tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post4215570152701184270..comments2023-10-20T10:08:03.133+01:00Comments on SomeBeans: Mother, do you think they'll drop the Bomb?SomeBeanshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11076372969807940310noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-52704301989571619502010-03-03T18:34:01.891+00:002010-03-03T18:34:01.891+00:00That sounds rather Asimov!
Your picture reminded ...That sounds rather Asimov!<br /><br />Your picture reminded me of a picture of the first true hydrogen bomb:<br />http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/IvyMikeDevB640c20.jpg<br />Which looks like a mis-placed piece of chemical engineering plant.SomeBeanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11076372969807940310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-78973706329379274712010-03-03T09:51:01.703+00:002010-03-03T09:51:01.703+00:00You have to admit, morally it isn't so great b...You have to admit, morally it isn't so great but the sheer awesome factor of some of the photos is just mind blowing. That one you have is truely astonishing. <br /><br />If you didn't know it, there is an Asimov story which I suspect is based on seeing that or similar pics - a group of sci+mil folk are watching the first ultra-fast movie of a A-bomb and just after the start they are horror-struck as a grinning devils face emerges...<br /><br />Meanwhile, http://www.flickr.com/photos/belette/2245367326/ is fun. "At work in the fields of the bomb" is the source.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-48938935821252511792010-01-31T09:32:07.867+00:002010-01-31T09:32:07.867+00:00@Alexander crockett, I think what you say about ma...@Alexander crockett, I think what you say about mass harm in distant lands becoming easier is correct, but mass media means we are much more concerned about deaths on our own side.<br /><br />I think war up's the level of effort in various fields but I think a lot of it is about engineering (getting workable devices) rather than pure discovery. No one funds science for <br /> the sake of it, they do it because it will provide economic or military advantage.SomeBeanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11076372969807940310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-51296668716435291612010-01-31T07:28:50.298+00:002010-01-31T07:28:50.298+00:00A really very interesting post. Much needed discus...A really very interesting post. Much needed discussion. Although I found the personal angle compelling I'm not convinced that the one bomb vs. many is much of an argument. Fire doesn't put out fire after all. But then that would be a pacifist line I suppose. What was important in this post for me was that someone was asking a personal question about how they would respond. The experiments by Stanley Milgram certainly show the degree to which these kinds of searching questions are not asked by people enough.<br /><br />In Humanity: A Moral History of the Twentieth Century Jonathan Glover makes the interesting point that mass harm has become much easier with the development of technologies such as the A Bomb as we can render great disaster with greater distance. Certainly with Hiroshima one plane was enough.<br /><br />I agree with you; a scientist is a person. The moral responsibility of scientists is certainly a hard one indeed. I don't suppose it's any different to the responsibility we all bear. For me the fundamental question is, what kind of a world do we want to live in? But at the same time how often has scientific progress gone hand in hand with military effort? I am pro knowledge, just wish we didn't need to kill people in order to finance it.Alexander crocketthttp://brokenpostcard.ceasura.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-58964976156584899752010-01-30T16:17:48.392+00:002010-01-30T16:17:48.392+00:00Sorry, I don't think I made myself clear. I w...Sorry, I don't think I made myself clear. I was trying not to judge them, I was considering myself in their position. I know I couldn't be part of something like that knowing the results it would deliver. That said, there's a large chunk of me that can justify the actions as a way to stop the war - many for the few. <br />I visited two of the D-Day landing beaches last summer and that and my research had a profound effect on me. The thought of what happened there and elsewhere in the war would lead me to try almost anything to bring a conflict like that to an end.<br />And therein, for me, lies the conflict. I just know I'd have difficulty with the moral aspect later as I'm sure many of those involved in the Manhattan Project did.bjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07026570500023144107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-28803285154009268222010-01-30T10:17:08.755+00:002010-01-30T10:17:08.755+00:00@drop4three - they were people living in a differe...@drop4three - they were people living in a different time. World War I had only finish 20 years or so previously (i.e. it was as distant as 1990 is to us). The UK alone lost over 1 million people to WWI. The war in Europe had killed millions by 1945.<br /><br />I think they would have felt like part of a large enterprise, i.e. not individually responsible, and also what they were doing was right in the sense that the war was killing millions, and this could be a way to end it.<br /><br />Countering that Joseph Rotblat and no doubt un-reported others made the decision that they did not want to be involved. This may have been because the US was clearly seeing the atomic bomb as an anti-Soviet device as much as an anti-Japan device (and not the anti-Hitler device originally envisioned).<br /><br />Richard Feynmann, who worked on the bomb, was certainly deeply effected in the period after the war and I imagine many others would have been too.<br /><br />I think in summary I'm profoundly suspicious of the moral judgements we make of people working in a different time under different circumstances.SomeBeanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11076372969807940310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-78973491461582023052010-01-30T08:56:27.641+00:002010-01-30T08:56:27.641+00:00Intesting post, and interesting dilema. Your ques...Intesting post, and interesting dilema. Your question on "kill with one bomb or many bombs" is the crux for me. <br />As a non-scientific type, the moral angle is my first consideration, although I can see how developing something of this magnitutde or power would be attractive but they must have known the devices they created would be deployed.<br />You could, though, put the same question to Barnes-Wallace and ask how many people died when the Ruhr dams were destroyed by his bouncing bombs. They were built for a specific purpose - destruction - as were the atomic bombs (I'll set aside all the other discoveries they made during the process).<br />Me? I can't reconcile head and heart. I know the argument that by hitting Japan this way it would bring the war to an end earlier, but I can't bring myself to think of something that would cause that loss of life in one go. <br />I'd never sleep again.bjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07026570500023144107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-4634510790568534192010-01-29T10:41:36.522+00:002010-01-29T10:41:36.522+00:00@Stephen - Egerton was a busy chap, unlike your bl...@Stephen - Egerton was a busy chap, unlike your blog post on Muybridge I was unable to recreate his photos locally. I think there's a law about setting off nuclear explosions - bloody nanny state ;-)<br /><br />The post was in part stimulated by my stepmother's report on a visit to the Los Alamos museum, she said it was all very gungho which gave me pause for thought.SomeBeanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11076372969807940310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-12922342422266278162010-01-29T09:11:36.172+00:002010-01-29T09:11:36.172+00:00Thanks for that Ian - very interesting indeed. Rho...Thanks for that Ian - very interesting indeed. Rhodes' book is one of my all-time favourites: a fantastic run through the history of atomic physics and the Manhattan project. <br /><br />I didn't know that Edgerton was involved in photographing the Trinity blast, though that's hardly surprising since I only really became aware of his work <a href="http://network.nature.com/people/scurry/blog/2010/01/26/still-running" rel="nofollow">last week</a>!Stephen Curryhttp://network.nature.com/people/scurry/blognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-26297723669036956652010-01-28T20:04:50.685+00:002010-01-28T20:04:50.685+00:00@Clare - I hadn't seen the PD Smith book - add...@Clare - I hadn't seen the PD Smith book - added to my list because I think more records have been released since Richard Rhodes wrote "The Making of The Atomic Bomb" (which I have read). I've also read Richard Feynmann's books of anecdotes, and the Gleick biography.<br /><br />I'd heard of the Tube Alloy project, but didn't know it had a Welsh link!SomeBeanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11076372969807940310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36070744.post-89011695230555143192010-01-28T19:22:25.166+00:002010-01-28T19:22:25.166+00:00Fascinating post, especially the resume of what th...Fascinating post, especially the resume of what the scientists did next. Have you read PD Smith's The Doomsday Men? I found this fascinating. <br /><br />Also did you know the Manhattan Project started near Mold in Rhydymwyn? It was called the Tubes Alloy project and ran alongside a vast complex making chemical weapons. It open to the public and atmospheric. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/8478844.stmClare Dudmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06197558842580794165noreply@blogger.com