DOCSLIB.ORG

Lise Meitner and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission Author(S): Ruth Lewin Sime Source: Scientific American , Vol

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lise Meitner and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission Author(S): Ruth Lewin Sime Source: Scientific American , Vol Lise Meitner and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission Author(s): Ruth Lewin Sime Source: Scientific American , Vol. 278, No. 1 (JANUARY 1998), pp. 80-85 Published by: Scientific American, a division of Nature America, Inc. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26057626 JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms Scientific American, a division of Nature America, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Scientific American This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:13:00 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Lise Meitner and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission by Ruth Lewin Sime One of the discoverers of fission in 1938, Meitner was at the time overlooked by the Nobel judges. Racial persecution, fear and opportunism combined to obscure her contributions 80 Scientific American January 1998 Lise Meitner and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission Copyright 1997 Scientific American, Inc. This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:13:00 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms hen scientists first recog- Questions from nuclear physics initiated believed that history would be on her nized, in late 1938, that a the work. Data and assumptions from side. Fifty years later, it is. Wneutron could split an atom’s both chemistry and physics guided and core, the discovery came as a complete misguided their progress. And private Investigating Uranium surprise. Indeed, no physical theory had letters reveal that Meitner made essen- predicted nuclear fission, and its discov- tial contributions until the very end. orn and educated in Vienna, Lise erers had not the slightest foreknowl- By any normal standards of scientific BMeitner moved to Berlin in 1907 at edge of its eventual use in atomic bombs attribution, the Nobel committees should the age of 28. There she teamed up with and power plants. That much of the have recognized her influence. But in Otto Hahn, a chemist just her age, to story is undisputed. Germany the conditions were anything study radioactivity, the process by which The question of who deserved credit but normal. The country’s anti-Jewish one nucleus is transformed into another for the breakthrough, however, has long policies forced Meitner to emigrate, sep- by the emission of alpha or beta parti- been debated. Physicist Lise Meitner and arated her from her laboratory and pro- cles. Their collaboration was capped by two chemists, Otto Hahn and Fritz hibited her from being a co-author with their discovery in 1918 of protactini- Strassmann, conducted a four-year-long Hahn and Strassmann in reporting the um, a particularly heavy radioactive ele- investigation that resulted in the discov- fission result. Because of political op- ment. As their careers progressed, they ery of fission in their laboratory in Berlin. pression and fear, Hahn distanced him- remained equals scientifically and pro- Meitner fled Nazi Germany in 1938 to self and fission from Meitner and phys- fessionally: both were professors at the escape the persecution of Jews, and soon ics soon after the discovery took place. Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry, after, Hahn and Strassmann reported the In time, the Nobel awards sealed these and each maintained an independent discovery. Meitner and her nephew, Otto injustices into scientific history. Recently section in the institute—his for radio- R. Frisch, published the correct theoreti- released documents show that the No- chemistry, hers for physics. cal interpretation of fission a few weeks bel committees did not grasp the extent During the 1920s, Hahn continued later. But the 1944 Nobel Prize in Chem- to which the result relied on both phys- developing radiochemical techniques, istry was awarded to Hahn alone. ics and chemistry, and they did not rec- whereas Meitner entered the new field That Strassmann did not get the No- ognize that Hahn had distanced himself of nuclear physics. Hahn later described bel with Hahn is probably because he from Meitner not on scientific grounds this period as a time when her work, was the junior investigator on the team, but because of political oppression, fear more than his, brought international and Nobel committees tend to favor se- and opportunism. recognition to the institute. Her promi- nior scientists. But Meitner and Hahn Other factors also served to margin- nence, and her Austrian citizenship, held equal professional standing. Why alize Meitner, including her outsider sta- shielded Meitner when Hitler came to was she excluded? Hahn offered what tus as a refugee in Sweden, a postwar power in 1933; unlike most others of became the standard account, which was unwillingness in Germany to confront Jewish origin, she was not dismissed uncritically accepted for many years. Nazi crimes, and a general perception— from her position. And although many According to him, the discovery had re- held much more strongly then than it is of her students and assistants were Nazi lied solely on chemical experiments that now—that women scientists were un- enthusiasts, Meitner found the physics were done after Meitner left Berlin. She important, subordinate or wrong. Pub- too exciting to leave. She was particu- and physics, he maintained, had noth- licly, Meitner said little at the time. Pri- larly intrigued by the experiments of En- ing to do with his success, except per- vately, she described Hahn’s behavior rico Fermi and his co-workers in Rome, haps to delay it. as “simply suppressing the past,” a past who began using neutrons to bombard Strassmann, who was very much in in which they had been the closest of elements throughout the periodic table. Hahn’s shadow, disagreed. He insisted colleagues and friends. She must have Fermi observed that when a neutron that Meitner had been their intellectual leader and that she remained one of them through her correspondence with Hahn, even after she left Berlin. The available documents support Strassmann’s view. Scientific publications show that the in- vestigation that led to the discovery of fission was intensely interdisciplinary. O COURTESY OF ARCHIV ZUR GESCHICHTE DER MAX-PLANCK-GESELLSCHAFT, BERLIN OF ARCHIV ZUR GESCHICHTE DER MAX-PLANCK-GESELLSCHAFT, O COURTESY LISE MEITNER (shown at left in about HOT 1930, at the age of 50) was regarded as , P AF one of the leading nuclear physicists of her day. Although she smoked and worked with radioactivity all her adult life, she lived to the age of 90. Otto Hahn and Meitner (right), photographed in their laboratory at the University of Berlin around 1910, were colleagues and good AIT © ATELIER LOTTE MEITNER-GR LOTTE AIT © ATELIER friends from 1907 until Meitner was BERLIN TESY OF ARCHIV ZUR GESCHICHTE DER MAX-PLANCK-GESELLSCHAFT, TR COUR POR forced to flee from Germany in 1938. Lise Meitner and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission Scientific American January 1998 81 Copyright 1997 Scientific American, Inc. This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:13:00 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms MEITNER’S PHYSICAL APPARATUS was used by the Berlin team from 1934 to 1938 for work that resulted in the dis- covery of nuclear fission. Beginning in the 1950s, it was displayed in the Deutsches Museum for some 30 years as the “Worktable of Otto Hahn,” with only a passing reference to Fritz Strass- mann and no mention of Meitner. COURTESY OF DEUTSCHES MUSEUM, MUNICH OF DEUTSCHES COURTESY though reluctant at first, agreed to help, and Fritz Strassmann, an analytical chemist from the institute, also joined the collaboration. The three were polit- ically compatible: Meitner was “non- Aryan,” Hahn was anti-Nazi, and Strassmann had refused to join the Na- tional Socialist–associated German Chemical Society, making him unem- ployable outside the institute. By the end of 1934, the team reported that the beta emitters Fermi observed reaction occurred, the targeted nucleus Fermi irradiated the heaviest known ele- could not be attributed to any other did not change dramatically: the incom- ment, uranium, with neutrons, he ob- known element and that they behaved ing neutron would most often cause the served several new beta emitters, none in a manner expected for transuranics: target nucleus to emit a proton or an al- with the chemical properties of uranium they could be separated out of the reac- ) pha particle, nothing more. Heavy ele- or the elements near it. Thus, he cau- tion mixture along with transition met- right ments, he found, favored neutron cap- tiously suggested that he had synthesized als, such as platinum and rhenium sul- ture. That is, a heavy nucleus would new elements beyond uranium. All over fides. Thus, like Fermi, the Berlin scien- ALIFORNIA ( gain an extra neutron; if radioactive, the the world, scientists were fascinated. tists tentatively suggested that these Y OF C heavier nucleus would invariably decay Meitner had been verifying Fermi’s activities were new elements beyond by emitting beta rays, which transformed results up to this point. The work per- uranium. As it turned out, the interpre- , UNIVERSIT it into the next higher element. When fectly suited her interests and expertise, tation was incorrect: it rested on two ORY and she was then in her assumptions—one from physics and one prime: one of the first women from chemistry—that would prove false PERIODIC TABLE of the 1920s and 1930s (below to enter the upper ranks of only several years later.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hitler and Heisenberg
    The Wall Street Journal December 27-28, 2014 Book Review “Serving the Reich” by Philip Ball, Chicago, $30, 303 pages Hitler and Heisenberg Werner Heisenberg thought that once Germany had won, the ‘good Germans’ would get rid of the Nazis. Fizzing The museum inside the former basement tavern where in early 1945 German scientists built a small nuclear reactor. Associated Press by Jeremy Bernstein The German scientists who remained in Germany throughout the Nazi period can be divided into three main groups. At one end were the anti-Nazis—people who not only despised the regime but tried to do something about it. They were very few. Two that come to mind were Fritz Strassmann and Max von Laue. Strassmann was a radiochemist—a specialist in radioactive materials—who was blacklisted from university jobs by the Society of German Chemists in 1933 for his anti-Nazi views. He was fortunate to get a half-pay job at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry, which got some of its funding from industry. He and his wife (they had a 3-year-old son) hid a Jewish friend in their apartment for months. With the radiochemist Otto Hahn, he performed the 1938 experiment in which fission was observed for the first time. Von Laue won the Nobel Prize in physics in 1914. Soon after Einstein published his 1905 paper on relativity, von Laue went to Switzerland to see him. They remained friends for life. Under the Nazis, Einstein’s work was denounced as “Jewish science.” When a number of von Laue’s colleagues agreed to use relativity but attribute it to some Aryan, he refused.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Synchrotrons in Britain, and Early Work for Cern
    EARLY SYNCHROTRONS IN BRITAIN, AND EARLY WORK FOR CERN J. D. Lawson Formerly Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Oxon, UK Abstract Early work on electron synchrotrons in the UK, including an account of the conversion of a small betatron in 1946 to become the world’s first synchrotron, is described first. This is followed by a description of the design and construction of the 1 GeV synchrotron at the University of Birmingham which was started in the same year. Finally an account is given of the work of the international team during 1952–3, which formed the basis for the design of the CERN PS before the move to Geneva. It was during this year that John Adams showed the outstanding ability that later brought the project to such a successful conclusion. 1 EARLY PLANS IN BRITAIN: THE WORLD’S FIRST SYNCHROTRON During the second world war Britain’s nuclear physicists were deployed in research directed towards winning the war. Many were engaged in developments associated with radar, (or ‘radiolocation’ as it was then called), both at universities and at government laboratories, such as the radar establishments TRE and ADRDE at Malvern. Others contributed to the atomic bomb programme, both in the UK, and in the USA. Towards the end of the war, when victory seemed assured, the nuclear physicists began looking towards the peacetime future. The construction of new particle accelerators to achieve ever higher energies was seen as one of the more important possibilities. Those working at Berkeley on the electromagnetic separator were familiar with the accelerators there, and following the independent invention (or discovery?) there of the principle of phase stability by Edwin McMillan in 1945, exciting possibilities were immediately apparent [4].
    [Show full text]
  • MASTER NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C 1983
    OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES IN C0NP 830214 RESEARCH WITH TRANSPLUTONIUM ELEMENTS DE85 010852 Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology Committee on Nuclear and Radlochemistry Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources National Research Council DISCLAIMER This iw.oort was prepared as an account of work spcnsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi- bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any infonnation, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer- ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or scivice by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom- mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. MASTER NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C 1983 DISTBIBUHOU OF THIS DOCUMENT IS Workshop Steering Committee Gerhart Friedlander, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Chairman Gregory R. Choppin, Florida State University Richard L. Hoff, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Darleane C. Hoffman, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Ex-Officio James A. Ibers, Northwestern University Robert A. Penneman, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory Thomas G. Spiro, Princeton University Henry Taube, Stanford University Joseph Weneser, Brookhaven National Laboratory Raymond G. Wymer, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Ex-Officio NRC Staff William Spindel, Executive Secretary Peggy J. Posey, Staff Associate Robert M.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nobel Laureate George De Hevesy (1885-1966) - Universal Genius and Father of Nuclear Medicine Niese S* Am Silberblick 9, 01723 Wilsdruff, Germany
    Open Access SAJ Biotechnology LETTER ISSN: 2375-6713 The Nobel Laureate George de Hevesy (1885-1966) - Universal Genius and Father of Nuclear Medicine Niese S* Am Silberblick 9, 01723 Wilsdruff, Germany *Corresponding author: Niese S, Am Silberblick 9, 01723 Wilsdruff, Germany, Tel: +49 35209 22849, E-mail: [email protected] Citation: Niese S, The Nobel Laureate George de Hevesy (1885-1966) - Universal Genius and Father of Nuclear Medicine. SAJ Biotechnol 5: 102 Article history: Received: 20 March 2018, Accepted: 29 March 2018, Published: 03 April 2018 Abstract The scientific work of the universal genius the Nobel Laureate George de Hevesy who has discovered and developed news in physics, chemistry, geology, biology and medicine is described. Special attention is given to his work in life science which he had done in the second half of his scientific career and was the base of the development of nuclear medicine. Keywords: George de Hevesy; Radionuclides; Nuclear Medicine Introduction George de Hevesy has founded Radioanalytical Chemistry and Nuclear Medicine, discovered the element hafnium and first separated stable isotopes. He was an inventor in many disciplines and his interest was not only focused on the development and refinement of methods, but also on the structure of matter and its changes: atoms, molecules, cells, organs, plants, animals, men and cosmic objects. He was working under complicated political situation in Europe in the 20th century. During his stay in Germany, Austria, Hungary, Switzerland, Denmark, and Sweden he wrote a lot papers in German. In 1962 he edited a large part of his articles in a collection where German papers are translated in English [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Hahn Otto Hahn
    R.N. 70269/98 Postal Registration No.: DL-SW-1/4082/15-17 ISSN : 0972-169X Date of posting: 26-27 of advance month Date of publication: 24 of advance month May 2017 Vol. 19 No. 8 Rs. 5.00 Otto Hahn Discoverer of Nuclear Fission Editorial: Consolidating 35 science communication activities in our country Otto Hahn: Discoverer of 34 Nuclear Fission Keep Your Eyes Healthy 31 Phenol: A Serious 30 Environmental Threat Accidental Discoveries in 28 Medical Science Cures for haemorrhoids— 24 Simple treatments and Surgeries Recent developments 21 in science and technology 36 Editorial Consolidating science communication activities in our country Dr. R. Gopichandran It is well known that the National Council of Science Museums of India’s leadership in science technology and innovation (STI) across the Ministry of Culture, Government of India, the National Institute the bilateral and multilateral framework also. The news feature service of Science Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR) and the portal activity have well defined action plans to reach out to of CSIR, the National Council for Science and Technology fellow institutions and citizens with suitably embellished platform Communication (NCSTC) of the Department of Science and and opportunities for all to deliver together. Technology (DST), Government of India and Vigyan Prasar, also While these are interesting and extremely important, especially of DST, have been carrying out excellent science communication because they respond to the call to upscale and value add science activities over the years. It cannot be denied that the reach has been and technology communication, it is equally important to document quite significant collectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Nobel Prizes in Nuclear Science
    Nuclear Science—A Guide to the Nuclear Science Wall Chart ©2018 Contemporary Physics Education Project (CPEP) Appendix E Nobel Prizes in Nuclear Science Many Nobel Prizes have been awarded for nuclear research and instrumentation. The field has spun off: particle physics, nuclear astrophysics, nuclear power reactors, nuclear medicine, and nuclear weapons. Understanding how the nucleus works and applying that knowledge to technology has been one of the most significant accomplishments of twentieth century scientific research. Each prize was awarded for physics unless otherwise noted. Name(s) Discovery Year Henri Becquerel, Pierre Discovered spontaneous radioactivity 1903 Curie, and Marie Curie Ernest Rutherford Work on the disintegration of the elements and 1908 chemistry of radioactive elements (chem) Marie Curie Discovery of radium and polonium 1911 (chem) Frederick Soddy Work on chemistry of radioactive substances 1921 including the origin and nature of radioactive (chem) isotopes Francis Aston Discovery of isotopes in many non-radioactive 1922 elements, also enunciated the whole-number rule of (chem) atomic masses Charles Wilson Development of the cloud chamber for detecting 1927 charged particles Harold Urey Discovery of heavy hydrogen (deuterium) 1934 (chem) Frederic Joliot and Synthesis of several new radioactive elements 1935 Irene Joliot-Curie (chem) James Chadwick Discovery of the neutron 1935 Carl David Anderson Discovery of the positron 1936 Enrico Fermi New radioactive elements produced by neutron 1938 irradiation Ernest Lawrence
    [Show full text]
  • Facts and Figures 2013
    Facts and Figures 201 3 Contents The University 2 World ranking 4 Academic pedigree 6 Areas of impact 8 Research power 10 Spin-outs 12 Income 14 Students 16 Graduate careers 18 Alumni 20 Faculties and Schools 22 Staff 24 Estates investment 26 Visitor attractions 28 Widening participation 30 At a glance 32 1 The University of Manchester Our Strategic Vision 2020 states our mission: “By 2020, The University of Manchester will be one of the top 25 research universities in the world, where all students enjoy a rewarding educational and wider experience; known worldwide as a place where the highest academic values and educational innovation are cherished; where research prospers and makes a real difference; and where the fruits of scholarship resonate throughout society.” Our core goals 1 World-class research 2 Outstanding learning and student experience 3 Social responsibility 2 3 World ranking The quality of our teaching and the impact of our research are the cornerstones of our success. 5 The Shanghai Jiao Tong University UK Academic Ranking of World ranking Universities assesses the best teaching and research universities, and in 2012 we were ranked 40th in the world. 7 World European UK European Year Ranking Ranking Ranking ranking 2012 40 7 5 2010 44 9 5 2005 53 12 6 2004* 78* 24* 9* 40 Source: 2012 Shanghai Jiao Tong University World Academic Ranking of World Universities ranking *2004 ranking refers to the Victoria University of Manchester prior to the merger with UMIST. 4 5 Academic pedigree Nobel laureates 1900 JJ Thomson , Physics (1906) We attract the highest calibre researchers and Ernest Rutherford , Chemistry (1908) teachers, boasting 25 Nobel Prize winners among 1910 William Lawrence Bragg , Physics (1915) current and former staff and students.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Oral History Office University of California the Bancroft Library Berkeley, California
    Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California Program in Bioscience and Biotechnology Studies RONALD E. CAPE, M.B.A., Ph. D. BIOTECH PIONEER AND CO-FOUNDER OF CETUS Interviews Conducted by Sally Smith Hughes in 2003 Copyright © 2006 by The Regents of the University of California Since 1954 the Regional Oral History Office has been interviewing leading participants in or well-placed witnesses to major events in the development of northern California, the West, and the nation. Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through tape-recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. The tape recording is transcribed, lightly edited for continuity and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewee. The corrected manuscript is indexed, bound with photographs and illustrative materials, and placed in The Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley, and in other research collections for scholarly use. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account, offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is reflective, partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ************************************ All uses of this manuscript are covered by legal agreements between The Regents of the University of California and Ronald Cape, dated December 18, 2003. The manuscript is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California, Berkeley.
    [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]
  • Recollections and Reconstructions
    @ ? Editor's Note: The Society's Nuclear Pioneer Citationfor 1977 goes not to an individual but to a distinguished group of individuals: those who took part in the epochal “ChicagoPile―experiment of Dec. 2, 1942, which produced thefirst successful atomicpile chain reaction. The 42 members ofthe Chicago Pilegroup are listed on page 591. One ofthose named, Harold M. Agnew, now Directorofthe Los Alamos Scient@flc Laboratory, is the Nuclear Pioneer Lecturerfor the 24th Annual Meeting. The guidingforce behind the Chicago Pile experiment was Enrico Fermi, recipient of the Nuclear Pioneer Citation of 1963. In the artick which follows, Laura Fermi recreates the excitement and mystery that surrounded the work ofher husband's research team in the early 1940s in Chicago. @. The FirstAtomic Pile: Recollections and Reconstructions by Laura Fermi @ . @ / - .-i@ ‘@:@ Enrico FermIat work, ca. 1942. As far as I can remember at the distance ofalmost 35 Perhaps not all husbands adhered as strictly as years, the first guests to arrive at our party on that Enrico to the rules of secrecy when talking to their beastly cold December night were the Zinns. Wally wives. He couldn't have been more tight-lipped. Once! and Jean. As they shook the snow off their coats, related some gossip to him: “Peoplesay that you stamping their feet on the floor, Wally turned to scientists at the Met Lab are seeking a cure for Enrico and said: “Congratulations!― I was surprised; cancer. .““Arewe?―he asked with his usual for Enrico had given me no hint that anything unusual imperturbable expression.
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Stern Annalen 4.11.11
    (To be published by Annalen der Physik in December 2011) Otto Stern (1888-1969): The founding father of experimental atomic physics J. Peter Toennies,1 Horst Schmidt-Böcking,2 Bretislav Friedrich,3 Julian C.A. Lower2 1Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation Bunsenstrasse 10, 37073 Göttingen 2Institut für Kernphysik, Goethe Universität Frankfurt Max-von-Laue-Strasse 1, 60438 Frankfurt 3Fritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin Keywords History of Science, Atomic Physics, Quantum Physics, Stern- Gerlach experiment, molecular beams, space quantization, magnetic dipole moments of nucleons, diffraction of matter waves, Nobel Prizes, University of Zurich, University of Frankfurt, University of Rostock, University of Hamburg, Carnegie Institute. We review the work and life of Otto Stern who developed the molecular beam technique and with its aid laid the foundations of experimental atomic physics. Among the key results of his research are: the experimental test of the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of molecular velocities (1920), experimental demonstration of space quantization of angular momentum (1922), diffraction of matter waves comprised of atoms and molecules by crystals (1931) and the determination of the magnetic dipole moments of the proton and deuteron (1933). 1 Introduction Short lists of the pioneers of quantum mechanics featured in textbooks and historical accounts alike typically include the names of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arnold Sommerfeld, Niels Bohr, Max von Laue, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Paul Dirac, Max Born, and Wolfgang Pauli on the theory side, and of Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Ernest Rutherford, Arthur Compton, and James Franck on the experimental side. However, the records in the Archive of the Nobel Foundation as well as scientific correspondence, oral-history accounts and scientometric evidence suggest that at least one more name should be added to the list: that of the “experimenting theorist” Otto Stern.
    [Show full text]
  • The Beginning of the Nuclear Age the Einstein Szilard Letter to Roosevelt Aug
    Questions 1. Otto Hahn received the 1945 Nobel prize for the experimental discovery of fission. His former colleague Lise Meitner, who explained the phenomenon did not. Do you consider that a fair decision of the Nobel prize committee? 2. What is the difference between a radiative capture reaction, a scattering reaction, and a nuclear reaction? 3. The allied bomb war against the civilian population did not bring the anticipated results, instead of weakening the will for resistance it strengthened it since it provided strong propaganda material to the German and Japanese leadership. Why did the bomb raids continue? The Beginning of the Nuclear Age The Einstein Szilard letter to Roosevelt Aug. 2, 1939 "Because of the danger that Hitler might be the first to have the bomb, I signed a letter to the President which had been drafted by Szilard. Had I known that the fear was not justified, I would not have participated in opening this Pandora's box, nor would Szilard. For my distrust of governments was not limited to Germany." Rumors or Reality? American and British nuclear physicists felt they needed to start a A-bomb project to avoid falling behind their German counterparts. They feared Hitler's forces would be the first to have use of atomic arms. This evaluation was based on a number of considerations: • The pre-war stop of uranium export • The high caliber of German theoretical and experimental physicists like Otto Hahn, Paul Harteck, Werner Heisenberg, Fritz Strassmann, and Carl-Friedrich von Weizsäcker; • German control of Europe's only uranium mine after the conquest of Czechoslovakia; • German capture of the world's largest supply of imported uranium with the fall of Belgium; • German possession of Europe's only cyclotron with the fall of France in 1940; • German control of the world's only commercial source of heavy water after its occupation of Norway.
    [Show full text]