DOCSLIB.ORG

The Manhattan Project—A Part of Physics History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. carries a strong symbolic load. It demonstrates How could a discussion of the Manhattan project vividly that the fruit of knowledge can contribute contribute to the image of physics or physicists? not only to the benefit of mankind but also bring The Manhattan project represented a water- immense destructive power and be a root of evil. shed in the relationship between physics, physi- Over the post-war decades, the public image of cists and politics [3]. science and scientists has changed from hero to After the war, physicists were often asked a common stereotype view of a ‘mad scientist’, often evil and selfish [2]. The turning away to go to Washington and give advice from science studies, which is a concern in many to various sections of the government, countries, may be not only because of lack of especially the military. What happened, knowledge or understanding of science, but rather I suppose, is that since the scientists from encountering its dark side. Physics can no had made these bombs that were so longer claim innocence. ‘I have become death, the important, the military felt we were shatterer of worlds.’ useful for something. Feynman [4, p 53]. The Manhattan project can show us physicists Physics teaching choices at work, and how their lives and research are Should physics teaching include military applica- shaped by the events in society (and sometimes tions? The understanding of projectile motion is shape them). Since many physicists have 0031-9120/06/060493+09$30.00 © 2006 IOP Publishing Ltd P HYSICS E DUCATION 41 (6) 493 A-M Martensson-Pendrill˚ after the Manhattan project. Towards the end of Timeline the course we then made a very informal roleplay, where I provided a timeline as a plan for the lesson, 1938 Fission of uranium discovered (Hahn, Meitner, Strassmann, Frisch) and the students took turns in the involvement of 1939 2 August, Letter to President ‘their’ physicist. Some chose a detached approach, Roosevelt (Einstein, initiated by Szilard) but many did their presentations in the first person; 1941 Heisenberg visits Bohr in Copenhagen some even dressed up. The informal character of 1942 23 September, Oppenheimer the class made it natural to stop for discussions appointed scientific director of the at any time. The audience was only ourselves. Manhattan project at Los Alamos Discussions of the responsibilities of scientists 1942 2 December, The first controlled become more interesting and thought-provoking nuclear reaction, Enrico Fermi, against a backdrop of historical events and the University of Chicago reactor reflections from those involved. The roleplay 1945 3 July, Szilard petition opened up ethical discussions through the voice 1945 16 July, Trinity test—world’s first of another person, which is often easier. Many of atomic blast the students also remarked on the deep impression 1945 6 and 9 August, Hiroshima and Nagasaki made by the discovery of how much the physicists 1949 Start of ‘Oppenheimer affair’ had already achieved at a young age. 1952 First hydrogen bomb explosion Socio-scientific issues, such as this one, are 1953 Oppenheimer faces a security hearing multidisciplinary in their character. In a school that ultimately recommended that situation, a possibility would thus be to do his security clearance be ended such a project together with, for example, the history and/or English teacher. A more ambitious More detailed timelines can be found, e.g. at approach could involve a drama teacher and aim NuclearFiles.org (www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/ for a performance for another class or at a school timeline/html index.htm) and at the WWW open-house day. In this issue Kofoed describes pages from the National Atomic Museum in how the decision to drop the bomb has been New Mexico (www.atomicmuseum.com/tour/ used in a roleplay in secondary-school classroom atomicage.cfm). situations [5]. One might argue that the Manhattan project described the period in their autobiographies, it is not really part of physics, but could and should gives us an opportunity to meet the physicists as be left for the history teacher, if included at persons, dealing with difficult ethical problems. In all. However, this approach could easily add to addition, many original documents, for example the image of scientists as lacking conscience and from various hearings, have been released and concern for society and maintain or widen the gap are often easily accessible on the WWW. We between ‘the two cultures’. From a physicist’s have the possibility to read their words, and point of view, the roles, thoughts and actions of sometimes even to listen to their voices from the our older colleagues are of particular interest. past. I have used these sources to help physics I present below a brief summary of what teacher students develop a richer understanding may be included and references to useful sources. of the context of atomic and nuclear physics and Wherever possible, I have provided WWW links, physicists and their relation to society. I have also because I have found that this considerably used a similar approach within interdisciplinary facilitates the administration of the task. I have courses for future teachers. To initiate the project, made a personal choice of quotes from much I provided a list of names of physicists with longer texts. I have tried to find examples of significant roles in the development, together with physicists struggling with the questions of the web addresses, and some journal articles and role of physics and physicists. Are the quotes books. representative? Find out! An important aspect The students (in a group of 15–20) were asked of this project is to develop an awareness that to sign up for one of the physicists, and read up one need not depend only on textbook or other on their involvement before, during and sometimes presentations, but that it is possible to go back 494 P HYSICS E DUCATION November 2006 The Manhattan project—a part of physics history to original sources and form more independent theory and design and acted as a scientific father opinions. I strongly encourage you to make confessor to the younger men.... His real function use of the richness in internet access and read there was that he made the enterprise which looked the original documents for yourself and let your so macabre seem hopeful’ [11]. students have a chance to read the previously top Many physicists’ flights include adventures. secret documents and hear some of the voices from When Bohr flew from Stockholm to London in the history of physics. the bomb bay of the plane, he fainted from lack of oxygen. Enrico Fermi, whose wife was Jewish, Ideas, politics and adventures never returned to Italy after the Nobel prize award ceremony, but continued directly on to New York. The photographs [6] from the early Solvay conferences show the key physicists of the 1920s getting together for discussions about the Los Alamos fundamentals of quantum physics, laying the Because of the danger that Hitler might ground for our understanding of atoms and nuclei. be the first to have the bomb, I signed This period is delightfully described in Gamow’s a letter to the President which had ‘Thirty Years That Shook Physics’[7], which gives been drafted by Szilard. Had I known a human side to the results presented in textbooks. that the fear was not justified, I would The Nobel museum (www.nobelprize.org)also not have participated in opening this has extensive information on the life and work of Pandora’s box, nor would Szilard. For many of the physicists involved. my distrust of governments was not The developments in Europe during the 1930s limited to Germany. Einstein [12]. changed the lives of many people, including scientists. Both before and during the war, The Manhattan project brought together a many physicists were forced to move abroad. remarkable collection of the leading physicists When fission of uranium was discovered in 1938, of the time. Many of the names we recognize in experiments prepared by Hahn, Meitner and from groundbreaking works presented in physics Strassmann, Lise Meitner was already exiled in textbooks.
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 San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The new prophet : Harold C. Urey, scientist, atheist, and defender of religion Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3j80v92j Author Shindell, Matthew Benjamin Publication Date 2011 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO The New Prophet: Harold C. Urey, Scientist, Atheist, and Defender of Religion A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in History (Science Studies) by Matthew Benjamin Shindell Committee in charge: Professor Naomi Oreskes, Chair Professor Robert Edelman Professor Martha Lampland Professor Charles Thorpe Professor Robert Westman 2011 Copyright Matthew Benjamin Shindell, 2011 All rights reserved. The Dissertation of Matthew Benjamin Shindell is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2011 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page……………………………………………………………………...... iii Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………. iv Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • LA JOLLA MAIL PO Box 2085 La Jolla, CA 92038 HISTORICAL SOCIETY OFFICE & RESEARCH 7846 Eads Ave .• EXHIBIT GALLERIES 780 Prospect St
    w LA JOLLA MAIL PO Box 2085 La Jolla, CA 92038 HISTORICAL SOCIETY OFFICE & RESEARCH 7846 Eads Ave .• EXHIBIT GALLERIES 780 Prospect St. T 858.459.5335 • lajollahistory.org July 5, 2016 Suzanne Segur San Diego Planning Department 1010 Second A venue, Suite 1200 San Diego, CA 92101 RE: Historical Report for 2345 Via Sienna, La Jolla Dear Ms. Segur: The La Jolla Historical Society recommends that 2345 Via Sienna be considered for designation as a historically significant under HRB Criterion B for its association with Dr. Maria Goeppert-Mayer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics while living in the property. Maria Goeppert-Mayer is one of only two females awarded the Nobel Prize for physics since its inception in 1901. (The other was Mme. Curie, who was awarded the prize in 1903.) In fact, only 49 women have EVER won the Nobel Prize in ANYTHING, as opposed to 822 men. Ms. Goeppert-Mayer's biographies provide evidence regarding the difficulty she had in being taken seriously as a scientist because of her gender. It was with her hiring at UC San Diego that she became a full-time faculty professor, earning the respect her training and achievements deserved. We believe Dr. Goeppert-Mayer's home is eligible for designation under Criterion B as defined in the Department of Interior Standards. Although the residence may read today as an interpretation of the mid-century era's California ranch style, it is not atypical of the kind of housing many UCSD professors and members of La Jolla's new scientific community resided in at the time - modest dwellings in tune with economic situations and their new lives as Californians enjoying the amenable climate of the West Coast.
    [Show full text]
  • Undergraduate Lecture Notes in Physics
    Undergraduate Lecture Notes in Physics Series Editors Neil Ashby William Brantley Michael Fowler Michael Inglis Elena Sassi Helmy S. Sherif Heinz Klose For further volumes: http://www.springer.com/series/8917 Undergraduate Lecture Notes in Physics (ULNP) publishes authoritative texts covering topics throughout pure and applied physics. Each title in the series is suitable as a basis for undergraduate instruction, typically containing practice problems, worked examples, chapter summaries, and suggestions for further reading. ULNP titles must provide at least one of the following: • An exceptionally clear and concise treatment of a standard undergraduate subject. • A solid undergraduate-level introduction to a graduate, advanced, or non-stan- dard subject. • A novel perspective or an unusual approach to teaching a subject. ULNP especially encourages new, original, and idiosyncratic approaches to physics teaching at the undergraduate level. The purpose of ULNP is to provide intriguing, absorbing books that will continue to be the reader’s preferred reference throughout their academic career. Series Editors Neil Ashby Professor, Professor Emeritus, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA William Brantley Professor, Furman University, Greenville, SC, USA Michael Fowler Professor, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA Michael Inglis Professor, SUNY Suffolk County Community College, Selden, NY, USA Elena Sassi Professor, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy Helmy Sherif Professor Emeritus, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada Bruce Cameron Reed The History and Science of the Manhattan Project 123 Bruce Cameron Reed Department of Physics Alma College Alma, MI USA ISSN 2192-4791 ISSN 2192-4805 (electronic) ISBN 978-3-642-40296-8 ISBN 978-3-642-40297-5 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-40297-5 Springer Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London Library of Congress Control Number: 2013946925 Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014 This work is subject to copyright.
    [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]
  • Gar Alperovitz and the Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb
    Advances in Historical Studies 2013. Vol.2, No.2, 46-53 Published Online June 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ahs) DOI:10.4236/ahs.2013.22008 Reclaiming Realism for the Left: Gar Alperovitz and the Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb Peter N. Kirstein History Department, St. Xavier University, Chicago, USA Email: [email protected] Received December 24th, 2012; revised February 14th, 2013; accepted February 22nd, 2013 Copyright © 2013 Peter N. Kirstein. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons At- tribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Sixty-seven years after the decision to use the atomic bomb in World War II, controversy remains whether the United States was justified in using fission bombs in combat. Gar Alperovitz, the great revi- sionist historian, in his Atomic Diplomacy and The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb transformed our knowledge of the geopolitical motives behind the atomic attack against Japan at the end of World War II. These uranium and plutonium-core bombs were political, not primarily military in purpose and motive behind their deployment. His analysis will be compared to realists such as Hans Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, Henry Kissinger and George Kennan who for the most part questioned unrestrained violence and offered nuanced views on the wisdom of using such indiscriminate, savage weapons of war. The paper will explore Alperovitz’s classic argument that out of the ashes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the A-bomb drove the incipient Cold War conflict. American national-security elites construed the bomb as a political- diplomatic lever to contain Soviet power as much as a military weapon to subdue Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: the PRINCIPAL UNCERTAINTY: U.S
    ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: THE PRINCIPAL UNCERTAINTY: U.S. ATOMIC INTELLIGENCE, 1942-1949 Vincent Jonathan Houghton, Doctor of Philosophy, 2013 Dissertation directed by: Professor Jon T. Sumida Department of History The subject of this dissertation is the U. S. atomic intelligence effort against both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in the period 1942-1949. Both of these intelligence efforts operated within the framework of an entirely new field of intelligence: scientific intelligence. Because of the atomic bomb, for the first time in history a nation’s scientific resources – the abilities of its scientists, the state of its research institutions and laboratories, its scientific educational system – became a key consideration in assessing a potential national security threat. Considering how successfully the United States conducted the atomic intelligence effort against the Germans in the Second World War, why was the United States Government unable to create an effective atomic intelligence apparatus to monitor Soviet scientific and nuclear capabilities? Put another way, why did the effort against the Soviet Union fail so badly, so completely, in all potential metrics – collection, analysis, and dissemination? In addition, did the general assessment of German and Soviet science lead to particular assumptions about their abilities to produce nuclear weapons? How did this assessment affect American presuppositions regarding the German and Soviet strategic threats? Despite extensive historical work on atomic intelligence, the current historiography has not adequately addressed these questions. THE PRINCIPAL UNCERTAINTY: U.S. ATOMIC INTELLIGENCE, 1942-1949 By Vincent Jonathan Houghton Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2013 Advisory Committee: Professor Jon T.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the James Franck Papers 1882-1966
    University of Chicago Library Guide to the James Franck Papers 1882-1966 © 2006 University of Chicago Library Table of Contents Acknowledgments 3 Descriptive Summary 3 Information on Use 3 Access 3 Citation 3 Biographical Note 4 Scope Note 15 Related Resources 21 Subject Headings 21 INVENTORY 22 Series I: Correspondence 22 Series II: Manuscripts 51 Subseries 1: Physics - work in Germany and Denmark, 1905-1934 51 Subseries 2: Physics - work in United States, 1935-1958 53 Subseries 3: Biophysics - work on Photosynthesis at Johns Hopkins, 1935-193855 Subseries 4: Biophysics - work on Photosynthesis at the University of Chicago,55 1938-48 Subseries 5: Biophysics - work on Photosynthesis after 1948 55 Subseries 6: General Articles and Talks on Science 71 Subseries 7: Papers by other scientists 72 Subseries 8: Notes, memoranda and fragments 76 Subseries 9: Atomic Scientists' Movement, 1944-1953 76 Subseries 10: Franck Memorial Symposium, May 12-13, 1966 79 Series III: Tape Recordings and Photographs 80 Subseries 1: Tape recordings 80 Subseries 2: Hertha Sponer's photograph album, Göttingen, 1920-1933 80 Series IV: Personal Documents and Memorabilia 90 Subseries 1: Documents 90 Subseries 2: Clippings 93 Subseries 3: Biographies and Obituaries 94 Subseries 4: Memorabilia; Scrolls, Certificates, Medals, Mementos 96 Series V: Robert Platzman's Editorial Papers for the "Selected Works of James98 Franck" Series VI: Addenda 103 Subseries 1: Correspondence between James Franck and his nephew and Dr. Heinz104 Kallman Subseries 2: Oversize 105 Descriptive Summary Identifier ICU.SPCL.FRANCK Title Franck, James. Papers Date 1882-1966 Size 20.5 linear feet (29 boxes) Repository Special Collections Research Center University of Chicago Library 1100 East 57th Street Chicago, Illinois 60637 U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Making the Bomb by John Lamperti
    November, 2012 Thoughts on Making the Bomb by John Lamperti I recently finished reading Martin Sherwin and Kai Bird’s monumental American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer.1 It's an admirable book, although I think the title might better have been American Faust. (No less than Freeman Dyson said Oppenheimer made a "Faustian bargain."2) There have been many books about Oppenheimer and the atomic bomb project in general; I've read some but not all of them. This one seems to be definitive. Everything we need to know is there – and it's a fascinating read. Two things struck me especially, and neither was directly about Oppenheimer. One was the ideological rigidity, and the blindness, of the crowd of Army and FBI "security" operatives who dogged Oppenheimer and the whole Manhattan Project from the beginning. To a man (no women are mentioned) they were obsessed with the pre-war leftist politics of many of the scientists, which they found highly suspicious and probably indicative of disloyalty. But while these agents were hounding leftists and "premature anti-fascists" (as supporters of the Spanish Republic were called) at Los Alamos and elsewhere and finding little or nothing, real spies were sending real scientific information to the USSR under their noses, apparently unsuspected. If the "security" people, especially Lt. Col. Boris Pash of Army Counter– Intelligence, had been given free rein, Oppenheimer and many others (but not the actual spies!) would have been banished from the Project and the "Trinity" test, as well as the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, might never have happened.
    [Show full text]
  • LANL Overview Brochure
    LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LAB: • Delivers global and national nuclear security • Fosters excellence in science and engineering • Attracts, inspires and develops world-class talent that ensures a vital workplace MISSION VISION VALUES To solve national security To deliver science and technology Service, Excellence, Integrity, challenges through that protect our nation Teamwork, Stewardship, scientific excellence and promote world stability Safety and Security YOUR INNOVATION IS INVITED lanl.jobs www.lanl.gov/careers/career-options/postdoctoral- APPLY research [email protected] @LosAlamosJobs CONNECT linkedin.com/company/los-alamos-national-laboratory facebook.com/LosAlamosNationalLab youtube.com/user/LosAlamosNationalLab DISCOVER A WORLD-CLASS SETTING FOR NATIONAL SECURITY Learn about our programs, our people and our rewards WHAT WE DO SCIENCE PILLARS: LEVERAGING OUR CAPABILITIES Areas of Operation • Accelerators and Electrodynamics • Astrophysics and Cosmology INFORMATION SCIENCE MATERIALS FOR • Bioscience, Biosecurity and Health AND TECHNOLOGY THE FUTURE • Business Operations We are leveraging advances in theory, In materials science, we are • Chemical Science algorithms and the exponential optimizing materials for national • Earth and Space Sciences Values growth of high-performance security applications by predicting computing to accelerate the and controlling their performance • Energy integrative and predictive capability and functionality through • Engineering of the scientific method. discovery science and engineering. • High-Energy-Density
    [Show full text]