Serving the Reich

by Philip Ball

  These people have detained us firstly: ibid., 81.

  The first atomic bomb has been dropped: see http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/6/newsid_3602000/3602189.stm.

  You’re just second-raters: Bernstein (ed.) (2001), 116.

  All I can suggest is that: ibid.

  then we are in luck: Frank (ed.) (1993), 93.

  I think it is dreadful: Bernstein (ed.) (2001), 117.

  I believe the reason we didn’t do it: ibid., 122.

  Our entire uranium research: Beyerchen (1977), 197.

  After that day we talked much: Bernstein (ed.) (2001), 352–3.

  I don’t intend to make any war physics: P. Rosbaud (1945), letter to S. Goudsmit, 5 August, 5. In Samuel Goudsmit Papers, Series IV, Alsos Mission: Box 28, Folder 42. American Institute of Physics.

  Germany must not lose the war: P. Rosbaud (1945), letter to S. Goudsmit, undated fragment. In ibid.

  He could not and probably: ibid.

  I went to my downfall: Bernstein (ed.) (2001), 134.

  History will record: ibid., 138.

  It seems paradoxical that: Jungk (1958), 105.

  what these scientists felt they needed most: Walker (1995), 241.

  betrayed: Dörries (ed.) (2005), 52.

  I want to thank you very much: W. Heisenberg (1956), letter to R. Jungk, 17 November. Available at http://werner-heisenberg.physics.unh.edu/Jungk.htm.

  Heisenberg did not simply withhold: Dörries (ed.) (2005), 53.

  Dr Hahn, Dr von Laue and I: R. N. Anshen (1986). Biography of an Idea, 71. Moyer Bell, Mount Kisco, NY.

  tragically absurd: Walker (1995), 267.

  to keep order in those small corners: Heisenberg (1971), 167.

  uncontaminated science: J. Medawar & Pyke (2001). Hitler’s Gift: The True Story of the Scientists Expelled by the Nazi Regime, 171. Arcade, New York.

  courageous polyphony: Dörries (ed.) (2005), 37.

  the true goal of the visit: Walker (1995), 257.

  Obviously Professor Bohr: Karlsch & Walker (2005), 17.

  Heisenberg and Weizsäcker sought: Niels Bohr Archive, documents released 6 February 2002, Document 6 (drafted by Margrethe Bohr). Available at www.nba.nbi.dk/papers/docs/cover.html.

  biological necessity: Walker (1995), 149.

  appearance in Denmark in 1941: Hentschel (1996), 334.

  I have heard very peculiar things: Dörries (ed.) (2005), 39.

  It is amazing, given that the Danes: W. Heisenberg (1941), letter to his wife Elisabeth, September. Available at http://werner-heisenberg.physics.unh.edu/copenhagen.htm.

  Because I knew that Bohr: W. Heisenberg (1956), letter to R. Jungk, op. cit.

  Everything I am writing here: ibid.

  Personally, I remember every word: N. Bohr, letter to W. Heisenberg, undated. Niels Bohr Archive, documents released 6 February 2002, Document 1. Available at www.nba.nbi.dk/papers/docs/d01tra.htm.html.

  you informed me that it was: ibid., Document 7, www.nba.nbi.dk/papers/docs/d07tra.htm.html.

  deeply mistaken: Dörries (ed.) (2005), 36.

  They didn’t need my help: Rhodes (1986), 525.

  He made the enterprise: ibid., 524.

  History legitimizes Germany: G. Kuiper (1945), report to Major Fischer, 30 June. In University of Arizona Library, Kuiper Papers, Box 28.

  From the very beginning: Heisenberg (1947), 214.

  The actual givens of the situation: W. Heisenberg (1956), letter to R. Jungk, op. cit.

  Obviously we were not fully aware: Hentschel (1996), lxxxvi.

  spared the decision: Heisenberg (1947), 214.

  The official slogan of the government: Cassidy (2009), 305.

  fought the Nazis not because: Goudsmit (1947), 115.

  presumably around 10–100 kilograms: Walker (2009), 353.

  I thought that one needed only: Bernstein (ed.) (2001), 117.

  This statement shows that at this point: ibid.

  But tell me why you used to tell me: ibid., 118.

  about the size of a pineapple: W. Heisenberg, letter to S. Goudsmit, 3 October 1948, 3. In Samuel Goudsmit Papers, Box 10, Folder 95. American Institute of Physics.

  This statement of course caused: ibid.

  makes it crystal clear: Karlsch & Walker (2005), 17.

  as far as they got: M. Walker, personal correspondence.

  We could feel satisfied with the hope: Heisenberg (1947), 214–15.

  dreamy wish: Walker (2009), 346.

  We always thought we would: Bernstein (ed.) (2001), 117.

  he stands for professional excellence: Heilbron (2000), 216.

  What he did during the Nazi period: ibid.

  physicists have a right to know: Hoffmann (2005), 294.

  that they had done everything possible: ibid., 324.

  the inborn conceit: Frank (ed.) (1993), 168.

  never reckoned with the possibility: Renneberg & Walker (eds) (1994), 252.

  Most of our old friends: Rose (1998), 309.

  we had enough trouble: Hentschel (2012), 332.

  It was one of the most depressing: ibid., 318.

  absolutely bitter, negative: ibid., 322.

  the tough momentary situation: ibid., 355.

  It is a difficult problem: ibid., 356.

  it seemed that the only thing: ibid., 322.

  He still goes on defending: Rose (1998), 311.

  I would like to apologize: Heim, Sachse & Walker (2009), 7.

  The conditioning of German culture: Rose (1998), 75.

  it remains incomprehensible: Dörries (ed.) (2005), 41.

  With your completely different: ibid., 43.

  It is, in most cases, morally wrong: S. Goudsmit (1947), ‘German scientists in army employment I: the case analysed’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists February, 64.

  The documents cited in Alsos: Morrison (1947), 365.

  brave and good men like Laue: ibid.

  Ever since war between: Laue (1948).

  honest, solid scientific investigation: ibid.

  what unutterable pain: ibid.

  How careful one must be: ibid.

  We recommend as the foundation: ibid.

  Many of the most able: Morrison (1948).

  but many a famous German: ibid.

  is not helping Germany: Hentschel (1996), 402.

  Someone should force a man: ibid., 334.

  It was clear to me: Hoffmann (2005), 325.

  Today I know that it was not only stupid: Hentschel (1996), 334.

  We all knew that injustice: Sime (1996), 364.

  for trying to make us understand: ibid.

  a physicist who never lost her humanity: ibid., 380.

  Chapter 12

  *1 Mother Night speaks very directly, in the way that fiction can, to the realities of living in Nazi Germany. One wonders how many scientists Campbell is speaking for when he says ‘It wasn’t that Helga and I were crazy about Nazis. I can’t say, on the other hand, that we hated them. They were a big enthusiastic part of our audience, important people in the society in which we lived . . . Only in retrospect can I think of them as trailing slime behind.’

  *2 A rare dissenter among this veneration was Paul Epstein, who was a student alongside Debye in Sommerfeld’s group before moving to the California Institute of Technology in 1921. He called Debye ‘not a lovable character, but very self-centered, and a great politician’. He was, said Epstein, ‘not a man of the very highest professional integrity’, but had a ‘talent to impress people’ and convinced Sommerfeld of his supposedly great abilities—‘he had him in his pocket actually’. But there is clearly some personal antipathy in Epstein’s assessment—‘I saw through him, and he didn’t like me for that reason’—as well as the snobbery of the aspiring middle-class intellectual:

  Debye was also a profoundly uninteresting person. That is, he had no culture; he was from a pretty low social stratum and had no general education. That is, he couldn’t talk about literary problems or art problems or phi
losophy problems, and his language was somewhat pedestrian and simple . . . Debye spoke with a street accent and outlook.

  One senses resentment here that such a low-born student rose so high. Debye suffered from this sort of snootiness even in his school days, when it became known that his parents were exempted from fees they could not afford.

  *3 The Alexander von Humboldt Foundation awards a Werner Heisenberg Medal for promoting international collaboration, the irony of which is hard to deny in the light of Heisenberg’s wartime propaganda lectures in occupied countries, while the German Research Foundation (DFG) awards Heisenberg professorships. The DPG’s Max Planck Medal for outstanding work in theoretical physics presents a much more conciliatory prospect: between the end of the war and 1970, many of the recipients were of Jewish descent, including Max Born (1948), Lise Meitner (1949), Gustav Hertz and James Franck (1951), Rudolf Peierls (1963) and Samuel Goudsmit (1964). Einstein was the first recipient in 1929. The medal was awarded to Heisenberg in 1933, Debye in 1950, and Weizsäcker in 1957. There is, to my knowledge, no Max von Laue Award.

  You alone kept me from concluding: Vonnegut (1961), 75.

  we are what we pretend to be: ibid., v.

  It wasn’t that Helga and I: ibid., 28–9.

  a man who served evil too: ibid., xii.

  Under totalitarianism: Gisevius (2009), 44–5.

  I have done that: Rose (1998), 7.

  But you see, it’s all terribly simple: Mansel (1970), 216.

  To the end his generosity: Williams (1975), 47.

  In his own eyes he had got through: Eickhoff (2008), 138.

  not a lovable character: Epstein (1965), 79.

  not a man of the very highest: ibid.

  I saw through him: ibid., 86.

  Debye was also a profoundly: ibid.

  refused to be browbeaten: Eickhoff (2008), 144.

  great personal courage: ibid., 145.

  striking lack of political interest: ibid., 141.

  I never found in Debye: van Ginkel (2006), 90.

  is not based on sound historical: Schultz (2006).

  If I had realized the consequences: van Ginkel (2006), 148.

  We believe you have done: the Debye family (2006), letter to the University Board of Utrecht University, 20 June.

  On World War II we Dutch: D. Hartmann & J. van Turnhout (2006), ‘Zestig Jaar later: niemand is veilig’, letter in Het Parool, 29 August. See http://home.kpn.nl/i.geuskens/peterdebye/DebyeTurn.htm.

  an ordinary man: Hoffmann & Walker (2006a).

  Based on the information to date: Cornell University press release, 2 June 2006. In van Ginkel (2006), 149.

  Debye took on positions of administration: R. Hoffmann (2006), Chemical & Engineering News 24 July, 6.

  Not to despair and always be ready: van Ginkel (2006), 3.

  opportunistic behaviour: Eickhoff (2008), 154.

  have the courage to relinquish: Dörries (ed.) (2005), 34.

  After the war, Debye made no apology: R. Hoffmann (2006), op. cit.

  money-business: Cassidy (2009), 64.

  I knew . . . if we Germans did not succeed: W. Heisenberg, letter to S. Goudsmit, 5 January 1948, 4. In Samuel Goudsmit Papers, Box 10, Folder 95. American Institute of Physics.

  For us there remains nothing: Rose (1998), 286.

  Heisenberg knew he was working: Walker (1995), 172.

  not one of the German colleagues: S. Goudsmit, letter to W. Heisenberg, 20 September 1948, 2. In Samuel Goudsmit Papers, Box 10, Folder 95. American Institute of Physics.

  the truth was not that the scientists: Beyerchen (1977), 207.

  It is always my custom to ask: van Ginkel (2006), 49.

  Debye comments that Hitler accomplished: Eickhoff (2008), 109.

  we have far-reaching pioneering work: F. Dürrenmatt (1964). The Physicists, transl. J. Kirkup, 54.

  new and inconceivable forces: ibid. 53. Jonathan Cape, London.

  Let us not forget that totalitarianism: Gisevius (2009), 42.

  I felt I had been a coward: Casimir (1983), 191–2.

  was not opposition at all: Beyerchen (1977), 206–7.

  the motive is not to honor: Reiding et al. (2008), unpaginated.

  Epilogue

  *1 Mark Walker has pointed out to me the echo here of the assertion by the conservative historian Ernst Nolte that ‘there are no forbidden questions’, made in the context of his revisionist analysis of the Holocaust during the 1980s, wherein he attempted to exonerate the Nazis by comparing their genocide with that of other regimes and nations.

  *2 Oppenheimer’s famous remark that after Hiroshima ‘the physicists have known sin’ seems in contrast to be an admission of guilt. But it too is ambiguous, not least in the elusive tense of ‘have known’. And did they, moreover, not know it until 1945? In this way, Haberer says, such comments ‘elude specific meaning’. Even Oppenheimer’s biblical phrasing is arguably a shield against the immediate, very practical questions that nuclear power raises.

  atheist extremism: address of Benedict XVI, Palace of Holyroodhouse, Edinburgh, 16 September 2010. Available at http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2010/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20100916_incontro-autorita_en.html.

  accustomed to regarding matters: Hentschel (2012), 334.

  an idealization of science: Haberer (1969), 2.

  The real issue involves how: ibid., 152–3.

  Whether they support the regime: Walker (ed.) (2003), 59–60.

  people who have to deal with black employees: see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7052416.stm.

  the hounding, by what can only be described: R. McKie (2007), ‘Disgrace: how a giant of science was brought low’, Observer 21 October. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/21/race.research.

  scientific importance: Hoffmann & Walker (eds) (2012), 390.

  The challenge to the understanding: Douglas (2003), 60.

  is infused with problems: Haberer (1969), 299.

  scientific leadership has tended: ibid., 303.

  one of the blackest comedies: Rhodes (1986), 529.

  He scolded us like schoolboys: ibid., 529–30.

  We regard it as proper: J. R. Oppenheimer (1989). Atom and Void: Essays on Science and Community, 74–5. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

  In most scientific study: Haberer (1969), 258.

  We hear different language: ibid., 252.

  elude specific meaning: ibid., 261.

  It must be possible both to respect: Walker (1995), 271.

  Many of the ways: Macrakis (1993), 4.

  The failure of scientists: Haberer (1969), 311.

  disgraceful role played by a few scientists: J. Rotblat (1995), Nobel Peace Prize 1995 Lecture. Available at http://www.pugwash.org/award/Rotblatnobel.htm

  When it comes to nuclear weapons: ibid.

  You are doing fundamental work: ibid.

  Looking back now, this unique conference: P. Berg (2004), ‘Asilomar and recombinant DNA’, article available at http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1980/berg-article.html.

  unfettered pursuit of this research: ibid.

  First and foremost, we gained: ibid.

  The history of science in totalitarian societies: Walker (ed.) (2003), 32.

  no single ideology: ibid., 58.

  the Kaiser Wilhelm Society was an integral part: Heim, Sachse & Walker (eds) (2009), 4.

  they will adapt to political and social changes: Renneberg & Walker (eds) (1994), 310.

  I cannot find any reason: ibid., 311.

  No political regime has ever tried: Walker (ed.) (2003), 58.

  Stalin left his nuclear physicists alone: T. Judt (2010). Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945, 174. Vintage, London.

  It is necessary to make this point: Renneberg & Walker (eds) (1994), 244.

  can profoundly influence how scientists work: Heim, Sachse & Walker (eds) (2009), 13.

  the Bush Administration has engaged: US House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (2007), ‘Political interference with climate change science under the Bush Administration’, December. Executive Summary, i.

  Bibliography

  H. D. Abruña (2006). ‘Peter Debye’, Chemical and Engineering News July 24, 4–6.

  H. Albrecht (1993). ‘Max Planck: Mein Besuch bei Adolf Hitler’—Anmerkungen zum Wert einer historischen Quelle, in H. Albrecht (ed.), Naturwissenschaft und Technik in der Geschichte 41–63. Verlag für Geschlichte der Naturwissenschaft und Technik, Stuttgart.

  G. C. Altschuler (2006). ‘The convictions of Peter Debye’, Daedalus, Fall, 96–103.

  J. Baggott (2009). Atomic. Icon, London.

  J. Bernstein (ed.) (2001). Hitler’s Uranium Club: The Secret Recordings at Farm Hall, 2nd edn. Copernicus, New York.

  A. D. Beyerchen (1977). Scientists under Hitler: Politics and the Physics Community in the Third Reich. Yale University Press, New Haven.

  M. Born (2005). The Born—Einstein Letters. Macmillan, London.

  P. Bridgman (1948). ‘Scientists and social responsibility’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 4(3), 69–72.

  H. Casimir (1983). Haphazard Reality. New York.

  D. C. Cassidy (2009). Beyond Uncertainty: Heisenberg, Quantum Physics, and the Bomb. Bellevue Literary Press, New York.

  J. Cornwell (2003). Hitler’s Scientists. Viking, London.

  M. Davies (1970). ‘Peter Joseph Wilhelm Debye: 1884–1966’, Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society 16, 175–232.

  P. Debye (1965–66). Oral interview conducted by D. M. Kerr and L. P. Williams, 22 December 1965, 20 January 1966, 6 June 1966 & 16 June 1966. Kroch Library, Cornell University, Archive 13–6–2282 trsc.5216–5218.

  P. Debye (1962). Oral interview conducted by T. Kuhn & G. Uhlenbeck, 3 May 1962. Available at www.aip.org/history/ohilist/4568_1.html.

  P. Debye (1964). Oral interview conducted by H. Zuckerman. Oral History Research Office, Butler Library, Columbia University, New York, Box 20, Room 801.

  M. Delbrück (1978). Oral interview conducted by C. Harding, 14 July—11 September. Archives of the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena. Available at oralhistories.library.caltech.edu/16/1/OH_Delbruck_M.pdf.

  J. van Dongen (2007). ‘Reactionaries and Einstein’s Fame: “German Scientists for the Preservation of Pure Science,” Relativity, and the Bad Nauheim Meeting’. Physics in Perspective 9, 212–30.

  M. Dörries (ed.) (2005). Michael Frayn’s Copenhagen in Debate. University of California Press, Berkeley.