Found 1070 results
24.4s
SERBER: We can now consider the actual mechanics of detonation. ROBERT: Any ideas? SERBER: I call this "shooting." We fire a chunk of fissionable material into a larger sphere with enough force to achieve criticality. What do we think? Anyone? TOLMAN: I've been thinking about implosion. Explosives around the sphere blast inwards, - crushing the material. - (blasting) I'd like to investigate that idea. I'll talk to Ordnance, get you blowing things up.
Oppenheimer
1m57s
Terrible ones. But yet you testified in here that the bombing of Hiroshima was very successful. - Technically successful. - ROBB: Oh! Technically, it was very successful. And it is also alleged to have helped end the war. Would you have been in support of the dropping of a hydrogen bomb on Hiroshima? That would make no sense at all. - Why? - The-the target is too small. Well, supposing there had been a target in Japan big enough for a thermonuclear weapon, would you have been opposed to the dropping of it? This was not a problem with which I was confronted... Well, I'm confronting you with it now, sir. It was all part of his plan. He wanted the glorious, insincere guilt of the self-important to wear like a fuckin' crown. Say, "No, we cannot go down this road," even as he knew we'd have to. Would you have been opposed to the dropping of a thermonuclear weapon on Japan - because of moral scruples? - Yes, I believe I would, sir. Well, did you oppose the dropping of an atomic bomb on Hiroshima because of moral scruples? - We set forth our arguments... - (tense music building) No, you, you, you. I'm asking you. - I set... I set forth... - ROBB: Not we. You, you, you! Our arguments against dropping it, but I did not endorse them. You mean after working night and day for three years building the bomb, you then argued against the use of it? (laughs) I was asked by the Secretary of War what the views of scientists were. I gave him the views against and the views for. You supported the dropping of the atom bomb on Japan. - What do you mean "support"? - ROBB: Didn't you? - You supported it! - What do you mean "support"? Well, you helped pick the target, didn't you? - (muffled rumbling) - I did my job. I was not in a policy-making position at Los Alamos. I would have done anything I was asked to do. Well, then you would have built the H-bomb too, - wouldn't you? - I couldn't. I didn't ask you that, Doctor! And the GAC report which you co-authored after the Soviet atomic test said a Super bomb should never be built! What we meant, what I meant was... - ROBB: What you, who? Who? - What I meant... (tense music continues) And wouldn't the Russians do anything - to increase their strength? - (music stops) (raises voice): If we did it, they would have to do it. Our efforts would only fuel their efforts, just as it had with the atomic bomb. "Just as it had with the atomic bomb," exactly! No moral scruples in 1945, plenty in 1949.
Oppenheimer
2m42s
(door closes) What are you doing? It's a trade union. Filled with Communists. So? I haven't joined the Party. They won't let me bring you onto the project because of this shit. They won't even let me tell you what the project is. Oh. (scoffs) I know what the project is. Oh, really? We've all heard about Einstein and Szilard's letter to Roosevelt warning him the Germans could make a bomb, and I know what it means for the Nazis to have a bomb. Oh, and I don't? It's not your people they're herding into camps. It's mine. You think that I tell them about your politics. The next time you're coming home from a meeting, why don't you take a look in the rearview mirror? Listen to the sounds on your phone line and stop being so goddamn naive. Why would they care what I do? (scoffs) Because you're not just self-important, you're actually important. Okay. Okay. I get it. If you could just be a little more... Pragmatic. I'll talk to Lomanitz, I'll talk to the others, you don't have to worry. It's done. Lawrence. Then welcome to the war. ROBERT: I filled out my first security questionnaire and was informed that my involvement with left-wing groups would not prove a bar to my working on the atomic program. SENATOR PASTORE: Why were his Communist associations not seen as a security risk during the war? Senator, I can't possibly answer for security clearance granted years before I ever met the man. Fine. What about after? After the war, Dr. Oppenheimer was the most respected scientific voice in the world. That's why I asked him to run the Institute, that's why he advised the Atomic Energy Commission. Simple as that. What are they accusing me of? I think they just want to know what happened between 1947 and 1954 to change your mind on Oppenheimer's security clearance. I didn't. I was chair of the AEC, but it wasn't me that brought the charges against Robert. - Who did? - Some former staff member of the Joint Congressional Committee. He was a rabid anti-Communist named Borden. He wrote to the FBI demanding they take action. The FBI? Why not go to the AEC, direct? Why get caught holding the knife yourself? What did Borden have against Oppenheimer? This was the McCarthy Era. People hounded out of jobs for any hint of red. And then, reading Oppenheimer's security file, his Communist brother, sister-in-law, fiancée, best friend, wife. That's before we even get to the Chevalier incident. But how would Borden have access to Oppenheimer's security file? Because somebody gave it to him.
Oppenheimer