The Hydrogen Bomb and Oppenheimer Affair (10/15)

J. Robert Oppenheimer is a fascinating public figure. He seems to be synonymous with success of the Manhattan Project, being termed the “Father of the Atomic Bomb” (http://www.wikipedia.org/). He dealt more with the bomb by being an advisor of the Atomic Energy Commission. This position, and his numerous others on almost every scientific board there was at the time, allowed him to have a voice in all nuclear issues. I would venture to say that he was the most well-known and respected scientist of the period.

Oppenheimer’s reputation came crashing down when he was put on trial. I think the fact that this trial happened is appalling. Since when was this scientist who everyone trusted and no one questioned during the Manhattan Project suddenly made a public enemy and put on trial? This trial seems even more suspicious when you take into account that Oppenheimer’s security clearance was close to being expired. The reasons Oppenheimer was brought to defend himself were ludicrous, for most involved activity for which he had already been cleared years before. Thus, the only reason to put Oppenheimer on trial was to completely humiliate him.

Oppenheimer’s story is truly an interesting one. While reading about this great man and his even greater demise, many questions ran through my mind. Some of these have already been addressed; however, I have yet to ask the question that I found most intriguing. Where are the women in physics and politics? I think my “feminist curiosity,” a concept proposed by Cynthia Enloe in her book Globalization and Militarism: Feminists Make the Link, was at work while reading this article. So far we have learned about J. Robert Oppenheimer and all of the male bigwigs involved in his trial as well as Werner Heisenberg, Johannes Stark, and Albert Einstein. These are only a few of the men we have talked about in class. We have learned about no women so far, with the exception of Marie Curie and Lise Meitner being briefly mentioned.

Looking at this topic through a gendered lense, I cannot help but ask why is this? One possible reason for this might be that a woman’s “proper” place was still thought to be to stay in the home. Limited educational opportunities could have also played a role, making it harder for women to enter the same fields as men with the same qualifications. Were women kept out of top-secret projects involved in national security? Was science seen as a realm for men? Because of this, does this mean that there were only a few women involved in physics during this time? For the women who were present in the field, why are their achievements not popularly known? Did women just not make as many impressive findings as men?

Lise Meitner is a great example of a woman who was not fully acknowledged for her achievements. “As a woman in a male-dominated field, she had braved sexist policies that denied her access to laboratories when men were present,” as Richard Wolfson notes in his book Nuclear Choices: A Citizen’s Guide to Technology (pg. 106). It is shocking that Meitner was not permitted to work in the presence of men, especially because she was performing such important research. Such limitations probably had a great effect on what she could have possibly discovered. However, there is another fact that is even more outrageous. We discussed in class how her partner, Otto Hahn, received the Nobel Prize for his work in nuclear fission, although Meitner was supposedly responsible. Did the Nobel Prize Committee purposely choose not to give the world-renowned award to her? Was her work not seen as valuable? Was it unheard of for a woman to receive such an esteemed prize? Shouldn’t Meitner be recognized even more because she made such immense contributions to the field of nuclear physics, especially considering she was a woman in a male-dominated arena? With these questions, looking into the politics of physics as well as gender is also interesting.