"...Reads like a gripping drama.... This book marks a turning point in the history of atomic-bomb scholarship, and no future study can credibly ignore its compelling contentions.... A genuinely original book about a profoundly important topic." The Kirkus Reviews
In "Critical Mass" substantial evidence/arguments are unfortunately mixed with those of little merit (for example, citing the Daily Mail as an authority on the salt mine uranium waste being from WW2 - German nuclear power plant operators have apologized for sequestering this material there in the 1960s). From my research I have unanswered questions which relate to the substantial material in "Critical Mass". A big one concerns the Wehrmacht research contract given to Paul Harteck in September, 1939, and the prototypes he developed, notably the Anschütz ultracentrifuge which in July of 1942 succeeded in 5%-7% U-235 enrichment - how many more of these ultracentrifuges were made and what happened to them and their product?
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure how the German authorities apologizing for putting radioactive materials in the mines in the 1960s qualifies as bad journalism on behalf of the Daily Mail. Or are you trying to suggest they apologized for the documents that stated a portion of the spent uranium was from the German World War Two atomic bomb program was found in the mines records? The accusation is unclear and certainly, as stated, does not reverse in any way the documentation stating German WW2 spent uranium is in the mines.
DeleteOn the other hand, Critical Mass deals with Hartek and his ultracentrifuges to the end of the war, to the extent of their import to the story, as it includes most of the other major German efforts. This would have been obvious to anyone who has actually read Critical Mass. Carter Hydrick