DOCSLIB.ORG

HIROSHIMA: a Study in Science, Politics, and the Ethics Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
HIROSHIMA: a Study in Science, Politics, and the Ethics Of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE OE FORM 6000,2/69 OFFICE OF EDUCATION rcC. MA%I FM UIVI C. ERIC ACC. NO. =KM. ED 032 335 ISDOCUMENTCOPYRIGHTED? YES NO X CH ACC. NO. P.A.PUBL. DATE 1 SSUE ERICREPRODUCTION RELEASE? YES NO X TE 499 933 24 6511I EJ A Ni?(IVELOF AVAILABILITY I D II0IHO AUTHOR Harris, Jonathan TITLE Hiroshima: A Study in Science, Politics and the Ethics of War. Teacher and Student Manuals. SOURCE CODEINSTITUTION (SOURCE) MGG02700 SP. AG. CODESPONSORING AGENCY RMQ66004 EDR S PRICE CONTRACT NO. GRANT NO. 0.50 OEC-5-10-158 REPORT NO. BUREAU NO. CRP-H-168 BR-5-1071 AVAILABILITY JOURNAL CITATION DESCRIPTIVE NOTE 60p. DESCRIPTORS *Social Studies; *Curriculum Guides; *Decision Making; *Moral Issues; United States History; Modern History; Secondary Education; Scientific Attitudes; Military Science; Political Influences; Political Power; Ethical Values; Public Opinion; *Nuclear War I DENTI Fl ER S Hiroshima ABSTRACT By focusing on the question of whether it was right or wrong to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, this social studies unit seeks to illuminate the political, military, scientific, and moral complexities involved in making far-reaching decisions today. Sections of the unit use primary materials from American, Japanese, and English sources to explore the following queEtions:(1) What was the choice in terms of Japanese versus American lives? (2) Was the A-bomb a military necessity? (3) As the agony of the atomic scientists and the Japanese reaction to the Potsdam Declaration are reviewed in light of recent history, was there a better way to win the war? (4) Was Russia the reason that the United States used the bomb? and (5) Was the use of the A-bomb morally defensible? Included are excerpts from the opinions of atomic scientists, military officers, and political leaders. fgot available in hard copy due to marginal legibility of original document:7 (Author/JB) GPO 670390 U.S. DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE inn OFFICE OF EDUCATION Pc\ THIS DOCUMENT HASBEEN REPRODUCED cJ EXACTLY AS RECEIVEDFROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT. PrN POINTS OF VIEW OROPINIONS STATED DO NOTNECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OFEDUCATION C) EXPERINENTAL MATERIAL POSITION OR POLICY. CZ) SUBJECT TO REVISION Lid PUBLIC DOMAIN EDITION TEACHER' S MANUAL HIROSHIMA: A STUDY IN SCIENCE, POLITICS AND THE ETHICS OF WAR Jonathan Harris. Paul D. Schreiber High School Port Washington, New York This material has been produced by the Committee on the Study of History, Amherst, Massachusetts under contract with the U. S. Office of Education as Cooperative Research Project#H-168. 1"1 TY 11101. I NOTE TO THE PUBLIC DOMAIN EDITION This unit was prepared by the Committee onthe Study of History, Amherst. College, under contract with the UnitedStates Office of Educa- tion. It is one of a number of units preparedby the Amherst Project, and was designed to be used either in serieswith other units from the Project or independently, in conjunctionwith other materials. While college-preparatory students at ' the units were geared initially for the high school level, experiments with themby the Amherst Project suggest the adaptability of many ofthem, either wholly or in part, for a considerable range of age and abilitylevels, as well as in a number of different kinds of courses, The units have been used experimentallyin selected schools throughout the country, in a wide range ofteaching/learning situa- tions. The results of those experiments will beincorporated in the Final Report of the Project on CooperativeResearch grant H-168, which will be distributed through ERIC. Except in one respect, the unit reproducedhere is the same as the experimental unit prepared and tried outby the Project. The single exception is the removal of excerptedarticles which originally appeared elsewhere and are under copyright.While the Project received special permission from authors and publishers to usethese materials in its experimental edition, the originalcopyright remains in force, and the Project cannot put such materials inthe public domain. They have been replaced in the present edition bybracketed summaries, and full bibliographical references have beenincluded in order that the reader may find the material in the original. This unit was initially prepared in the summerof 1965 INTRODUCTION A.classroom teacher compiledthis unit. Some ofthe with his own students areindicated niques .he will probably use of these in thispccompanyingmanual, He hopes you may find some has no doubt that youwill think of other, ideas helpful, but all very possiblybetter, methods fortreating some or perhaps of the material. The manual also attemptsto explain whyparticular documents Also included inthe manual is somebackground were selected. The material which may comein handy in classroomdiscussion. decide to devote tothe unit willobviously amount of time you The author depend on your teachingsituation and yourinterests. plans to give it abouttwo weeks. of the unit iss was itright or wrong The central question intent of the Hiroshima? The instructional to drop the bomb on By involving" unit, however, goesbeyond that specificissue. the student in adirect confrontationwith the raw, living ma- terial of one supremelydramatic historicaldecision, it-seeks of the complexityof all suchdecision-making. tb make him aware the' The student Will beimmersed in themultifaceted confusioa counter-proposals, the 'high purposeand the cross proposals and Thereby, pUtbses which arethe stief of high-leveldecisions. ambiguity of thehistorical he...=triay gain insight intothe infinite process. There will be a temptationat several pointsfor students to discussion of the central,issue. The. leap prematurely into themselves to a danger here is that oncestudents have committed many. of their point ofviewin the presence oftheir classmates, shift ground. For such students;,all fur- find it difficult to the ther reading anddiscussion would reallybe pointless, and. unit would be defeatedat the start..It whole purpose of the policy of post- is therefore suggestedthat you adopt a general until the full poningrange all discussion ofthe central question of specific issuespresented in the unithas been considered.. The unit was conceived as anexperience to be lived,not 'a body of data to belearned. The student shouldnot set himself above4m/d.apart from the men, womenand children whospeak to listen] well, and he him in these pages. Let him listen to them, this is no place for snapyes-or-nojudgments. will realize that the suffering too The issues were toointricate and interlocked, great on both sides,for that. Study of the unit onHiroshima may 'have yetanother result. tend to be callous.Perhaps It American.youngsters sometimes which is due to theremorseless diet oftelevision violence on it is because theyhave lived theirwhole they are Tecl; perhaps In lives in a world onthe brink of thethermonuclear abyss. SIM IS go .any case, a littlehumanizing may help. If thisunit_shakestli4li up a little, if it arousestheir compassion a little,if.it them see that the decision to exterminate acity was not tafpan lightly but in torment and' regret, outof a convolutfidcompounCi..- of patriotism and politics scientificgenius and humanisticsen:. timent, thdesire to save lives and thedesire todestroy'lives', assumptions' partly true and partlyfalse; if it,ogn do some:of this, it may have done a job worth doing. SEC.TION I THE APPARENT CHOICE: JAPANESE,LIVES VS.AMERICAN LIVES Some of .,the material in this sectionwill doubtless em.. shocking, even harrowing. It is included because ameaningful- consideration.of the problem requiresthat students become emo!, tionally involved in the human realitiesof Hiroshima. By arousing a strong personal reactionat the very start of the unit, the author topes to provoke the kindof commitment that can con tribute not only to students°understanding of history but to their development as individuals aswell. Th6vreadings in this section should probably beadsigned-all natonce, ra,ther'than piecemeal, sothat students have a well- 7 balanced picture before they begin discussion. It need not re- 'quire more than two 'evenings,perhaps only one if yourstudents; ,are fast readers, At the same time that you assignthe reading, you might informthe students that they are tokeep the follow- #it question, in .mind for classroomdiscussion: How valid as a basis for drawing conclusions is thekind of evidence contained in this section? The information in the section isthe type of data most often made available to the averagecitizen in wartime., our mass media 'w'& et lotsof "human interest" stories,,like these, while the deeper and more relevantissues, the more significant facts, are known only to those at thetop level :until enough time has pddsed to permit historiansto uncover them, Yet;ipublio, opinion takes shape and exertspotent influence onstatesmen even when 4.t has fed oninformation no moresubstantial...t0an this. As the rest of the unit willdemonstrate, the "apparentohoioe of Section I is to some:Extent asuperficial one, masking other, . profounder issues. On the otheil.,hand, this material isnot exactly irrelevant. In a sense it can be considered,the most relevant of all, for it does present theindividual'human experience which is the fundamental element of all history. The' human factor is obviously indispensable; for it is simply notthe only factor. 3 Accordingly, on the question of the validity andThrelevamb of Section 19 it may be advisable to guide students toward the concept of balance in the formulation of conclusions, The author considers the word "balance" as the key to valid discussion of all the issues raised in the unit, and plans to begin orienting students in that direction as early as possible, Here the'Socratic method or °devil's advocate" approach is often effective; by challenging, questioning, criticizing students' proposed conclu- sions, you can impel a deeper consideration of the issues involved, If you wish to assign a short paper at the same timethat you assign the readings in Section 19 you might require your student0 to discuss the. problem in some such terms as theses If they knew .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Dropping the A-Bomb on Cities Was Mistake”—Father of Health Physics (As Published in the Oak Ridger’S Historically Speaking Column the Week of June 29, 2020)
    “Dropping the A-bomb on cities was mistake”—Father of Health Physics (As published in The Oak Ridger’s Historically Speaking column the week of June 29, 2020) A friend and fellow historian, Alex Wellerstein, has just written in his blog, Restricted Data, The Nuclear Secrecy Blog, an entry entitled, What journalists should know about the atomic bombings. In this blog entry he notes that as we approach the 75th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki we will surely see increased emphasis in the news regarding the atomic bombs. This is understandable and especially so in Oak Ridge, Los Alamos and Hanford. While my focus on Oak Ridge history in Historically Speaking may vary from time to time, the atomic bombs and what has resulted from the nuclear age over the years is never far from my mind. In these articles researched and written by Carolyn Krause, I am attempting to bring Historically Speaking readers perspectives that might well not normally be expressed. Not that I intend to alter your thinking regarding the use of the atomic bombs, as generally each of us have made our decision already. However, seeing the issue from different perspectives is worthwhile. For example, this particular article features comments and perspectives of Karl Z. Morgan. Some of you may even have known him. If that is the case, you likely already know his opinions. If you are being introduced to him for the first time reading this, it will be good for you to appreciate his perspective, even if you disagree with his conclusions.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright by Paul Harold Rubinson 2008
    Copyright by Paul Harold Rubinson 2008 The Dissertation Committee for Paul Harold Rubinson certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Containing Science: The U.S. National Security State and Scientists’ Challenge to Nuclear Weapons during the Cold War Committee: —————————————————— Mark A. Lawrence, Supervisor —————————————————— Francis J. Gavin —————————————————— Bruce J. Hunt —————————————————— David M. Oshinsky —————————————————— Michael B. Stoff Containing Science: The U.S. National Security State and Scientists’ Challenge to Nuclear Weapons during the Cold War by Paul Harold Rubinson, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin August 2008 Acknowledgements Thanks first and foremost to Mark Lawrence for his guidance, support, and enthusiasm throughout this project. It would be impossible to overstate how essential his insight and mentoring have been to this dissertation and my career in general. Just as important has been his camaraderie, which made the researching and writing of this dissertation infinitely more rewarding. Thanks as well to Bruce Hunt for his support. Especially helpful was his incisive feedback, which both encouraged me to think through my ideas more thoroughly, and reined me in when my writing overshot my argument. I offer my sincerest gratitude to the Smith Richardson Foundation and Yale University International Security Studies for the Predoctoral Fellowship that allowed me to do the bulk of the writing of this dissertation. Thanks also to the Brady-Johnson Program in Grand Strategy at Yale University, and John Gaddis and the incomparable Ann Carter-Drier at ISS.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Truman Have Dropped the Bomb?
    Should Truman have dropped the bomb? It is 1945. You are a top advisor to President Truman and a close, personal friend. He values your opinion and wants to know what you think about using atomic bombs to try to end the war with Japan. You are to write President Truman a Letter supporting or rejecting the use of atomic bombs. Because you are an intelligent, well-read individual, you should have at least four reasons (using the documents provided) to support your argument as well as any background knowledge. Should President Truman have decided to, or not to, drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If so, what was Truman’s rational? If not, how else could have World War II ended? Historical Background: With the advent of the nuclear age, new dilemmas in the art of warfare arose. The war in Europe had concluded in May. The Pacific war would receive full attention from the United States War Department. As late as May 1945, the U.S. was engaged in heavy fighting with the Japanese at Iwo Jima and Okinawa. In these most bloody conflicts, the United States had sustained more than 75,000 casualties. These victories insured the United States was within air striking distance of the Japanese mainland. The bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese to initiate United States entrance into the war, just four years before, was still fresh on the minds of many Americans. A feeling of vindication and a desire to end the war strengthened the resolve of the United States to quickly and decisively conclude it.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Irvine UC Irvine Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC Irvine UC Irvine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Publishing Words to Prevent Them from Becoming True: The Radical Praxis of Günther Anders Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5nr2z210 Author Costello, Daniel Christopher Publication Date 2014 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Publishing Words to Prevent Them from Becoming True: The Radical Praxis of Günther Anders DISSERTATION submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Comparative Literature by Daniel C. Costello Dissertation Committee: Professor Jane O. Newman, Chair Professor Emeritus Alexander Gelley Associate Professor Kai Evers 2014 © 2014 Daniel C. Costello TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgments vi Curriculum Vitae vii Abstract of the Dissertation viii INTRODUCTION I. A Writerly Life a. Beginnings 1 b. A Note on Style 13 c. Prelude 19 CHAPTER ONE: COMPETENCE AND AUTHORITY I. Introductions a. The Promethean Discrepancy 25 b. Network and Actor-Network Theories 29 c. Archives and the Occasional Philosophy 31 II. Historical Contexts: The Scientists’ Movement a. Genesis 34 b. One World Government 37 c. The Changing Role of Science 44 d. Generational Outcomes 51 III. Backgrounds: Anders and the Bomb a. Wars and Exile 55 b. Return to Vienna 62 IV. Historical Contexts: The Second Wave a. Fallout 65 b. Forms: Diary, Fable, Dialog, and Commandment 69 c. Groundwork to Praxis 73 V. Organizational Work a. Pursuing Scientists 81 ii b. A Pugwash for the Humanities 86 VI. Conclusions 88 CHAPTER TWO: THE CASE OF CLAUDE EATHERLY I. Introductions a.
    [Show full text]
  • Hiroshima & Nagasaki
    Hiroshima & Nagasaki From Roosevelt to Truman German Unconditional Surrender! A Missed Opportunity! In spring 1945 it became obvious that project would not be ready before Germany’s collapse. That triggered discussion of plan modifications. q Should the bomb be used for Japan? q Is bomb use justified like it seemed justified for Germany? q Would the scientists continue their work with new goal? Hans Bethe, who headed the Theoretical Division at Los Alamos, was astonished Groves presented the situation and new plans in February: "I am amazed both by the conclusion not to use [the bomb] on Germany and secondly by their reasons [for targeting the Japanese fleet]. We [the scientists] had no idea of such a decision. We were under the impression that Germany was the first target until the German surrender. That was my belief. Obviously, it was wrong." Opportunities & Alternatives? Definition of new goal for demonstrating new weapon: Forcing Japanese unconditional surrender to avoid extended jungle war and invasion of Japanese islands Conventional areal target bombing or devastation by single bomb? To Use or Not to Use? Japan had never been a threat to develop a bomb. General Groves definitely wanted to use the bombs. This triggered discussion in bomb development community: Target Committee, Los Alamos, May 10-11, 1945 – Identified bombing conditions and four possible target sites in Japan; Kyoto (old capital), Hiroshima (urban industrial area), Yokohama (industrial center), Kokura Arsenal (military industrial complex) The Franck Report, June
    [Show full text]
  • Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project
    Peace and Conflict Studies Volume 15 Number 2 Article 3 1-2009 Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project Lee-Anne Broadhead Cape Breton University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/pcs Part of the Peace and Conflict Studies Commons Recommended Citation Broadhead, Lee-Anne (2009) "Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project," Peace and Conflict Studies: Vol. 15 : No. 2 , Article 3. DOI: 10.46743/1082-7307/2009.1096 Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/pcs/vol15/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Peace & Conflict Studies at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Peace and Conflict Studies by an authorized editor of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Our Day in Their Shadow: Critical Remembrance, Feminist Science and the Women of the Manhattan Project Abstract Inspired by the publication of a book celebrating the role of the women in the Manhattan Project, this paper seeks to demonstrate that such an effort – to the extent it accepts and endorses the historical, political and scientific legitimacy of the Project – is both misguided and dangerous. An alternative feminist critique is presented: one respecting the views of those scientists (men and women) who refused to participate or who have sought to challenge the reductionist Western scientific paradigm from which the Bomb emerged. Illumination of the repressive and hierarchal structures requisite for the “birth” of the nuclear age is undertaken and views excised by the official narrative – the voices of wives, daughters and victims – are recalled.
    [Show full text]
  • La Pace Calda. La Nascita Del Movimento Antinucleare Negli Stati Uniti E in Gran Bretagna, 1957-1963
    Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna DOTTORATO DI RICERCA IN Storia dell’età contemporanea nei secoli XIX e XX “Federico Chabod” Ciclo XXII Settore scientifico-disciplinare di afferenza: M-Sto/04 Storia Contemporanea La Pace Calda. La nascita del movimento antinucleare negli Stati Uniti e in Gran Bretagna, 1957-1963 Presentata da: Dario Fazzi Coordinatore Dottorato Relatore prof. Stefano Cavazza prof. Mario Del Pero Esame finale anno 2010 1 2 A Laura, l’affetto per la quale è nato e cresciuto con questa tesi 3 Introduzione Parte I – La Scienza Cap. 1, Origini La rivoluzione atomica, 1939-1945, p. 23 Il sostegno al controllo internazionale dell’energia atomica, 1946, p. 32 La campagna per il controllo civile, 1946, p. 40 Un movimento maturo, 1946-1948, p. 43 Cap. 2, Evoluzione L’assolutizzazione del nemico, 1949-1952, p. 49 Un biennio Gattopardesco, 1953-1954, p. 66 L’età degli appelli, 1955-1956, p. 78 Una coscienza solida, 1957-1960, p. 110 Cap. 3, Decadenza La scienza al potere, 1960- 1961, p. 139 Sull’orlo dell’abisso, 1962-1963, p. 148 Parte II – La Piazza Cap. 1, Origini Le fondamenta, 1945-1952, p. 167 La nascita di una nuova percezione, 1953-1955, p. 180 Cap. 2, Evoluzione La fase della maturazione, 1956-1957, p. 186 La battaglia per la conquista dell’opinione pubblica, 1958-1960, p. 200 Un movimento di massa, 1961-1962, p. 222 Cap. 3, Decadenza Pace calda e Guerra fredda, 1962, p. 236 Il successo e il declino, 1963, p. 245 Conclusioni Nota bibliografica e Bibliografia 4 Abstract The aim of this proposal is to offer an alternative perspective on the study of Cold War, since insufficient attention is usually paid to those organizations that mobilized against the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9325485 Scientists and statesmen: President Eisenhower’s science advisers and national security policy, 1953-1961 Damms, Richard Vernon, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1993 Copyright ©1993 by Damms, Richard Vernon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scientist's Imagination: Cold War Politics and Nuclear Futures in Leo
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF Anna Elizabeth Dvorak for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History of Science presented on July 24, 2019. Title: The Scientist’s Imagination: Cold War Politics and Nuclear Futures in Leo Szilard’s Fact and Fiction. Abstract approved: ______________________________________________________ Jacob Darwin Hamblin The story of Leo Szilard has not been told in its full complexity. This is especially so of the role imagination played in Szilard’s worldview. Szilard, like many other scientists in the mid- twentieth century, worked on the Manhattan Project. Like these other wartime participants, the work and relationships formed during this time greatly influenced his future work. Furthermore, Szilard brought his regret for his role in the development of the atomic bomb into his arguments for peace and scientist involvement in seeking peace through conversations with Russians. Many authors have explained his involvement in the initiation of what became the Manhattan Project and his involvement during the war and petitions on the use of the weapons in Japan. Most frequently he played a supporting role to other scientist-actors of the time, aiding and extending their actions as a part of a larger story in which Szilard did not play a central role. But the story of Szilard is important as it tracks changes in American diplomacy and relations with both Russia and the larger world. Through both his fiction and non-fiction, the stories Szilard presented are both serious and humorous, a direct relation to how Szilard thought about the issues and approached them in daily life. These stories also parallel his interests in science and his desires, or fears, for the potential uses of this research.
    [Show full text]
  • The July 1945 Szilard Petition on the Atomic Bomb
    1 The July 1945 Szilard Petition on the Atomic Bomb Memoir by a signer in Oak Ridge Howard Gest Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Microbiology, Departments of Biology, and History & Philosophy of Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405 2 Well before the first test of a nuclear explosive device at Alamogordo (New Mexico) on July 16, 1945, many scientists of the Manhattan (Atomic Bomb) Project were very concerned about how nuclear bombs might be used in World War II. Meetings were held at the University of Chicago site and at Oak Ridge (Tennessee) to discuss the future of atomic energy and its political implications. As a result, a petition originated by Leo Szilard and addressed to President Truman in July 1945 discussed the moral responsibilities involved in using nuclear weapons. It recommended that such bombs not be used against Japan “unless the terms which will be imposed upon Japan have been made public in detail and Japan knowing these terms has refused to surrender.” The Szilard petition was displayed during 1989/1990 in a special exhibition at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. This article explains how I happened to be in Oak Ridge, where I signed the petition, and examines its background and complex, unfortunate history. From bacteriology to nuclear chemistry After graduating from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) in 1942, with a major in bacteriology, I began graduate work with Max Delbrück at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee (Delbrück was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1969 for his research on bacterial viruses). Because of the increasing intensity of World War II in 1942, however, research in universities was grinding to a halt.
    [Show full text]
  • The Manhattan Project—A Part of Physics History
    S PECIAL F EATURE: W AR AND P EACE www.iop.org/journals/physed The Manhattan project—a part of physics history Ann-Marie Martensson-Pendrill˚ Department of Physics, University of Gothenburg, SE-412 96 G¨oteborg, Sweden E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Current physics textbooks tend to exclude military applications, but it is explained here how a study of the Manhattan project—the devastatingly successful attempt to develop an atomic bomb—can show students how the lives and work of physicists are shaped by events in society. Much of the original source material is available in books and on the internet (and referenced here), which allows students to discover the views of the scientists for themselves. In the early morning hours of July 16 important for shooting cannons and guns and drop- 1945, a truck driver in New Mexico ping bombs. In older textbooks, these examples reported that he saw the sun about to rise often dominate, whereas more modern texts are at 4 am. The sun decided it was too early, likely to include or even focus on more everyday he said, so it went down again and came applications such as throwing balls or jumping. up an hour later [1]. There is also a trend to include more historical as- Robert Oppenheimer quoted the Bhagavad- pects which can give an opportunity to focus on the Gita: ‘I have become death, the shatterer of development of ideas in physics. Still, many newer worlds.’ The picture of the mushroom cloud textbooks mention the bomb very briefly, if at all.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Draft Enola Gay January 2015
    (Name of Project) by (Name of First Writer) (Based on, If Any) Revisions by (Names of Subsequent Writers, in Order of Work Performed) Current Revisions by (Current Writer, date) Name (of company, if applicable) Address Phone Number Copyright David Blackman 2015 All Rights Reserved ENOLA GAY David Blackman 101 Clyde St Box Hill North Melbourne Australia 3129 Mobile: 61 0438 201 731 [email protected] 2 “The point I am trying to make is that even in time of war, you can see current events in their historical perspective, provided that your passion for the truth prevails over your bias in favor of your own nation.” LEO SZILARD 3 Author’s Note The events in Enola Gay have been authenticated by multiple sources, and in many instances are part of historical record. These sources include published or unpublished letters, diaries and memoirs of the key participants in the story, as well as official transcripts of meetings. Scenes of direct address (following the MAIDEN’S narration) byspecific characters are verbatim. These are the characters own words. In the private meetings of the characters when the doors are closed and only brief quotes are available of what was actually said, I have used my imagination. Of course, this does not make it a documentary, but for such a topic, there is no loose playing with the facts. David Blackman 4 Cast of characters: AGENT ANNOUNCER BARD BYRNES CHURCHILL COMPTON CREW MEMBERS DAVIS DOOMAN EISENHOWER FEREBEE FERMI FORRESTAL GOUDSMIT GREW GRONOUSKI GROVES HUME LEAHY LEWIS LAURENCE MAIDEN COLONEL MARSHALL GENERAL MARSHALL MCKLOY NICHOLS NEDDERMEYER OPPENHEIMER PARSONS PHOTOGRAPHERS REPORTERS SCIENTISTS SPAATZ STALIN STIMSON SWEENEY SZILARD TELLER TIBBETS TRUMAN WIGNER WILSON ZHUKOV 5 Production Notes The play consists of three acts.
    [Show full text]