DOCSLIB.ORG

The Endless Frontier

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Endless Frontier OPINION NATURE|Vol 466|19 August 2010 for example, how physicians will use genetic what variants mean for the individual. James Shreeve has written a detailed study of data for diagnosis and treatment, and whether Drawing the Map of Life is one of many Venter’s contributions. individuals will welcome or fear knowledge of books that have been written about the HGP. All of these books are valuable; what is what their genomes hold for the future. The volume does not add much to earlier now needed is a scholarly history of the HGP. Such social change will follow, I believe, descriptions of the project’s genesis, such as Drawing the Map of Life is not that book, but it when useful applications of genomic infor- Genome by Jerry Bishop and Michael Wald- offers an enjoyable account of the project from mation become available. They might tell holz (Simon and Schuster, 1990) and The Gene origin to conclusion and beyond. ■ us how to alter our lifestyles to improve our Wars by Robert Cook-Deegan (W. W. Norton, Jan Witkowski is executive director of the health, or distinguish which drugs will be of 1994). In Cracking the Genome (Free Press, Banbury Center and a professor in the Watson benefit or have serious side effects, or may 2001), Kevin Davies brought us up to the com- School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor guide the development of new drugs. But this pletion of the draft sequences. More recently, Laboratory, New York 11724, USA. He is co-author will take time. We are only at the beginning of protagonists John Sulston and Venter have of Recombinant DNA: Genes and Genomes. interpreting the sequence and understanding told their contrasting personal stories, while e-mail: [email protected] In Retrospect: Science — The Endless Frontier Vannevar Bush’s pivotal report that marked the beginning of modern science policy catapulted the phrase ‘basic research’ into popular usage, explains Roger Pielke Jr. Science — The Endless Frontier. TTY E A Report to the President on a Program for /G Postwar Scientific Research RES CTU by Vannevar Bush I P National Science Foundation: 1960 (reprint). IFE L E First published 1945. M TI / ER K The US government’s landmark report AL Science — The Endless Frontier was published W H. 65 years ago last month. Commissioned by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and prepared by electrical engineer Vannevar Bush, who directed US government research during the Second World War, the document distilled the lessons of wartime into proposals for subse- quent federal support of science. Although its bold recommendations were only partly imple- mented, the document is ripe for reappraisal today: it marked the beginning of modern science policy. Bush’s report called for a centralized approach to government-sponsored science, Engineer Vannevar Bush’s proposals led to the creation of the National Science Foundation in 1950. largely shielded from political accountability. The creation of the National Science Foun- of the atomic bomb, radar and penicillin meant along similar lines were made to no avail in dation in 1950, a small agency with a limited that Bush’s declaration that “scientific progress 1924 by the UK National Union of Scientific mandate, was far from the sweeping reform is essential” to public welfare found a recep- Workers (NUSW) and in 1929 by US agricul- set out in the 30-page report and its appen- tive audience. Bush also adopted innovative ture secretary Arthur Hyde. The poor response dices. However, its publication ushered in a language that capitalized on this new-found might have been due to the confused messages new era in which science was viewed as vital government credulity. offered to protect the integrity of pure research. for progress towards national goals in health, In particular, he broadened the meaning of In a 1921 essay, for example, the NUSW presi- defence and the economy. Government fund- the phrase ‘basic research’. In using it to refer dent declared that scientific research has “no ing for research and development consequently simultaneously to the demands of policy- industrial bearing at all” but later stated that it increased by more than a factor of ten from the makers for practical innovation and to the inter- is “the foundation of progress in industry”. Not 1940s to the 1960s. ests of scientists in curiosity-driven enquiry, he surprisingly, most policy-makers shrugged. The influence of Science —The Endless Fron- satisfied both sectors. Some political leaders did champion govern- tier stems largely from its timing, coming at Before the report, pleas by scientists to ment support for basic research before 1945. the tail end of a war in which science-based expand government support for research had Prior to Hyde’s appointment, US agriculture technology had been crucial. The development met with only limited success. Prominent calls secretary Henry C. Wallace had argued in 922 © 2010 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved NATURE|Vol 466|19 August 2010 OPINION JR E K EL USAGE OF THE PHRASE “BASIC RESEARCH” Launched in 1977, 3.5 the twin Voyager E: R. PI R. E: C R probes are true U 3.0 The New York Times SO explorers. Among 2.5 Science Nature the earliest 2.0 spacecraft 1.5 to visit the 1.0 Average usage* Average neighbourhoods 0.5 of Jupiter and 0.0 Saturn, they will soon exit the Solar 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2009 System and witness interstellar space. Report Environmental historian Stephen Pyne *Running 5-year mean as a proportion of 1920–2009 annual average. sets these missions within the wider The fluid meaning of “basic research” galvanized science-policy discussions in the mid-twentieth century. arc of human exploration in Voyager (Viking, 2010). He examines the the early 1920s (one of the first narrow uses patronage of scientific research in policy origins of the planetary exploration of the phrase) that the agency should fund discourse. The setting up of the National programme in cold war politics, and more “basic research” to enhance agricul- Science Foundation and countless other policy looks to modern frontiers of discovery, tural productivity. At the time, Wallace’s call reports cemented it. “Institutions and statistics such as journeys to the ocean floor or for investment was counter-intuitive because are what gave stability to the fuzzy concept of beneath Antarctica’s ice sheets. US agriculture was suffering from being too basic research,” wrote science-policy scholar efficient; a surfeit of production depressed Benoît Godin in 2000. The speed with which Pythagoras held prices and caused hardship for farmers. But he science and society discussions were reframed that the Universe reasoned presciently that consumption would is demonstrated by usage of the phrase in The is rational, and catch up in the longer term. Wallace did not live New York Times, which rose rapidly from that there is to see his vision realized, but his son, Henry A. 4 mentions in 1944 to a peak of 159 men- order and unity Wallace, picked up the baton, first as agricul- tions in 1957 (see ‘Usage of the phrase “basic to all things. In ture secretary under Roosevelt (1933–40) and research”’). Pythagoras (Icon, then as Roosevelt’s vice-president (1941–45). In recent decades, science policy has shifted 2010), science During the war, the younger Wallace served as its focus towards conferring measurable ben- writer Kitty liaison between Roosevelt and Bush. efits to society. The fuzzy concept of basic Ferguson pieces together the life story Bush was selected by his friend and neigh- research no longer seems to fit — nebulous of the ancient Greek philosopher bour Vice-President Wallace to draft Science — descriptions of benefit are insufficient in and his followers. She asks how his The Endless Frontier. As director of the Office of today’s competitive environment for public interest in mathematics arose and Scientific Research and Development, Bush had funds. Consequently, use of the phrase has how his convictions developed. She credibility and good connections within both declined since the early 1990s, as indicated by unravels how Pythagoras’s influence the science and policy camps. This meant that mentions in Science and Nature (see ‘Usage has spread across the ages, to when the report was released — less than two of the phrase “basic research”’). Other terms, underpin the work of great scientists weeks before the Hiroshima atomic bomb was such as ‘transformative research’, have sprung such as Nicolaus Copernicus, detonated — it was well positioned to influence. up to fill the gap; even ‘fundamental research’ Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton, When Wallace’s political fortunes fell, leader- has made an ironic return. And science policy together with modern figures such as ship in science policy completed its switch itself has been renamed by scholars of science Stephen Hawking. F from the agriculturists to the physicists, and the studies: as collaborative assurance, socially language of science policy changed too. robust science, use-inspired basic research Mathematics IE With its inherent inscrutability, Bush’s and other monikers that have meanings largely fills some people ‘basic’ research descriptor helped to secure a known only to that community. with fear. In R pragmatic compromise between scientists and Words alone cannot bridge the gap between The Calculus politicians. The concepts of ‘pure’ and ‘funda- the different interests of scientists and poli- Diaries (Penguin, B mental’ research had long presented a narrow ticians in pursuing research: governments 2010), science view of science in terms of benefits only to demand relevance; scientists desire freedom. writer Jennifer N scientists. By contrast, basic research could The so-far futile search for a language that is Ouellette makes be carried out for curiosity’s sake — satisfying relevant today both reflects and reinforces the maths palatable I scientists — and could meet national needs, unsettled nature of science policy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ira Sprague Bowen Papers, 1940-1973
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf2p300278 No online items Inventory of the Ira Sprague Bowen Papers, 1940-1973 Processed by Ronald S. Brashear; machine-readable finding aid created by Gabriela A. Montoya Manuscripts Department The Huntington Library 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2203 Fax: (626) 449-5720 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org/huntingtonlibrary.aspx?id=554 © 1998 The Huntington Library. All rights reserved. Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington Collection Inventory of the Ira Sprague 1 Bowen Papers, 1940-1973 Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington Collection Inventory of the Ira Sprague Bowen Paper, 1940-1973 The Huntington Library San Marino, California Contact Information Manuscripts Department The Huntington Library 1151 Oxford Road San Marino, California 91108 Phone: (626) 405-2203 Fax: (626) 449-5720 Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.huntington.org/huntingtonlibrary.aspx?id=554 Processed by: Ronald S. Brashear Encoded by: Gabriela A. Montoya © 1998 The Huntington Library. All rights reserved. Descriptive Summary Title: Ira Sprague Bowen Papers, Date (inclusive): 1940-1973 Creator: Bowen, Ira Sprague Extent: Approximately 29,000 pieces in 88 boxes Repository: The Huntington Library San Marino, California 91108 Language: English. Provenance Placed on permanent deposit in the Huntington Library by the Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington Collection. This was done in 1989 as part of a letter of agreement (dated November 5, 1987) between the Huntington and the Carnegie Observatories. The papers have yet to be officially accessioned. Cataloging of the papers was completed in 1989 prior to their transfer to the Huntington.
    [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]
  • The Endless Frontier 75Th Anniversary Edition
    the endless frontier 75th Anniversary Edition VANNEVAR BUSH Reprinted in celebration of the National Science Foundation’s 70th anniversary1 | 1950-2020 Book cover photo: © Arnold Newman Collection via Getty Images SCIENCE THE ENDLESS FRONTIER A Report to the President by VANNEVAR BUSH Director of the Ofce of Scientifc Research and Development July 1945 Foreword by France A. Crdova, 14th Director of NSF Reissued by the National Science Foundation in celebration of the agency’s 70th anniversary and the 75th anniversary of Science—the Endless Frontier CELEBRATING NSF’S 70th BIRTHDAY By France A. Crdova, 14th Director of NSF “...basic research is the pacemaker of technological progress.” That statement is as relevant today as it was in 1945 when Vannevar Bush wrote it in his landmark tract, Science—the Endless Frontier. In the report, submitted to President Harry S. Truman, Bush made the case for creating a new agency that he and others felt was needed to support the underlying basic research essential for combatting disease, ensuring national security, and increasing the standard of living, including supporting new industries and jobs. Bush drew an important lesson from directing the Office of Scientific Research and Development during World War II: “The most important ways in which the Government can promote industrial research are to increase the flow of new scientific knowledge through support of basic research and to aid in the development of scientific talent.” Bush desired that the benefits of scientific re- search realized during the war could have even wider application postwar. He advocated for government funding of basic research in universities, colleges, and research institutes because that’s where the talent was.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Review Tuxedo Park, by Jennet Conant (Simon & Schuster, 2002), 330 Pp., ISBN 0684872870, $26.00
    Book Review Tuxedo Park, by Jennet Conant (Simon & Schuster, 2002), 330 pp., ISBN 0684872870, $26.00 Reviewed by Jane A. Roman Department of Chemistry, Regis College, Weston, MA In the early chapters of this book, Jennet Conant, granddaughter of James Conant former President of Harvard and esteemed scientist, describes brilliantly the life of Alfred Lee Loomis, philanthropist, scientist and Wall Street tycoon. Prompted by the mysterious circumstances surrounding the suicide of her granduncle, William Richards, son of Nobel laureate Theodore William Richards, Jennet using her granduncles’ notes and letters, wrote this biography, which is a small but significant chapter in the history of American science. Her accounts of Loomis depict his relationships with many Nobel Laureates in science and also detail an illicit love affair Loomis had with Manette Hobart, the wife of Garrett A. Hobart III, his protégé and secretary at Tuxedo Park. The setting for most of the book is the region of Tuxedo Park in Orange County, New York where Loomis established a research laboratory, funded solely by his personal fortune. Very important discoveries in radar detection, atomic fission, and other wartime inventions that led the allies to victory over the Germans were made there. Because the circumstances surrounding her granduncle’s death and the hush-up carried out by her family were indicative of the gentry at that time, Ms. Conant was prompted to reveal in her novel the relationship her granduncle had with Loomis in Tuxedo Park. From his papers and letters, she describes how Richards and his friend at Princeton, George Kistiakowsky, came to work at Tuxedo Park, often referring to it as a private scientific playground in the Ramapo Mountains.
    [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]
  • Crossing the Rubicon Barton 1
    Crossing the Rubicon Barton 1. Bernstein A Missed Opportunity to Stop the H-Bomb? are in some way limited, the future of our society will come increasingly into peril of the gravest kind. --Panel of Consultants on Disarmament, September 1952 Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/isec/article-pdf/14/2/132/694430/isec.14.2.132.pdf by guest on 24 September 2021 That first thermonuclear] test ended the possibility of the only type of agreement that 1 thought was possible with Russia . an agreement to make no more tests. [It]would have been self-policing. 1 still think that we made a grave error in conducting that test at that time. Those who pushed that thing . without making that attempt have a great deal to answer for.’ -Vannevar Bush, April 1954 “In the thermonuclear tests at Eniwetok,” President Harry S. Truman announced in his January 1953 State of the Union address, “we have entered another stage in the worldshaking development of atomic energy.” This I am indebted for counsel to Coit Blacker, McGeorge Bundy, Alexander Dallin, Peter Galison, Allen Greb, Jonathan Haslam, Gregg Herken, David Holloway, Gail Lapidus, Condoleezza Rice, David Rosenberg, Scott Sagan, Martin Sherwin, and Herbert York; for various sources to Roger Anders, Nancy Bressler, Jack Holl, Sally Marks, and William Tuttle; for support to the Ford Foundation Program in International Security, Barbara and Howard Holme, the Center for the History of Physics (American Institute of Physics), the Harry S. Truman Library Institute, and the Center for International Security and Arms Control; for access to the James Conant papers to Theodore Conant; and for early access to the Lewis L.
    [Show full text]
  • Lawrence Berkeley Lab.O,R~Tory ' '- '·' R-.: I V L: UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA E!::Rkr-·Lt..Ltvrf:NCE I '-~Eflailr",..,.~ IJ
    LBL-26560. C'_~ Lawrence Berkeley Lab.o,r~tory ' '- '·' r-.: I V L: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA E!::RKr-·Lt..ltVRf:NCE I_ '-~EfLAilr",..,.~ IJ Presented at the Symposium "Science Advice to the President: The First 200 Years," at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, CA, January 18, 1989 Science Advice to the President: During and Immediately after World War II G.T. Seaborg January 1989 . .• t .. _- "l~ ~ ..... ~ .. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract Number DE-AC03-76SF00098. DISCLAIMER This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor the Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, .or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or the Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof or the Regents of the University of California. ~ '. SCIENCE ADVICE TO THE PRESIDENT: DURING AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER WORLD WAR II Presented by Glenn T.
    [Show full text]
  • William T. Golden October 1950 – April 1951
    Impacts of the Early Cold War on the Formulation of U.S. Science Policy Selected Memoranda of William T. Golden October 1950 – April 1951 Edited with an Appreciation by William A. Blanpied Foreward by Neal Lane Copyright © 1995, 2000 American Association for the Advancement of Science 1200 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20005 The findings, conclusions, and opinions stated or implied in this publication are those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Directors, Council, or membership of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. William T. Golden Contents Contents Foreword....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Preface ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................ 7 A Brief Biography ........................................................................................................................................ 8 William T. Golden’s Chronicle of an Era: An Appreciation ....................................................................... 9 Decision Memorandum F.J. Lawton, Decision Memorandum for the President, October 19, 1950................................................ 34 Conversations: 1950 Herman
    [Show full text]
  • Oppenheimer: a Life April 22, 1904-February 18, 1967
    Oppenheimer: A Life April 22, 1904-February 18, 1967 an online centennial exhibit of J. Robert Oppenheimer http://ohst.berkeley.edu/oppenheimer/exhibit/ This print edition of the online exhibit is free for use, reproduction, and distribution for educational purposes as long as this cover page and the acknowlegments page are included. It may not be altered or sold. For other usage questions, please contact the Office for History of Science and Technology, Univer- sity of California, Berkeley, at http://ohst.berkeley.edu. All image copyrights are retained by their hold- ers. © 2004 by The Regents of the University of California. 1 Oppenheimer: A Life April 22, 1904-February 18, 1967 Introduction As Alice Kimball Smith and Charles Weiner have noted, “Part of Oppenheimer’s attraction, at first for his friends and later for the public, was that he did not project the popularly held image of the scientist as cold, objective, rational and therefore above human frailty, an image that scientists themselves fostered by underplaying their per- sonal histories and the disorder that precedes the neat scientific conclusion.” There is a cacophony of conflicting descriptions of Oppenheimer – as friends have remembered him, as historians have analyzed him. He has been labeled both warm and cold, friendly and condescending, affable as well as hurtful. Learning Sanskrit and cultivating the air of an aesthete, as a young professor he stretched the bounds of the scientist’s persona. Yet in the space of a decade, the otherworldly theorist was transformed into a political insider par excellence. His fellow scientists remembered him as a visionary and capable leader at Los Alamos, while his security hearing brought to light foolish mistakes in judgment and human relationships.
    [Show full text]
  • As We May Think, Vannevar Bush
    AS WE MAY THINK by VANNEVAR BUSH THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY, JULY 1945 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This article was originally published in the July 1945 issue of The Atlantic Monthly. It is reproduced here with their permission. The electronic version was prepared by Denys Duchier, April 1994. Please email comments and corrections to [email protected]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- As Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, Dr. Vannevar Bush has coordinated the activities of some six thousand leading American scientists in the application of science to warfare. In this significant article he holds up an incentive for scientists when the fighting has ceased. He urges that men of science should then turn to the massive task of making more accessible our bewildering store of knowledge. For many years inventions have extended man's physical powers rather than the powers of his mind. Trip hammers that multiply the fists, microscopes that sharpen the eye, and engines of destruction and detection are new results, but the end results, of modern science. Now, says Dr. Bush, instruments are at hand which, if properly developed, will give man access to and command over the inherited knowledge of the ages. The perfection of these pacific instruments should be the first objective of our scientists as they emerge from their war work. Like Emerson's famous address of 1837 on ``The American Scholar,'' this paper by Dr. Bush calls for a new relationship between thinking man and the sum of our knowledge. - The Editor ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This has not been a scientist's war; it has been a war in which all have had a part.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Greatest Projects & Their Engineers-II
    America's Greatest Projects & Their Engineers-II By Dom Perrotta, P.E. PDHLibrary Course No 000101 4 PDH HOURS America's Greatest Projects & Their Engineers-II 1. The Manhattan Project This course traces technological events leading up to the dropping of the first two atomic bombs on Japan, including the ideas and the attempts by other nations to develop similar weapons that could ultimately make them the world's strongest military powers. Course describes efforts of many individual U. S. engineers and scientists to achieve this engineering feat. A. Early Events B. The United States Plan C. U. S. Race to Completion D. Result/Summary 1 Introduction A lot has been made about the fact that the two atomic bombs dropped over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while they likely brought a quick end to World War II, also killed nearly 130,00 Japanese civilians as well as an estimated 20,000 Japanese soldiers. Unless your Uncle Tony was a part of the U. S. Infantry that battled the Japanese in the Pacific Theater and suffered the trauma and deprivation at the hands of the heinous Japanese military, you might wonder if there could have been a better (more humane) way to end the war. Indeed that is a fair question to ask about the carnage that was wreaked on the mostly innocent Japanese population. However, this course deals with the achievements and successes of the many engineers and scientists who put their lives on temporary hold in order to assure that the worst criminal in world history, Adolph Hitler, would never have the opportunity to reign supreme.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientists and the Decision to Build the Superbomb, 1952-1954
    In Any Light: Scientists and the Decision to Build the Superbomb, 1952-1954 Author(s): Peter Galison and Barton Bernstein Source: Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, Vol. 19, No. 2 (1989), pp. 267-347 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27757627 Accessed: 09-09-2019 20:44 UTC 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 University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences This content downloaded from 206.253.207.235 on Mon, 09 Sep 2019 20:44:00 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms PETER GALISON* AND BARTON BERNSTEIN** In any light: Scientists and the decision to build the Superbomb, 1952-1954 If the development [of the hydrogen bomb] is possible, it is out of our powers to prevent it. All that we can do is to retard its completion by some years. I believe, on the other hand, that any form of international control may be put on a more stable basis by the knowledge of the full extent of the problem that must be solved and of the dangers of a ruth less international competition.
    [Show full text]