DOCSLIB.ORG

Deja Vu All Over Again

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deja Vu All Over Again ALL OVERALL OVER AGAIN AGAINALL OVER AGAIN ALL OVERALL OVER AGAIN AGAINALL OVERALL OVER AGAIN AGAIN DéjàALL vu OVER all over AGAIN again ALL OVER AGAINALL OVER AGAIN ALL HoustonOVERALL T. Hawkins OVERAGAIN AGAIN ALL OVER AGAINALL OVERALL OVER AGAIN AGAIN ALL OVER AGAIN he Manhattan Project grew out necessary to make such anALL assess- OVERA team of scientists was AGAIN assem- of a chilling intelligence as- ment was so compartmentalized that bled at Los Alamos and charged Tsessment by scientists—many even Vice President Truman did not with providing the required assess- of whom would later work at Los know of the existence of our pro- ments and tracking of the Third Alamos—that the Third Reich was gram until he became president fol- Reich program. Relying on techni- ALL OVER AGAINactively pursuing the development of lowing the death of President Roo- cal literature published by the Ger- an atomic explosive. Indications sevelt. Albert Gore, Sr., who as a mans even in the throes of World were that researchALL was being carried OVERcongressman was AGAINtold by Speaker of War II, on information collected by ALLout by a team OVER headed by Werner AGAINthe House Sam Rayburn to hide mil- the AlsosALL Mission,2 and onOVER contacts AGAIN Heisenberg in the Reich Research lions of dollars in the budgetALL for a thatOVER a few Los Alamos scientists, AGAIN Council, which reported to Field “special project,” did not know or such as Niels Bohr, had had with Marshall Hermann Goering. Devel- dare ask about the project for which Heisenberg, the team determined opment of an atomic warhead for the the money was appropriated.1 that the Germans had grossly over- German V-2 rocket had the real po- Therefore, the function of assess- estimated the amount of highly-en- ALL OVER AGAINtential of changing the course—and ing the status of the Third Reich riched uranium required for an probably the outcome—ofALL the war .OVERprogram had to be AGAINtransferred to Los atomic explosive and had overesti- ALLTracking OVERthe Third Reich program AGAINAlamos because only scientists actu- mated the thermal-neutron cross sec- instantly became the single most im- ally working on our atomic-explo- tion of graphite. The team suggest- portant intelligence task for the sive project had the requisite clear- ed that the Germans would possibly United States and Great Britain. ances and knowledge to make the pursue heavy water in lieu of Unfortunately, when the question of crucial judgements demanded by the graphite as the neutron moderator in the status of the Third Reich atomic- enormity of the threat. their plutonium-production reactor. explosive program was posed to the Office of Special Services (OSS)— 1Private communication, 1986. Senator Albert 2The Alsos Mission was established by General Gore, Sr., said that money for the Manhattan Pro- Leslie Groves within his Intelligence Department the forerunner of the Central Intelli- ject was dispersed throughout the federal budget. to collect information on German nuclear- gence Agency—the probable re- He had no idea what the money was for until he physics programs. The mission operated within sponse from General Donovan, the read about the use of the atomic bomb in Japan. European areas liberated by Allied Forces. For He opined that the project was possible only be- more information about the Alsos Mission, see head of the OSS, was, “What is an cause of the trust and discipline that existed in the Alsos by Samuel A. Goudsmit (Henry Schuman, atomic explosive?” Information House of Representatives at that time. Inc., 1947). 70 Los Alamos Science Number 21 1993 Déjà Vu All Over Again As a result, the heavy-water plants deployment of U.S. military forces and high operating costs. However, in Nazi-occupied Norway were tar- and compounded by the dearth of in- the technique had provided top prod- geted for destruction by the Royal formation available on the Iraqi nu- uct enrichment for the uranium used Air Force and British commandos. clear-weapons program. However, in the “Little Boy” device. There was some uncertainty as to before U.S. forces landed in Saudi Considering the size of the Iraqi whether the Germans had knowledge Arabia, the U.S. intelligence commu- nuclear-weapons program, had the of the use of plutonium in atomic nity, relying heavily on assessments Iraqi invasion of Kuwait not oc- explosives or even knew of its exis- from Los Alamos and Livermore na- curred and had that invasion not pre- tence. Therefore the destruction of tional laboratories, had reached a cipitated a military response by the the heavy-water plants was only general consensus that the Iraqis Allies, Iraq probably would today added insurance that the Third Reich were still within several months to a possess material for one or more nu- never would be able to develop a year of having a nuclear weapon. clear weapons, forever altering the plutonium-production capability. Barring the diversion of highly-en- strategic situation in the politically Inspection of German facilities riched uranium from their research volatile Middle East. after the war by intelligence officers reactors at Tuwaitha, the Iraqis prob- Since Desert Storm, Los Alamos indicated that the Los Alamos team ably did not possess enough plutoni- scientists have served on several in- had provided very accurate assess- um or enriched uranium to actually spection teams under United Nations ments of the Third Reich effort. Ac- build a nuclear weapon. Moreover, sponsorship and have played a sig- cording to Samuel A. Goudsmit, his- inspections by the International nificant role in developing our un- torian of the Alsos Mission, because Atomic Energy Agency found the re- derstanding of the scope and nature of the lack of progress and direction, actor fuel still in place. of the Iraqi program to build nuclear support for Heisenberg’s efforts by However, our assessment of the weapons. Currently, as part of an the Third Reich had waned substan- status of the Iraqi program—although ongoing effort, the Laboratory is tially about the same time that our technically accurate—proved more heavily involved in developing new program was going into high gear. an example of good fortune than an nonproliferation-monitoring meth- example of good intelligence. Un- ods and negotiating more effective n 1990, as American troops were known to us at the time our assess- agreements on dual-use technolo- Ibeing assembled for deployment to ment was made was the sheer magni- gies. This process goes on today. the Persian Gulf, we were again con- tude of the nuclear-weapons program The major lesson learned in fronted with the chilling prospect being carried out by the Iraqis—in Desert Storm is that because of the that a despotic regime was on the violation of the Nonproliferation growing availability of plutonium verge of acquiring one or more nu- Treaty—under the cover organization and enriched uranium throughout the clear weapons. Like Adolf Hitler, Petro Chemical 3 (PC-3). world and because of the prolifera- Saddam Hussein—the regime's Borrowing the technology behind tion of nuclear-weapons know-how, ruler—had already demonstrated a the “calutrons” developed early in the we cannot afford to enter future con- capability to deliver weapons of Manhattan Project, PC-3 had built an flicts blind to the realities of any nu- mass destruction3 and had demon- enrichment facility and was in the clear-weapons programs in the area strated a resolve to use such weapons process of separating weapon quanti- of conflict. We cannot have any fu- even against his own people. In the ties of highly-enriched uranium. In ture déjà vu interrupted with an in- words of Yogi Berra, “It was déjà vu essence, these separators, which the opportune flash of blue light. It is all over again.” Iraqis called Baghdadtrons, were this realization that has provided the Coming to grips with that large mass spectrometers capable of real spur to nonproliferation initia- prospect was a frantic process made deflecting uranium ions of differing tives and programs within the DOE all the more urgent by the impending masses into graphite collectors. The and other federal agencies. basic technology, called electromag- 3Interestingly, the Iraqui AL ABBAS and AL netic isotope separation, had been HUSSAIN missiles were derivatives of the Sovi- abandoned by the U.S. as a means of Houston T. Hawkins is leader of the Laboratory’s et SCUD missile that was, in turn, a derivative of International Technology Division. He joined the the Third Reich’s WASSERFALLEN surface-to- separating large amounts of uranium Laboratory in 1988 after twenty-five years of ser- air missile. because of its relative inefficiency vice in the U.S. Air Force. 1993 Number 21 Los Alamos Science 71.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Doctor Atomic
    What to Expect from doctor atomic Opera has alwayS dealt with larger-than-life Emotions and scenarios. But in recent decades, composers have used the power of THE WORK DOCTOR ATOMIC opera to investigate society and ethical responsibility on a grander scale. Music by John Adams With one of the first American operas of the 21st century, composer John Adams took up just such an investigation. His Doctor Atomic explores a Libretto by Peter Sellars, adapted from original sources momentous episode in modern history: the invention and detonation of First performed on October 1, 2005, the first atomic bomb. The opera centers on Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer, in San Francisco the brilliant physicist who oversaw the Manhattan Project, the govern- ment project to develop atomic weaponry. Scientists and soldiers were New PRODUCTION secretly stationed in Los Alamos, New Mexico, for the duration of World Alan Gilbert, Conductor War II; Doctor Atomic focuses on the days and hours leading up to the first Penny Woolcock, Production test of the bomb on July 16, 1945. In his memoir Hallelujah Junction, the American composer writes, “The Julian Crouch, Set Designer manipulation of the atom, the unleashing of that formerly inaccessible Catherine Zuber, Costume Designer source of densely concentrated energy, was the great mythological tale Brian MacDevitt, Lighting Designer of our time.” As with all mythological tales, this one has a complex and Andrew Dawson, Choreographer fascinating hero at its center. Not just a scientist, Oppenheimer was a Leo Warner and Mark Grimmer for Fifty supremely cultured man of literature, music, and art. He was conflicted Nine Productions, Video Designers about his creation and exquisitely aware of the potential for devastation Mark Grey, Sound Designer he had a hand in designing.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Technology
    Nuclear Technology Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. GREENWOOD PRESS NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY Sourcebooks in Modern Technology Space Technology Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. Sourcebooks in Modern Technology Nuclear Technology Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. GREENWOOD PRESS Westport, Connecticut • London Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Angelo, Joseph A. Nuclear technology / Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. p. cm.—(Sourcebooks in modern technology) Includes index. ISBN 1–57356–336–6 (alk. paper) 1. Nuclear engineering. I. Title. II. Series. TK9145.A55 2004 621.48—dc22 2004011238 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available. Copyright © 2004 by Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2004011238 ISBN: 1–57356–336–6 First published in 2004 Greenwood Press, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881 An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. www.greenwood.com Printed in the United States of America The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization (Z39.48–1984). 10987654321 To my wife, Joan—a wonderful companion and soul mate Contents Preface ix Chapter 1. History of Nuclear Technology and Science 1 Chapter 2. Chronology of Nuclear Technology 65 Chapter 3. Profiles of Nuclear Technology Pioneers, Visionaries, and Advocates 95 Chapter 4. How Nuclear Technology Works 155 Chapter 5. Impact 315 Chapter 6. Issues 375 Chapter 7. The Future of Nuclear Technology 443 Chapter 8. Glossary of Terms Used in Nuclear Technology 485 Chapter 9. Associations 539 Chapter 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Building 9731 – Secret City Festival’S Y-12 Public Tour Or: Building 9731 to Be Featured in Secret City Festival's Public Tour (Title Provided by the Oak Ridger)
    Building 9731 – Secret City Festival’s Y-12 public tour Or: Building 9731 to be featured in Secret City Festival's public tour (title provided by The Oak Ridger) In March 1943 the very first structure to be completed at the newly emerging Y-12 Electromagnetic Separation Plant was Building 9731. It was only a little over a month earlier that ground had been broken for the first of nine major buildings designed to hold cautrons (CALifornia University Cyclotron). But the real push had been to complete the construction of a smaller building, one with a high bay and especially designed to house four very special units of newly designed equipment using huge magnets. The Alpha Calutron magnets stand well over 20 feet tall and are still standing there today―the only ones in the world! For the first time ever, the public will have a chance to see these huge magnets and will also be able to tour inside historic Building 9731. This historic event is a part of the Secret City Festival this year. On Saturday, June 19, 2010, from 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM, a major part of the Y-12 public tour will include Building 9731. The public will be allowed to see inside the historic structure and view the magnets of both the two Alpha and two Beta calutrons. These calutron magnets have been designated as Manhattan Project Signature Artifacts by the Depart- ment of Energy’s Federal Preservation Officer in the DOE Office of History and Heritage Resources. The building is being submitted for Historical Landmark status on the National Register of Historic Places.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Effort to Achieve World
    Marshall and the Atomic Bomb Marshall and the Atomic Bomb By Frank Settle General George C. Marshall and the Atomic Bomb (Praeger, 2016) provides the first full narrative describing General Marshall’s crucial role in the first decade of nuclear weapons that included the Manhattan Project, the use of the atomic bomb on Japan, and their management during the early years of the Cold War. Marshall is best known today as the architect of the plan for Europe’s recovery in the aftermath of World War II—the Marshall Plan. He also earned acclaim as the master strategist of the Allied victory in World War II. Marshall mobilized and equipped the Army and Air Force under a single command, serving as the primary conduit for information between the Army and the Air Force, as well as the president and secretary of war. As Army Chief of Staff during World War II, he developed a close working relationship with Admiral Earnest King, Chief of Naval Operations; worked with Congress and leaders of industry on funding and producing resources for the war; and developed and implemented the successful strategy the Allies pursued in fighting the war. Last but not least of his responsibilities was the production of the atomic bomb. The Beginnings An early morning phone call to General Marshall and a letter to President Franklin Roosevelt led to Marshall’s little known, nonetheless critical, role in the development and use of the atomic bomb. The call, received at 3:00 a.m. on September 1, 1939, informed Marshall that German dive bombers had attacked Warsaw.
    [Show full text]
  • Leslie Richard Groves, Jr. Years
    Name: Leslie Richard Groves, Jr. Years: August 17, 1896 – July 13, 1970 Residence: Albany, New York; Brief Biography: Leslie Richard Groves, Jr. was born to Leslie Richard Groves, Sr. and Gwen Griffith. Groves attended both the University of Washington and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology before he attended the U.S. Military Academy in 1916-1918. After his graduation from U.S. Military Academy, Groves spent an additional year at the Engineer School at the Camp A.A. Humphreys when he was made a second lieutenant of engineers. This was followed by a brief tour with the American Expeditionary Force in France soon after the end of World War I. In 1921 he graduated from the Engineer School. In 1922, Groves married Grace Wilson with whom he had two children with. From 1921-1931 Groves traveled extensively to Hawaii, San Francisco, Texas, Delaware, and ending up in Nicaragua in 1931. The work he conducted in Nicaragua led him to receive, from the Nicaraguan government, the medal of merit. Ambition led Groves to attend and graduate from the Command and General Staff College, in 1936, and the Army War College, in 1939. He then received the ranks of lieutenant colonel, which lead him to the War Department where he became the head of the Operations Branch, Corps of Engineers. During this time Groves became responsible for the design of the new Pentagon Building. During World War II he was picked to lead the Manhattan Engineer District, what would later be referred to as the Manhattan Project. Groves involvement in this project resulted in the a promotion to the rank of brigadier general.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2013.Pdf
    ATOMIC HERITAGE FOUNDATION Preserving & Interpreting Manhattan Project History & Legacy preserving history ANNUAL REPORT 2013 WHY WE SHOULD PRESERVE THE MANHATTAN PROJECT “The factories and bombs that Manhattan Project scientists, engineers, and workers built were physical objects that depended for their operation on physics, chemistry, metallurgy, and other nat- ural sciences, but their social reality - their meaning, if you will - was human, social, political....We preserve what we value of the physical past because it specifically embodies our social past....When we lose parts of our physical past, we lose parts of our common social past as well.” “The new knowledge of nuclear energy has undoubtedly limited national sovereignty and scaled down the destructiveness of war. If that’s not a good enough reason to work for and contribute to the Manhattan Project’s historic preservation, what would be? It’s certainly good enough for me.” ~Richard Rhodes, “Why We Should Preserve the Manhattan Project,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2006 Photographs clockwise from top: J. Robert Oppenheimer, General Leslie R. Groves pinning an award on Enrico Fermi, Leona Woods Marshall, the Alpha Racetrack at the Y-12 Plant, and the Bethe House on Bathtub Row. Front cover: A Bruggeman Ranch property. Back cover: Bronze statues by Susanne Vertel of J. Robert Oppenheimer and General Leslie Groves at Los Alamos. Table of Contents BOARD MEMBERS & ADVISORY COMMITTEE........3 Cindy Kelly, Dorothy and Clay Per- Letter from the President..........................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Manhattan Park Map
    Manhattan Project National Historical Park - Los Alamos National Park Service 475 20th Street, Suite C U.S. Department of the Interior Manhattan Project National Historical Park Los Alamos, NM 87544 Los Alamos, New Mexico 505-661-MAPR (6277) Project Y workers with the Norris Bradbury with Thin Man plutonium gun the Trinity device. device at Gun Site. In 1943, the United States government’s Manhattan Three locations comprise the park: Project Y at Los Alamos, Project built a secret laboratory at Los Alamos, New New Mexico; Site X at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and Site W at site map SITES ON THIS PAGE Mexico, for a single military purpose—to develop the Hanford, Washington. The Manhattan Project National world’s first atomic weapons. The success of this Historical Park legislation references 17 sites at Los Alamos NOT CURRENTLY unprecedented, top-secret government program National Laboratory, as well as 13 sites in downtown Los forever changed the world. Alamos. These sites represent the world-changing history of Original Technical Area 1 OPEN TO THE PUBLIC (TA-1); see reverse. the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos. Their preservation and In 2004, the U.S. Congress directed the National Park interpretation will show visitors the scientific, social, Service and the Department of Energy to determine political, and cultural stories of the men and women who the significance, suitability, and feasibility of including ushered in the atomic age. signature facilities in a national historical park. In 2014, the National Defense Authorization Act, signed by President Obama, authorized creation of the Park. This The properties below are within the legislation stated the purpose of the park: “to improve Manhattan Project National Historical Park 4 the understanding of the Manhattan Project and the boundaries on land managed by the legacy of the Manhattan Project through Department of Energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundation Document Manhattan Project National Historical Park Tennessee, New Mexico, Washington January 2017 Foundation Document
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Foundation Document Manhattan Project National Historical Park Tennessee, New Mexico, Washington January 2017 Foundation Document MANHATTAN PROJECT NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK Hanford Washington ! Los Alamos Oak Ridge New Mexico Tennessee ! ! North 0 700 Kilometers 0 700 Miles More detailed maps of each park location are provided in Appendix E. Manhattan Project National Historical Park Contents Mission of the National Park Service 1 Mission of the Department of Energy 2 Introduction 3 Part 1: Core Components 4 Brief Description of the Park. 4 Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 5 Los Alamos, New Mexico . 6 Hanford, Washington. 7 Park Management . 8 Visitor Access. 8 Brief History of the Manhattan Project . 8 Introduction . 8 Neutrons, Fission, and Chain Reactions . 8 The Atomic Bomb and the Manhattan Project . 9 Bomb Design . 11 The Trinity Test . 11 Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan . 12 From the Second World War to the Cold War. 13 Legacy . 14 Park Purpose . 15 Park Signifcance . 16 Fundamental Resources and Values . 18 Related Resources . 22 Interpretive Themes . 26 Part 2: Dynamic Components 27 Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments . 27 Special Mandates . 27 Administrative Commitments . 27 Assessment of Planning and Data Needs . 28 Analysis of Fundamental Resources and Values . 28 Identifcation of Key Issues and Associated Planning and Data Needs . 28 Planning and Data Needs . 31 Part 3: Contributors 36 Appendixes 38 Appendix A: Enabling Legislation for Manhattan Project National Historical Park. 38 Appendix B: Inventory of Administrative Commitments . 43 Appendix C: Fundamental Resources and Values Analysis Tables. 48 Appendix D: Traditionally Associated Tribes . 87 Appendix E: Department of Energy Sites within Manhattan Project National Historical Park .
    [Show full text]
  • Trinity Site July 16, 1945
    Trinity Site July 16, 1945 "The effects could well be called unprecedented, magnificent, beauti­ ful, stupendous, and terrifying. No man-made phenomenon of such tremendous power had ever occurred before. The lighting effects beggared description. The whole country was lighted by a searing light with the intensity many times that of the midday sun." Brig. Gen. Thomas Farrell A national historic landmark on White Sands Missile Range -- www.wsmr.army.mil Radiation Basics Radiation comes from the nucJeus of the gamma ray. This is a type of electromag­ individual atoms. Simple atoms like oxygen netic radiation like visible light, radio waves are very stable. Its nucleus has eight protons and X-rays. They travel at the speed of light. and eight neutrons and holds together well. It takes at least an inch of lead or eight The nucJeus of a complex atom like inches of concrete to stop them. uranium is not as stable. Uranium has 92 Finally, neutrons are also emitted by protons and 146 neutrons in its core. These some radioactive substances. Neutrons are unstable atoms tend to break down into very penetrating but are not as common in more stable, simpler forms. When this nature. Neutrons have the capability of happens the atom emits subatomic particles striking the nucleus of another atom and and gamma rays. This is where the word changing a stable atom into an unstable, and "radiation" comes from -- the atom radiates therefore, radioactive one. Neutrons emitted particles and rays. in nuc!ear reactors are contained in the Health physicists are concerned with reactor vessel or shielding and cause the four emissions from the nucleus of these vessel walls to become radioactive.
    [Show full text]
  • Oppenheimer & Groves
    Oppenheimer & Groves: The Duality That Led To Trinity Theresa G. Connaughton and Sharon E. Smith Presented at the SouthwestiTexas Popular Culture AssociatiordAmerican Culture Association Conference, “ATOMIC CULTURE IN THE NUCLEAR AGE,” Albuquerque, N.M. February 14,2002, Abstract: The alliance of J. Robert Oppenheimer, scientist, and Leslie R. Groves, military leader, is often interpreted as the classic example of the clash between the academic mind and the military style. Evidence suggests, instead, that it was a collaboration that led to the dawn of the nuclear age. Instead of a clash, it was collaboration and an implosion of the diverse talents needed for the success of this project. Discussion of these flawed and fascinating individuals still ignites controversy today. This presentation will explore the backgrounds and personalities of these two men and their work together to accomplish their mission. Was the aftermath inevitable, given a relationship based on respect, but perhaps not trust? The genesis of the modern military-industrial complex rested on the genius of these two men, though they personify two distinct American sub-cultures. What lessons can be drawn from their wartime and post-war relationship? What analogies can be drawn for current American values? Introduction For the past fifty-seven years the myth of the “good” scientist vs. the “evil” military man has been personified by the relationship of J. Robert Oppenheimer and Leslie R. Groves during and after World War 11. This paper attempts to discuss their lives and their relationship and dispel a bit of the myth. New examinations of their relationship and contributions to the development of the atomic bomb are overdue.
    [Show full text]
  • Character List
    Character List - Bomb ​ Use this chart to help you keep track of the hundreds of names of physicists, freedom fighters, government officials, and others involved in the making of the atomic bomb. Scientists Political/Military Leaders Spies Robert Oppenheimer - Winston Churchill -- Prime Klaus Fuchs - physicist in ​ ​ ​ designed atomic bomb. He was Minister of England Manhattan Project who gave accused of spying. secrets to Russia Franklin D. Roosevelt -- ​ Albert Einstein - convinced President of the United States Harry Gold - spy and Courier ​ ​ U.S. government that they for Russia KGB. Narrator of the needed to research fission. Harry Truman -- President of story ​ the United States Enrico Fermi - created first Ruth Werner - Russian spy ​ ​ chain reaction Joseph Stalin -- dictator of the ​ Tell Hall -- physicist in Soviet Union ​ Igor Korchatov -- Russian Manhattan Project who gave ​ physicist in charge of designing Adolf Hitler -- dictator of secrets to Russia ​ bomb Germany Haakon Chevalier - friend who ​ Werner Reisenberg -- Leslie Groves -- Military approached Oppenheimer about ​ ​ German physicist in charge of leader of the Manhattan Project spying for Russia. He was designing bomb watched by the FBI, but he was not charged. Otto Hahn -- German physicist ​ who discovered fission Other scientists involved in the Manhattan Project: ​ Aage Niels Bohr George Kistiakowsky Joseph W. Kennedy Richard Feynman Arthur C. Wahl Frank Oppenheimer Joseph Rotblat Robert Bacher Arthur H. Compton Hans Bethe Karl T. Compton Robert Serber Charles Critchfield Harold Agnew Kenneth Bainbridge Robert Wilson Charles Thomas Harold Urey Leo James Rainwater Rudolf Pelerls Crawford Greenewalt Harold DeWolf Smyth Leo Szilard Samuel K. Allison Cyril S. Smith Herbert L. Anderson Luis Alvarez Samuel Goudsmit Edward Norris Isidor I.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Nuclear Forensics: Analysis of Nuclear Material for Security
    THE NEW NUCLEAR FORENSICS Analysis of Nuclear Materials for Security Purposes edited by vitaly fedchenko The New Nuclear Forensics Analysis of Nuclear Materials for Security Purposes STOCKHOLM INTERNATIONAL PEACE RESEARCH INSTITUTE SIPRI is an independent international institute dedicated to research into conflict, armaments, arms control and disarmament. Established in 1966, SIPRI provides data, analysis and recommendations, based on open sources, to policymakers, researchers, media and the interested public. The Governing Board is not responsible for the views expressed in the publications of the Institute. GOVERNING BOARD Sven-Olof Petersson, Chairman (Sweden) Dr Dewi Fortuna Anwar (Indonesia) Dr Vladimir Baranovsky (Russia) Ambassador Lakhdar Brahimi (Algeria) Jayantha Dhanapala (Sri Lanka) Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger (Germany) Professor Mary Kaldor (United Kingdom) The Director DIRECTOR Dr Ian Anthony (United Kingdom) Signalistgatan 9 SE-169 70 Solna, Sweden Telephone: +46 8 655 97 00 Fax: +46 8 655 97 33 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.sipri.org The New Nuclear Forensics Analysis of Nuclear Materials for Security Purposes EDITED BY VITALY FEDCHENKO OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 2015 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © SIPRI 2015 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of SIPRI, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organizations.
    [Show full text]