In my mind's eye, like a waking dream, I could still see the tongues of fire at work on the bodies of men.” With such profound insights into the philosophy of science available, it is a shame that the author chose instead to grasp at lofty sentiments about the nature of war and weapons of mass destruction. Of course, in a book about the atom bomb, such discussions are obligatory, and it's logical for this to be the focus of the philosophical discussions in the book. But the position that the author chose to argue - specifically, Bohr's conviction that the surest guarantee of peace in a post-nuclear world would have been for the USA to share its knowledge with Russia - is frankly nonsensical, and in historical hindsight, mistaken. MM: Freeman’s book examines the emergence of the Atomic Age, with its odd mixture of futuristic fantasy and existential angst. It extends the narrative of wartime Oak Ridge into the Cold War and beyond, revealing some of the curious ambiguities that characterize contemporary scientific and political culture.

This book read like a wonderful novel with nail-biting cliffhangers and spellbinding plots. At its heart is the wonderful energy and passion of inventing an entirely new science. But what makes it so poignant is that it is set in a time of horrible desperation in the heart of World War II. It is compelling and terrifying to see what happened to Japan's people and then think of what could have happened to the world if the Nazis had built an atomic bomb first. But no one knew just how terrible this new weapon was. Some scientists had an idea (particularly Bohr and Szilard) but preventing the use of it after completion was too late - politically, the US had to use it; and only after using it, and only after some time, did everyone understand what vast terror they unleashed.

A great story of science, war, history, politics, a story that uniquely blends humanity’s greatest talents with its gravest errors. A triumphant scientific and industrial effort of the greatest minds racing to invent the way of humankind’s self-destruction. The book is very TMI about everything and everybody. The other factor is that the events he covers have largely faded from memory. I think it’s safe to say that it would not get published today. One of the best parts about this book is that it also focuses a lot on the people involved with the original scientists who worked on the Manhattan Project. This book by Jennet Conant also talks about many of the families who lived in Santa Fe during the war. Most of these characters are friends and family to the scientists working on the project. I thought about this when Richard Rhodes writes about the men who dropped the atom bomb on Hiroshima. One is quoted, and I paraphrase: "At least this will get this thing over with and we can get home alive." If I had been that man, or any of those men, would I not think the same thing and sigh with incredible relief? What was happening on the ground was just more of what had been suffered for the past half decade worldwide. There would be more pain before the relief could come; that is just the way of it. Several characters played a very central part in the book; of course, General Leslie Groves, Leo Szilard and Robert Oppenheimer played central roles in the story. But, the most interesting character was the Danish scientist Niels Bohr. He won the Nobel Prize for his work in understanding the strucutre of the atom and quantum mechanics. Besides this, he was politically active. He went to President Roosevelt and to Prime Minister Winston Churchill, to try to convince them to share the atomic bomb with the Soviet Union. He was concerned about the political balance of power after World War II. His ideas were dismissed by both leaders. He also played a key role in saving thousands of Jews in Denmark, by persuading the King of Sweden to allow them to escape into Sweden, to avoid capture by the Nazis.

Rhodes does not ignore any aspect of the process. This book is a scientific history, a political history, a biography, and a technical manual. He begins in the 19th century at the advent of nuclear physics, and walks through the lives of its significant contributors. He goes into (often excrutiating) details about the development of the first nuclear reactors, the early life of Oppenheimer, and the development of the amazing military-industrial complex required to create the small amount of material needed for the three atom bombs detonated during World War II (one test unit and the two used over Japan). Rhodes makes the people involved seem human and manages to mostly avoid social commentary, merely presenting the facts as they were. The safety of a nation – as opposed to its ability to inflict appalling damage on the enemy power – cannot lie primarily in its scientific and technological capability. It can be based only on making future war impossible. But does the atomic bomb eliminate the possibilities of total wars in the future? The Manhattan Project: The Birth of the Atomic Bomb in the Words of its Creators, Eyewitnesses, and HistoriansThe content in this book is not merely well researched. The author writes one of the most compelling stories about this man’s life based on countless hours of research. To give you an idea of what he went through, it took Kai 25 years to finally have enough to write it.

The best thing about each of these books is that all of them offer a different perspective of this entire historical event. 109 East Palace is the perfect example of this as it describes the same event as all of these other books but yet it tells an entirely different story in terms of characters and perspective. Eventually, though, it got more readable. I still could have done with less technical physics bits, but... apparently that can't be helped. Oh well.

How to Vote

I don’t use these words often (on Goodreads, maybe 3 times in toto), but here they are, and all together at once. The Making of the Atomic Bomb is a tour de force, a magnum opus, a bible, a masterpiece, a work sui generis. Richard Rhodes has conducted a crusade to chronicle all things Atomic Bomb. In scope and scale this is Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Tolstoy’s War and Peace, and David McCullough’s Truman. Nevertheless, I learned a great deal from this book. And will read more about it from shorter tomes. We won’t spoil any of these crucial secrets, as that may be one of the most exciting moments of this book. The bottom line is if you’re looking for one of the most popular Manhattan Project books out there, then you’ve found the perfect choice. This is the true story of the women of Oak Ridge, and the roles they played in building the atomic bomb. There were many people involved in this project. The books that we’re about to review include many names, events, secrets, and much more that may surprise you. The story is a broad one with many versions told by different people. However, this project wasn’t a secret for long and there is so much to discover about it after the time that has passed. Why Was the Manhattan Project Called That? Knowing that he'd need the right man to run the operation, he hired Oppenheimer, who was a man born to wealthy Jewish parents and used to high society, to assemble the scientific team. Kunetka explores how these two men interacted and balanced the demands of their positions while working to develop the first atomic bomb.

Beverly Willis, co-founder of the National Building Museum and Founding Trustee of the Museum, Dies While some of the top Manhattan Projects books tell stories of certain events involving the project, this book by Cynthia C. Kelly focuses on spreading more facts, such as the number of people that came to work on this, the time it took to progress, the amount of money spent, and much more. Most intriguing to me was the fascination of Oppenheimer and others with atomic bomb research as a research problem and the interesting mental rationale this involved in separating the thrill of the research from the moral implications of the use of these weapons. Not all could sustain this. Joseph Rotblat left the project when he realized the Germans would not build the bomb and became a disarmament advocate. Leo Szilard organized scientists to appeal to the President not to use this weapon.The book's weakest element is its occasional staccato rhythm. At times we jump from place to place, person to person, making discovery after discovery, and decision after decision with the only link being a temporal one. As if the research of Fermi in his lab in Rome and the decisions of Churchill at 10 Downing St can be juxtaposed simply because they happened on the same day.