History 4000

History 4000 Papers

Earlier 4000 Papers

2285 Attendance

History 2285

This writer contends that the scientists at Los Alamos were driven by intellectual curiosity; creating a weapon which they could not control. Los Alamos, a city in New Mexico, became the secret site during the Second World War where scientists, their assistants, and families worked and lived for twenty-seven months developing and eventually testing the first atomic bomb. These scientists created a weapon that would not only change the course of the war but also history, driving the question; “If these men of science had known the outcome of their creation would they have created such a destructive weapon?” The lives of J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Isidor Rabi, and Edward Teller will be examined in an attempt to show that scientific curiosity drove these men to create that which they ultimately could not control, the atomic bomb. It will look at their lives before their involvement in the Manhattan Project, the project developed by the United States to create the first atomic bomb, their lives at Los Alamos, their reaction to the successful testing of the atomic bomb and also their reaction to its use in World War II. Finally the paper will examine their lives after the Second World War, during the period where the development and continued use of atomic weapons would be formed. While this paper will not focus on the morality behind President Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bombs it is important to create context to better understand the impact their creation had on the world and history.

            World War II had begun approximately five years prior to Truman’s decision to drop the bomb. The war started in Europe in 1939 when Germany, under Adolph Hitler’s leading, invaded Poland causing the United Kingdom and France to declare war against Germany. However, it was the Pacific front in the Second World War, which would eventually lead to the United States’ use of atomic bombs to bring the war to an end. On December 7, 1941 the Japanese Navy launched a surprise attack on the United States naval base in Hawaii. The Japanese attack destroyed two battleships, one minelayer, two destroyers, 188 aircrafts but most tragic of all was the over 2,403 lives that were lost.[1] This attack caused the United States to enter the war on both fronts. The Japanese would prove to be a fierce enemy for the United States. The United States ambasssdor to Japan at the time of the Pearl Harbor attacks commented on the determination of the Japanes by saying, “…The Japanese will not crack. They will not crack morally or psychologically or economically, even when eventual defeat stares them in the face. They will pull in their belts another notch, reduce their rations from a bowl of rice a day to a half a bowl of rice, and fight to the bitter end. Only by utter physical destruction or utter exhaustion of their men and materials can they be defeated. That is the difference between the Germans and Japanese. That is what we are up against fighting the Japanese.”[2] This determination and commitment to victory caused the Pacific front of the war to continue on after the Allies defeated Germany and would be one of the factors that lead to President Truman’s decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan.

The necessity of President Truman’s decision to use of atomic bombs during the Second World War on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been historically debated for over five decades. Scholarly debate usually centers on the issue of whether or not atomic bombs were necessary for the United States to achieve victory in the Pacific theater of the Second World War. The debates are argued between two primary views. The conservatives, whose view holds that the use of atomic bombs prevented the need for a United States military invasion of Japan and the liberals view that its use was not necessary as surrender was inevitable. The conservatives contend that the invasion would have cost thousands if not millions of American’s their lives. This view holds that Truman was forced to make the decision to use atomic bombs due to Japan’s unwillingness to surrender unconditionally. The liberal perspective holds that Truman and the United States government used the atomic bomb in a diplomatic maneuver to prove to the Soviet Union the power and technological advantage of the United States.[3] This side has even argued, in works by Ronald Takaki and Greg Mitchell, that President Truman used the atomic bombs against Japan in an effort to make-up for the “sissy” image he was labeled with as a child.[4] The liberal perspective has also cited that apart from the bomb the Soviet Union’s entry into the Pacific theater of World War II would have soon caused Japan to surrender without the use of atomic force. It also contends that if President Truman had relented on his insistence of unconditional surrender, and had allowed the Japanese emperor to remain a figurehead, then the war would have ended in a Japanese surrender without the use of atomic weapons.[5] The conservative perspective did not allow the liberal’s claims to go unchallenged and they quickly presented countering arguments. They offered the proposition that the Japanese realized the terms of unconditional surrender were more figurative than literal.[6] And they, the conservatives, strongly argued against the contention that Japan was eager and ready to surrender before President Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bombs.[7] Neither side of the debate has gained much ground in establishing their case as most of their effort has been focused on disproving the other’s arguments; rather than proving the veracity of their own arguments. J. Samuel Walker contends in his Historiographical Essay that, “The polarization and acrimony over Truman’s decision to use the bomb muddied efforts to evaluate the strengths and the weaknesses of the competing positions and to reach a defensible middle ground.”[8] Walker holds that there are those who occupy the middle ground within the debate; arguing that President Truman’s decision to use atomic bombs to end the war in order to save the lives of American is defensible. However, they feel that the use of atomic weapons was not his only option to end the Second World War.[9] Despite a middle ground being found, the debate over the use of the atomic bomb continues, as much of the debate centers around speculation based on inconclusive information. While the debate is likely to continue unabated, hopefully the arguments surrounding this topic will not remain the stark black and white picture painted by conservatives and liberals in pervious decades, thus allowing a clearer picture of history to emerge.[10]

            Before the development or creation of the atomic bomb, the men of science who would eventually birth such a creation and change the world were uncovering the secrets that would make atomic weaponry possible. It was not out of malicious intent or a desire for world domination that these men searched to unlock the secret of the atom, but out of intellectual curiously and the desire to know the “how’s” of the universe. Four men who would be pivotal in the creation of the atomic bomb at Los Alamos were steeped in the world of science long before the tides of the Second World War would present them with the opportunity to use science to change the world. J. Robert Oppenheimer, the eventual director of the Los Alamos laboratories in New Mexico, and one of the most pivotal figures in the creation of the atomic bomb, was born in New York City in 1901 to Julius and Ella Oppenheimer. From a very young age Oppenheimer showed interest in science and the academic world, as it was noted that he often preferred the company of rocks and books to children his own age.[11] However, it was not until high school that his curiosity in the field of science was awakened. He would recount later, “I think the most important change came in my junior year in high school ….The teacher of physics and chemistry was marvelous; I got so excited that after the first year, which was physics, I arranged to spend the summer working with him setting up equipment for the following year and I would take chemistry and would do both…. I loved chemistry so deeply that I automatically now respond when people want to know how to interest people in science by saying, ‘Teach them elementary chemistry.’”[12] After high school Oppeneheimer attended Harvard, where he showed great potential in the field of mathematical physics.[13] Following his years at Harvard Oppenheimer attended the University of Göttingen in Germany. There he became interested in quantum mechanics, writing several papers on matrix mechanics and wave mechanics. However, it was his work with Max Born on the topic of collision theory that would lead to his receiving a Ph. D. in 1927 from Göttingen University. Oppenheimer soon became a full professor at the University of California at Berkley in the mid 1930’s where he would lead the University of California to become the center for theoretical physics.[14] His research would extend over many aspects of physics, yet it was his study of nuclear fission that would lead to his involvement in the Manhattan Project.[15] Oppenheimer’s studies and works attest to his desire for knowledge and his insatiable curiosity.

            Enrico Fermi, a world-renowned scientist whose study and knowledge of neutrons would make him an indispensable figure at the Los Alamos laboratories, was born in Italy in 1901 to Alberto and Ida Fermi. Enrico Fermi was a mathematical genius; from a young age he was reading and mastering such math concepts, as projective geometry. However, in school he excelled in all subjects areas, particularly language, mathematics, and science.[16] In 1915 Fermi would discover one of his great loves, physics. In an attempt to cope with the lost of his older brother and the affects of the First World War, Fermi went looking for something to ease his pain. What Fermi found was a physics book that was written in 1840 entitled Elementorum Physicae Mathematicae.[17] Fermi graduated high school at the age of seventeen and went to Normale Superiore at Pisa, receiving his doctorate in 1922. He then received a scholarship to work with Max Born in the field of quantum mechanical research at Göttingen. In 1926. after his time at Göttingen, he became the Chair of theoretical physics at the university of Rome. In 1930, due to growing European tensions, Fermi moved himself and his family to New York where he became a professor of physics at Columbia University.[18] At Columbia, Fermi worked on creating secondary neutron reactions and in 1942 he created the first controlled nuclear chain reaction.[19]

            Oppenheimer and Fermi, with their love of science, would not be the only ones to contribute significantly to the creation of the atomic bomb. Isidor Rabi and Edward Teller were two other men whose love of science and desire for scientific knowledge would predestine them to become involved in the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos. Isidor Rabi was born in Raymanov, Austria in 1898 but was brought to the United States with his family one-year later.[20] Rabi, unlike Oppenheimer or Fermi, did not describe himself as excelling at school; however, his interest in books would lead him to become a great man of science. Rabi would later say about his childhood reading “that was what determined my later life more than anything else---reading that little book on astronomy.”[21] Rabi attended Cornell University after graduating high school and graduated with a degree in chemistry. Three years later he would go back to Cornell to study physics in the University’s graduate program. Once his desire to understand physics had been kindled he would not let even financial trouble prevent him from studying physics in depth; eventually graduating with a Ph. D. in Physics from Columbia. This degree would open the door for him to become a lecturer of physics at Columbia; where he would plunge himself into the studies of both theoretical and experimental quantum mechanics. But it was his research and publications on the magnetic and mechanical movements of an atom’s nuclei that would cause Oppenheimer to invite him to be apart of the scientific team at Los Alamos.[22]

Edward Teller, born in Budapest, Hungary in 1908 to Max and Ilona Teller, did not show signs of world changing potential as a young child; his grandfather even believed due to his lack of speech that Teller might have been mentally handicapped. However, when he did begin to speak, his family’s first assumptions were blown away as he spoken in full coherent sentences, as noted by his older sister Emmi.[23] Not long after this, his love for learning and aptitude toward math and science were made evident at home and in school. Before the age of six he was cited as having put himself to sleep at night by working multiplication tables in his head. His interest in math would lead him to enroll in the Institute of Technology in Karlsruhe in Germany to study both chemical engineering and mathematics. It was at Karlsruhe that Teller became interested in quantum mechanics and transferred to Munich University to study this aspect of physics. However, a streetcar accident would put his studies to an end in Munich. He would then transfer to University of Leipzig; where he received his doctorate in 1930. Upon graduation he worked in the University of Göttingen, but due to Hitler’s rule of Germany he soon moved to Denmark to work at Institute for Theoretical Physics. There he worked with a group of scientists who were attempting to understand the secrets of the atom. Five years later, in 1935, Teller would move to the United States and begin research on subatomic particles. He, along with a scientist named Gamow, would begin developing rules for classifying subatomic particles in radioactive decay. As tensions in Europe grew, and eventually lead to the outbreak of the Word War II, Teller became an active advocate for the development of nuclear weapons in the United States. Teller joined Oppenheimer’s Los Alamos division of the Manhattan Project in 1941.[24] While these men were not the only scientists involved in the Manhattan Project at the Los Alamos location, their lives best exemplify how curiosity and capabilities of science would create that which they would not ultimately be able to control.

            The lives of the scientist chronicled above would come together in 1944 in the New Mexico town of Los Alamos with their effort to develop the first atomic bomb. Brought together by an idea that had captured the thoughts of scientists for decades, an idea which the United States government would use in an effort to bring the Second World War to an end.[25] General Leslie Groves had been commissioned by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt to be director over the entire Manhattan Project.[26] Due to his commitment to the project and no nonsense personality, Groves soon employed over 125,000 individuals and began running a project which operated in numerous secret locations throughout the United States.[27] Groves would personally select Oppenheimer to be director of the scientific laboratories division, a task Oppenheimer embraced whole-heartedly. Once selected by Groves and approved by the United States government, Oppenheimer set out to find a location that would house one of the greatest scientific research projects in the history of the 20^th century. There were certain criteria that had to be met in order to deem site Y, as it was first labeled, acceptable. It had to have transportation, water, a local population large enough to help supply a labor force if needed, a stable climate, a location large enough to house over a hundred scientists and their families, and it had to be far enough removed from society to isolate it from speculation and public view.[28] Three locations; were considered; Oak City in Utah, Jemez Springs, New Mexico, and the Los Alamos Boy’s School also located in New Mexico. For $440,000 the Manhattan Project bought the Los Alamos Boy’s School and the surrounding area and immediately began setting up the laboratories and housing that were needed for the scientists and their families to live and work in the New Mexico desert.[29] Oppenheimer’s task was not complete once he had decided upon a location. He still had to convince the great men of physical science to give up their work at universities to work at a secret location on a secret project that if successful would change the outcome of the Second World War. It was not an easy task but one that Oppenheimer handled with ease.[30] He later commented about this task saying, “The prospect of coming to Los Alamos aroused great misgivings. It was to be a military post; men were asked to sign up more or less for the duration; restrictions on travel and on the freedom of families to move about would be severe…the notion of disappearing into the New Mexico desert for an indeterminate period and under quasi-military auspices disturbed a good many scientists, and the families of many more.”[31] However he also noted, “But there was another side to it. Almost everyone realized that this was a great undertaking. Almost everyone knew that if it were completed successfully and rapidly enough, it might determine the outcome of the war. Almost everyone knew that it was an unparalleled opportunity to bring to bear the basic knowledge and art of science for the benefit of his country. Almost everyone knew that this job, if it were achieved, would be a part of history. This sense of excitement, of devotion and of patriotism in the end prevailed. Most of those with whom I talked to came to Los Alamos.”[32]

            Upon arriving in New Mexico, scientists where faced with not only forging a new life for themselves and their families, but also daily risking their lives to make theoretical science a reality. The scientists were challenged with creating a weapon that would sustain and promote an atomic chain reaction on command. But perhaps the larger challenge was living and working in less than ideal conditions. Los Alamos was set up by Groves to run in a military fashion; no extra frills or amenities were purchased to make Los Alamos feel like a city. Every spring the unpaved streets and sidewalks turned to mud causing cars and equipment to frequently become bogged down. The cast-iron coal and wood burning stoves that were placed in each wooden apartment were another source of discomfort for the families. They took hours to heat and once warm would turn the apartments into heat boxes causing many to worry about fires. However, enough wives complained to force General Groves to buy them electric hot plates. Jane Wilson, a scientist’s wife, commented about Los Alamos saying, “We aged day to day. Our electricity power was uncertain. Our water supply ran out. Crisis succeeded crisis. Everything went wrong. We had few of the conveniences which most of us had taken for granted in the past. No mailman, no milkman, no laundryman, no paperboy knocked at our doors. There were no telephones in our homes. We shared unique difficulties of living with our husbands without sharing the recompensing thrill of sometimes even the knowledge of the great scientific experiment which was in progress.”[33] Despite the rather unpleasant living conditions, Oppenheimer turned Los Alamos into a community. Evening parties and dances were held, schools were built, families grew and soon Los Alamos, despite its negatives, was home to a close-knit community of world-renowned scientists and their families.[34]  However, the purpose of Los Alamos was not to create a scientific community but an atomic bomb; a goal they accomplished in an astounding twenty-seven months.

            The twenty-seven months of scientific research and labor eventually came to the moment that would change the course of history, the testing of the first atomic bomb in the desert of New Mexico. “The whole spectacle was so tremendous and one might almost say fantastic that the immediate reaction of the watchers was one of awe rather than excitement. After some minutes of silence, a few people made remarks like, ‘Well, it worked,’ and then conversation and discussion became general. I am sure that all who witnessed this test went away with a profound feeling that they had seen one of the greatest events of history.” Edwin M. McMillan, a scientist working at Los Alamos, would record the above concerning the Trinity atomic bomb test. As early as March 9^th 1944 planning had begun for the testing of the atomic bomb, but it was not until February 1945 that the Trinity testing site was final prepared for the explosion of the world’s first atomic bomb. Twenty-seven months of intense research, collaboration and labor had come to this one-day, July 16, 1945. Military personnel and the scientists working at Los Alamos gathered together on the 16^th to see if their creation would work. Speculation, anticipation and fear flowed throughout the New Mexico desert that night. Enrico Fermi was one of the scientists who personally exacerbated the fear among the military personnel that night, “he suddenly offered to take wagers from his fellow scientists on whether or not the bomb would ignite the atmosphere, and if so, whether it would merely destroy New Mexico or destroy the world.”[35] Fermi also remarked that it was the curiosity of the scientists that had brought them to this moment as someone noted, “He [Enrico Fermi] had also said that after all it wouldn’t make any difference whether the bomb went off or not because it would still have been a worth-while scientific experiment. For if it did not go off, we would all have proved that an atomic explosion was not possible.”[36] The atomic bomb did however go off, and Isidor Rabi’s description of the explosion perhaps best captures the event, “Suddenly, there was an enormous flash of light, the brightest light I have ever seen or that I think any one has ever seen. It blasted; it pounced; it bored its way right through you. It was a vision which was seen with more than the eye. It was seen to last forever. You would wish it to stop; altogether it lasted about two seconds. Finally it was over, the diminishing, and we looked toward the place where the bomb had been; there was an enormous ball of fire which grew and grew and it rolled as it grew; it went up into the air, in a yellow flashes and into scarlet and green. It looked menacing.”[37]

            The reaction of the scientific community to the possible use of the atomic bomb they had created was mixed. In July 1945 Leo Szilard had circulated a petition among the scientific community pleading with President Truman not to use the bomb on Japan. The petition received seventy signers from the scientific community. However, others in the scientific community like Edward Teller felt the atomic bomb and its use might prevent future wars. Upon receiving Szilard’s petitions Teller wrote, “First of all let me say that I have no hope of clearing my conscience. The things we are working on are so terrible that no amount of protesting or fiddling with politics will save our souls…Our only hope is in getting the facts of our results before the people. This might help to convince everybody that the next war would be fatal. For this purpose actual combat use might even be the best thing.”[38] While some scientist were advising against the bomb and others encouraging its use the scientists remained united on one issue, the scientific community demanded a voice in the desison making processes surrounding atomic bombs. Arthur Compton, director of the metallurigal laboratoies at the University of Chicago, tried to explain the need for the scientific community to stay active in the decision making process. “The scientists have a very strong feeling of responsibility to society regarding the use of the new power they have released. They first saw the possibility of making the new power available to human use…[they] have perhaps felt more keenly than others the enormous possibilities that would thus be opened for man’s welfare or destruction. The scientist will be held responsible, both by the public and by their own consciences, for having faced the world with the existence of the new powers. The fact that the control has been taken out of their hands makes it necessary for them to plead the need for careful consideration and wise action to someone with authority to act. There is no other way in which they can meet their responsibility to society.”[39] Science received its request to be consulted in May of 1945 when Scretary of War Henry L. Stimson compiled a science panel to take part in the Interim Committee. The science panel was asked how they felt about the use of the atomic bomb. The four scientist; Arthur Compton, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Ernest Lawerence, and Enrico Fermi gave their verdict in a leter to the Interim Committee on June 16, 1945. The letter relayed the recommendations of the scientific community, saying, “You have asked us to comment on the initial use of the new weapon. This use, in our opinion, should be such as to promote a satisfactory adjustment of our international relations. At the same time, we recognize our obligation to our nation to use the weapons to help save American lives in the Japanese war.”[40] The letter later revealed that the scientific community was not unified in their opinion towards it use nor did they feel they had the right to dictate its use stating, “The opinions of our scientific colleagues on the initial use of these weapons are not unanimous; they range from the proposal of a purely technical demonstration to that of the military application best designed to induce surrender.”[41] And “…as scientific men, [we] have no propietary rights. It is true that we are among the few citizens who have had occasion to give thoughtful consideration to these problems during the past few years. We have however, no claim to special competence in solving political, social and military problems which are presented by the advent of atomic power.”[42] The varied and undefinitive opinions of the scientific community nullified their voice in the monumental decision of whether or not to use atomic weapons.

            On August 6, 1945 the world went nuclear as the United States dropped an atomic bomb, named “Little Boy,” on the Japanese city of Hiroshima.[43] Three days later the second atomic bomb, named “Fat Man,” was dropped on the Japanese city of Nagasaki in an attempt to bring the Second World War to an end.[44] As noted before, the morality and necessity of this decision has been a historically contested issue. Non-the-less, atomic bombs were used, leading to Japan’s surrender on August 15, 1945. The Japanese Emperor Hirohito said to his advisors the day before his acceptance of the Allied power’s surrender terms “I cannot endure the thougth of letting my people suffer any longer. A continuation of the war would bring death to tens, perhaps even hundreds, or thousands of persons. The whole nation would be reduced to ashes. How then could I carry on the wishes of my imperial ancestors?”[45] The Emperor’s sober address is a stark contrast to the joy of American service men as they were now able to head back home; to their families who anxiously awaited their return. The scientific community was also thankful to have such a devastating war come to an end.

            After the war had ended the scientists were faced with the ramifications of their creation, but they were also faced with decisions concerning their personal lives, such as where would they work and live, would they stay involved in “political science” or would they once again enter the world of theoretical and practicle science. In the years after the bomb most of the scientists who had worked at Los Alamos, such as Enrico Fermi, would choose to once again work at universities teaching and conducting research.[46] Others, including Isidor Rabi, would work at universities but would also stay active in the political side of science.[47] J. Robert Oppenheimer and Edward Teller would represent another group of scientsts; those whose focus was not soley in the academic world, but also on the issues surrounding the development and control of nuclear science. The goals of Oppeheimer and Teller were different and thus their future fate in government and governmental policy making would be starkly different. Through examining the lives of these four scientists after the creation and use of the atomic bomb one can see how the control and development of atomic research was removed from their hands and placed in the hands of political and military figures within the United States government.

            As the war came to a close, Enrico Fermi was faced with the decision of whether or not to stay involved in developing nuclear weapons, energy, and conducting research; or going back to the academic world. He chose the latter. In 1945 he accepted a professorship at the Univerity of Chicago.[48] There he would turn his attentions to the research and study of high energy physics and pion-nucleon interaction.[49] While not directly involved in the politics of nuclear science he would be an active advocate for removing the secrecy surrounding atomic energy, thereby allowing science to continue un-fettered by secrecy or strict governmental control. Fermi wrote a letter to be presented at a confernece on atomic energy revealing his opinion about the control of atomic energy, “…That secrecy on the scientfic phases of the development not only would be of little effect but would soon hamper the progress of nuclear physics in this country to such an extent as to even make it exceedingly difficult to grasp the importnace of new discoveries made elsewhere in the field.”[50] Fermi would serve on the General Advisory Committee (GAC) for the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) from 1947 to 1950, but at the end of his term he asked not to reappointed due to conflicts of interest.[51] One conflict was his belief that the hydrogen bomb should not be created. He stated, “The fact that no limits exist to the destructiveness of this weapon makes its very existence and the knowledge of its construction a danger to humanity as a whole… we think it is wrong on fundamental ethical principles to initiate the development of such a weapon.”[52] However, his opinion was nullified when President Truman ordered the development of a hydrogen bomb in 1950.[53] Once his term on the GAC came to an end Fermi gladly focused his full attentions on academic science; a pursuit that he would continue until his death in 1954.[54] Fermi achieved many great scientific accomplishments and discoveries including; Fermi’s statistics, beta ray theory and experimental neutron studies.[55] While Fermi will be primarily remembered for his part in the creation of an atomic bomb, his life revealed a man who was captivated and driven by the love of science.

            At the end of the Second World War Isidor Rabi went back to the University of Columbia as exective officer of the physics department, remaining active in politics and policies surrounding the development and use of atomic energy. He was an active participant in the Brookhaven National Laboratory for Atomic Research, an organization that promoted the peacful development and use of atomic energy.[56] Rabi’s passion was physics, but the war had changed how physicists were viewed and treated as he noted, “Suddenly physicists were exhibited as lions at Washington tea parties, were invited to conventions of social scientists, where their opinions on society were respectfully listened to by life on experts in the field,… were asked to endorse plans for world government, and to give simplified lectures on the nucleus to congrssional committees.[57] Rabi recognized that the role of physicists had changed, but Rabi also realized that their creation, atomic weapons, was a reality stating, “We cannot put this evil spirit back in a bottle. We have to learn to live with it.”[58] Rabi choose to remain in the politics of physics, advocating the global knowledge of nuclear engergy, as a means to regulate its power or monoploization.[59] Rabi, like Fermi, believed that the United States’ pursuit to create a hydrogen bomb should not take place as it jepordized global security and peace. In1946 he wrote a letter along with other Columbia faculty members calling on President Truman to stop the production of atomic bombs and to stop any attempts made to develop and create more powerful atomic weapons.[60] Despite his efforts the United States attempted to keep atomic weapons development a secret; as well as, promote the continued growth of an atomic arsenal. Rabi however, realized that he was not the United States, just a citizen and that the United States government was ultimately responsible for decisions made concerning the development of nuclear weapons.[61] While he recognized the reality of the government’s control over nuclear energy development, concerning Truman’s decision to develop the hydrogen bomb he stated, “I never forgave Truman for buckling under the pressure. He simply did not understand what it was about.”[62] Rabi continued on in both the academic and political world of science until his death in 1988.[63]

            J. Robert Oppenheimer’s life after World War II is perhaps the most stark reminder of how government siezed control of science’s creation. At the end of the war Oppenheimer chose to stay at Los Alamos as director for a year; helping to establish one of the first National Scientific Laboratories. In 1947 he accepted a position at Princeton University as director of the Institute for Advance Studies. Oppenheimer remained actively involved in government and policy making towards the atomic bomb; serving as the Chair for the Atomic Energy commission from 1946 to 1952.[64] Similar to both Fermi and Rabi, Oppenheimer believed that atomic energy was too great for any one country to possess and because of this he advocated global control of such powerful weapons. He stated in an address he gave in 1947 to officers in the armed and foreign services and to state Department heads, “You may think it is strange that I included the achievement of international control as one of the things to keep in mind in planning atomic activities. This I think…is the only way in which this country can have a security comparable to that which it had in the years before the war. It is the only way which we will be able to live with bad governments, with new discoveries, with irresonsible governments such as are likely to arise in the next hundred year, without living in fairly constant fear of the surprise use of these weapons, and there surprise development…The whole notion of international control supposes a certain confidence.”[65] Oppenheimer would also actively oppose the United States’ development of the hydrogen bomb.

Oppenheimer’s opposition to the development of the hydrogen bomb and his past acquaintences would cause one of the most shocking governmental trials in the 20^th century. The end of the Second World War, and the creation of atomic weapons, had ushered in another war; the Cold War. With the Cold War came a hypersensitivity to a person’s political ideologies and beliefs. Oppenheimer, while never a member of the communist party, had close associations with those that were; namely his wife and brother. Oppenheimer’s comments, noted earlier, came into question and he was brought before the Personnel Security Board in 1953. The hearings lasted for an intense three weeks. At the end of which his security clearance to have knowledge or participate in the government’s development of nuclear energy was revoked.[66] The trial represented a disgraceful day in American history as a man who had commitedly labored for the United States government helping to create the first atomic bomb was accused of disloyalty towards his country. His friend and collegue, Isidor Rabi, commented on the whole affair saying, “So it didn’t seem to me the sort of thing that called for this kind of proceeding…against a man who has accomplished what Dr. Oppenheimer has accomplished. There is a real positive record… We have the A-bomb and a whole series of them… what more do you want, Mermaids? This is just a tremendous achievement. If the end of the road is this kind of hearing, which can’t help be humiliating, I [think it is] a pretty bad show.”[67] While the committee found Oppenheimer unfit for participation in nuclear development, the trial revealed itself to be based more on rumor than fact.[68] After the trials Oppenheimer became committed to the academic world but he acutely felt the sting of being barred from participation in governmental nuclear engergy development. This was a shame that he would carry with him the rest of his life. The father of the Atom Bomb died in 1967 from cancer. His later life would be a constant reminder of science’s limited ability to effect politics.[69]

            Edward Teller’s life after the creation of the atomic bomb represents a different reality than the three lives chronicaled above. Teller believed that nuclear weapons development should continue, as the United States needed to protect itself from Russia; an enemy just as dangerous as Germany had been in the war.[70] After the war Teller passionatley advocated the development of the hydrogen bomb to such an extent that he would alienate many of the other scientists he had worked with at Los Alamos. He believed that “[ They lost] their appetites for weapons work.”[71] And that as stated by Bethe “…[Teller thought] it was wrong of all of us to want to leave [Los Alamos].”[72] Teller, like many of the other scientists, went back to teaching physics at the University of Chicago. But when Russia tested it first atomic bomb, Teller went to work delving into and campaigning for the creation of the more powerful hydrogen bomb. He and mathmetician Stanislaw Ulam developed the model for the H-bomb. Despite this he was not chosen as director of the project when the United States decided to continue developing an atomic arsenal. In retaliation he broke ties with the Los Alamos laboratory to work for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.[73] By being a witness against Oppenheimer during Oppenheimer’s security clearance trial, Teller would more fully alienate himself from many of those scientists who he had worked with at Los Alamos.[74] Despite this Teller continued to advocate the development of nuclear weapons as a strong defense policy. After leaving the University of Chicago he became director of Emeritus at Livermore Laboratory and then he took a position at Hoover Institution; one that he held until his death in 2003.[75] Teller, while he may not have always been in favor with the scientific community, changed history with his commitment to scientific developments through the channels of government; helping to develop the atomic bomb, the hydrogen bomb, and being an advocate for the Strategic Defense Initiative or SID.[76]

            As this writer has contended, the atomic bomb was developed more out of a sense of scientific curiosity than a desire to develop the ultimate weapon. The scientists, as seen throughout this paper, were obviously committed to scientific discovery long before they engaged in the creation of the atomic bomb. As stated about Enrico Fermi, as previously noted in the paper, “He [Enrico Fermi] had also said that after all it wouldn’t make any difference whether the bomb went off or not because it would still have been a worth-while scientific experiment. For if it did not go off, we would all have proved that an atomic explosion was not possible.”[77] This quote reveals the underlying devotion the scientists had to the scientific process. However, as also contended by this writer, the scientists would lose control of what they had created. As can been seen from their strong apprehension to the future secret development of atomic weapons, they had misgivings about what such an outcome would produce. Teller being the notable exception, as he was more closely focused on the pragmatic benefits of atomic weapons development. While their witnessing of the power of the bomb at the Trinity site may have heightened these misgivings, they were likely latent throughout the development, only fully surfacing after they had satisfied their curiosity. As the writer has shown, at this juncture, the control of the bomb was already out of their grasps. John S Ridgden in his biography about Isidor Rabi, titled Rabi, wrote, “Nuclear energy is as much a product of human curiosity and ingenuity as the polio vaccine, a Stradivarius violin, or the Declaration of Independence. Knowledge can come in small bits or it can come as a grand overarching synthesis, but once it has come, it is eternal.”[78] Rigden, while not a scientist, captured the reality the scientists were faced with; they had expanded scientific boundaries creating an eternal knowledge which they could not contain. The scientists were quick to experience these realities despite their new given star status. Even in this new role their opinions did little to thwart the geo-political realities of the Cold War. This was particularly evident for J. Robert Oppenheimer, who was eventually found unfit to participate in future nuclear development, not in small part due to his willingness to express his reservations regarding future governmental development and also due to his association with others willing to embrace alternative political ideals. The atomic bomb was created by scientists who possessed an insatiable curiosity, but their creation was controlled by a government who had little time to take heed to their concerns; ultimately creating a world that continues to live under the spectra of the atomic bomb.