[henkster]

Homer

Thanks for posting the full article. It was very informative, and much more comprehensive than I thought it was. As I’d mentioned earlier, the astute reader of the New York Times science beat could have discerned that construction of a bomb from U235 was theoretically possible. So the average crewman on the Enola Gay could deduce they were “splitting atoms today.” I did notice that they downplayed the destructive force liberated from an “atomic explosion.” But all of that was not well understood at this time. Two things the article does not mention:

1. The scale of industrial plant and complexity of engineering processes necessary to isolate a sufficient quantity of U235, and

2. Just what becomes of that new “new” Uranium isotope “239.”

One thing the article got wrong; ordinary water will not act as a “moderator” for the neutrons in their “reactor.” Something “heavier” is needed. Maybe graphite, maybe a different “type” of water?

This article was a very good catch. Now keep your eyes open about December of this year, and let’s see if there is any news out of the University of Chicago...

[CougarGA7]

This is an excellent article indeed. Good eye henkster and analysis.

I would also keep an eye out on anything on the Uranium Committee or the National Defense Research Council next month. I would think it wouldn’t have made the press, but on June 12th The NDRC got the OK from FDR to really start pursuing this line of research. Their first move was to absorb the Uranium Committee into their organization. On July 1st they asked for their first chunk of money; $140,000. This was quite a bit more than the 6 grand Teller asked for to buy graphite back in October of last year.