Book Read Free

The Last Man Who Knew Everything

Page 48

by David N. Schwartz


  A more logical British publication: It might be objected that because Fermi was not a fellow of the Royal Society he could not submit the paper to its Proceedings, but the Proceedings regularly accepted papers submitted by fellows on behalf of nonfellows.

  A white lie: This interpretation has been suggested by Francesco Guerra and Nadia Robotti, private communication, September 21, 2015.

  In the 1970s, Fermi’s future: Yang, “Reminiscences of Enrico Fermi,” 243.

  CHAPTER NINE: GOLDFISH

  Around 1930, however, Fermi sensed: For a good accounting, see Guerra and Robotti, “Enrico Fermi’s Discovery of Neutron-Induced Artificial Radioactivity: The Influence of His Beta Decay Theory.”

  To Fermi, the nucleus presented: Holton, Scientific Imagination, 163ff.

  “Italy will regain with honor”: Ibid., 164–165.

  Unfortunately, Corbino was never able: See Battimelli “Funds and Failures,” 169ff.

  The massive 575-page book: Rutherford, Chadwick, and Ellis, Radiations.

  a young Pisan named Bruno Pontecorvo: Guerra and Robotti, “Bruno Pontecorvo in Italy.”

  In another carefully considered step: This process is discussed in Segrè, Enrico Fermi, 58, and in Holton, Scientific Imagination, 167.

  The problems associated with beta decay: Segrè, Enrico Fermi, 70, suggests that Fermi began calling Pauli’s phantom particle a “neutrino” in these discussions. However, there was no need at the time of the Rome conference to find a way to distinguish Pauli’s particle from Chadwick’s particle; Chadwick’s discovery lay several months in the future. Most historians date the use of the term “neutrino” to sometime in 1932.

  It was a productive meeting: Segrè, Enrico Fermi, 68.

  Robert Millikan at Caltech: Millikan won the 1923 Nobel Prize for measuring, in an exquisitely precise experiment, the electric charge of a single electron.

  he received the startling news: This is exactly the kind of short report that Nature published during this period, in contrast to Fermi’s lengthy beta decay paper.

  Wick was an insightful theorist: Guerra and Robotti, “Enrico Fermi’s Discovery of Neutron-Induced Artificial Radioactivity: The Influence of His Theory of Beta Decay.”

  and had located a small sample of radium: Radium releases gamma rays as part of its radioactive signature. A thorough review of Fermi’s work with neutron sources can be found in Guerra and Robotti, “Enrico Fermi’s Discovery of Neutron-Induced Artificial Radioactivity: Neutrons and Neutron Sources.”

  In an act of extraordinary generosity: For his role in providing radon, he received an appropriate nickname: La Divina Provvidenza (Divine Providence).

  One example is the story: Laura Fermi, Atoms; Guerra and Robotti, “Enrico Fermi’s Discovery of Neutron-Induced Artificial Radioactivity: The Influence of His Beta Decay Theory,” 398–399.

  Another story, told by Segrè and Rasetti: See Guerra and Robotti, Enrico Fermi e Il Quaderno Ritrovato, 128. It is possible, of course, that Fermi did not record the first few experiments, which were unsuccessful, but this seems unlikely, given his thoroughness.

  “Your results are of great interest”: Rutherford to Fermi, April 23, 1934. EFDG, Box IV L7.

  “What did you think I was president”: CPF I, 641.

  Only a German physicist, Ida Noddack: Noddack, “Uber das Element 93.”

  Her suggestion was ignored: Fermi had done calculations that seemed to show the impossibility of nuclear fission; he was working with data that proved to be wrong. See “Emilio Segrè’s Interview,” Voices of the Manhattan Project, June 29, 1983, http://manhattanprojectvoices.org/oral-histories/emilio-segr%C3%A8s-interview. Brought to my attention by William Zajc.

  They had split the uranium atom: He would not learn about his mistake until January 1939.

  By Saturday, October 20, 1934: Segrè recalls it as October 22, 1934, but the notebooks at Domus Galilaeana clearly indicate that Fermi began his work on October 20, 1934.

  “I will tell you how I came to make”: Chandrasekhar, “The Pursuit of Science,” 415.

  His notebooks suggest: Holton, Victory and Vexation in Science, 58–59; Orear, Enrico Fermi, 32.

  Fermi conducted the paraffin experiment: That so many people happened to be at Via Panisperna on that particular day is one of the complicating factors for an historian—they all had subsequent recollections of these events, some details of which do not match up.

  The report is dated October 22, 1934: CPF I, 751–752.

  Yet, in the end, it was Fermi: See Holton, Victory and Vexation in Science, 58–59, for a discussion of the way Fermi’s explanation illuminates the way scientific breakthroughs are made.

  This method was later christened: Segrè, cited by Metropolis, “The Beginning of the Monte Carlo Method,” 128.

  Yet they made the astonishing discovery: Chapter 3 of Miriam Mafai’s book Il lungo freddo: storia di Bruno Pontecorvo, lo scienziato che scelse l’URSS reports how three of the Panisperna boys looked back on this error some twenty years later. Segrè: “God, in his inscrutable will, made us blind in front of the phenomenon of the fission”; Amaldi: “We made an historical mistake”; and Pontecorvo: “We were just unlucky.” Thanks to Andrea Gambassi of SISSA-Trieste for calling my attention to this, and for the translation.

  CHAPTER TEN: PHYSICS AS SOMA

  These papers became a foundation: CPF I, 837–1016.

  In December 1934, skirmishes: The Italian general in charge of the operation, Pietro Badoglio, wrote a self-aggrandizing account of the invasion, The War in Abyssinia. For a more balanced view, see Barker, Rape of Ethiopia.

  In 1936, George Pegram: His lectures can be found in Enrico Fermi, Thermodynamics.

  Bloch and Fermi drove back across: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 114.

  “Physics as soma”: Segrè, Enrico Fermi, 90.

  The building that would house: Painter, Mussolini’s Rome, 64–65.

  The brilliant Ettore Majorana: The strange mystery of Ettore Majorana’s disappearance continues to fascinate historians of science. See Magueijo’s A Brilliant Darkness. A controversial novel by an Italian author and politician, Leonardo Sciascia, is loosely based on the case. Occasionally, the Italian authorities announce that they are reopening the investigation, but to date no definitive resolution has occurred.

  Fermi wrote a eulogy: CPF I, 1020.

  Street lamps were torn down: Some of these lamps can still be seen in the vicinity of the Ostiense station.

  “It satisfied my ambitions”: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 113.

  The beautiful Margherita Sarfatti: Cannistraro and Sullivan, Il Duce’s Other Woman.

  Many, like Laura Fermi’s family: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 106ff.

  Fermi’s file with the fascist political police: Archivio Nazionale, Ministero dell Interno, Polizia Politica, Enrico Fermi folder.

  He hoped that the Italian authorities: It was not long after he arrived that Italian authorities began to suspect he would never return. EFREG, 16:4.

  One could apply to the regime: Thanks to Mauro Canali for this information and for access to the Archivio Nazionale.

  Jews, including Laura’s father: Giorgio Capon, interview with author, September 16, 2015. Fermi’s sister Maria offered to help the admiral hide out, but he rejected the offer, believing to the end that the Germans would not touch an admiral of the Italian Navy, even though he was Jewish.

  He also was never able to obtain: Battimelli, “Funds and Failures,” 169ff.

  CHAPTER ELEVEN: THE NOBEL PRIZE

  The concern of the Swedish Academy: Laura Fermi unedited interview transcript, TWOEF, 6.

  Fermi received thirty-six nominations: “Nomination Database,” Nobelprize.org, http://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/archive/show_people.php?id=2955. Thanks to Karl Grandin for guidance on this website. Fermi received two more nominations postwar, presumably for work that was not recognized by the Nobel Committee in 1938.

  The prize came with a twenty-three-karat: “Prize Amount and Market
Value of Invested Capital Converted into 2015 Year’s Monetary Value,” Nobelprize.org, updated December 2015, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/about/amounts/prize_amounts_16.pdf.

  “I was determined to be of good cheer”: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 121–122.

  Fermi had been awarded the Nobel Prize: “The Nobel Prize in Physics 1938,” Nobelprize.org, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1938/.

  the solution was clear: Vergara Caffarelli, Enrico Fermi, 67–71.

  Laura never mentioned: In her interview for “The World of Enrico Fermi,” there is a moment when she talks about her passport not having been stamped with a J for Jew, but she does not offer any more details. Even in the 1960s she clearly was not proud of what she had to do to leave Italy. Laura Fermi unedited interview transcript, TWOEF, 29.

  The final preparations were fraught: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 128–129.

  The ceremony, on Saturday, December 10: The award ceremony can be seen on YouTube: “Enrico Fermi arriva a Stoccolma con la sua famiglia per ritirare il Premio Nobel per la Fisica,” YouTube video, 1:29, December 21, 1938, posted by CinecittaLuce, June 15, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rno28bDjsd8.

  Perhaps, as Laura Fermi suggests: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 132. Leona Libby, on the other hand, suggests that Fermi almost landed on Mrs. Buck’s lap. Uranium People, 8.

  Fermi chose, understandably, to focus: CPF I, 1037–1043.

  CHAPTER TWELVE: THE NEW WORLD

  The transatlantic journey: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 139.

  Neither he nor Laura: “Ocean Travelers,” New York Times, January 2, 1939, 27.

  Fermi was not particularly interested: He did, however, occasionally raise his voice in song—as when, according to Hans Bethe’s wife, Rose, he led a group of physicists in a rousing chorus of “My Darling Clementine.” See “Rose Bethe’s Interview,” Voices of the Manhattan Project, June 11, 2014, http://manhattanprojectvoices.org/oral-histories/rose-bethes-interview.

  teach the younger Giulio English herself: In time the children would teach their parents American idioms, hastening Enrico and Laura’s Americanization. Laura Fermi, Atoms, 151.

  King’s Crown on West 116th Street: “420 West 116th Street,” Wikicu, updated February 2, 2014, http://www.wikicu.com/420_West_116th_Street.

  small scientific team, closeted away: Point made by Sparberg, “A Study of the Discovery of Fission.”

  Frisch informed Bohr: Frisch, What Little I Remember, 116.

  Frisch extracted a promise: In 1945, the Royal Academy of Science of Sweden retroactively awarded Hahn the 1944 Nobel Prize for this work. No one doubts Hahn deserved the recognition, but the Nobel Committee’s decision to ignore the contributions of Strassmann and Meitner became the subject of an extended and sometimes rancorous debate within the physics community. In 1966, perhaps in an effort to correct the Nobel Committee’s rather obvious lapse, President Johnson presented the three of them with the prestigious Enrico Fermi Award, given by the Atomic Energy Commission for exceptional achievement in scientific areas associated with the development of nuclear energy. See Crawford, Sime, and Walker, “A Nobel Tale of Postwar Injustice.”

  CHAPTER THIRTEEN: SPLITTING THE ATOM

  John Wheeler, a twenty-seven-year-old: Later in his career Wheeler was the dissertation adviser for a young and brilliant Richard Feynman, encouraging Feynman to solve one of the great puzzles of QED. Later still, he coined the phrase “black hole” to describe what happens when a star collapses and becomes so dense that nothing, not even light, can escape its gravitational pull. Throughout his career he was a man with an extraordinary gift for metaphor.

  The conference was scheduled: Squire, Brickwedde, Teller, and Tuve, “The Fifth Annual Washington Conference on Theoretical Physics,” 180–181.

  The Fermis persuaded Bohr: Wheeler, Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam, 14ff.

  I. I. Rabi, visiting from Columbia: Ibid. This is at variance with Segrè, Enrico Fermi, 106, and other sources, all of which have both Rabi and Lamb attending. Also, Bohr is often given credit as the Princeton lecturer who first informed US physicists. The exact sequence of events is not clear from the historical record, but this author relies on Wheeler, who was at the center of the events at Princeton.

  Lamb reported with presumed understatement: Wheeler, Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam, 17.

  “probably a scientist not discovering fission”: Allison, “Enrico Fermi, 1901–1954,” 129.

  Such blame would be unfair: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 157.

  classic case of cognitive dissonance: Festinger, “Cognitive Dissonance.” See also Pearson, “On the Belated Discovery of Fission,” who finds it astonishing that no one took Ida Noddack’s proposals more seriously at the time.

  “Let me tell you about fission!”: American Institute of Physics, “Oral History Interviews: Herbert Lawrence Anderson—Session II,” interviewed by Lillian Hoddeson and Alison Kerr, January 13, 1981, https://www.aip.org/history-programs/niels-bohr-library/oral-histories/24508–2. Anderson says that he couldn’t really understand Bohr’s explanation, but Fermi made the phenomenon quite clear. Because Fermi obviously knew about fission, it is clear that the Anderson-Bohr meeting took place after Fermi had been informed by Lamb.

  Anderson had found a mentor: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 150.

  Fermi was happy to throw himself: CPF II, 1.

  used the train ride back: Close, Neutrino, 53–55, gives an accessible account of the work.

  They had seen fission: Squire, Brickwedde, Teller, and Tuve, “The Fifth Annual Washington Conference on Theoretical Physics,” 180–181. It remains one of the great puzzles of the story that the news of fission had not traveled beyond Princeton and Columbia by the time the Washington Conference began.

  he was front-and-center: See GW Astrophysics Group, “Washington Conferences on Theoretical Physics,” George Washington University and the Carnegie Institute of Washington, http://home.gwu.edu/~kargaltsev/HEA/washington-conferences.html.

  On January 16, 1939, one week: Weart and Szilard, Leo Szilard, 53ff.

  “Since it was a private meeting”: Ibid., 54.

  “Ten percent is not a remote possibility”: Ibid.

  “the line was drawn”: Ibid.

  paper he published with Anderson: CPF II, 5.

  Pegram opted for sending papers: Pegram authorized Physical Review to publish both papers in April in response to Joliot-Curie’s definitive decision to continue publishing his own results.

  CHAPTER FOURTEEN: FERMI MEETS THE NAVY

  “fit of house-cleaning enthusiasm”: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 162.

  “This morning I had a telephone”: Cronin, Fermi Remembered, 54–55.

  Laura was mystified by the letter: Laura Fermi, Atoms, 163.

  “There’s a wop outside”: Rhodes, Making of the Atomic Bomb, 295.

  “the excess in the number”: Schuyler minutes quoted in Strauss, Men and Decisions, 237.

  “these experiments show more neutrons”: Ibid.

  “In the small samples used”: Ibid.

  Fermi made it clear: Ibid.

  Years later, Szilard dismissively suggested: Weart and Szilard, Leo Szilard, 56.

  “Who is this man Fermi?”: Ibid.

  Unfortunately for the Navy scientist: Philip Abelson wrote a fine account of Gunn’s career for the National Academy of Sciences: Philip H. Abelson, “Ross Gunn: 1897–1966,” in Biographical Memoirs (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 1998), http://www.nasonline.org/publications/biographical-memoirs/memoir-pdfs/gunn-ross.pdf.

  Rabi was one of them: American Institute of Physics, “Oral History Interviews: I. I. Rabi—Session II,” interviewed by Stephen White, February 21, 1980, https://www.aip.org/history-programs/niels-bohr-library/oral-histories/24205–2.

  Rabi would tell his biographer: Rigden, Rabi, 83. Rabi later found out that Fermi was one of the people who nominated him for his 1944 Nobel Prize in Physics. Einstein was another.

  “It remains an open question”:
CPF II, 13.

  Anderson later noted several important points: CPF II, 11.

  Fermi estimated that this phenomenon: CPF II, 13.

  “This was the first, and also the last”: CPF II, 11.

  “There was actually not much to do”: Dresden, “Heisenberg, Goudsmit, and the German ‘A-Bomb,’” 93–94.

  Some three decades later Heisenberg: Heisenberg, Physics and Beyond, 169ff.

  “That’s a great pity”: Ibid., 171.

  CHAPTER FIFTEEN: PILES OF GRAPHITE

  Hydrogen has two heavy isotopes: The German uranium project would, to its detriment, rely on heavy water, made with deuterium, for its moderator.

  Fermi and Szilard came to the idea: Cronin, Fermi Remembered, 56ff.

  The image of a carload: There are many accounts of this fascinating tale of Hungarians in search of Einstein. Perhaps the best is Rhodes, Making of the Atomic Bomb, 303–307. This author retraced their drive during the summer of 2016 and, like them, had trouble finding Einstein’s house.

  “Some recent work by E. Fermi”: Letter from Albert Einstein to Franklin D. Roosevelt, August 2, 1939, http://www.dannen.com/ae-fdr.html.

  but Roosevelt was already engaged: Kaiser, No End Save Victory, recounts the efforts of Roosevelt prior to Pearl Harbor to ready the United States for war.

  sometimes irritating cheerleader: Szilard once berated members of the team for planning to take a weekend off, reminding them that the Germans were hard at work on their own nuclear weapons. When they canceled their weekend plans, Szilard then announced that he was leaving town for the weekend. Lanouette, Genius in the Shadows, 221.

  “High Energies and Small Distances”: See Enrico Fermi, “High Energies and Small Distances in Modern Physics,” Charles M. and Martha Hitchcock Lectures, University of California, Berkeley, http://gradlectures.berkeley.edu/lecture/high-energies/. See also CPF II, 29.

 

‹ Prev