AHC: Delay the A-bomb

If we go with Einstein dying as part of the final solution, i'm assuming it would still be possible to have some kinda nuclear accident. It was mentioned earlier that Fermi could make a mistake that would end with a chuck of Chicago being taken out.

Could this still happen with Fermi, just later? If so, when is the bomb finally done?
 
It was mentioned earlier that Fermi could make a mistake that would end with a chuck of Chicago being taken out.

If a serious accident happens and a major American city is destroyed as a result, I could see the Manhattan Project effectively being shot between the eyes. Atomic bomb technology might be seen as simply too dangerous to persue.
 
If we go with Einstein dying as part of the final solution, i'm assuming it would still be possible to have some kinda nuclear accident. It was mentioned earlier that Fermi could make a mistake that would end with a chuck of Chicago being taken out.

Could this still happen with Fermi, just later? If so, when is the bomb finally done?

I am not sure that Fermi Chicago experiment could, even in theoretically worst case, cause runaway chain reaction. Irradiate the lab - sure. Cause huge fire, possible. But not take out chunk of the city. In the development of the bomb I think they tried every alley in parallel, not being sure what would work and what would not. Theory itself was known even before Einstein and he only confirmed the amount of energy that would be released, not the possibility of the bomb itself.

So slowing the development is very hard and many people would have to be snuffed. Simplest design - Little Boy did not require any particularly complicated engineering or science.
 
If a serious accident happens and a major American city is destroyed as a result, I could see the Manhattan Project effectively being shot between the eyes. Atomic bomb technology might be seen as simply too dangerous to persue.

Would another country end up making it though? Stalin doesn't seem like the kind to worry about the lives of his people if it means he could be the sole possessor of such an awesome weapon.
Churchill does however.
 
I am not sure that Fermi Chicago experiment could, even in theoretically worst case, cause runaway chain reaction. Irradiate the lab - sure. Cause huge fire, possible. But not take out chunk of the city. In the development of the bomb I think they tried every alley in parallel, not being sure what would work and what would not. Theory itself was known even before Einstein and he only confirmed the amount of energy that would be released, not the possibility of the bomb itself.

So slowing the development is very hard and many people would have to be snuffed. Simplest design - Little Boy did not require any particularly complicated engineering or science.

So, Einstein dies, Fermi causes the 2nd great fire of Chicago (Perhaps a slight exaggeration), and Little Boy is still finished at the same time? There would have to at least be some delay, surely.
 
Xachiavelli not to sound too harsh, but your trying to 'retcon an idea' into a timeline that doesn't like it. That shows that you've done little reading to get an idea of the general course of events that lead to the Manhatten Project and the dropping of the Atomic Bombs.


Why is Einstein going to die in the Holocaust? He left Germany in something like 1932, well before much of the Anti-semitism hit the streets. Even then, Einstein is as big a figure in science at the time as Heisenberg. Hitler might have been insane, but his aids were smart enough that if he goes round ordering hits on top interllectuals the 3rd Reich is dead from litterally shooting itself in the head!


Why is Fermis reactor going to cause a great fire in Chicargo? Look, reactors at this time weren't much more than a few kg of not so enriched material used for generating heat and conducting experienments on activity rates and neutron counts and things like that. Absolutely nothing like 3 Mile Island, Chenobyl or Fukashima. The very idea of 'an explosion or fire getting out of control' is frankly a bit ludicris. No offense.


Singular wrong calculations will not affect anything, becauses there is a good process in science to get others to correct them.


----------------------------------------------

The only idea that makes sense in all of this, is for their not be the will from the top of government in America to invest in the scheme. Just like Britian, France (while it still exsited), Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union (although the Soviets stole a lot of tech, so arguably one might consider their project 'piggy backed' on Allied Research).

Indeed, it is very unlikely, but still possible, that both Britian and Japan could have themselves got to the testing/design stages of a Bomb by the end of the war with the right political will. However, there wasn't that will, so it didn't happen.

That said, you need to concentrate on the political angle, not the technological R&D angle to get the effects you want. The two best points are;

1. No famous letter to Roosevelt
2. No Szilard* Mission/Different effect of it

A 3rd way might be;

3. Trinity is a fizzle (fairly likely) and that retards the program several months.

A 4th way might be;

4. One of the scientists accidentally irradiates a large number of other scientists taking out a chunk of the research team for a few months/kills them off. (No superhero jokes here).

But now we start to wander in the realms of conjecture. Where everything fits, but we are making up fictional events. Therefore while still valid, it would be better to stick to the known events that had the cause to stimulate the Manhatten Project into being.



*Cheers for the spelling correction
 
Xachiavelli not to sound too harsh, but your trying to 'retcon an idea' into a timeline that doesn't like it.

I don't really understand this statement. I'm simply asking the best way to temporarily delay the A-Bomb, so it's not used in WW2, but still features in the cold war.

Why is Einstein going to die in the Holocaust? He left Germany in something like 1932, well before much of the Anti-semitism hit the streets. Even then, Einstein is as big a figure in science at the time as Heisenberg. Hitler might have been insane, but his aids were smart enough that if he goes round ordering hits on top interllectuals the 3rd Reich is dead from litterally shooting itself in the head!

I did state earlier than Einstein would either fail to escape Germany, or simply decide not to for whatever reason.
As for his death in the holocaust, perhaps that was a little ASB (only a little though). Basically, stop Einstein from signing the letter any way you want.

Why is Fermis reactor going to cause a great fire in Chicargo? Look, reactors at this time weren't much more than a few kg of not so enriched material used for generating heat and conducting experienments on activity rates and neutron counts and things like that. Absolutely nothing like 3 Mile Island, Chenobyl or Fukashima. The very idea of 'an explosion or fire getting out of control' is frankly a bit ludicris. No offense.

I'm going to point out that i wasn't the one who suggested Fermi's reactor going wrong or what the effects of that would be.
 
I don't really understand this statement. I'm simply asking the best way to temporarily delay the A-Bomb, so it's not used in WW2, but still features in the cold war.



I did state earlier than Einstein would either fail to escape Germany, or simply decide not to for whatever reason.
As for his death in the holocaust, perhaps that was a little ASB (only a little though). Basically, stop Einstein from signing the letter any way you want.



I'm going to point out that i wasn't the one who suggested Fermi's reactor going wrong or what the effects of that would be.

I stated the concerns with the Chicago Pile of 1942. Fermi have over 10,000 pounds of Uranium metal and over 80,000 pounds of uranium oxide at the site with no radiation shielding system or cooling system. Any sort of release of the uranium oxide can spread radioactive dust over much of the southern Chicago area, essentially replicating the effects of a dirty bomb. Fermi had no cooling system, so a meltdown is concievable with a major release of radiation depending pn circumstances. Finally I'm not sure what might happen under the absolute worst of circumstances but you could certainly see an irradiated chunk of the Chicagoland area and a serious motivation against pursuit of nuclear weapons. This might result in the USSR developing them in the last 50s/early 60s and a one-sided Cuban Missile Crisis...er, global liberation...Comrade...
 
I stated the concerns with the Chicago Pile of 1942. Fermi have over 10,000 pounds of Uranium metal and over 80,000 pounds of uranium oxide at the site with no radiation shielding system or cooling system. Any sort of release of the uranium oxide can spread radioactive dust over much of the southern Chicago area, essentially replicating the effects of a dirty bomb. Fermi had no cooling system, so a meltdown is concievable with a major release of radiation depending pn circumstances. Finally I'm not sure what might happen under the absolute worst of circumstances but you could certainly see an irradiated chunk of the Chicagoland area and a serious motivation against pursuit of nuclear weapons. This might result in the USSR developing them in the last 50s/early 60s and a one-sided Cuban Missile Crisis...er, global liberation...Comrade...

Except that the pile was carefully built. There were enough control rods that nothing happened until enough rods had been slowly removed so that a chain reaction could sputter forward. Note that the peak power was 0.5 W. I dont know what pod would be required to make this a runaway, but would involve huge changes and probably massive stupidity.
 
I don't really understand this statement.

What I am implying is don't try and 'force changes' where they won't work, or are contrived.

Einstein or Szilard dying, are examples of 'retconning' in this context. It's contrived, because to be frank its going to be rather difficult to have them get 'conveniently put away' by direct means.

The best method you can say is that they simply decided not to write the letter. Which was my initial point, you don't need a reason for many of the pivotal moments, you just have them not occur as they did. Similarly Dathi makes my point with Fermi's reactor, it's contrived to make that 'go boom' in the extreme.

When faced with highly variable events, such as those that led up to the Manhatten Project, Trinity and the Atomic Bombing of Japan. You don't need to 'shoulder in' Explosions, Nazi Agents or ASBs. It's remarkable that the Manhatten Project was completed when it was, simply on its own standing! Therefore you need non of that 'hard interfering' to create a POD, you can simply just state things like Roosevelt said "No". Much like the Japanese Emperor Hirohito said "No" to the idea and his scientists.

That's it, history changed. Move on.



Because of this fact, even writing this thread title kinda shows a lack of understanding of the events that led up to the creation of the atomic bomb. Any general reading should be enough for anybody to realise it was a rather lucky course of events in the 1930s that led to the bomb projects of the '40s. Hence you miss some steps, or have them occur differently, you got your delay. If there is anything in this paragraph I want you to take away is, go do a litter reading, then open a thread so you can tell the bullcrap from the nuggets ;).
 
I stated the concerns with the Chicago Pile of 1942. Fermi have over 10,000 pounds of Uranium metal and over 80,000 pounds of uranium oxide at the site with no radiation shielding system or cooling system. Any sort of release of the uranium oxide can spread radioactive dust over much of the southern Chicago area, essentially replicating the effects of a dirty bomb. Fermi had no cooling system, so a meltdown is concievable with a major release of radiation depending pn circumstances. Finally I'm not sure what might happen under the absolute worst of circumstances but you could certainly see an irradiated chunk of the Chicagoland area and a serious motivation against pursuit of nuclear weapons. This might result in the USSR developing them in the last 50s/early 60s and a one-sided Cuban Missile Crisis...er, global liberation...Comrade...

Okay, this is something i like, but i have one question for everyone: Other than the USSR, who might develop the bomb next. I know Germany was working on it, how much chance did they have? What about the UK?
 
Okay, this is something i like, but i have one question for everyone: Other than the USSR, who might develop the bomb next. I know Germany was working on it, how much chance did they have? What about the UK?

Unless an effort is an all out one with unlimited budget, such as an American one was, it would take more time, but eventually any country that tried could have succeed. Germany has a little less chance than UK, since midway through the project they decided that it is impossible and curtailed their effort plus an ingrained prejudice against what hey termed 'jewish science'. UK could never afford parralel development so they would probably advance in stages and possibly in one staggered fashion. Their effort would probably take a two to three years longer than American one.
 
Last edited:
Top