Big Science
Page 51
“I can not understand”: The quotation is from Lawrence to Cockcroft, March 14, 1934, EOLP. Lawrence wrote to Tuve in the same vein on the same date.
“for a long time”: Fowler to Lawrence, March 14, 1934, EOLP.
“one of judgment”: Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 172.
“In the face”: Tuve to Lawrence, April 17, 1934, EOLP.
at one point, Raymond Birge: Childs, American Genius, p. 219.
“are not contradictory”: “The Berkeley Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,” Science 80, no. 2064 (July 20, 1934): pp. 43-44.
“erroneous and misleading”: Tuve, “Nuclear-Physics Symposium: A Correction,” Science 80, no. 2068 (August 17, 1934.): pp. 161–62.
“I’m not going to have”: Chadwick, AIP.
“You would be surprised”: Chadwick to Lawrence, December 29, 1935, EOLP. See also Andrew P. Brown, “Liverpool and Berkeley: The Chadwick-Lawrence Letters,” Physics Today 49, no. 5 (May 1996): pp. 34-40.
“wallowing in cash”: Pollard to Cooksey, August 22, 1937, cited in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 337.
“This was a mistake”: Livingston, AIP.
Chapter Seven: The Cyclotron Republic
When they ceased: Joliot, F., and I. Curie, “Artificial Production of a New Kind of Radio-Element,” Nature 133, no. 3354 (February 10, 1934): pp. 201–202. See also W. Palmaer, presentation speech for the 1935 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, at www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1935/press.html [accessed March 16, 2013].
“I can still see”: Goldsmith, Frederic Joliot-Curie, p. 57.
“roaring into the lab”: Livingston, AIP.
“We have had”: Lawrence to Boyce, February 27, 1934, EOLP.
The unfortunate wiring: Prominent among those who dismiss the miswiring as an explanation are Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 179.
“would always be a matter”: Lawrence to Weaver, February 21, 1940, EOLP.
“I always felt”: Henderson recollections, HCP.
“We felt like”: Davis, Lawrence & Oppenheimer, p. 60.
“the field is getting”: Kurie to Cooksey, March 4, 1934, EOLP.
“in these nuclear”: G. N. Lewis, M. C. Henderson, M. S. Livingston, and E. O. Lawrence, “Artificial Radioactivity Produced by Deuton Bombardment,” Physical Review 45 (March 15, 1934): pp. 428-429.
They provided precise: Crane and Lauritsen, “Radioactivity from Carbon and Boron Oxide Bombarded with Deuterons and the Conversion of Positrons into Radiation,” ibid.
“To our surprise”: Lawrence to Boyce, February 27, 1934, EOLP.
In March, Enrico Fermi: Enrico Fermi, “Radioactivity Induced by Neutron Bombardment,” Nature 133, no. 3368 (May 19, 1934), p. 757.
Martin Kamen: Kamen, “The Birthplace of Big Science,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, November 1974.
“We are finding”: Lawrence to Beams, February 27, 1934, EOLP.
“the most exciting”: Alvarez, Adventures, p. 35.
“enormous superiority”: Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 187.
Rasetti calculated: Ibid.
“radiation equal”: Ibid., p. 190.
“We are now”: Lawrence to Kast, May 3, 1934, EOLP.
“Doubtless radio-sodium”: E. O. Lawrence, “Transmutations of Sodium by Deuterons,” Physical Review 47 (Jan 1, 1935): pp. 17–27. The preliminary letter appeared in the Physical Review 46 (October 15, 1934): p. 746.
Fermi scoffed: Emilio Segrè, “Fifty Years Up and Down a Strenuous and Scenic Trail,” Annual Review of Nuclear Science 31 (1981): pp. 1–18.
“before the accompanying”: Lawrence to Poillon, September 29, 1934, EOLP.
They objected that: For the objections and some responses, see USPO actions, March 9, 1935, and May 9, 1936; and Knight to Lawrence, April 17, 1937, all EOLP.
“just what parts”: Knight to Lawrence, April 8, 1935, EOLP.
“the radio-sodium experiments”: Lawrence to Knight, April 12, 1935, EOLP.
“I know how repugnant”: Poillon to Lawrence, Oct, 10, 1935. Poillon’s mention of “powerful Katinka” is a slightly garbled reference to “the powerful Katrinka,” a burly farm girl appearing in Fontaine Fox’s popular newspaper comic strip “Toonerville Trolley.”
“Although prosecuting”: Lawrence to Poillon, October 19, 1935, EOLP.
“The more I think”: Lawrence to Knight, April 26, 1939, EOLP.
the patent office rejected: Knight to Lawrence, April 25, 1939, EOLP.
Cyclotron Republic: See Segrè, A Mind Always in Motion, p. 136.
“an abnormal competitive element”: Karl T. Compton to M. C. Winternitz, November 24, 1941, EOLP. Winternitz was then a member of the government’s wartime Committee on Medical Research, and Compton’s letter was in the nature of an appeal for a federal contract.
“seem to be rousing ‘hits’ ”: Lawrence to McMillan, May 11, 1935, EOLP.
“It has been extraordinarily”: Lawrence to McMillan, May 5, 1935, EOLP.
The difficulty that even Lawrence: Birge, Raymond T., History of the Physics Department, University of California, Berkeley, p. 418.
“We were all supposed”: Interview of L. Jackson Laslett by Charles Weiner, October 18, 1970, AIP.
In Copenhagen: Ibid.
“all of whom know”: Cooksey to “Dodie,” March 30, 1938, cited in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 234.
“it can be used”: W. Palmaer, presentation speech, December 10, 1935, www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1935/press.html [accessed March 25, 2013].
Chapter Eight: John Lawrence’s Mice
writing each other: This and other personal reminiscences are from “John H. Lawrence, M.D.: Nuclear Medicine Pioneer and Director of Donner Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley,” interview by Sally Smith Hughes, 1979–1980, BANC. Henceforth John Lawrence OH.
“Medical students were advised”: Ibid.
“got up and made”: Birge OH, BANC.
“the radiation is so”: Lawrence to Poillon, October 4, 1933, EOLP.
“told me facetiously”: Lawrence to Poillon, September 30, 1936, EOLP.
“No one ever”: John Lawrence OH, BANC. The story of the dead mouse became one of the treasured legends of the early Rad Lab, though with slight variations. Alvarez, in Adventures, p. 63, times the irradiation at fifteen minutes, but he was not present and is reporting at second- or third-hand; Childs, whose source is unidentified, places it at three minutes (p. 228). The one-minute estimate is John Lawrence’s and is accepted here because he was the designer of the experiment. There is common agreement, in any case, that the impact of the mouse’s death was, as Edwin McMillan reports, “very dramatic.” (Edwin M. McMillan, “History of the Cyclotron-II,” Physics Today 12, no. 10 [October 1959], p. 24.)
an “amusing” distraction: Lawrence to Milton White, October 30, 1935, EOLP.
“complete blood studies”: John Lawrence to Ernest Lawrence, March 24, 1936, EOLP.
“not unlike a billiard”: John H. Lawrence and Ernest O. Lawrence, “The Biological Action of Neutron Rays,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 22, no. 2 (February 15, 1936): pp. 124–33.
“a development”: Lawrence to Poillon, February 27, 1936, EOLP.
“led to much coarse humor”: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 67.
intellectually stimulating: For Oppenheimer at Harvard, see Bird and Sherwin, American Prometheus, pp. 29–31.
“It’s our duty”: Childs, American Genius, p. 237.
“was pure research”: Birge OH, BANC.
“To have a quarrel”: A transcription of Birge’s index cards is at EOLP.
“Hell, he made me”: Mary Blumer Lawrence oral history, interview by Suzanne Riess, 1984, Robert Gorden Sproul Oral History Project, BANC.
Right away, President Sproul: Lawrence to P
oillon, February 26, 1936, EOLP.
“Many of the leading”: Lawrence to Sproul, February 20, 1936, EOLP.
He ran his finger: Lawrence described the meeting in his letter to Poillon, February 26.
“I can report only”: Sproul to Lawrence, February 28, 1936, EOLP.
“It was a question”: Mary Blumer Lawrence oral history, BANC.
“It was like a secondhand”: Neylan recollections, HCP. Neylan’s memory appears to have betrayed him here; he placed his first meeting with Lawrence in 1928, shortly after he became a regent and Lawrence arrived on campus; but that is inconsistent with his recollection of the site of the encounter being the Rad Lab, which did not come into existence until several years later.
“Neylan kind of considered”: Mary Blumer Lawrence OH, BANC.
“When can you begin”: Alvarez, Adventures, p. 39.
“that would signal”: Ibid., p. 42.
“epidemic of trouble”: Lawrence to Tuve, September 12, 1935, EOLP.
“our apparatus runs only”: Lawrence to Poillon, October 16, 1935, EOLP.
“one of the formerly”: P. Gerald Kruger and G. K. Green, “The Construction and Operation of a Cyclotron to Produce One Million Volt Deuterons,” Physical Review, 51 (April 30, 1937): p. 699.
The Rad Lab called: Lawrence and Cooksey, “On the Apparatus for the Multiple Acceleration of Light Ions to High Speeds,” Physical Review 50 (December 15, 1936): pp. 1131–40.
“signs of professionalism”: Edwin M. McMillan, “History of the Cyclotron.”
By mid-1937: Ibid. McMillan places the number of non-Berkeley cyclotrons around the world at 20 by the end of 1936. This is almost certainly an overestimate, resulting possibly from the imperfect memory of two decades later, when he gave the count. More authoritative lists of U.S. and foreign machines and their dates of development can be found in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, pp. 301, 310, and 321.
“pushes a slide rule”: William M. Brobeck oral history, interviews by Graham Hale, June 1975–January 1976, BANC.
“was very pleased”: Ibid.
“no one objected”: Brobeck, William M., “Early Days at the Radiation Laboratory,” IEEE Transactions in Nuclear Science NS-28, no. 3 (June 1981): pp. 2004–2006.
“amazed at how”: Brobeck OH.
preventive maintenance. . . . checklist: Brobeck, “Suggested Maintenance Operations on 37” Cyclotron,” July 29, 1938, EOLP. See also Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 241.
“sitting open mouthed”: Stanley Van Voorhis to Lawrence, February 5, 1939, EOLP.
“The boys are all complaining”: Cooksey to Barnes, April 19, 1937, EOLP.
“two dozen physicists”: Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 236.
“We hope very soon”: McMillan to Lawrence, October 27, 1937, cited in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 238.
“too painful”: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 70.
“a mania for gadgets”: Quoted in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 240.
“as a radioactivity”: Alvarez, Adventures, pp. 55–56.
“knack for ingenious”: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 308.
“We are trying”: Lawrence to Henderson, January 24, 1937, EOLP.
“a full-time”: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 80.
“She was the first”: Birge OH, p. 165, BANC.
Carl reported: Childs, American Genius, p. 278.
“I’d stand by”: John Lawrence OH, p. 51, BANC.
(“[T]he patients will”): Lawrence to Frank Exner, September 22, 1938, EOLP.
“I could see”: John H. Lawrence OH.
So it was: For an influential review of the Berkeley treatments, see Sheline et. al., “Effects of Fast Neutrons on Human Skin,” American Journal of Roentgenology 111, no. 1 (January 1971): pp. 31–41.
Chapter Nine: Laureate
the Radiation Laboratory was leading: See Fig. 8.4 in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 388, for the comparative role in isotope discovery by Berkeley, the Cavendish, and five other leading nuclear laboratories.
This was an extraordinary: Ibid., p. 387, for Birge’s estimate.
“the infallibility”: Alvarez, Adventures, p. 53.
“Bethe’s Bible”: Bethe, et. al., “Nuclear Physics,” appeared in Reviews of Modern Physics 8, no. 2 (April 1936): pp. 82–229; vol. 9, no. 2 (April 1937): pp. 69–244; and vol. 9, no. 3 (July 1937): pp. 245–390.
“practically unobservable”: Hans Bethe and R. F. Bacher, “Nuclear Physics: Stationary States of Nuclei” (Bethe Bible-I).
“The cyclotron evidently”: Segrè to Lawrence, February 7, 1937, EOLP.
“I would beg you”: Segrè to Lawrence, June 13, 1937, EOLP.
“Of course all of us”: Lawrence to Buffum, April 5, 1937, EOLP.
“Ernest Rutherford was”: Time, November 1, 1937.
“blew his top”: Childs, American Genius, p. 261.
“I realize it is none”: Alan Wells to Lawrence, February 7, 1940, EOLP.
In a letter: Bethe and Rose, “The Maximum Energy Obtainable from the Cyclotron,” Physical Review 52 (December 14, 1937): p. 1254.
“I am awfully glad”: Lawrence to DuBridge, December 4, 1937, EOLP.
Robert R. Wilson had been: R. R. Wilson, “Magnetic and Electrostatic Focusing in the Cyclotron,” Physical Review 53 (March 1, 1938): pp. 408–20. See also Lawrence to DuBridge, December 4, 1937, and Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 468.
“we considered”: Bethe to McMillan, quoted in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 470.
“Although the principle”: J. D. Cockcroft, “The Cyclotron and Its Applications,” Journal of Scientific Instruments 16, no. 2 (February 1939): pp. 2–34.
“The real limitation”: Lawrence to Oliphant, August 2, 1938, EOLP.
“an elegant theory”: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 76.
“fantastic number”: Edwin McMillan and Martin Kamen, “Neutron-Induced Radioactivity of the Noble Metals,” Physical Review 15 (August 15, 1937): pp. 375–77.
“Why, he just”: Cooksey to Lawrence, April 29, 1938, EOLP.
“there should be”: Lawrence to A. L. Hughes, May 26, 1938, quoted in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 311.
“whether or not”: Evans to Cooksey, June 1, 1938, EOLP.
Ernest called MIT’s bluff: Lawrence to Evans, June 2, 1938, cited in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 235.
“Don’t let this”: Livingston to Cooksey, July 28, 1938, EOLP.
“For medical purposes”: Lawrence to A. L. Hughes, July 5, 1939, quoted in Heilbron and Seidel, p. 283.
“because we can get”: Ibid., p. 284.
“its neutrons would reach”: Arthur Snell, cited in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 283.
the magnet alone: See Lawrence to Ludvig Hektoen, November 13, 1937, EOLP.
“immediate and urgent”: Ibid.
“It is not necessary”: Compton to Lawrence, November 29, 1937, EOLP.
Ernest drew up: The list is in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 268, n. 162.
“special concern”: Weaver, “The Program in the Natural Sciences,” Trustees Confidential Report, March 1950, RF.
Weaver mistakenly described: Weaver Diary, January 25, 1937, RF.
“who had obvious”: John Lawrence OH, BANC.
“congress of cripples”: Quoted by Weaver, memo to Raymond B. Fosdick, “Cyclotron Project—Professor E. O. Lawrence, University of California,” November 23, 1937, RF.
“an unexpected emergency”: Ibid.
“as a biological”: Lawrence to Weaver, November 10, 1937, RF.
“There is a spirit”: Sproul to Weaver, November 26, 1937, RF.
“subversive to the spirit”: Kast to Poillon, October 13, 1936, quoted in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and Hi
s Laboratory, p. 217.
“in such a way”: Hanson, Frank B., memorandum of visit to the University of California, Berkeley, April 13–23, 1938, RF.
In January 1939: The chronology of construction is from Lawrence, “The First Ten Years of Cyclotrons, 1930–1939, inclusive,” EOLP.
“no hand-me-down”: Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 284.
“We are convinced”: E. O. Lawrence, et al., “Initial Performance of the 60-Inch Cyclotron of the William H. Crocker Radiation Laboratory, University of California,” Physical Review 56 (July 1, 1939): p. 124.
“Lawrence apparatus”: Josephson, Physics and Politics in Revolutionary Russia, p. 181.
but news reporters: Childs, American Genius, p. 287.
“The new cyclotron”: Kamen to Hahn, November 21, 1939, EOLP.
“kept me in a steady”: Martin Kamen, “Early History of Carbon-14,” Science 140, no. 3567 (May 10, 1963): pp. 584–90.
they draped these: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 79.
“almost driven”: Lawrence to Kruger, October 1, 1935, EOLP; “amazing smoothness” is from Lawrence to Kruger, March 14, 1940, quoted in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 297.
“no less than prodigious”: Lawrence to Foster, March 26, 1940, EOLP.
Hydrogen’s naturally occurring: Luis W. Alvarez and Robert Cornog, “Helium and Hydrogen of Mass 3,” Physical Review 56 (Sept. 15, 1939): p. 613.
The young chemist sprinted: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 127ff.
Aebersold’s contribution: Aebersold file, EOLP.
“Your career is showing”: Childs, American Genius, p. 296.
“without comparison”: Nobel Prize in Physics 1939—Presentation Speech.
“Well, what has Lawrence done?”: Bohr to Thomson, quoted in Heilbron and Seidel, Lawrence and His Laboratory, p. 491.
“It is extremely”: Oliphant to Lawrence, November 20, 1939, ibid., p. 492.
Kamen was alone: Kamen, Radiant Science, Dark Politics, p. 130.
What they did not: See Samuel Ruben and Martin D. Kamen, “Radioactive Carbon of Long Half-Life,” Physical Review 57 (March 15, 1940): p. 549.