Often wonder if the Manhattan Project failed and the atomic bomb not worked, would General Groves really have had to live on the hill, testifying to Congresses inquisition or would it have been covered up & classified away unknown forever?
-
As Alex is too modest to do so himself, he documented the thin veneer of secrecy hiding the effort.http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2013/03/29/narratives-of-manhattan-project-secrecy/ …
Modesty is not generally one of my attributes but thanks. There were also many leaks even during the war — the idea that a lid would have been kept on it in the postwar when the censorship regime lifted seems unlikely to me:http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2013/09/20/worst-manhattan-project-leaks/ …
![trey [no stake in society]🇭🇰](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1158606715647954944/_BiLvj2C_normal.jpg)
-
-
What about recruitment secrecy, do you know it was as strictly enforced as claimed or do you think they told *some* of the scientist to get them to join. Heard a few found out accidentally e.g. Think Feynman and even Oppenheimer. Thoughts? Maybe you’ve written on this too?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Relative to me, it is.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, IIRC Frank Brynes gave the high sunk costs as a reason why Slizard suggestion to cancel Trinity was not viable. The same rationale wud probably have applied in case of a major technical failure.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.