SPECIAL FEATURE: W AR
AND
P EACE
www.iop.org/journals/physed
The Manhattan project—a part of
physics history
Ann-Marie Mårtensson-Pendrill
Department of Physics, University of Gothenburg, SE-412 96 Göteborg, 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
1945, a truck driver in New Mexico
reported that he saw the sun about to rise
at 4 am. The sun decided it was too early,
he said, so it went down again and came
up an hour later [1].
Robert Oppenheimer quoted the BhagavadGita: ‘I have become death, the shatterer of
worlds.’ The picture of the mushroom cloud
carries a strong symbolic load. It demonstrates
vividly that the fruit of knowledge can contribute
not only to the benefit of mankind but also bring
immense destructive power and be a root of evil.
Over the post-war decades, the public image of
science and scientists has changed from hero to
a common stereotype view of a ‘mad scientist’,
often evil and selfish [2]. The turning away
from science studies, which is a concern in many
countries, may be not only because of lack of
knowledge or understanding of science, but rather
from encountering its dark side. Physics can no
longer claim innocence. ‘I have become death, the
shatterer of worlds.’
Physics teaching choices
Should physics teaching include military applications? The understanding of projectile motion is
0031-9120/06/060493+09$30.00
important for shooting cannons and guns and dropping bombs. In older textbooks, these examples
often dominate, whereas more modern texts are
likely to include or even focus on more everyday
applications such as throwing balls or jumping.
There is also a trend to include more historical aspects which can give an opportunity to focus on the
development of ideas in physics. Still, many newer
textbooks mention the bomb very briefly, if at all.
How could a discussion of the Manhattan project
contribute to the image of physics or physicists?
The Manhattan project represented a watershed in the relationship between physics, physicists and politics [3].
After the war, physicists were often asked
to go to Washington and give advice
to various sections of the government,
especially the military. What happened,
I suppose, is that since the scientists
had made these bombs that were so
important, the military felt we were
useful for something. Feynman [4, p 53].
The Manhattan project can show us physicists
at work, and how their lives and research are
shaped by the events in society (and sometimes
shape them).
Since many physicists have
© 2006 IOP Publishing Ltd
PHYSICS EDUCATION
41 (6)
493
A-M Mårtensson-Pendrill
Timeline
1938
1939
1941
1942
1942
1945
1945
1945
1949
1952
1953
Fission of uranium discovered (Hahn,
Meitner, Strassmann, Frisch)
2 August, Letter to President
Roosevelt (Einstein, initiated by Szilard)
Heisenberg visits Bohr in Copenhagen
23 September, Oppenheimer
appointed scientific director of the
Manhattan project at Los Alamos
2 December, The first controlled
nuclear reaction, Enrico Fermi,
University of Chicago reactor
3 July, Szilard petition
16 July, Trinity test—world’s first
atomic blast
6 and 9 August, Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Start of ‘Oppenheimer affair’
First hydrogen bomb explosion
Oppenheimer faces a security hearing
that ultimately recommended that
his security clearance be ended
More detailed timelines can be found, e.g. at
NuclearFiles.org (www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/
timeline/html index.htm) and at the WWW
pages from the National Atomic Museum in
New Mexico (www.atomicmuseum.com/tour/
atomicage.cfm).
described the period in their autobiographies, it
gives us an opportunity to meet the physicists as
persons, dealing with difficult ethical problems. In
addition, many original documents, for example
from various hearings, have been released and
are often easily accessible on the WWW. We
have the possibility to read their words, and
sometimes even to listen to their voices from the
past. I have used these sources to help physics
teacher students develop a richer understanding
of the context of atomic and nuclear physics and
physicists and their relation to society. I have also
used a similar approach within interdisciplinary
courses for future teachers. To initiate the project,
I provided a list of names of physicists with
significant roles in the development, together with
web addresses, and some journal articles and
books.
The students (in a group of 15–20) were asked
to sign up for one of the physicists, and read up
on their involvement before, during and sometimes
494
PHYSICS EDUCATION
after the Manhattan project. Towards the end of
the course we then made a very informal roleplay,
where I provided a timeline as a plan for the lesson,
and the students took turns in the involvement of
‘their’ physicist. Some chose a detached approach,
but many did their presentations in the first person;
some even dressed up. The informal character of
the class made it natural to stop for discussions
at any time. The audience was only ourselves.
Discussions of the responsibilities of scientists
become more interesting and thought-provoking
against a backdrop of historical events and the
reflections from those involved. The roleplay
opened up ethical discussions through the voice
of another person, which is often easier. Many of
the students also remarked on the deep impression
made by the discovery of how much the physicists
had already achieved at a young age.
Socio-scientific issues, such as this one, are
multidisciplinary in their character. In a school
situation, a possibility would thus be to do
such a project together with, for example, the
history and/or English teacher. A more ambitious
approach could involve a drama teacher and aim
for a performance for another class or at a school
open-house day. In this issue Kofoed describes
how the decision to drop the bomb has been
used in a roleplay in secondary-school classroom
situations [5].
One might argue that the Manhattan project
is not really part of physics, but could and should
be left for the history teacher, if included at
all. However, this approach could easily add to
the image of scientists as lacking conscience and
concern for society and maintain or widen the gap
between ‘the two cultures’. From a physicist’s
point of view, the roles, thoughts and actions of
our older colleagues are of particular interest.
I present below a brief summary of what
may be included and references to useful sources.
Wherever possible, I have provided WWW links,
because I have found that this considerably
facilitates the administration of the task. I have
made a personal choice of quotes from much
longer texts. I have tried to find examples of
physicists struggling with the questions of the
role of physics and physicists. Are the quotes
representative? Find out! An important aspect
of this project is to develop an awareness that
one need not depend only on textbook or other
presentations, but that it is possible to go back
November 2006
The Manhattan project—a part of physics history
to original sources and form more independent
opinions. I strongly encourage you to make
use of the richness in internet access and read
the original documents for yourself and let your
students have a chance to read the previously top
secret documents and hear some of the voices from
the history of physics.
Ideas, politics and adventures
The photographs [6] from the early Solvay
conferences show the key physicists of the
1920s getting together for discussions about the
fundamentals of quantum physics, laying the
ground for our understanding of atoms and nuclei.
This period is delightfully described in Gamow’s
‘Thirty Years That Shook Physics’ [7], which gives
a human side to the results presented in textbooks.
The Nobel museum (www.nobelprize.org) also
has extensive information on the life and work of
many of the physicists involved.
The developments in Europe during the 1930s
changed the lives of many people, including
scientists. Both before and during the war,
many physicists were forced to move abroad.
When fission of uranium was discovered in 1938,
in experiments prepared by Hahn, Meitner and
Strassmann, Lise Meitner was already exiled in
Sweden. The explanation for fission was found
while her nephew Otto Robert Frisch visited her
in December 1938. This story is told in many
sources [8] and has even reached some textbooks.
Weisskopf describes how “Bohr traveled
every year to the United States ‘to sell his Jews
to American universities’, as we called it” [9].
Weisskopf came to the US in 1937, and was
impressed with how the new country welcomed
it refugees. In 1941, Heisenberg visited Bohr in
Copenhagen, when Denmark was occupied. This
visit was in focus in Frayn’s play ‘Copenhagen’
from 1998 [10] and is also discussed in many
other sources. We may know the ‘initial and final
states’, but a detailed knowledge of the interaction
is inaccessible. Their accounts of the discussion
differ, but it is clear that it related to the possibility
of using fission to create a powerful bomb—and
that a deep friendship and creative relation was
shattered.
In 1943, Bohr himself fled from Denmark.
Although he did not take up residence at Los
Alamos, he ‘made several extended visits [during
which] he showed a vigorous interest in both
November 2006
theory and design and acted as a scientific father
confessor to the younger men. . .. His real function
there was that he made the enterprise which looked
so macabre seem hopeful’ [11].
Many physicists’ flights include adventures.
When Bohr flew from Stockholm to London in
the bomb bay of the plane, he fainted from lack
of oxygen. Enrico Fermi, whose wife was Jewish,
never returned to Italy after the Nobel prize award
ceremony, but continued directly on to New York.
Los Alamos
Because of the danger that Hitler might
be the first to have the bomb, I signed
a letter to the President which had
been drafted by Szilard. Had I known
that the fear was not justified, I would
not have participated in opening this
Pandora’s box, nor would Szilard. For
my distrust of governments was not
limited to Germany. Einstein [12].
The Manhattan project brought together a
remarkable collection of the leading physicists
of the time. Many of the names we recognize
from groundbreaking works presented in physics
textbooks. It marks the first large-scale physics
collaboration. The appointment in 1942 of Robert
Oppenheimer as the scientific leader
was a marvellous choice. Los Alamos
might have succeeded without him, but
certainly only with much greater strain,
less enthusiasm, and less speed. As it
was, it was an unforgettable experience
for all the members of the laboratory.
Bethe [13].
The Los Alamos site was an exciting
brewing pot of creative brains focusing on very
difficult problems, involving both theoretical
challenges, technological development, logistics
and numerics.
For today’s generation, brought up with easily
accessible computing power, it is hard to understand how advanced numerical computing could
be possible with mechanical calculators, slow
CPUs and small memory capacities accessed with
punch cards. Nevertheless the Los Alamos period marks an intensive development of numerical computing. For example, Feynman worked out
a technique to run several calculations in parallel
PHYSICS EDUCATION
495
A-M Mårtensson-Pendrill
Figure 1. The author together with Norman Ramsey
discussing thallium isotope shifts during a conference
in Stockholm in 1987. (Photo: Ingvar Lindgren).
on the punched-card machines and von Neumann
formulated ways to translate mathematical procedures into a language of instructions for the early
electronic computers [14].
The historical accounts of the work at Los
Alamos rarely mention any women involved
in the project, except possibly as wives and
participants in the array of people forming an
assembly line for numerical calculations, set up
by Feynman and Metropolis [15]. In fact, at least
85 female scientists and engineers helped design
and construct the atomic bomb [16], including
Chien-Shiung Wu and future Nobel laureate Maria
Goeppert-Mayer, who was invited to Los Alamos
by Edward Teller.
As the scientists gathered for the Trinity
test, they placed bets on the explosive power of
the ‘gadget’. Edward Teller picked the highest
with 45 ktons of TNT; Bethe placed his bet
at 8 ktons; Robert Oppenheimer went lower,
800 tons; Norman Ramsey went lowest: zero.
Isidor Rabi came late and made the last bet:
18 ktons [17].
The events at the Trinity test site
Suddenly, there was an enormous flash of
light, the brightest light I have ever seen
or that I think anyone 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. Rabi [15].
The test at Jornada del Muerto created
unforgettable memories and thoughts in all who
496
PHYSICS EDUCATION
witnessed it. Stanislaw Ulam [18], who remained
at Los Alamos, observed: ‘You could tell at once
they had had a strange experience. You could see
it on their faces. I saw that something very grave
and strong had happened to their whole outlook on
the future.’
The physicists’ experiences in connection
with this explosion have been described in
various essays and other contexts. Gleick, in
his Feynman biography ‘Genius’ [15] writes:
‘Feynman tinkered with radios again at the
century’s big event. Someone passed around dark
welding glass for the eyes. Edward Teller put
on sun lotion and gloves. The bomb makers
were ordered to lie face down, their feet toward
ground zero, twenty miles away, where their
gadget sat atop a hundred-foot steel tower. . ..
Then, suddenly, music, the eerie, sweet sound
of a Tchaikovsky waltz floating irrelevantly from
the ether. It was a shortwave transmission on a
nearby frequency, all the way from San Francisco.
The signal gave Feynman a bench mark for his
calibrations.’
In an unclassified eyewitness account from 8
days after the explosion, Weisskopf recalls [19]:
After about three seconds its intensity
was so low I could remove the dark glass
and look at it directly. Then I saw a
reddish glowing smoke ball rising with a
thick stem of dark brown colour. This
smoke ball was surrounded by a blue
glow which clearly indicated a strong
radioactivity and was certainly due to the
gamma rays emitted by the cloud into the
surrounding air.
For many of the physicists, the initial reaction
was excitement over a spectacular demonstration
of the successful ‘technologically sweet’ joint
effort leading up to ‘the gadget’, as it was known:
‘[W]e started for a good reason, then you’re
working very hard to accomplish something and
it is a pleasure, it is excitement. And you stop
thinking, you know; you just stop.’ [4, p 136].
However, many of the descriptions also reflect
the tension between the physical and emotional
experience. Gleick [15] tells us: ‘The yellow–
orange sphere surrounded by a blue halo—a colour
that Weisskopf thought he had seen before, on
an altarpiece at Colmar painted by the medieval
master Mattias Grünewald to depict (the irony was
November 2006
The Manhattan project—a part of physics history
disturbing) the ascension of Christ.’ Gleick also
tells how “when the hot clouds dissipated, Rabi felt
a ‘chill which was not the morning cold’ ”.
Fermi’s wife Laura found that when he came
back later that day, he seemed ‘shrunken and aged,
made of old parchment, so entirely dried out and
browned was he by the desert sun and exhausted
by the ordeal’ [18].
Fermi’s eye-witness account shows him
always ready to perform estimations:
About 40 s after the explosion the air
blast reached me. I tried to estimate
its strength by dropping from about six
feet small pieces of paper before, during,
and after the passage of the blast wave.
Since, at the time, there was no wind I
could observe very distinctly and actually
measure the displacement of the pieces of
paper that were in the process of falling
while the blast was passing. The shift
was about 2 12 metres, which, at the time,
I estimated to correspond to the blast that
would be produced by ten thousand tons
of TNT [19].
Peierls comments: ‘I am not sure for what
I admire him most—his ingenuity in thinking of
the method, or his control in letting the scraps of
paper go at the right time’ [20]. Later, data from
various instruments gave a more accurate result,
about 19 ktons. Rabi won the bet!
The decision
One month before the Trinity test, a scientific
panel, consisting of Compton, Lawrence, Oppenheimer and Fermi presented Recommendations on
the Immediate Use of Nuclear Weapons [21], noting that the scientists are not unanimous and that
With regard to these general aspects of
the use of atomic energy, it is clear
that we, as scientific men, have no
proprietary 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 the
political, social, and military problems
which are presented by the advent of
atomic power.
November 2006
In Chicago a committee, chaired by Franck,
discussed in considerable detail the consequences
of an armament race and possibilities for
international control and agreements.
They
recommended that ‘a demonstration of the new
weapon may best be made before the eyes of
representatives of all United Nations, on the desert
or a barren island’ [22].
In early July, Szilard, who was part of the
Franck committee, circulated a petition which was
signed by physicists at Chicago and, some days
later, by physicists at Oak Ridge [23], totalling 137
signatures. (At Los Alamos Edward Teller chose
not to circulate Szilard’s petition.)
Discoveries of which the people of the
United States are not aware may affect
the welfare of this nation in the near
future. The liberation of atomic power
which has been achieved places atomic
bombs in the hands of the Army. . ..
In the cover letter to the colleagues at Oak Ridge,
Szilard wrote
However small the chance might be that
our petition may influence the course of
events, I personally feel that it would be
a matter of importance if a large number
of scientists who have worked in this field
went clearly and unmistakably on record
as to their opposition on moral grounds
to the use of these bombs in the present
phase of the war.
They were soon to know that the petition was
unsuccessful.
The responsibility of a scientist
With the background above, we can understand
Oppenheimer’s comments:
A scientist should assume responsibility
for the fruits of his work. I would
not argue against this, but it must be
clear to all of us how very modest such
assumption of responsibility can be, how
very ineffective it has been in the past,
how necessarily ineffective it will surely
be in the future [24].
Could scientists be held responsible for the
way results are used? Should certain areas of
science be avoided because of possible destructive
PHYSICS EDUCATION
497
A-M Mårtensson-Pendrill
use? After all, what has been discovered cannot
be undiscovered. Should allowable fields be
regulated—and if so, who should decide? Who
can predict the possible outcome of different
investigations? At what stage should work be
stopped? There are many difficult questions,
which are not, in themselves, of physical character.
How could Einstein have known that his famous
equation, E = mc2 , would come to be associated
with mass destruction? In the view of a historical
situation, with strong emotional load, opinions
may be easier to form before considering the
details. However, looking into a chain of events
should help students develop more balanced views.
Expressing views through the voices of others can
also help to widen the range of discussable views
in a classroom situation.
The true responsibility of a scientist, as
we all know, is to the integrity and vigor
of his science [24].
Is this sufficient? Oppenheimer’s assertion is
likely to provoke discussions. The American
Physical Society and Institute of Physics codes
of ethics [25] focus mainly on aspects related to
‘misconduct’. Many engineering societies include
a concern for other aspects: engineers use ‘their
knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human
welfare’ [26] and include also a consideration of
the consequences in their codes. A stronger Code
of Ethics for Scientists was formulated in 1984 by
a group of scientists at Uppsala [27].
Still, the consequences of fundamental physics
research are often hard to predict. Although,
as a post-doc at the University of Washington
in 1978–80, I was financed by the Department
of Energy, the work on methods for relativistic
many-body calculation in connection with parity
non-conservation seemed far removed from application. However, some years later, when we were
developing methods to treat correlation effects,
dealing with heavy two-electron ions as test cases,
we found that numerical results coming out were
sought after by the SDI—the ‘Star Wars’ initiative.
Is physics human?
Being a physicist is a wonderful privilege, giving
you the opportunity to meet and interact with many
dedicated people with strong personalities, and
you can also see how many of them grow old
498
PHYSICS EDUCATION
with a maintained creativity and interest in physics
and life.
The names of the Los Alamos physicists
occur again and again in textbooks and in
groundbreaking papers. Their names have become
names of effects, approximations and equations:
for example, Feynman diagrams, the Bethe
logarithm and the Bethe–Salpeter equation in
quantum electrodynamics mechanics, the Born–
Oppenheimer approximation in molecular physics,
the Rabi frequency, the Franck–Hertz experiment,
the Jahn–Teller effect, the Fermi distribution,
fermions, . . .. Often the name becomes so closely
related to the effect that we tend to forget that it
refers to a person. In my own research, I have
worked with the Bohr–Weisskopf effect, due to the
distribution of magnetization in the nucleus. I have
heard Weisskopf talk about nuclear disarmament
but also, for example, tell the story of a visit to
Israel where he learned from a Kabbalist that the
integer 137 (which is very close to the reciprocal
of the dimensionless fine structure constant) means
Kabbalah. I have read many of Weisskopf’s texts,
but only with conscious effort do I make the
connection between the person and the different
aspects of his work.
Let us not forget to show our students that
physics and physics research is a creative and
challenging human activity, where people interact
not only through equations and fields but also
through their personalities.
It troubles me that the public sees physics
only as the mother of technology. . .. No
one any longer pays attention to—if I
may call it—the spirit of physics, the idea
of discovery, the idea of understanding. I
think it is difficult to make clear to the
non-physicist the beauty of how it fits
together, of how you can build a world
picture, and the beauty that the laws of
physics are immutable [28].
In 1988, I spent three months at a workshop
at the Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa
Barbara. One of the participants in residence was
Bethe. As I read the description [15] of Bethe as
the Battleship and Feynman as the Mosquito Boat,
I recall how Bethe’s former student, Gerry Brown,
always left the coffee room, following closely in
the wake as soon as Bethe left. Rudolf Peierls
might have appeared old and fragile but he was
November 2006
The Manhattan project—a part of physics history
telling us about physics and of Los Alamos—
without manuscript or other aids. During a whalewatching trip he was standing with his binoculars,
always at the best viewing spot, his curiosity as
strong as ever.
Feynman was on the list of participants, but
disease and death prevented his participation. Also
Rabi, whom I have met at several conferences,
died that spring.
Scientists in school?
Direct contact with the Los Alamos physicists
is, of course, not an option for our students.
But in reading the documents related to the
Manhattan project, and sometimes listening to
recordings, they can get closer to the persons
behind textbook names and learn how great men
have dealt with difficult questions. The Manhattan
project abounds with interesting aspects and can
be used as examples for students in many different
ways. In my first contacts with general courses
in teacher education in our university, I was a
bit taken aback by a common attitude to science
and technology as a ‘root of all evil’, with the
bomb as a prime example. I decided to have the
students learn more about the development. A few
times I had the students prepare different minilessons about different aspects: history, politics,
physics, biology, ethics, where each group of
students could make use of their speciality. The
first time I used it in physics courses in the
teacher programme, I had the students choose
different aspects and tell the rest of the class. I
have also asked one group of students to do a
short dramatization, staging an imagined dinner
conversation taking place an evening before a
conference, when some of the physicists got
together again, sharing reminiscences from Los
Alamos. All these approaches have worked
reasonably well, although, on occasion, one or two
students might drift deep into weapons technology
or military strategies. With open-ended tasks, it
is always a question of subtle balance to give the
students freedom to feel ownership of their work,
and still provide sufficient instruction to help them
maintain the intended focus.
I found that asking the students to choose one
physicist and study his/her work, actions and reactions brought a good focus to their preparations.
The human aspects were inevitable—but so was
physics. Seeing the same event through the eyes of
November 2006
different physicists gave a good mixture of repetition and variation. By following the same physicist
through different periods the connections between
physics, life and society were more accessible.
Science and society
New frontiers of the mind are before us,
and if they are pioneered with the same
vision, boldness, and drive with which
we have waged this war we can create a
fuller and more fruitful employment and
a fuller and more fruitful life [29].
These optimistic words written in November 1944
are part of the letter from president Roosevelt to
Vannevar Bush, which led to the July 1945 report
Science—the Endless Frontier laying the ground
for many years of research policy and to the
establishment of the National Science Foundation
(NSF). After the war, many physicists also played
important roles as science advisors.
The period after the war showed some
dark sides of the relation between physics and
society. After the Second World War Edward
Teller concentrated on developing the hydrogen
bomb, leading to a first explosion in 1952.
The documents from the McCarthy era and the
Oppenheimer affair show us the action of the
Los Alamos physicists, with pride, integrity and
conflicting loyalties, in a slightly different context
where scientific openness and judgement clash
with national security issues [30]. Although
sufficiently long ago to be unclassified, this type
of problem is not outdated. However, the post-war
period also offers many examples of concerned
physicists getting involved with society-related
questions in a much more active way than before.
Many physicists worked in different ways to
reduce the nuclear threat.
The Federation of Atomic Scientists (later,
Federation of American Scientists, FAS) was
formed in 1945 by atomic scientists from the
Manhattan project ‘who felt that scientists,
engineers and other innovators had an ethical
obligation to bring their knowledge and experience
to bear on critical national decisions, especially
pertaining to the technology they unleashed—
the Atomic Bomb’ [31]. The Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists, also founded in 1945, continues
to ‘educate citizens about global security issues,
especially the continuing dangers posed by nuclear
PHYSICS EDUCATION
499
A-M Mårtensson-Pendrill
and other weapons of mass destruction, and the
appropriate roles of nuclear technology’ [32].
In 1955, Russell and Einstein launched a
manifesto [33] asking scientists of every country
to meet to devise ways of avoiding nuclear war.
One of the 11 signatories was Joseph Rotblat, who
founded the Pugwash Conference in 1957. Rotblat
and the Pugwash Conferences were awarded the
1995 Nobel peace prize.
What is the role of physics in society? Physics
has unleashed nuclear energy and there is no going
back. Weisskopf, in the preface to his book The
Privilege of Being a Physicist still maintained an
optimism concerning the role of scientists:
Science is a truly human concern; its concepts and language are the same for all
human beings. It transcends any cultural and political boundaries. Scientists understand each other immediately
when they talk about their scientific problems; it is therefore easier for them to
speak to each other on political or cultural questions and problems about which
they may have divergent opinions. The
scientific community serves as a bridge
across boundaries, as a spearhead of international understanding [34].
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank many colleagues, both at
the physics department and at the department of
education, in particular Aadu Ott, for inspiration to
try alternative forms of teaching and assessment.
Helpful comments from physics teacher Conny
Modig, professors Aant Elzinga and Gunnar
Tibell, as well as from the editors, were very much
appreciated.
Received 15 August 2006, in final form 29 August 2006
doi:10.1088/0031-9120/41/6/001
References
[1] Weisskopf V F 1985 Forty Years After: Thoughts
of a Nuclear Witness (New York: Freeman)
(reprinted in 1989 The Privilege of Being a
Physicist)
[2] Sjøberg S 2003 Science and technology
education: current challenges and possible
solutions Innovations in Science and
Technology Education vol VIII, ed
E Jenkins (Paris: UNESCO) folk.uio.no/
sveinsj/STE paper Sjoberg UNESCO2.htm
500
PHYSICS EDUCATION
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
Sjøberg S 2002 Science for the Children? Report
from the SAS-project, a cross-cultural study of
factors of relevance for the teaching and
learning of science and technology
folk.uio.no/sveinsj/sas report new%20.pdf
Horowitz J 1998 Building bombs, talking peace:
the political activity of Manhattan Project
physicists BA Thesis History and Social
Sciences, Harvard seti.harvard.edu/grad/jhpdf/
thesis.pdf
Feynman R P (as told to R Leighton) 1985 Surely,
You are Joking, Mr Feynman—Adventures of a
Curious Character (New York: Norton)
Kofoed M 2006 Phys. Educ. 41 502–7
Photos from the Solvay conferences can be found
e.g. at the Emilio Segrè visual archives at the
American Institute of Physics photos.aip.org/
A short movie from the 1927 conference is
available at www.maxborn.net/
Gamow G 1966 Thirty Years That Shook Physics:
The Story of Quantum Theory (Garden City,
NY: Anchor Books)
Sime R L 1996 Lise Meitner: A Life in Physics
(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press)
Rife P 1999 Lise Meitner and the Dawn of the
Nuclear Age (Basle: Birkhäuser)
Weisskopf V F 1989 Thoughts of a Hitler refugee
The Privilege of Being a Physicist (New York:
Freeman) p 203
Frayn M 1998 Copenhagen (London: Methuen
Drama)
See also e.g. Ziman J 1998 An evening with the
Bohrs Phys. World (June) physicsweb.org/
articles/review/11/6/5
Durani M 2001 Secret letters cast light on
Copenhagen Phys. World (November)
physicsweb.org/articles/world/14/11/2
Pais A 1994 Niels Bohr’s Times—in Physics,
Philosophy, and Polity (Oxford: Clarendon)
p 497
American Institute of Physics Einstein
Exhibit www.aip.org/history/einstein/ae44.htm
Bethe H A J. Robert Oppenheimer Obituary
published at www.nap.edu/readingroom/
books/biomems/joppenheimer.pdf
Los Alamos National Laboratory 1995 Evolving
from Calculators to Computers, 50th
Anniversary Article www.lanl.gov/history/
atomicbomb/computers.shtml
Gleick J 1992 Genius: The Life and Science of
Richard Feynman (London: Pantheon) excerpts
available on-line from Gleick’s site www.
around.com/genius.html
Howes R H and Herzenberg C L 2000 Their Day
in the Sun: Women of the Manhattan Project
(Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press)
www.temple.edu/tempress/titles/1222 reg.html
Contributions of Twentieth-Century Women to
Physics cwp.library.ucla.edu
Moody S 1995 Proving ground An Albuquerque
Journal Special Reprint (July) www.
abqjournal.com/trinity/trinity3.pdf
Fermi L 1995 Atoms in the Family: My Life with
Enrico Fermi (cited in Kitchens S A 2005
November 2006
The Manhattan project—a part of physics history
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
1945; Dead Old Parchment)
www.2020hindsight.org/2005/07/16/
Dannen G (transcriber) 1945 Trinity Test, July 16,
1945—Eyewitness Accounts www.dannen.
com/decision/trin-eye.html
Peierls R 1985 Bird of Passage (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press) p 202
Compton A H, Lawrence E O,
Oppenheimer J R and Fermi E 1945
Recommendation on the Immediate Use of
Nuclear Weapons, June 16, 1945 transcribed
by G Dannen (June) www.dannen.com/
decision/scipanel.html
Franck J et al 1945 Report of the Committee on
Political and Social Problems, Manhattan
Project ‘Metallurgical Laboratory’, University
of Chicago, June 11, 1945 (The Franck Report)
transcribed by G Dannen at www.dannen.com/
decision/franck.html
Szilard L 1945 Petition transcribed by G Dannen
at www.dannen.com/decision/45-07-03.html
and www.dannen.com/decision/45-07-04.html
and www.dannen.com/decision/
Oppenheimer J R 1947 Physics in the
contemporary world MIT Lecture, published in
Great Essays in Science 1994 ed M Gardner
(New York: Meridian) p 205
Statements of Ethics by the APS www.aps.org/
statements/index.cfm and by the IoP, www.iop.
org/aboutus/The Institute of Physics/
Governance/Ethics/page 1863.html
Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions
at IIT, Codes of Ethics Online—
Engineering ethics.iit.edu/codes/engineer.html
The Uppsala Code of Ethics for Scientists
available on-line at user.it.uu.se/∼pugwash/
Etik/uppsalakodex.html
November 2006
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
see also Gustafsson B, Ryden L, Tibell G and
Wallensten P 1984 Focus on: the Uppsala code
of ethics for scientists J. Peace Res. 21 (4)
Bethe H A 1991 The Road from Los Alamos see
also www.aip.org/history/newsletter/fall2005/
bethe.htm
Bush V 1945 Science—The Endless Frontier
www.nsf.gov/about/history/vbush1945.htm
The Atomic Archive www.atomicarchive.com/
Docs/Oppenheimer/ includes transcripts of
testimonies in the Oppenheimer affair
See also www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/
nuclear-weapons/history/cold-war/
oppenheimer-affair/index.htm and www.yale.
edu/lawweb/avalon/abomb/oppmenu.htm
Federation of Atomic Scientists www.fas.org/
static/about.jsp
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists www.thebulletin.
org/
Russell B and Einstein A 1955 The Russell
Einstein Manifesto www.nuclearfiles.org/
menu/key-issues/ethics/issues/scientific/
russell-einstein-manifesto.htm
Weisskopf V F 1989 The Privilege of Being a
Physicist (New York: Freeman) pp 7–8
Ann-Marie Mårtensson-Pendrill is
professor in physics at Göteborg
University, with a background in
computational atomic physics. She is a
fellow of the American Physical Society
and of the Institute of Physics. Her
teaching involves engineering, physics
and teacher programmes and she is
involved with different forms of informal
learning, including amusement park
physics.
PHYSICS EDUCATION
501