdown following World War II, wrote an article for the Atlanta Constitution, the premier newspaper of the American south.
    [Show full text]
  • History Newsletter CENTER for HISTORY of PHYSICS&NIELS BOHR LIBRARY & ARCHIVES Vol
    History Newsletter CENTER FOR HISTORY OF PHYSICS&NIELS BOHR LIBRARY & ARCHIVES Vol. 43, No. 1 • Summer 2011 Taking Technology Through the “Valley of Death,” Physicists Don’t Fear Risk As the History of Physics Entrepreneur- Physicists are highly skilled in risk Two other issues surprised us by ship (HoPE) project transitions from the analysis and few, if any, appear inclined the degree to which they influenced interview phase to the analysis phase, to venture into activity at which they physics-based innovation in the US. The new and intriquing insights have begun do not feel confident they will succeed role of the federal SBIR/STTR programs to bubble to the surface. The project even though they are aware that they in providing resources to enable high staff have completed 114 interviews with are bringing new technologies through tech innovation appears critical. SBIR/ physicist entrepreneurs, STTR grants play at least 11 interviews with univers- two important roles. At ity intellectual property one level they provide transfer offices, and two critical seed funding for interviews with venture ideas and innovations capitalists throughout that have not yet the U.S. With field trips reached a stage that will to Georgia and Colorado attract venture capital remaining on the agenda, or angel investment. we expect to interview At another level they another ten to fifteen provide an essential physicist entrepreneurs resource for companies and five or six venture whose technologies are capitalists. We’ll then nearly fully developed spend the last year of but have not yet found the three-year study their proper market coding and analyzing and for whom venture the interviews and other capitalists are either resources and compiling our findings.
    [Show full text]
  • Der Mythos Der Deutschen Atombombe
    Langsame oder schnelle Neutronen? Der Mythos der deutschen Atombombe Prof. Dr. Manfred Popp Karlsruher Institut für Technologie Ringvorlesung zum Gedächtnis an Lise Meitner Freie Universität Berlin 29. Oktober 2018 In diesem Beitrag geht es zwar um Arbeiten zur Kernphysik in Deutschland während des 2.Weltkrieges, an denen Lise Meitner wegen ihrer Emigration 1938 nicht teilnahm. Es geht aber um das Thema Kernspaltung, zu dessen Verständnis sie wesentliches beigetragen hat, um die Arbeit vieler, gut vertrauter, ehemaliger Kollegen und letztlich um das Schicksal der deutschen Physik unter den Nationalsozialisten, die ihre geistige Heimat gewesen war. Da sie nach dem Abwurf der Bombe auf Hiroshima auch als „Mutter der Atombombe“ diffamiert wurde, ist es ihr gewiss nicht gleichgültig gewesen, wie ihr langjähriger Partner und Freund Otto Hahn und seine Kollegen während des Krieges mit dem Problem der möglichen Atombombe umgegangen sind. 1. Stand der Geschichtsschreibung Die Geschichtsschreibung über das deutsche Uranprojekt 1939-1945 ist eine Domäne amerikanischer und britischer Historiker. Für die deutschen Geschichtsforscher hatte eines der wenigen im Ergebnis harmlosen Kapitel der Geschichte des 3. Reiches keine Priorität. Unter den alliierten Historikern hat sich Mark Walker seit seiner Dissertation1 durchgesetzt. Sein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Kaiser Wilhelm-Gesellschaft im 3. Reich beginnt mit den Worten: „The Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics is best known as the place where Werner Heisenberg worked on nuclear weapons for Hitler.“2 Im Jahr 2016 habe ich zum ersten Mal belegt, dass diese Schlussfolgerung auf Fehlinterpretationen der Dokumente und auf dem Ignorieren physikalischer Fakten beruht.3 Seit Walker gilt: Nicht an fehlenden Kenntnissen sei die deutsche Atombombe gescheitert, sondern nur an den ökonomischen Engpässen der deutschen Kriegswirtschaft: „An eine Bombenentwicklung wäre [...] auch bei voller Unterstützung des Regimes nicht zu denken gewesen.
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Stern Annalen 4.11.11
    (To be published by Annalen der Physik in December 2011) Otto Stern (1888-1969): The founding father of experimental atomic physics J. Peter Toennies,1 Horst Schmidt-Böcking,2 Bretislav Friedrich,3 Julian C.A. Lower2 1Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation Bunsenstrasse 10, 37073 Göttingen 2Institut für Kernphysik, Goethe Universität Frankfurt Max-von-Laue-Strasse 1, 60438 Frankfurt 3Fritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin Keywords History of Science, Atomic Physics, Quantum Physics, Stern- Gerlach experiment, molecular beams, space quantization, magnetic dipole moments of nucleons, diffraction of matter waves, Nobel Prizes, University of Zurich, University of Frankfurt, University of Rostock, University of Hamburg, Carnegie Institute. We review the work and life of Otto Stern who developed the molecular beam technique and with its aid laid the foundations of experimental atomic physics. Among the key results of his research are: the experimental test of the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of molecular velocities (1920), experimental demonstration of space quantization of angular momentum (1922), diffraction of matter waves comprised of atoms and molecules by crystals (1931) and the determination of the magnetic dipole moments of the proton and deuteron (1933). 1 Introduction Short lists of the pioneers of quantum mechanics featured in textbooks and historical accounts alike typically include the names of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arnold Sommerfeld, Niels Bohr, Max von Laue, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Paul Dirac, Max Born, and Wolfgang Pauli on the theory side, and of Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Ernest Rutherford, Arthur Compton, and James Franck on the experimental side. However, the records in the Archive of the Nobel Foundation as well as scientific correspondence, oral-history accounts and scientometric evidence suggest that at least one more name should be added to the list: that of the “experimenting theorist” Otto Stern.
    [Show full text]
  • Kerne, Kooperation Und Konkurrenz. Kernforschung In
    Wissenschaft, Macht und Kultur in der modernen Geschichte Herausgegeben von Mitchell G. Ash und Carola Sachse Band 3 Silke Fengler Kerne, Kooperation und Konkurrenz Kernforschung in Österreich im internationalen Kontext (1900–1950) 2014 Böhlau Verlag Wien Köln Weimar The research was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) : P 19557-G08 Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Datensind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar. Umschlagabbildung: Zusammentreffen in Hohenholte bei Münster am 18. Mai 1932 anlässlich der 37. Hauptversammlung der deutschen Bunsengesellschaft für angewandte physikalische Chemie in Münster (16. bis 19. Mai 1932). Von links nach rechts: James Chadwick, Georg von Hevesy, Hans Geiger, Lili Geiger, Lise Meitner, Ernest Rutherford, Otto Hahn, Stefan Meyer, Karl Przibram. © Österreichische Zentralbibliothek für Physik, Wien © 2014 by Böhlau Verlag Ges.m.b.H & Co. KG, Wien Köln Weimar Wiesingerstraße 1, A-1010 Wien, www.boehlau-verlag.com Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist unzulässig. Lektorat: Ina Heumann Korrektorat: Michael Supanz Umschlaggestaltung: Michael Haderer, Wien Satz: Michael Rauscher, Wien Druck und Bindung: Prime Rate kft., Budapest Gedruckt auf chlor- und säurefrei gebleichtem Papier Printed in Hungary ISBN 978-3-205-79512-4 Inhalt 1. Kernforschung in Österreich im Spannungsfeld von internationaler Kooperation und Konkurrenz ....................... 9 1.1 Internationalisierungsprozesse in der Radioaktivitäts- und Kernforschung : Eine Skizze ...................... 9 1.2 Begriffsklärung und Fragestellungen ................. 10 1.2.2 Ressourcenausstattung und Ressourcenverteilung ......... 12 1.2.3 Zentrum und Peripherie ..................... 14 1.3 Forschungsstand ........................... 16 1.4 Quellenlage .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Max Planck Institute for the History of Science Werner Heisenberg And
    MAX-PLANCK-INSTITUT FÜR WISSENSCHAFTSGESCHICHTE Max Planck Institute for the History of Science PREPRINT 203 (2002) Horst Kant Werner Heisenberg and the German Uranium Project Otto Hahn and the Declarations of Mainau and Göttingen Werner Heisenberg and the German Uranium Project* Horst Kant Werner Heisenberg’s (1901-1976) involvement in the German Uranium Project is the most con- troversial aspect of his life. The controversial discussions on it go from whether Germany at all wanted to built an atomic weapon or only an energy supplying machine (the last only for civil purposes or also for military use for instance in submarines), whether the scientists wanted to support or to thwart such efforts, whether Heisenberg and the others did really understand the mechanisms of an atomic bomb or not, and so on. Examples for both extreme positions in this controversy represent the books by Thomas Powers Heisenberg’s War. The Secret History of the German Bomb,1 who builds up him to a resistance fighter, and by Paul L. Rose Heisenberg and the Nazi Atomic Bomb Project – A Study in German Culture,2 who characterizes him as a liar, fool and with respect to the bomb as a poor scientist; both books were published in the 1990s. In the first part of my paper I will sum up the main facts, known on the German Uranium Project, and in the second part I will discuss some aspects of the role of Heisenberg and other German scientists, involved in this project. Although there is already written a lot on the German Uranium Project – and the best overview up to now supplies Mark Walker with his book German National Socialism and the quest for nuclear power, which was published in * Paper presented on a conference in Moscow (November 13/14, 2001) at the Institute for the History of Science and Technology [àÌÒÚËÚÛÚ ËÒÚÓËË ÂÒÚÂÒÚ‚ÓÁ̇ÌËfl Ë ÚÂıÌËÍË ËÏ.
    [Show full text]