DOCSLIB.ORG

The Scientist's Imagination: Cold War Politics and Nuclear Futures in Leo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Scientist's Imagination: Cold War Politics and Nuclear Futures in Leo AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF Anna Elizabeth Dvorak for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History of Science presented on July 24, 2019. Title: The Scientist’s Imagination: Cold War Politics and Nuclear Futures in Leo Szilard’s Fact and Fiction. Abstract approved: ______________________________________________________ Jacob Darwin Hamblin The story of Leo Szilard has not been told in its full complexity. This is especially so of the role imagination played in Szilard’s worldview. Szilard, like many other scientists in the mid- twentieth century, worked on the Manhattan Project. Like these other wartime participants, the work and relationships formed during this time greatly influenced his future work. Furthermore, Szilard brought his regret for his role in the development of the atomic bomb into his arguments for peace and scientist involvement in seeking peace through conversations with Russians. Many authors have explained his involvement in the initiation of what became the Manhattan Project and his involvement during the war and petitions on the use of the weapons in Japan. Most frequently he played a supporting role to other scientist-actors of the time, aiding and extending their actions as a part of a larger story in which Szilard did not play a central role. But the story of Szilard is important as it tracks changes in American diplomacy and relations with both Russia and the larger world. Through both his fiction and non-fiction, the stories Szilard presented are both serious and humorous, a direct relation to how Szilard thought about the issues and approached them in daily life. These stories also parallel his interests in science and his desires, or fears, for the potential uses of this research. Szilard was extremely rational and held a large amount of faith in science and the power of scientists and other intellectuals to direct policy. In Szilard’s eyes, if he did not speak out about peace and how it might be achieved, he did not know who else would. This dissertation opens with an outline of Szilard’s core beliefs. The following chapters then expand and comment on these beliefs and provide specific examples. In the second chapter, I explore how Szilard’s arguments changed when the Soviets completed in 1949 what he saw to be inevitable, an atomic bomb and the start of the arms race. Chapter three details Szilard’s perspectives on science and science education and how he thought American education should be conducted in order to produce an educated citizenry. I also use fictional pieces to demonstrate Szilard’s critique of society and fears of where a scientized society could lead. Continuing with the use of fiction, chapter four focuses on Szilard’s satirical short story “The Voice of the Dolphins” to explore his ideas of the future and his vision of an ideal world. I connect this to larger ideas of future planning and the trajectory of his thinking throughout his life. A fifth and final, chapter traces the history of Szilard’s “crusade,” and his creation of a lobby through the Council for a Livable World, which ensured citizen involvement in effecting political change through Congressional elections and still functions today. ©Copyright by Anna Elizabeth Dvorak July 24, 2019 All Rights Reserved The Scientist’s Imagination: Cold War Politics and Nuclear Futures in Leo Szilard’s Fact and Fiction by Anna Elizabeth Dvorak A DISSERTATION submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Presented July 24, 2019 Commencement June 2020 Doctor of Philosophy dissertation of Anna Elizabeth Dvorak presented on July 24, 2019 APPROVED: Major Professor, representing History of Science Director of the School of History, Philosophy, and Religion Dean of the Graduate School I understand that my dissertation will become part of the permanent collection of Oregon State University libraries. My signature below authorizes release of my dissertation to any reader upon request. Anna Elizabeth Dvorak, Author ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In the past seven years at Oregon State University I have been influenced by all my professors, both as a student and teaching assistant. They have shown me how to mentor, teach effectively, encourage critical thinking, and so much more. I have had the privilege of working more closely with some of these faculty members. Each of the members of my Dissertation Committee has provided me extensive professional guidance and taught me a great deal about working in academia. Both through their role as researchers and teachers. I would especially like to thank my advisor, Jacob Hamblin, for guiding me as I completed both my master’s and PhD. He has taught me to be a better historian and writer, and encouraged me to find my own voice and to trust it. I am grateful to Mike Osborne for his help editing and all the constructive feedback he has given me on this project and others. I am especially indebted to Ray Malewitz and his encouragement to pursue intersections of science and literature. I would also like to thank Anita Guerrini and Trina Hogg for advice and support along the way. I have also found support from other academic institutions. The sheer amount of information and knowledge discussed at the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Nuclear History Bootcamp is mind boggling but has given me a firmer basis for the claims I’ve made in this work, and every piece I will write in the future. Perhaps more important though were the conversations that transpired over the ten days in Allumiere with Marty Sherwin, David Holloway, and Joe Pilat. Your support and encouragement has meant a lot to me. I would not be the historian I am today without the support of Oregon State’s Special Collections and Archives Research Center. The faculty and students have been both wonderful colleagues and friends supporting me as I figure out where my PhD will take me. At SCARC I have found a passion for not only conducting research, but for preserving the sources and sharing them with other researchers in the Reading Room. I am eternally grateful for the personal and professional guidance Anne Bahde and Tiah Edmunson-Morton have shared with me over my tenure as a Student Archivist. They have both played major roles in guiding me towards my professional goals and will continue to serve as role models. Last, but certainly not least, I am forever grateful for my family. For my siblings, Erika and Ian who keep me grounded. I am thankful my close-knit extended family who have supported me along the way. Sam, thank you for putting up with me these last few months. I know it hasn’t always been easy. And last but certainly not least, I need to thank my parents. They have been there for me since day one, encouraging me, and telling me I could do anything I put my mind to. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction...…………………………………………………………………………… 1 1. Szilard’s Politics and the Politics of Szilard……………………………………….…… 14 2. Communicating with the Enemy: Szilard on US-Soviet Relations ……………..……… 42 3. Szilard and Science in a Post-war World ……………………………………………… 74 4. Szilard and his Think Tank ……………..………………………………….……….…. 95 5. Lobbying for a Worldview ……………………………………………………………. 118 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………….... 141 Bibliography …………………………………………………….………….……….…... 148 DEDICATION To family, in every sense of the word 1 Introduction: In 1947 Leo Szilard wrote a letter to the Premier of the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin. This letter was never sent to Stalin directly, but this was not for Szilard’s lack of trying. Approaching Stalin directly was precisely why the letter was not able to be sent, it was viewed as Szilard influencing a foreign government. However, the letter was subsequently published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (BAS), and this act places the letter in a unique position between fact and fiction. On one hand, Szilard used this letter to put forth his ideas on what he saw to be the main issues facing the US and Soviet Union in their nuclear standoff. A reality that he wished to share directly with Stalin. On the other hand, it gave suggestions for steps for Stalin to take to approach the American people, who would listen even if their government did not. Steps, like a radio broadcast, that he knew the Premier would not take and steps he knew would be unacceptable to American citizens. Szilard knew early on that this letter would likely never be sent but wrote it anyways, hoping that it may be published and thus have an audience. Then perhaps this letter would find its way to the Soviet Union. Szilard’s “Letter to Stalin” underscores the necessity to reexamine his written and spoken word through the lens of scientific creativity and imagination. Szilard’s use of imagination allowed him to think outside of the box and beyond the traditional strictures of foreign policy and diplomacy by expanding his role as a scientist. Using imaginative scenarios and playing them out in his fiction and non-fiction, allowed Szilard to pose questions and solve them in what he believed to be the most clear and rational way. Proceeding in such a rational manner allowed Szilard to describe discrete steps leading to his desired outcome. With this broader view of the possibilities that existed for the problems at hand, Szilard was able to envision a world in which there was no race for larger and larger nuclear weapons and the world was finally at peace. These scenarios played out in a manner akin to the scientific method, highlighting the importance of Szilard’s training as a scientist in his worldview. Stating a question or problem Szilard saw the world facing, he would propose a hypothetical set of steps to reach what he hoped would be a compromise with the Russians.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Dropping the A-Bomb on Cities Was Mistake”—Father of Health Physics (As Published in the Oak Ridger’S Historically Speaking Column the Week of June 29, 2020)
    “Dropping the A-bomb on cities was mistake”—Father of Health Physics (As published in The Oak Ridger’s Historically Speaking column the week of June 29, 2020) A friend and fellow historian, Alex Wellerstein, has just written in his blog, Restricted Data, The Nuclear Secrecy Blog, an entry entitled, What journalists should know about the atomic bombings. In this blog entry he notes that as we approach the 75th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki we will surely see increased emphasis in the news regarding the atomic bombs. This is understandable and especially so in Oak Ridge, Los Alamos and Hanford. While my focus on Oak Ridge history in Historically Speaking may vary from time to time, the atomic bombs and what has resulted from the nuclear age over the years is never far from my mind. In these articles researched and written by Carolyn Krause, I am attempting to bring Historically Speaking readers perspectives that might well not normally be expressed. Not that I intend to alter your thinking regarding the use of the atomic bombs, as generally each of us have made our decision already. However, seeing the issue from different perspectives is worthwhile. For example, this particular article features comments and perspectives of Karl Z. Morgan. Some of you may even have known him. If that is the case, you likely already know his opinions. If you are being introduced to him for the first time reading this, it will be good for you to appreciate his perspective, even if you disagree with his conclusions.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright by Paul Harold Rubinson 2008
    Copyright by Paul Harold Rubinson 2008 The Dissertation Committee for Paul Harold Rubinson certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Containing Science: The U.S. National Security State and Scientists’ Challenge to Nuclear Weapons during the Cold War Committee: —————————————————— Mark A. Lawrence, Supervisor —————————————————— Francis J. Gavin —————————————————— Bruce J. Hunt —————————————————— David M. Oshinsky —————————————————— Michael B. Stoff Containing Science: The U.S. National Security State and Scientists’ Challenge to Nuclear Weapons during the Cold War by Paul Harold Rubinson, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin August 2008 Acknowledgements Thanks first and foremost to Mark Lawrence for his guidance, support, and enthusiasm throughout this project. It would be impossible to overstate how essential his insight and mentoring have been to this dissertation and my career in general. Just as important has been his camaraderie, which made the researching and writing of this dissertation infinitely more rewarding. Thanks as well to Bruce Hunt for his support. Especially helpful was his incisive feedback, which both encouraged me to think through my ideas more thoroughly, and reined me in when my writing overshot my argument. I offer my sincerest gratitude to the Smith Richardson Foundation and Yale University International Security Studies for the Predoctoral Fellowship that allowed me to do the bulk of the writing of this dissertation. Thanks also to the Brady-Johnson Program in Grand Strategy at Yale University, and John Gaddis and the incomparable Ann Carter-Drier at ISS.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Truman Have Dropped the Bomb?
    Should Truman have dropped the bomb? It is 1945. You are a top advisor to President Truman and a close, personal friend. He values your opinion and wants to know what you think about using atomic bombs to try to end the war with Japan. You are to write President Truman a Letter supporting or rejecting the use of atomic bombs. Because you are an intelligent, well-read individual, you should have at least four reasons (using the documents provided) to support your argument as well as any background knowledge. Should President Truman have decided to, or not to, drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If so, what was Truman’s rational? If not, how else could have World War II ended? Historical Background: With the advent of the nuclear age, new dilemmas in the art of warfare arose. The war in Europe had concluded in May. The Pacific war would receive full attention from the United States War Department. As late as May 1945, the U.S. was engaged in heavy fighting with the Japanese at Iwo Jima and Okinawa. In these most bloody conflicts, the United States had sustained more than 75,000 casualties. These victories insured the United States was within air striking distance of the Japanese mainland. The bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese to initiate United States entrance into the war, just four years before, was still fresh on the minds of many Americans. A feeling of vindication and a desire to end the war strengthened the resolve of the United States to quickly and decisively conclude it.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Irvine UC Irvine Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC Irvine UC Irvine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Publishing Words to Prevent Them from Becoming True: The Radical Praxis of Günther Anders Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5nr2z210 Author Costello, Daniel Christopher Publication Date 2014 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Publishing Words to Prevent Them from Becoming True: The Radical Praxis of Günther Anders DISSERTATION submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Comparative Literature by Daniel C. Costello Dissertation Committee: Professor Jane O. Newman, Chair Professor Emeritus Alexander Gelley Associate Professor Kai Evers 2014 © 2014 Daniel C. Costello TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgments vi Curriculum Vitae vii Abstract of the Dissertation viii INTRODUCTION I. A Writerly Life a. Beginnings 1 b. A Note on Style 13 c. Prelude 19 CHAPTER ONE: COMPETENCE AND AUTHORITY I. Introductions a. The Promethean Discrepancy 25 b. Network and Actor-Network Theories 29 c. Archives and the Occasional Philosophy 31 II. Historical Contexts: The Scientists’ Movement a. Genesis 34 b. One World Government 37 c. The Changing Role of Science 44 d. Generational Outcomes 51 III. Backgrounds: Anders and the Bomb a. Wars and Exile 55 b. Return to Vienna 62 IV. Historical Contexts: The Second Wave a. Fallout 65 b. Forms: Diary, Fable, Dialog, and Commandment 69 c. Groundwork to Praxis 73 V. Organizational Work a. Pursuing Scientists 81 ii b. A Pugwash for the Humanities 86 VI. Conclusions 88 CHAPTER TWO: THE CASE OF CLAUDE EATHERLY I. Introductions a.
    [Show full text]
  • Hiroshima & Nagasaki
    Hiroshima & Nagasaki From Roosevelt to Truman German Unconditional Surrender! A Missed Opportunity! In spring 1945 it became obvious that project would not be ready before Germany’s collapse. That triggered discussion of plan modifications. q Should the bomb be used for Japan? q Is bomb use justified like it seemed justified for Germany? q Would the scientists continue their work with new goal? Hans Bethe, who headed the Theoretical Division at Los Alamos, was astonished Groves presented the situation and new plans in February: "I am amazed both by the conclusion not to use [the bomb] on Germany and secondly by their reasons [for targeting the Japanese fleet]. We [the scientists] had no idea of such a decision. We were under the impression that Germany was the first target until the German surrender. That was my belief. Obviously, it was wrong." Opportunities & Alternatives? Definition of new goal for demonstrating new weapon: Forcing Japanese unconditional surrender to avoid extended jungle war and invasion of Japanese islands Conventional areal target bombing or devastation by single bomb? To Use or Not to Use? Japan had never been a threat to develop a bomb. General Groves definitely wanted to use the bombs. This triggered discussion in bomb development community: Target Committee, Los Alamos, May 10-11, 1945 – Identified bombing conditions and four possible target sites in Japan; Kyoto (old capital), Hiroshima (urban industrial area), Yokohama (industrial center), Kokura Arsenal (military industrial complex) The Franck Report, June
    [Show full text]
  • Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project
    Peace and Conflict Studies Volume 15 Number 2 Article 3 1-2009 Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project Lee-Anne Broadhead Cape Breton University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/pcs Part of the Peace and Conflict Studies Commons Recommended Citation Broadhead, Lee-Anne (2009) "Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project," Peace and Conflict Studies: Vol. 15 : No. 2 , Article 3. DOI: 10.46743/1082-7307/2009.1096 Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/pcs/vol15/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Peace & Conflict Studies at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Peace and Conflict Studies by an authorized editor of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project Abstract Inspired by the publication of a book celebrating the role of the women in the Manhattan Project, this paper seeks to demonstrate that such an effort – to the extent it accepts and endorses the historical, political and scientific legitimacy of the Project – is both misguided and dangerous. An alternative feminist critique is presented: one respecting the views of those scientists (men and women) who refused to participate or who have sought to challenge the reductionist Western scientific paradigm from which the Bomb emerged. Illumination of the repressive and hierarchal structures requisite for the “birth” of the nuclear age is undertaken and views excised by the official narrative – the voices of wives, daughters and victims – are recalled.
    [Show full text]
  • La Pace Calda. La Nascita Del Movimento Antinucleare Negli Stati Uniti E in Gran Bretagna, 1957-1963
    Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna DOTTORATO DI RICERCA IN Storia dell’età contemporanea nei secoli XIX e XX “Federico Chabod” Ciclo XXII Settore scientifico-disciplinare di afferenza: M-Sto/04 Storia Contemporanea La Pace Calda. La nascita del movimento antinucleare negli Stati Uniti e in Gran Bretagna, 1957-1963 Presentata da: Dario Fazzi Coordinatore Dottorato Relatore prof. Stefano Cavazza prof. Mario Del Pero Esame finale anno 2010 1 2 A Laura, l’affetto per la quale è nato e cresciuto con questa tesi 3 Introduzione Parte I – La Scienza Cap. 1, Origini La rivoluzione atomica, 1939-1945, p. 23 Il sostegno al controllo internazionale dell’energia atomica, 1946, p. 32 La campagna per il controllo civile, 1946, p. 40 Un movimento maturo, 1946-1948, p. 43 Cap. 2, Evoluzione L’assolutizzazione del nemico, 1949-1952, p. 49 Un biennio Gattopardesco, 1953-1954, p. 66 L’età degli appelli, 1955-1956, p. 78 Una coscienza solida, 1957-1960, p. 110 Cap. 3, Decadenza La scienza al potere, 1960- 1961, p. 139 Sull’orlo dell’abisso, 1962-1963, p. 148 Parte II – La Piazza Cap. 1, Origini Le fondamenta, 1945-1952, p. 167 La nascita di una nuova percezione, 1953-1955, p. 180 Cap. 2, Evoluzione La fase della maturazione, 1956-1957, p. 186 La battaglia per la conquista dell’opinione pubblica, 1958-1960, p. 200 Un movimento di massa, 1961-1962, p. 222 Cap. 3, Decadenza Pace calda e Guerra fredda, 1962, p. 236 Il successo e il declino, 1963, p. 245 Conclusioni Nota bibliografica e Bibliografia 4 Abstract The aim of this proposal is to offer an alternative perspective on the study of Cold War, since insufficient attention is usually paid to those organizations that mobilized against the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9325485 Scientists and statesmen: President Eisenhower’s science advisers and national security policy, 1953-1961 Damms, Richard Vernon, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1993 Copyright ©1993 by Damms, Richard Vernon.
    [Show full text]
  • The July 1945 Szilard Petition on the Atomic Bomb
    1 The July 1945 Szilard Petition on the Atomic Bomb Memoir by a signer in Oak Ridge Howard Gest Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Microbiology, Departments of Biology, and History & Philosophy of Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405 2 Well before the first test of a nuclear explosive device at Alamogordo (New Mexico) on July 16, 1945, many scientists of the Manhattan (Atomic Bomb) Project were very concerned about how nuclear bombs might be used in World War II. Meetings were held at the University of Chicago site and at Oak Ridge (Tennessee) to discuss the future of atomic energy and its political implications. As a result, a petition originated by Leo Szilard and addressed to President Truman in July 1945 discussed the moral responsibilities involved in using nuclear weapons. It recommended that such bombs not be used against Japan “unless the terms which will be imposed upon Japan have been made public in detail and Japan knowing these terms has refused to surrender.” The Szilard petition was displayed during 1989/1990 in a special exhibition at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. This article explains how I happened to be in Oak Ridge, where I signed the petition, and examines its background and complex, unfortunate history. From bacteriology to nuclear chemistry After graduating from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) in 1942, with a major in bacteriology, I began graduate work with Max Delbrück at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee (Delbrück was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1969 for his research on bacterial viruses). Because of the increasing intensity of World War II in 1942, however, research in universities was grinding to a halt.
    [Show full text]
  • The Manhattan Project—A Part of Physics History
    S PECIAL F EATURE: W AR AND P EACE www.iop.org/journals/physed The Manhattan project—a part of physics history Ann-Marie Martensson-Pendrill˚ Department of Physics, University of Gothenburg, SE-412 96 G¨oteborg, Sweden E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Current physics textbooks tend to exclude military applications, but it is explained here how a study of the Manhattan project—the devastatingly successful attempt to develop an atomic bomb—can show students how the lives and work of physicists are shaped by events in society. Much of the original source material is available in books and on the internet (and referenced here), which allows students to discover the views of the scientists for themselves. In the early morning hours of July 16 important for shooting cannons and guns and drop- 1945, a truck driver in New Mexico ping bombs. In older textbooks, these examples reported that he saw the sun about to rise often dominate, whereas more modern texts are at 4 am. The sun decided it was too early, likely to include or even focus on more everyday he said, so it went down again and came applications such as throwing balls or jumping. up an hour later [1]. There is also a trend to include more historical as- Robert Oppenheimer quoted the Bhagavad- pects which can give an opportunity to focus on the Gita: ‘I have become death, the shatterer of development of ideas in physics. Still, many newer worlds.’ The picture of the mushroom cloud textbooks mention the bomb very briefly, if at all.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Draft Enola Gay January 2015
    (Name of Project) by (Name of First Writer) (Based on, If Any) Revisions by (Names of Subsequent Writers, in Order of Work Performed) Current Revisions by (Current Writer, date) Name (of company, if applicable) Address Phone Number Copyright David Blackman 2015 All Rights Reserved ENOLA GAY David Blackman 101 Clyde St Box Hill North Melbourne Australia 3129 Mobile: 61 0438 201 731 [email protected] 2 “The point I am trying to make is that even in time of war, you can see current events in their historical perspective, provided that your passion for the truth prevails over your bias in favor of your own nation.” LEO SZILARD 3 Author’s Note The events in Enola Gay have been authenticated by multiple sources, and in many instances are part of historical record. These sources include published or unpublished letters, diaries and memoirs of the key participants in the story, as well as official transcripts of meetings. Scenes of direct address (following the MAIDEN’S narration) byspecific characters are verbatim. These are the characters own words. In the private meetings of the characters when the doors are closed and only brief quotes are available of what was actually said, I have used my imagination. Of course, this does not make it a documentary, but for such a topic, there is no loose playing with the facts. David Blackman 4 Cast of characters: AGENT ANNOUNCER BARD BYRNES CHURCHILL COMPTON CREW MEMBERS DAVIS DOOMAN EISENHOWER FEREBEE FERMI FORRESTAL GOUDSMIT GREW GRONOUSKI GROVES HUME LEAHY LEWIS LAURENCE MAIDEN COLONEL MARSHALL GENERAL MARSHALL MCKLOY NICHOLS NEDDERMEYER OPPENHEIMER PARSONS PHOTOGRAPHERS REPORTERS SCIENTISTS SPAATZ STALIN STIMSON SWEENEY SZILARD TELLER TIBBETS TRUMAN WIGNER WILSON ZHUKOV 5 Production Notes The play consists of three acts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Men Who Made the Atomic Bomb THIS COULD HAVE BEEN a BIBLICAL STORY
    The Men Who Made The Atomic Bomb THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A BIBLICAL STORY “Your children who follow you in later generations and foreigners who come from distant lands will see the calamities that have fallen on the land and the diseases with which the LORD has afflicted it. The whole land will be a burning waste of salt and sulfur — nothing planted, nothing sprouting, no vegetation growing on it. It will be like the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboyim, which the LORD overthrew in fierce anger.” - Deuteronomy 29:22-23 THE REAL STORY IS ABOUT JEWISH SCIENTISTS MAKING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION Albert Einstein Leo Szilard Robert Oppenheimer Definition From Wikipedia - A weapon of mass destruction (WMD or WoMD) is a nuclear, radiological, chemical, biological or other weapon that can kill and bring significant harm to a large number of humans or cause great damage to human-made structures (e.g. buildings), natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere. Early WMDs – Chemical weapons, such as Greek Fire, were in use as early as 673 CE. Even earlier legend says that Archimedes had developed a “heat ray” using mirrors circa 250 BCE. H. G. Wells – Science Fiction • Heat Ray – War of the Worlds (1898) • Tanks – The Ironclads (1903) • Aerial Combat – The War in the Air (1907) • Poison Gas (Black Smoke) – War of the Worlds (1898) • Biological Weapons – War of the Worlds (1898) • Atomic Bomb – The World Set Free (1914) WMD - World War I Fritz Haber had won the 1918 Nobel Prize in chemistry for his invention of the Haber-Bosch process, a means of synthesizing fertilizer that is credited with saving Europe from famine caused by depleted soil.
    [Show full text]