"The Effects of Nuclear Weapons"

"Barnaby Finch" wrote in message
...
On 6/1/04 9:47 PM, in article ,
"JASON A. KAATZ" wrote:

History may judge Teller correct about the wisdom of acquiring the Super
before the Russians did,

The current draft of history seems not to do so.

It conforms to contentions made publicly by a former Teller protege, Herbert
York, that following Oppenheimer and the GACs advice would not harmed U.S.
security at all and probably would have enhanced it. In the 1970s York
pointed out that if the U.S. had not gone ahead with testing the hydrogen
bomb,and had just retained it untested as a backup, and simply outfitted
its bomber force with 500 kt fission bombs, the US would have retained
overwhelming dominance over the USSR.

This is because the U.S. had a tremendous advantage in :
1) delivery capability, and
2) uranium enrichment, and
3) the U.S. had a viable bomb concept that it could get ready to test and
leave on the shelf as a contingency

Even if the USSR had gone ahead and perfected the hydrogen bomb on its own,
the U.S. would have picked up the test and could have taken its own design
off the shelf, tested it, and still beaten the USSR into having significant
deployment.

And the most recent evidence shows that without U.S. testing, the USSR would
have come up with the hydrogen bomb much, much later that it did. The 1952
Mike test alerted the USSR to a the existence of an important new design
concept, but they still didn't crack the nut until the second U.S. test
series in 1954 which provided additional stimulus.

but he was not above some duplicity.

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

On 6/15/04 9:14 AM, in article
t, "Carey Sublette"
wrote:

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".

Barnaby

In article ,
Barnaby Finch wrote:

On 6/15/04 9:14 AM, in article
t, "Carey Sublette"
wrote:

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".

Barnaby

Okay, boys, this has damn little to do with space history (which has
never stopped us on s.s.h. before . . .) but, yes, Teller was an
outstanding physicist. He was also very proud and jealous of his own
reputation and standing among the physics community, very
anti-communist, and very status-seeking. His high profile is a result
of many things, not just hawkishness. See, e.g., Rhodes' "The Making of
the Atomic Bomb" and "Dark Sun".

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Barnaby Finch wrote:

On 6/15/04 9:14 AM, in article
t, "Carey Sublette"
wrote:

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not
only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of
Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits
mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts
his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of
Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him
to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support
of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".

Barnaby

Okay, boys, this has damn little to do with space history (which has
never stopped us on s.s.h. before . . .) but, yes, Teller was an
outstanding physicist. He was also very proud and jealous of his own
reputation and standing among the physics community, very
anti-communist, and very status-seeking. His high profile is a result
of many things, not just hawkishness. See, e.g., Rhodes' "The Making of
the Atomic Bomb" and "Dark Sun".

Teller's high profile is due to his connection with nuclear weapons, and his
involvement in policy-making (of the hawkish variety), and his relentless
reputation-burnishing ("status seeking" as you say). His contributions to
physics were modest, probably his Ph.D. thesis on the quantum states of the
hydrogen ion was his most important work. Nearly everything after was in
collaboration with another physicist, with Teller as the second author (i.e.
not the primary author), and his scientific productivity (as opposed his
weapon engineering efforts) came to an end in the mid 1940s. He is a minor
figure in twentieth century physics.

This doesn't mean he wasn't an outstanding physicist, just that he made no
outstanding contributions to science.

Similar remarks could be made about Oppenheimer (not a major physicist, and
whose productivity came to an end in the mid 1940s due to involvement with
nuclear weapons and policy making). Oppenheimer's mark on physics is
certainly larger than Teller's for an indirect reason - he was a gifted
professor and taught and inspired many leading physicists of the next
generation.

Barnaby Finch wrote:

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".



The book "Teller's War" doesn't paint a very flattering picture of him
either.

Pat