Nazi Atomic weapons in 1943

page: 23
22
<< 20  21  22   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: sy.gunson


Just because you can't accept the facts, doesn't entitle you to piss all over it and dismiss it as made up.

Sorry, Sy, but MadScientist is right. Nuclear physics was in its infancy in those days and the Germans nuclear projects (one of which was run by Werner Heisenberg) never worked out how to obtain a sufficient concentration of fissile material to make a bomb. They were completely on the wrong track,


This is true.


and their efforts were also sabotatged by many brave German scientists who didn't want to see Hitler get his hands on an atom bomb.


Is there any evidence for this? I mean excluding the obviously self-serving testimony of the losers after being captured by the Allies?

The interrogations which found that although Other Unspecified or Dead People were Nazis, nobody was themselves a Nazi.

And people who didn't want to admit that their great science was steamrolled by Americans, Brits, and European Jews they kicked out.
edit on 12-12-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 14 2014 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel


Is there any evidence for this?

I believe there is, although I'm no expert in the subject. There is the (conflicting) testimony of Bohr, Heisenberg and Bohr's own archives. Perhaps more credible, if oblique and open to interpretation, are the transcripts of the wiretaps at Farm Hall, near Cambridge, where scientists working on the Nazi programme were held until after the war. Their reactions to the news from Hiroshima are particularly telling.

The playwright Michael Frayn, has researched the subject extensively, and discussed the matter in the long afterword to his play Copenhagen, whose subject is Heisenberg's own actions vis-à-vis the Nazi programme, and the degree to which these were influenced (or manipulated) by Bohr. You may find it interesting to read or watch the play.

More here, though a definitive answer will probably never emerge.

edit on 14/12/14 by Astyanax because: a location.



posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Adaluncatif
This design you have shown should work. You don't have to have criticality to have a measure of fission. Any amount of fission produces energy. High temperature and pressure from this RPG like device should cause fusions in lithium deuteride producing some neutrons and some fission in the fissionable material. This would be a subcritical explosion, but it would by definition be a nuclear explosion, since the majority of the blast is supplied by the fission process. It would be a very dirty bomb. This would be half way between a dirty bomb and a traditional nuclear bomb.



This is very close to my understanding of what sort of weapon the Kurt Diebner - German Army - end of the war desperation program was trying to produce, and the process with which they hoped to set it off. FWIW, one of the reasons I continue to probe this topic is because it appears to me that the Germans were onto something potentially workable and that their basic concept was viable. More complicated than some other approaches, particularly the bread and butter U-235 bomb pursued by the Japanese and completed and used by the US, but still apparently viable in theory. Bedlam has posted considerable information that appears to show pretty conclusively that the Schumann - Trinks U233 boosted fission bomb concept / design would not have worked, but Adaluncatif mentions both the RPG analogy (the "Bazooka Effect") used in some articles about this topic, and also the fact that a nuclear explosion of some sort can be achieved by working different angles of the weapons physics than were employed by the Manhattan Project. So I'm not sure that "finis" has been written to this story. Also, while it may be that the S-T design itself would not have worked---and I'm still asking for more input on this point---it is all but certain that the Germans pursued other bomb concepts. Remember, we are not certain whether the Baltic coast tests were of the S-T bomb, or of one or more other designs, or all of the above.



posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Meanwhile, it appears that a major find has recently been made by that pesky Rainer Karlsch. In this case he is working with an Austrian filmaker named Andreas Sulzer. While the article below appeared recently in Newsmax, a right wing organ, it was first published in the online edition of the Washington Post, obviously a left-leaning paper. I am linking the Post version because it contains photographs. Note that this bit of historical detective work and archaeology was originally set off---as Simon mentioned upthread---by the discovery of unusually high radioactivity near a school located in (or near) the small Austrian town of Perg.


Filmmaker Says He Uncovered Nazis' Biggest Underground Secret Weapons Facility


Note also, yet again, the name of Hans Kammler, the SS General who from some point in 1944 appears to have been the top man in charge of the entire "black project" hierarchy of Nazi secret weapons projects, and who disappeared enirely from the historical record shortly after the war ended. What happened here, and why, and who knew about it?



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: mbkennel


Is there any evidence for this?

I believe there is, although I'm no expert in the subject. There is the (conflicting) testimony of Bohr, Heisenberg and Bohr's own archives. Perhaps more credible, if oblique and open to interpretation, are the transcripts of the wiretaps at Farm Hall, near Cambridge, where scientists working on the Nazi programme were held until after the war. Their reactions to the news from Hiroshima are particularly telling.


What they say, after losing the war, and under arrest by their enemy which executes Nazis, aren't likely to be entirely truthful.

Is there independent evidence of any internal sabotage? I'm unaware of it.

I saw the play Copenhagen too. It's a good play but not necessarily history.

Personally I think that Heisenberg and his team were just not good enough, or funded enough. Regarding that link and use of heavy water. The way I heard it is that theory showed that graphite would be the best. Both Allies and Germany tested it, but found the results were different from theoretical predictions. Slightly ironically, Heisenberg, the theorist, believed experiment and not theory and gave up and switched to inferior deuterated water. Fermi, the experimentalist, looked more into the graphite and found that processing impurities were causing the problem. He sourced more chemically pure graphite, and it was as good as predicted, and Hanford was built.

Heisenberg wasn't trying to sabotage---and in any case, an obviously wrong decision would have been sniffed out by the many other people involved in the project. He and colleagues just missed something critical.
edit on 7-1-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   
If Heisenberg was stalling, sabotaging, or incompetent does not matter...Because while he was in charge of his group, there were other German "black" groups working the problem.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: oletimer
If Heisenberg was stalling, sabotaging, or incompetent does not matter...Because while he was in charge of his group, there were other German "black" groups working the problem.



And this is precisely the crux of the issue in this thread. Heisenberg and some of the other scientists in his group were, justifiably, well known around the world both before and after WWII. But his group was by no means the only center of wartime German nuclear weapons R&D, and it is now well established that they were definitely not the most likely to have produced a weapon. For that we must look to Kurt Diebner's German Army sort-of "skunk works" advanced weapons bureau, to the Reichspost-funded laboratory under the guidance of Manfred von Ardenne, to General Kammler's black projects empire, and perhaps even to other sources beyond these.


Again, this search may not produce a smoking gun that will fundamentally alter the more or less established history of the war, particularly of the end of the war in Europe. But then again, it might. In any case there are some very important questions that have yet to be answered.
edit on 8-1-2015 by williamjpellas because: typo



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 02:42 PM
link   
A follow up here to something I posted earlier, in the interest of accuracy:

It turns out that there is some question about exactly what is actually buried in the Asse II salt mine near Hanover. Although there are claims that at least some of the waste in the mine is, in fact, from one aspect or another of the WWII German atomic bomb projects, most of it is probably left over from postwar nuclear power plants. Here is an article from Der Spiegel, which, in the typically weird and bizarre fashion that only that publication can achieve, fails completely to make any mention whatsoever of the WWII connection. However, there is a cool photo from inside the mine and it discusses the attempt at cleaning up what is now an environmental disaster.

www.spiegel.de...

The Daily Mail piece, which I posted previously and will re-post here for comparison, mentions a 1967 statement by one of the mine supervisors in which he specifically mentioned that some of what was buried in the mine came from the bomb project(s).

'A statement by a boss of the Asse II nuclear fuel dump, just discovered in an archive, said how in 1967 'our association sank radioactive wastes from the last war, uranium waste, from the preparation of the German atom bomb.'

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
edit on 5-2-2015 by williamjpellas because: Italicized statement from 1967 mine boss



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

As to "why show (Luigi Romersma) something so secret", the answer should be obvious. Mussolini, as one historian said, was the closest thing to a friend Adolf Hitler ever had. Both were disciples of Nitzsche, and Hitler had even given Mussolini a complete set of Nitzsche's writings as a gift. Hitler was of course also counting on his closest (only) "friend" to stay in the war, if for no other reason than to tie up Allied troops on his mountainous southern border rather than have them disengage and come 'round to land in, say, Mediterranean France. What better way to do so than to have his the Italian's trusted chronicler, Romersma, attend the nuclear test as an eyewitness? Romersma said somewhere that there were also a few Japanese VIPs in attendance, though I have tried several times to find that reference and I seem to have lost it.

Romersma was certainly no crank and he was one of the more eminent journalists from any nation in the 20th century. There is no reason not to take him seriously as a reliable eyewitness. There is also the Zinsser Affadavit in which a Luftwaffe pilot gave very detailed descriptions of a mushroom cloud from this same detonation.
edit on 15-2-2015 by williamjpellas because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 20  21  22   >>

log in

join