🚀 go-pugleaf

From oml@eloka.demon.co.uk (Owen Lewis)

In article <C1D84A.989@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie writes:

>Does anyone know of any evidence confirming or disputing the existence of a
>German nuclear research programme? If there was one, was it very far
>advanced by the time the war ended? 
>
For a very reasonable account, read 'The Most Secret War' by Dr R.V.Jones, an
account of WWII British Scientific Intelligence by one of the men who lead it.

-- 

                               -= Owen Lewis =-
                                      @
Tele/fax     +44-(0)794-301731      ELOKA       Consultancy & Project Management
                            oml@eloka.demon.co.uk
 

From "Eugene N. Miya" <eugene@nas.nasa.gov>

In article <C1D84A.989@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie
(Aylwyn Scally) writes:
>It seems to be a commonly held view that by the end of the Second World War,
>German physicists were very close to developing their own atomic bomb.

No where near.

>However, Gleick, in his biography of Feynman, suggests that most physicists
>in Britain and the US at the time doubted the existence of a German atomic
>programme, on the grounds that there had been very little published research
>from Germany in this field.

You interpret this wrong.  America published little.  The German program
was known.  That knowledge got the US program going.

>While this may be the case, I do recall reading somewhere that the large
>heavy-water distilling plant (the name of which I cannot remember) in Nazi-
>controlled Norway was considered a serious-enough threat for them to try to
>destroy it.

Norsk Hydro plant in Telemark.  A popular film and a documentary exist
on its destruction.

>Does anyone know of any evidence confirming or disputing the existence of a
>German nuclear research programme? If there was one, was it very far
>advanced by the time the war ended? 

Visit a decent University library.  The history is documented.
The number of reference pages is in the dozens.
New documents are going to be published by the Engish shortly.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Associate Editor, Software and Publication Reviews
  Scientific Programming
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Seeking Books to buy:	Bongard, Pattern Recognition
			3 down 1 to go.

From Steve Williams <swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil>


In sci.military, aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie (Aylwyn Scally) writes:
 >From aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie (Aylwyn Scally)
 >
 >It seems to be a commonly held view that by the end of the Second World War,
 >German physicists were very close to developing their own atomic bomb.

This was a common view at that time, but there's nothing to sustain
this concept.  The Germans initially had a five-year lead in the nuclear
research, but they took a wrong turn somewhere along the way.

 >While this may be the case, I do recall reading somewhere that the large
 >heavy-water distilling plant (the name of which I cannot remember) in Nazi-
 >controlled Norway was considered a serious-enough threat for them to try to
 >destroy it.

This was a potential threat, but this doesn't mean that the Germans 
were inches away from building a nuclear bomb.  If I remember right, 
the Germans hadn't even achieved a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction,
similar to that under Enrico Fermi at University of Chicago.

>Does anyone know of any evidence confirming or disputing the existence of a
>German nuclear research programme? If there was one, was it very far
>advanced by the time the war ended?

As the Allied forces overran the countries of France and Germany in 
1944 and 1945, they searched for any existence of this proramme, but 
found none.  After the war the American physicists interviewed the German
physicists and reviewed their records, and concluded that the Germans
did take a wrong turn along the way.  Furthermore, the French physicists
weren't cooperating with the Germans.

Note: All of this from my memory; please correct me if I am wrong.  
      No flames, please.  There's a book on this subject that I read
      some time ago; I think its title was "Making of the Atomic Bomb".

---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Steve Williams                           swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil
---------------------------------------------------------------------

From Stephen Jacobs <saj@chinet.chi.il.us>

There is a small industry in reconstructing the what and why of German 
nuclear weapon research in WWII.  A fair amount was learned by physical
intelligence methods during the war.  More was learned after the war, and
texts of various interrogations are now being released.  The short 
summary is that small numbers of atomic bombs would have done Germany
little good, and the people in charge realized that.  The resources to
develop atomic explosives were used instead on other, more promising,
projects.  A V-2, with a 1 metric ton warhead, couldn't have carried an
atomic bomb of crude design (like the ones dropped on Japan).  If Germany
had produced, say, 4 atomic bombs, and threatened to use them against
Allied cities, the likely response would have involved a very credible
threat to use mustard gas against German cities.  The weapon which the
German nuclear weapons program was within some decent reach of by the
end would have denied use of an area by essentially melting down a reactor.

                                    Steve     saj@chinet.chi.il.us

From "Eugene N. Miya" <eugene@nas.nasa.gov>

In article <C1F74x.L3M@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Steve Williams
<swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil> writes:
>As the Allied forces overran the countries of France and Germany in 
>1944 and 1945, they searched for any existence of this proramme, but 
>found none.  After the war the American physicists interviewed the German
>physicists and reviewed their records, and concluded that the Germans
>did take a wrong turn along the way.  Furthermore, the French physicists
>weren't cooperating with the Germans.
>
>Note: All of this from my memory; please correct me if I am wrong.  

The only correction was that it was the British who interviewed the
Germans (Farmhall).  The Americans only did the capture and had minimal
contact.  The Americans did find the elements of an incomplete pile,
stockpiles of uranium, and tons of documents.  Specific reference was made
to Rhoades book, but in this case Sam Goudsmit's book on the Alsos Project
would be better.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Associate Editor, Software and Publication Reviews
  Scientific Programming
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Seeking Books to buy:	Bongard, Pattern Recognition
			3 down 1 to go.

From dave pierson <pierson@empror.enet.dec.com>

In article <C1F74x.L3M@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, Steve Williams
<swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil> writes, in part:

> >While this may be the case, I do recall reading somewhere that the large
> >heavy-water distilling plant (the name of which I cannot remember) in Nazi-
> >controlled Norway was considered a serious-enough threat for them to try to
> >destroy it.

>This was a potential threat, but this doesn't mean that the Germans 
>were inches away from building a nuclear bomb.  If I remember right, 
>the Germans hadn't even achieved a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction,
>similar to that under Enrico Fermi at University of Chicago.

	They took a lot longer, buit i believe they had one or two by war's
	end.

>>Does anyone know of any evidence confirming or disputing the existence of a
>>German nuclear research programme? If there was one, was it very far
>>advanced by the time the war ended?
	For a summary, look for:
		The German Atomic Bomb
		David Irving

	which is relatively recent.

	Also, by coincidence, i note that NOVA, the PBS Science show (in the
	USA) has an upcoming show on the early history of the Russian/USSR
	program, and the influence of the German nuclear scientists the
	"acquired".  (Tuesday, 2 Feb, 8:00pm in Boston, others, check local
	listings...)

thanks
dave pierson			|the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Digital Equipment Corporation	|the opinions, my own.
pierson@msd26.enet.dec.com	|I am the NRA.
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing."  A J Raffles

From Ewan M Munro IE90 <emunro@cs.strath.ac.uk>


In article <C1D84A.989@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie (Aylwyn Scally) writes:
|> 
|> From aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie (Aylwyn Scally)
|> 
|> [Stuff about WWII nuclear research deleted]
|>
|> Does anyone know of any evidence confirming or disputing the existence of a
|> German nuclear research programme? If there was one, was it very far
|> advanced by the time the war ended?

The BBC ran a "Horizon" programme about this topic, not so long ago - it was
called "Hitler's Bomb."

The show was partly based on secret recording that had recently been
declassified. British Intelligence gathered a group of German Nuclear
Physicists in a country mansion and recorded their reactions to the news
that the bomb had been dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

At the beginning of the war German nuclear research was *AT LEAST* on a
par with America's or Britian's.

In 1941, German scientists were asked if the could produce a bomb. They said,
in theory, it could be done - but it would take about three or four years to do.
German generals were unwilling to commit themselves to such a long term project,
since it was generally believed that the war would only last a couple more
years, win or lose. Instead, scientific projects which offered more immediate
weapons, such as rocket research, were pursued.

This was in contrast to the American belief that it would take *MANY* years to
grind down Germany and her allies.

German nuclear research continued right until the end of the war, but the scale
was nowhere near as great as that of the "Manhattan Project." The research was
not funded by the military, but by the "Ministry of Culture" (!!!) and was
hampered by availability of Uranium & Heavy water.

The German goal appears to have been to produce a sustainable nuclear reaction
is a Uranium machine. I think that this was basically a large number of Uranium
cubes, suspended in Heavy Water. They got about 75% of the reactants that they
needed before the reactor was caopture by the allies.

An implication is that, since the Germans chose rocket research instead of
nuclear ( in fact these funding decisions were made by one man ), the Germans
could have procured the bomb instead of the missile, but not both. It is argued
that the Germans spent more on rocket research than was spent in the "Manhattan
Project."

Hope that this info is of interest.

-- 
#include <disclaimer.h>                    Internet: emunro@cs.strath.ac.uk
"You don't understand. If you do drop <the microprocessor> through a crack
 and lose it, then there are millions more where that came from."
        Robert Noyce : co-inventor of the integrated circuit.  

From Mr YC Yap <eln118w@lindblat.cc.monash.edu.au>

Aylwyn Scally (aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie) wrote:
: 
: 
: It seems to be a commonly held view that by the end of the Second World War,
: German physicists were very close to developing their own atomic bomb.
: Coupled with the development of the V2 missile, this could have completely
: changed the outcome of the war.
: 
: Does anyone know of any evidence confirming or disputing the existence of a
: German nuclear research programme? If there was one, was it very far
: advanced by the time the war ended? 

I seem to remember watching this documentary on German nuclear research.
The Germans were ahead initially, and thised the Americans to develop their
own bomb. But as the war turned against the Germans,around 1942, Hitler
preferred research projects that could turn out war-winning weapons within
a short time, about 6 months I think. German nuclear scientists predicted
it'll take at least 2 years before they could achieve self-sustaining
reaction. So the German High Command lost interest in this field, but
instead based their hopes on rocket research. I think the Germans spent
more money on the V-weapons research than the Americans spent on their
nuclear project.

At the end of the war, it was discovered that the Germans had build a crude
experimental reactor, but did not achieve self-sustaining reaction due to
the lack of certain raw material(either uranium or heavy water, I'm not
sure). They were close to achieving self-sustaining reaction, but still far
away from the bomb.

Alexander.
Mailing address : 10792759@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au
 

From "Andres C. Gaeris" <agae@palm.lle.rochester.edu>


The best reference about the history, science and politics of the German
nuclear research program in WW2 is in the book of the controversial (because
his supposed Germanophilia) author David Irving. From the Univewrsity's
electronic catalog I get:

AUTHOR:   Irving, David John Cawdell, 1938-
TITLE:    The German atomic bomb; the history of nuclear research in Nazi Germ>
IMPRINT:  New York, Simon and Schuster [1968, c1967]

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION:  329 p. illus., maps, ports. 23 cm.
NOTES:      "Notes and sources": p. 305-320.
SUBJECTS:   Atomic energy research -- Germany. * Atomic bomb -- History.
OCLC NUMBER: 00382109
 
I found this book pretty interesting, fairly written and very enlightening
about the workings of the German research 'establishment'.

Andres C. Gaeris
Junior laser fusioneer

agae@lle.rochester.edu

From "Eugene N. Miya" <eugene@nas.nasa.gov>

In article <C1H2CL.Dyu@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> dave pierson
<pierson@empror.enet.dec.com> writes:
>And tracking down the public info on this is rather a hobby of mine.

I was just at LLNL Friday (third visit in 4 months) and one thing I
have noticed is that there is a lot of historical discussion going on
right now in the nuclear community.  I am on the sideline of one such
email discussion between physicists (some of whom are weapons designers),
and some interesting historical questions are being raised in parallel to
this discussion (I was just passing thru, and I noted this discussion to
them).  While the discussion is not classified, it is private, so I
will make no further note than to say you are not alone in tracking,
wondering, and reviewing, the people who lived this are introspecting as well.

BTW guys, the ref I gave on pigeons and aerial photography is a solid
ref.  It never comes better than the Manual of Remote Sensing.
Just probing moderation policies.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Associate Editor, Software and Publication Reviews
  Scientific Programming
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Seeking Books to buy:	Bongard, Pattern Recognition
			3 down 1 to go.

From Brian Douglass <anasaz!briand@anasazi.com>

In article <C1F74x.L3M@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Steve Williams <swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil> writes:
>
>From Steve Williams <swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil>
>
>
>In sci.military, aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie (Aylwyn Scally) writes:
> >From aylwyn@maths.tcd.ie (Aylwyn Scally)
> >
> >It seems to be a commonly held view that by the end of the Second World War,
> >German physicists were very close to developing their own atomic bomb.
>
>This was a common view at that time, but there's nothing to sustain
>this concept.  The Germans initially had a five-year lead in the nuclear
>research, but they took a wrong turn somewhere along the way.

[stuff deleted]
>Note: All of this from my memory; please correct me if I am wrong.  
>      No flames, please.  There's a book on this subject that I read
>      some time ago; I think its title was "Making of the Atomic Bomb".

There is also a documentary out, somewhere in which the principal subject
was the Army Officer responsible for going through captured facilities
looking for evidence of the German program.  Though he did find such
evidence, what he found led him and others back at the Manhattan project to
believe the Germans were not even close to completion of a bomb.  

What sticks out in memory about this documentary was how this officer said
"...though shocked to realize the Germans were so far behind, Oppie and the
rest never even thought about stopping the project [Manhattan].  After all,
there was still a war on in the Pacific."  to paraphrase.

Whether or not Manhattan should have been stopped was another question the
documentary was attempting to answer.

>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Steve Williams                           swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil
>---------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
"The best government of all is that government which governs the least."
	Jefferson
Brian Douglass		briand@anasazi.com 	602-870-3330 X657

From "Stimpson J. Cat" <davidy@seattleu.edu>

In article <C1H2zB.F53@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Ewan M Munro IE90 <emunro@cs.strath.ac.uk> writes:
>
>From Ewan M Munro IE90 <emunro@cs.strath.ac.uk>
>
>

******************* other German A-Bomb meterial deleted ****************

>
>The German goal appears to have been to produce a sustainable nuclear reaction
>is a Uranium machine. I think that this was basically a large number of Uranium
>cubes, suspended in Heavy Water. They got about 75% of the reactants that they
>needed before the reactor was caopture by the allies.
>

************************* meterial deleted ****************************

>
>Hope that this info is of interest.
>
>-- 
>#include <disclaimer.h>                    Internet: emunro@cs.strath.ac.uk
>"You don't understand. If you do drop <the microprocessor> through a crack
> and lose it, then there are millions more where that came from."
>        Robert Noyce : co-inventor of the integrated circuit.  
>



	According to Albert Speer in his autobiography "Inside the Third
Reich," nuclear research was indeed given a low priority in Germany. Speer
attended a conference on nuclear technology, where he was informed by Walter
Heisenburg that America appeared to be well in the lead in nuclear research,
as... "Excerpts from American technical journals suggested that plenty of
technical and financial resources were available there for nuclear research.
This meant America probably had a head start in the matter, whereas Germany had
been in the forefront of those studies only a few years ago." (Inside the
3rd Reich, pp.301, paperback edition.)

	Speer also said nuclear research was held back by the lack of a 
cyclotron, and when Speer proposed to have cyclotrons built as large or
larger than the American ones, he was told their lack of experience meant
only a small one would be useful. Speer offered more in resources, but was told
they could not utilize them at that time. In the end, Speer was told the
bomb could not be ready for 3-4 years, and Speer reasoned the war would end
before then. Thus, Speer says, he "authorized the development of an energy-
producing uranium motor for propelling machinery. The Navy was interested in
that for its submarines." (I3R, pp. 303)

	Speer said he eventually released the stock of 1200 tons of uranium 
for use in solid-core ammuniation, prompted by a shortage of tungsten caused
by cutoffs from their suppliers from Portgual. I recall a thread a while
back asking if the Germans had used uranium-cored ammunition in WWII - if
Speer is correct, it seems they did.




					David L. Yee
				email to:davidy@sumax.seattleu.edu