Did Heisenberg Misconceive A-Bomb?

Paul Lawrence RoseMark Walker

Citation: Physics Today 45, 2, 126 (1992); doi: 10.1063/1.2809558

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2809558
View Table of Contents: http://physicstoday.scitation.org/toc/pto/45/2
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

Was Nazi Know-how Enough for an A-Bomb?
Physics Today 47, 84 (2008); 10.1063/1.2808766

Circuitry made robust enough for Venus

Physics Today 70, 19 (2017); 10.1063/PT.3.3484

Heisenberg, Goudsmit and the German Atomic Bomb

Physics Today 43, 52 (2008); 10.1063/1.881237
little short of hard currency. He all these people are wrong or blinded explosives (and thereby nuclear weap-
hopes, however, to persuade them to by personal losses during the war? I ons) used fast-neutron chain reac-
contribute rugs. do not believe that Walker can contin- tions. As far as the critical mass is
DAVID MERMIN ue to assert blithely that Heisenberg concerned, page 13 of the comprehen-
Cornell University knew what he was doing and that sive German Army Ordance report of
10/91 Ithaca, New York Goudsmit was all at sea. At the very February 1942, "Energiegewinnung
least, the fact that Heisenberg aus Uran" (from Erich Bagge's pri-
claimed after the war never to have vate papers, Kiel), written by Army
Did Heisenberg made a calculation of the critical
mass of an atomic bomb should ring
physicists in consultation with Hei-
senberg and the other project scien-
Misconceive A-Domb? warning bells about the danger of tists, proves that the German re-
I was disappointed to see that Samuel relying on anything he or other Ger- searchers were working with an
Goudsmit's defenders (May 1991, man scientists had to say after Hiro- estimate of 10-100 kilograms, com-
page 13) have yielded the central shima about their wartime uranium parable to the Allied estimates at this
point to the campaign being conduct- project. time. Heisenberg may have sounded
ed by Mark Walker against Goud- If it seems farfetched that a physi- confused at Farm Hall, but that
smit's scientific and personal intelli- cist of Heisenberg's caliber should proves little about what he knew or
gence. have got wrong the essential principle did during the war. Heisenberg and
Your correspondents seem to have of the bomb, one should recall that in his colleagues knew how to build a
accepted it as a fact that Werner February 1940 hopes for a uranium bomb in principle by February 1942
Heisenberg did understand that any bomb had been written off in Britain at the latest, and it is unlikely that
atomic bomb would depend on the and Otto Frisch—the true inventor of they would have forgotten so soon.
scientific principle of a fast-neutron the bomb—had himself so far missed I respectfully suggest that Rose
reaction. There is a great deal of the fast-neutron principle. It was consult my book, especially since I
direct evidence to the contrary, start- only a brain wave that inspired him in believe he is writing his own book on
ing with Heisenberg's original paper March 1940 to consider a fast-neutron this subject. If he remains uncon-
of December 1939 that mapped out bomb and, along with Rudolf Peierls, vinced I am willing to send him copies
the strategy of the German uranium calculate that a comparatively small of the relevant documents.
project. This paper (now available in amount of U-235 was needed. In the MARK WALKER
Heisenberg: Gesammelte Werke, series US this idea was not appreciated until Department of History
A, part 2 [Springer-Verlag, 1989]) the summer of 1941, as is apparent Union College
suggests that Heisenberg's concept of from the memoirs of Arthur Compton 10/91 Schenectady, New York
a bomb at this stage was a reactor and Mark Oliphant and from much
fueled by pure U-235 that would use other documentation. Even Niels
an immense mass of the isotope to Bohr himself believed that a fast- Legislating Science
ensure that there would be enough neutron bomb would entail a large
mass of U-235—that is, until his
time (given the length of time that arrival in London and briefing by the Funding Levels
slow-neutron diffusion would require) British on 8 October 1943. It is sad but increasingly apparent: A
for a useful enough amount of the U- scientist has to be politically savvy to
235 to be turned into energy. It was PAUL LAWRENCE ROSE be scientifically successful. Leon Led-
the vast amount of U-235—tons—that Department of History erman's Reference Frame column
was needed for this reactor-bomb York University "The Privilege—and Obligation—of
that in fact forestalled the German 8/91 North York, Ontario, Canada Being a Physicist" (April 1991, page 9)
atomic project. (For a reference to will have received thousands of sym-
this absurd conception of a critical WALKER REPLIES: I deeply regret that pathetic ears, I am sure, but haven't
mass of tons, see R. V. Jones's intro- Paul Lawrence Rose has chosen to we heard this kind of plea more than
duction to the American Institute of follow Jonothan Logan's and Max once before? I am quite suspicious of
Physics reissue of Goudsmit's Alsos Dresden's lead by misconstruing the notion that a cohesive political
[Tomash, 1988]: Jones and his col- gravely my words and intent. Thus I strategy representing the interests of
league Charles Frank actually heard feel compelled to reiterate: I have all subfields of physics, to say nothing
the tapes of Heisenberg's Farm Hall never written or said that Samuel of the interests of individual institu-
internment conversations in 1945 and Goudsmit's claims should be rejected tions, groups and investigators, can be
affirm that he made out the critical because he had suffered at the hands formulated and executed effectively.
mass to be 4 or 5 tons.) of Germans and therefore was no I hereby propose a legal alternative
As to the still classified transcripts longer objective. Goudsmit's claims to Lederman's admirable political
of the Farm Hall tape recordings of are false because of evidence to the course. We must keep our message
the German scientists' reactions to contrary of those claims. and tactics simple. Start with legisla-
the news of Hiroshima in August The report Werner Heisenberg tion to mandate that funds are com-
1945, all those who have had access to wrote in 1939 is a good source for his mitted to basic science and technolo-
them—including Goudsmit himself, understanding of the problem at that gy research at a per capita rate
Jones, Frank, Leslie Groves, Paul time, but people can change their comparable to that of our major
Rosbaud and Margaret Gowing (the minds. Subsequent documents such economic competitors (notably Ja-
author of the official history Britain as "Die theoretischen Grundlagen fur pan). Such a legal course has several
and Atomic Energy 1939-1945 [Mac- die Energiegewinnung aus der Uran- advantages. First, it's simple and
millan, London, 1964])—are agreed spaltung" (26 February 1942), which forceful. Many a politician who
that they bear out the truth of Goud- is also reprinted in Heisenberg's Ge- might sniff privately at the idea of
smit's charge that Heisenberg never sammelte Werke, prove that Heisen- giving more funds to science may find
did understand during the war the berg knew that both uranium-235 and it politically unwise to object public-
scientific principle of the atomic plutonium could be used as nuclear ly. Second, it is a uniting path of
bomb. Is Walker going to argue that explosives and that these nuclear action, around which all disciplines of

126 PHYSICS TODAY FEBRUARY 1992