New evidence of a german nuclear weapon project?

[Anonymous]

I would hardly refer to a dated New York Times article concerning Germany's progress in developing a bomb mythical. You fail to cite sources in your rebuttal.

I did not mean that the article was mythical, rather that its contents were. But, try as I might, I was able to find no references to said article. Without seeing the article and somehow being able to evaluate its source I cannot evaluate its contents. They certainly don't fit with anything I've ever read about the A-bomb projects - and I've studied most of the A-bomb projects for most nations as best I could over the years - Its nice to have a feel for just how hard it is to build one of those things.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I don't suppose you saw the documentary on the Rosenbergs. It's kinda sad, it starts with the grandson trying to prove his grandparent's innocence, and ends with is acceptance they were in fact guilty.

=S=

Lunatic

Yeah they made us watch in Basic Training as part of our espionage brief adn threat con stuff.

They certainly don't fit with anything I've ever read about the A-bomb projects - and I've studied most of the A-bomb projects for most nations as best I could over the years

Though I believe that you are correct in this, history has proven that over time many things are proven wrong and new facts are found.

 

[delcyros]

We are actually meaning the same, Lun.
Kurchatov did name all as U-235 which was better than 1:135. (U235:U238) That is usually U238 =1:150 and U235= 1:135 = low enriched (10%) (see above, page 28-32.). I found the values of Uranium for the Jordanov mines in 1944: U-235 =0,06 %, U238=99,2%+traces. The actual Die Zeit article covering Karlsch´s book also did not see any vital proof for a german nuke, however it underlines his new sources as beeing important and they think he was doing agood recherche but he made wrong conclusions.
The earth samples of Ohrdruf are taken to the Karlsruhe research reactor and to Bern. Complete Analysis is not expected prior to December 2005. All samples indicate a nuclear event on that site. Tchernobyl has to be excluded, since there are different traces found. No soviet nuclear tests in eastern germany are known. That´s the actual disskussion.

 

[Anonymous]

My point is just that it may well have simply been a failed reactor experiment. We know the German's suffered at least one such disaster, I believe near Liepzig.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[delcyros]

I would think a reactor accident is well possible, also. It doesn´t fit to the statements by the eyewitnesses, but, yes, I regard them as possible, too. G IV happened at Gottow/near Kummerdorf, that is almost 30 miles north east of Berlin. The area is closed for public (it was a military training area). We don´t know much about that disaster, but I think it was both, a succes for Diebner and a disaster. One of Diebners coworker, Willi Henning was probably radiated on that special day (he died at 12th of september 1946 by some kind of radiation). But it was a succes, too. He wrote to Hahn: "unser Reaktor ist gelaufen" ("our reactor did run")and the samples indicate that the accident did happen outside the concrete structure for the reactor. That seems to indicate that the accident happend after all mesurements were taken. (Karlsch found in Moscow a document of Diebner, who was telling Heisenberg that the mesurements of the reactor have been almost completed, just a few mesurements in the outer stage are not that good, the inner stage runs good, see in Karlsch, page 332, document number IV) In a procedure at which the reactor should cool down. (it was unknown in 1945 that the outer stage continues to work after 8 additional hours if not cooled efficiently. The process is called Xenon 135 poisoning).

 

[Anonymous]

Well, it's not much of a "success". A reactor failure of that nature is the result of improper moderation. This means flawed calculations with respect to the rates of fission, and implies a faulty understanding of the underlying nuclear physics. It is clear with the Hiesenburg group that they had a flawed understanding of the topic - their focus on heavy water as a moderator was almost totally based on wrong physics. My guess is this other reactor also tried to use heavy water as a moderator, so of course it went out of control.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I dont know eneough about the workings of a nuclear reactor but it all sounds interesting.

 

[delcyros]

I disagree in this. The focus on heavy water sounds silly, but it is quite enough for the task. (Diebner wanted a reactor with a moderator of normal water, he calculated that at least 10 % enrichment is necessary. That is correct) G IV did worked. (it has to be underlined that the accident did happen after the experiment (the moderator worked fine during), so there is no way to suggest a bad understanding of the physics) As far as we know Heisenberg calculated that a heavy water reactor will run safely after it reached a working temperature. Diebner´s G IV confirmed that. Xenon 135 poisoning was not known before G IV, this will excuse the accident. The accident was mainly because Diebner had not time for refitting a emergancy shut down device. That device is missing by Heisenberg, too.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Why did they not have time though? If you are going to build a reactor it should be a given.

 

[delcyros]

As I pointed out above, Heisenberg and Diebner worked against each other. Heisenberg wanted to get acces to all Uranium and heavy water for his reactor program at Haigerloch. Gerlach officially confirmed that but he still gave Diebner enough material to keep on working (Diebners reactor experiments had far better results in neutron output than Heisenbergs experiments at Leipzig and Berlin). That´s why Diebner was under pressure. He had all support by SS and HWA but he needed results. Heisenberg on the other hand started his reactor experiment in late march (with insufficiant Uranium) at Haigerloch/Hechingen. There was no possibility for both to delay their experiments for a refitting. Really new is that Karlsch´s documents prove that G IV was the first try to build a breed reactor (that probably was Diebner´s motivation). Could be an expleantion why they kept it secret (it wouldn´t fit the postwar self view of some german scientists, who said to refuse even thinking of nuclear weapons), but now we have recently opened documents from Moscow and physical evidence to proof G IV.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

So pretty much they were in compitition with one another?

 

[Anonymous]

I disagree in this. The focus on heavy water sounds silly, but it is quite enough for the task. (Diebner wanted a reactor with a moderator of normal water, he calculated that at least 10 % enrichment is necessary. That is correct) G IV did worked. (it has to be underlined that the accident did happen after the experiment (the moderator worked fine during), so there is no way to suggest a bad understanding of the physics) As far as we know Heisenberg calculated that a heavy water reactor will run safely after it reached a working temperature. Diebner´s G IV confirmed that. Xenon 135 poisoning was not known before G IV, this will excuse the accident. The accident was mainly because Diebner had not time for refitting a emergancy shut down device. That device is missing by Heisenberg, too.

The problem is that "heavy water" was not needed, it is hard to extract (espeically back then), and it is less efficient than other moderators (cadnium and graphite for instance). Tying up the whole project for want of a rare compound that was easily repleaced with more common compounds was a "mistake".

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Anonymous]

I dont know eneough about the workings of a nuclear reactor but it all sounds interesting.

Well, basically a reactor is simply a pile of nuclear material (much less enriched than weapons grade) which undergoes fission in a chain reaction. In order to regulate the fission, so that you don't get a critical reaction that gets out of hand, you have to use a moderator. Typically graphite, beryllium, boron, cadinum, or deuterium oxide (heavy water) can be used as moderators, depending on the reactor design and its intended purpose.

For most nuclear power producing reactors (which are designed for heat production rather than radioactive beams used for research reactors or nuclear materials production for breeder reactors), rods of graphite/boron/cadnium(?) are used to moderate the reaction. Inserting the rods into the nuclear pile absorbs free neutrons reducing the rate of fission (chain-reaction). Removing all the rods = meltdown.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Cool thanks.

 

[delcyros]

It is a good question why they focussed on heavy water. Could be because of Heisenbergs early experiments at Virushaus (Berlin). As far as I know, there were a few analysis of graphite for use as moderator in a pile. (Bothe and Jensen in april 1940) They suggested to build an experimental pile with "Präperat 38 (code for Uranium) and pure coal (graphite)". While Diebner confirmed their results, Heisenberg refused to use graphite as moderator. In a later experiment Bothe got another charge of Graphite, but the mesurements were not that positive (he did not knew that Siemens provided material in bad quality/pureness), so Bothe concluded that deuterium would be a better moderator. Another experiment from Georg Joos and Wilhelm Hanle in late 1940 proved that pure graphite was excellent in the use as moderator. Bothe and Joos did had a discussion about their different results with raphite at the KWI in march 1941. Heisenberg voted together with Bothe for deuterium...The main problem with deuterium was, as you say, the acces. Diebner suggested in 1940 to build large industrial complexes for it´s production (in order to be independent of Norsk Hydro), as it was later decided (late 1943). But again, Heisenberg did not wanted that, he stays in basic research, while Diebner, Gerlach, Bothe and others wanted to get experimental.

 

[Anonymous]

I really think the problems were with the basic mathematics. As I understand it, if you are astute enough in nuclear physics, it is an easy mistake to conclude that heavy water is the much superior choice as a moderator. The best physicists in Germany had all fled, the next tier down could only almost do the math.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[delcyros]

Hmm, the most famous physician, Albert Einstein, left Gemany, agreed. Oppenheimer and others did follow him, agreed. But I see no way, you can say that there were only scientists avaiable, who were unable to do the job. This is a claim which has to be proved. for physician I can clearly disagree, since aerodynamical and high pressure research (and others) shows that there is no lack in excellent physician scientists in germany. Even for nuclear physician (I´m sure you mean this) Heisenberg and Hahn were excellent in theoretical research, v. Ardenne, Bothe, Diebner and Bagge (as well as others) were excellent experimental scientists. What about the maths? I traced this back to Goudsmit 1947, who wanted to disprove all scientific advances in nazi germany (even his compare of democratic scientists and NS-scientists is laughable, or isn´t?), Heisenberg first. The next important step is David Irving, who intended to place a race between germany and the USA in nuclear physics. Really important for our understanding of the german nuclear weapon project is Mark Walker, who took his conclusions of the analysis of the "german reports". He finishes with the point that the germans were unable (however they intended) to build a nuke. Thomas Powers on the other side disagrees in this point, he comes to the conclusion that Heisenberg intentionally led the german project into a trap. The "Farm Hall" reports are the last key factor for this question. (to name only the most important english written) Beside of Goudsmit and Mark Walker there is no one telling that they were unable to do the maths. On the discussion regarding deuterium/graphite I believe there was miscommunication. I agree that you can come to such conclusions if you concentrate on Heisenberg, only (and even here we have much uncertainities, who knows about his intentions?).
The news are going to be divided about Karlsch, again. Some article mistrusting the samples and others disagrees in the opinion that the construction of the bomb could ensure a chain reaction.

 

[Anonymous]

Heisenburg made many mathematical and theoretical errors, and these were not caught by his associates. When such errors were made during the Manhatten project, they were caught. The very best theoretical and nuclear physicists in Germany had all fled, leaving the 2nd tier and prentenders behind.

Heisenburg's intentions were clearly to build an A-bomb for Hitler. When he was in captivity after the war he was secretly recorded, and these comments, plus examination of letters he sent to colleages just before the end of the war, make it clear he did his best to give Hitler the bomb. His post-war claims of not really trying to do so are just an attempt to cover his shame over having collaborated with the Nazi's.

When Hiesenburg first read of the Hiroshima bomb while in captiviity, he is quoted as having burst out and said to his fellow prisoners that it was a sham, that someone had perpetuated a huge fraud, and that it was not possible the Americans had actually built a deployable A-bomb.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Wasn't the program in Norway using Heavy Water.

 

[Anonymous]

Wasn't the program in Norway using Heavy Water.

The program in Norway was extracting the heavy water for use by the German nuclear bomb researchers. Mountain water supplies in Norway are particularly rich in heavy water.

=S=

Lunatic