Germany has the readily available, easily extractable Uranium, the high class scientists, the industrial infrastructure and a large national military budget with room for more.
No World War I. Who gets the Atomic bomb?
- Thread starter kernals12
- Start date
People like Otto Hahn, Leo Szilard, Otto Frisch, and Rudolf Peierls (and several others) are at least a hundred-fold more important to the development of the nuclear bomb than Albert Einstein. Each. Leo Szilard was a personal friend of Einstein's, which is probably the most significant personal connection between Einstein and the bomb—but although Einstein did a lot of important things, on this matter his association with the bomb is just popular memes (e.g. encouraged by a 1946 Time magazine cover).
TruthfulPanda
Gone Fishin'
I agree that one of the three of UK, Germany and France are the best bets for getting the Bomb first. I'd say equal - UK due to wealth and desire to remain top-dog, France due to wealth combined with revanchism, and Germany due to wealth and desire to become top-dog.
Russia, A-H and Italy too poor/backward, but they could still surprise us. A very long shot nonetheless
The USA - the longest shot. In a no-WWI AU it is not as rich as in OTL and - as noted already, unless it is in a war it is very, very unlikely to assign funds to such research.
Russia, A-H and Italy too poor/backward, but they could still surprise us. A very long shot nonetheless
The USA - the longest shot. In a no-WWI AU it is not as rich as in OTL and - as noted already, unless it is in a war it is very, very unlikely to assign funds to such research.
Philip
Donor
How anti-Semetic is Germany? If Germany is a reasonably decent place to live, it is not unfathomable that Szilard, Wigner, von Neumann, and Teller all remain in Germany. If they do, it is likely that Fermi joins them rather than going to the US. This group virtually guarantees that is anyone develops atomic weapons, it is Germany. It would come down to funding and national will.
When it comes to physics, it is difficult to overstate the brain-drain of Germany after WWI or the US's benefit from it.
When it comes to physics, it is difficult to overstate the brain-drain of Germany after WWI or the US's benefit from it.
He is a bit rash and bumbling but he is dead by 1941, and the more frightful prospect is any military here possessing a weapon that has yet to be used in war or a fear of mass death upon its use. The Kaiser forbid the bombing of historic places in London, he was still old school enough, it is the British RAF leadership that implemented the fire bombing of Dresden. I hold no nation as fully trustworthy in war.
I believe the Belgian Congo was among the first places to get developed and that leaves its Uranium simply another industrial commodity, it can be bought by the UK, Germany or France. And Germany pursuing nuclear reactors might discover its domestic reserves and develop them. Uranium is a bottleneck but I think in this scenario it seems none of the big players are lacking access.
The German Uranium is in Saxony, not some colonial backwater with logistics so bad it would make Napoleon blush, filled with a hostile population on top of that...
He died in 1941 and the Kronprinz in 1951. Is the bomb likely to be developed in their lifetime(s)?
longsword14
Banned
Not really necessary. The talent they had in OTL might very well have been enough, but the industrial push needed to realise it never came. The powers that be choosing to push for the bomb is more important than the scientists.
kernals12
Banned
Things usually will get invented shortly after the technological advances needed are achieved.
Italy is actually a fairly strong candidate not for number one but number two. They had decent physicists in Fermi and Pontecorvo (and Fermi only left Italy after anti-semitic laws were passed, his wife was Jewish) and more importantly they had pretty decent intelligence services, among the best in WW2. Austria, France or Germany develops the bomb, Italy is in good position to copycat. And no problem funding a "dreadnought" level advance which would leapfrog them from second to first rate power
The question OP asked was not who gets the bomb first but "who gets them"?
The answer would be all of them. Every country would have a stockpile. Eventually.
The reality is that there would be a nuclear arms race. It would be a matter of national pride and prestige to have the bomb. Kind of like every country has their own airline, every country in this world would have nukes. Countries would either have their own nuclear program or they would be under the nuclear umbrella of another who has one. That would just be the way it would be.
This could end up with everyone dead or people eventually realizing how stupid they are being and saying "enough is enough" and agree to an mutual disarmament treaty.
The answer would be all of them. Every country would have a stockpile. Eventually.
The reality is that there would be a nuclear arms race. It would be a matter of national pride and prestige to have the bomb. Kind of like every country has their own airline, every country in this world would have nukes. Countries would either have their own nuclear program or they would be under the nuclear umbrella of another who has one. That would just be the way it would be.
This could end up with everyone dead or people eventually realizing how stupid they are being and saying "enough is enough" and agree to an mutual disarmament treaty.
Yes, but when would that be? The Manhattan Project was hugely expensive and was undertaken under the pressure of a major war. How long would I take w/o that war? Or has WW2 somehow happened w/o WW1?
You underestimate the international scientific community. The technology would become available by the 1950s with mass government interest and investment by the 1960s.
The man had a severe case of Battleship Envy mixed with an inferiority complex due to his withered arm, but I wouldn't say he was crazy.
Once it becomes clear that an atomic bomb is actually possible the German government with the current Kaiser's whole hearted support will push hard to build one. It solves the German Army's main problem, having to fight France and Russia at the same time. Vaporise large numbers of Russian troops (because the wind blows west to east) and use most of your conventional forces to crush France. With France crushed and large parts of the Russian Army falling as dust all over Siberia the Tsar will have to give in.
It was also rushed, no one says you have to do the project in 4 years, try 10, or 15, and limit it to just one bomb proposal not both. This way everyone can afford it.
Napoleonrules
Banned
Uh... everyone seems to be under the impression that Germany was economically better than the US prior to WWI... this is not true. The US economy was roughly on par with Germany's at the time of German unification in 1870... and then just prior to WWI starting- the US economy is twice the size of Germany;s. That's quite a growing gap and no reason to think it won't continue to grow on logarithmic scale increasing the gap. Even Marx believed it was inevitable that the US and Russia would be the two greatest powers... there's no reason to think that a POD in 1914 stopping WWI from happening would stop that, you'd need a much further back, more far-reaching POD.
TruthfulPanda
Gone Fishin'
Oh, in 1913 the US economy 100M people was about double that of Germany - 65M people.
But please do some research on what WWI brought to the US economy - top of mind:
- destruction of competition
- grabbing German IP/patents
- expansion of manufacturing to meet demand previously met by European imports
- money made on providing war material and food to the Entente
No WWI means that Europe is richer and the USA does not have that growth spurt. The 1870-1913 catching up by US is in large part due to population growth - the USA had c.40M people in 1870, remember?
True that by 1950 the US - with 150M people - would have had an economy roughly double that of Germany with 80M.
In this AU such a Germany would be richer while the USA would be poorer than in OTL.
But please do some research on what WWI brought to the US economy - top of mind:
- destruction of competition
- grabbing German IP/patents
- expansion of manufacturing to meet demand previously met by European imports
- money made on providing war material and food to the Entente
No WWI means that Europe is richer and the USA does not have that growth spurt. The 1870-1913 catching up by US is in large part due to population growth - the USA had c.40M people in 1870, remember?
True that by 1950 the US - with 150M people - would have had an economy roughly double that of Germany with 80M.
In this AU such a Germany would be richer while the USA would be poorer than in OTL.
Napoleonrules
Banned
https://www.ghi-dc.org/fileadmin/user_upload/GHI_Washington/Publications/Bulletin41/033.pdf this explains the German versus US economies leading up to WWI. I highly doubt that even with no WWI that Germany could have caught up to the US economy which already in 1913 had twice the GDP, a GDP per capita that is 75% larger, and more urban cores. While I agree that Einstein really has no impact on an atomic bomb, the idea he'd be in Germany in an ATL isnt guarenteed (his contribution really only amounts in OTL of having written a letter to the US President encouraging the idea, because other scientists believed his celebrity made the letter coming from him would make it more "exciting" for the press); Einstein had Austrian citizenship in 1911, and prior he worked at the Swiss patent office in Bern, Switzerland, and could have been lured to an American Ivy League university in the 1920s just as readily in an ATL of no WWI; in fact I say without WWI he's most likely to be in an Austria-Hungary and if the universities there begin to be hurt by the decay of an empire unable to come to some sort of federalization that succeeds then it is likely he picks the US.
Given the US's penchant for industrial magnates and large enterprises (eg- Standard Oil) I could see a robber baron start "Big Uranium" and once you have a product you want as many uses for that product. And when the US is corrupt and listens to the likes of robber barons who fund campaigns, you can easily have the government start producing spent uranium shells, nuclear powered naval ships, and eventually the atomic bomb.
Given the US's penchant for industrial magnates and large enterprises (eg- Standard Oil) I could see a robber baron start "Big Uranium" and once you have a product you want as many uses for that product. And when the US is corrupt and listens to the likes of robber barons who fund campaigns, you can easily have the government start producing spent uranium shells, nuclear powered naval ships, and eventually the atomic bomb.