Robert Jungk - Brighter Than 1000 Suns

Before reviewing this book I feel compelled to note that it represents a personal milestone of sorts. It is likely one of the oldest, unread, books on my to be read pile. Slightly over thirty years ago I purchased it, intending to read it during my physics course at university. I never got around to it, though I wish that I had read it many years ago. The reason for this is that it is a interesting discussion about the motivations of scientists, particularly the moral dilemmas of those engaged in nuclear weapons research. In a time of heightened international tensions between Russia and the United States there's much to concern the public about nuclear weapons, and this book offers insights into the very earliest days of the Cold War.

The book opens with the intoxicating atmosphere of physics research in the first two decades of the 20th century. This would probably have been the most useful part of the book to read during my university period, because it simultaneously captures the excitement of physics and the way in which scientists develop their knowledge. The exchange of information, the excitement of research and the incredible breakthroughs that are covered are fascinating. It is particularly notable that Jungk notes the important roles of female scientists like Lise Meitner and Irène Joliot-Curie, and because this is a political and moral account of their work, we also see their personal bravery in the face of the rise of the Nazis.

The book moves on to the Hitler's victory and World War Two, which provides the first key discussion of the morals of the scientists. Because German scientists had been at the forefront of atomic research there was a real fear that Germany might get the Atom bomb. This fear led to many scientists urging the US to begin their own research into the weapon. Many brave German scientists who did not flee, refused to assist their government's atomic research, or at least slowed it. It is, of course, impossible to say how much this actually took place, and it seems clear that several scientists did assist Hitler's efforts. Historically the book is at its weakest in this section, likely because Jungk was unable to get his sources to speak, or archives were still inaccessible. I am not sure his relatively positive summary of Werner Heisenberg stands scrutiny today. Among atomic scientists the fear of a Nazi atomic bomb appears to have made their belief in the positive force of the United States in the world real. Jungk concludes:

It seems paradoxical that the German nuclear physicists, living under a sabre-rattling dictatorship, obeyed the voice of conscience and attempted to prevent the construction of atom bombs, while their professional colleagues in the democracies who had no coercion to fear, with very few exceptions concentrated their whole energies on production of the new weapon.

Many of those scientists were to find their faith in US democracy undermined by the events of the war and the first use of atomic bombs on Japan. Jungk reports a discussion between the physicist Samuel Goudsmit and a US major, with whom he was liasing between the War Department and the Manhattan Project. Goudsmit remarks, "Isn't it wonderful, that the Germans have no atom bomb? Now we won't have to use ours." The major replied, "Of course you understand, Sam, that if we have such a weapon we are going to use it". This answer shocked Goudsmit, who like many of the scientists seemed to genuinely believe that the US would not use the weapon. This, for me, is the real paradox of these scientists who dedicated their work towards making a bomb, they expected would not be used because they naively believed in the public ideals of the US. 

Jungk neatly describes the combination of shock and relief when the first nuclear weapon is used on Hiroshima. The scientists are proud their work has succeeded and relieved the war is over, but utterly shocked that the weapon had been used against a city. Jungk discusses the Franck report, a detailed discussion of the military significance and the need to avoid the use of nuclear weapons by a number of atomic scientists sent to the US President in 1944. Reading it today it seems hopelessly naïve, its authors firmly believing that the world would sit down and sensibly discussion nuclear weapons and work to avoid a proliferation of bombs. 

But to be fair to many of the scientists, their immediate response to the use of nuclear weapons was to try to awake the world to their threat and highlight the problems. Jungk credits this movement with forcing both the US and the USSR to acknowledge the scale of the threat to their citizens, and begin a discussion about the use of these weapons. It was, in a very small way, the beginning of the anti-nuclear weapon movement.

These broad outlines tell the main subject of the books, though we learn a great deal more. There's plenty of material on Robert Oppenheimer, though there are better and more recent books. In terms of autobiography only the briefest material is included, but the book offers the reader directions to follow, especially for those interested in specific scientists. The book is at its best discussing the moral quandaries of the scientists of the Manhattan Project during World War Two. In some regards the book is dated, but it does attempt to look at the  question of nuclear weapons from an explicitly moral and political individual point of view - a vantage point that is unusual for such studies. Most importantly it is a powerful reminder about why scientists cannot abstract themselves from politics and history, or even social movements. The book is very readable, and I'd recommend you don't wait thirty years to pull it off your shelf.

Related Reviews

Ananthaswamy - Through Two Doors at Once
Prescod-Weinstein - The Disordered Cosmos
Farmelo - It Must Be Beautiful: Great Equations of Modern Science