Discovery of 500 genes responsible for human food preferences

Julius Robert Oppenheimer, director of the Manhattan Project that would build the world’s first atomic bomb, became one of the most famous scientists of his generation when a fireball flashed across the sky at the Los Alamos test site in the New Mexico desert in July 1945.

The creation of the atomic bomb and the destruction of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, killing more than 200,000 people, and the start of a new era made Oppenheimer a historical icon, now occupying the entire world. In later worldly life.

The Manhattan Project required a huge effort, and thousands of scientists worked tirelessly throughout the war. But when the time came, when the bomb was completed and successfully tested, Oppenheimer was agitated and perhaps sad, quoting a Hindu phrase: “Now death has become the destroyer of worlds.” However, he himself, in the same week, provided the US military with information that would enable them to bomb Japan as accurately as possible.

“It’s a story that gives you a sense of the man and his complexity and paradox in what he’s doing,” Guy Bird said in a July 15 interview with Live Science.

Oppenheimer achieved what they set out to do, and some of his colleagues attest that it would not have happened if he hadn’t directed the project.

Stephen Chapin, the Franklin Ford Research Professor of the History of Science, tells us about another aspect of the film in an interview with The Harvard Gazette published on July 19: “Oppenheimer was really a completely unlikely choice for scientific management at Los Alamos.

The Los Alamos scholars described Oppenheimer’s emaciation as “a model of a religious ascetic, almost fleshless, and as a result of the asceticism that controlled him he became whole-hearted and whole-souled,” Chapin explained, “the result of his constant involvement in his work and the severe illness he suffered because of his severe illness.”

As for Oppenheimer’s intentions, they were quite clear. As a teenager he studied quantum physics in Germany and knew that German scientists understood the physics of the atomic bomb and could possess a weapon of mass destruction. From a political perspective, he was a left-wing man who feared that German scientists would hand over the weapon to Hitler, who would not hesitate to use it, and Beard describes it: “It was his worst nightmare.”

After the war, Oppenheimer became a more outspoken critic of nuclear weapons—he opposed efforts to develop a hydrogen bomb, and referred to the US Air Force’s plans for mass strategic bombing with nuclear weapons as genocide. “We know from letters his wife (Kitty) wrote to friends that Oppenheimer was depressed after Hiroshima,” says Beard.

Oppenheimer returned to Washington and knew that the Japanese were going to surrender in September. He knew the Truman administration’s position on the new weapon, and that they wanted American national security to depend entirely on a large arsenal of those weapons.

In October 1945, Oppenheimer gave a public address in Philadelphia, stating that these weapons were the weapons of the occupiers. They are weapons of terror, not weapons of defense, and the United States must find a way to create an international monitoring mechanism to prevent their proliferation. This was a direct threat to the War Department and the US Army, Navy, and Air Force, all of whom demanded increased budgets in these weapons.

By late 1953 Oppenheimer had become a direct threat to the US government. As a result, he was stripped of his security clearance, interrogated and publicly humiliated. About that, Baird says: “They wanted to publicly humiliate him so that he would be an example to those behind him. They sent a message to scholars everywhere: (Don’t stray from your narrow path, as you have no right to speak in politics, you are not allowed to become a public intellectual).”

Physicist Muhammad Darwad Hasan, professor of physics and light at the University of Arizona, USA, said: “I think Oppenheimer was not forced to do so, but it was his choice, and the scientist should focus on scientific research that plays a role in increasing human knowledge and creating useful applications.”

On his Facebook page, Hasan said, “Robert Oppenheimer neither likes nor respects him, and he represents everything he dislikes about the scientist’s personality.” Asharq Al-Awsad said in an interview: “He knew exactly what he had to do, knew its danger, and he did it despite it; seeking personal glory even at the cost of thousands of human lives.

Of Oppenheimer’s retreat and his opposition to nuclear weapons, he added: “After seeing what he did on the ground, I don’t think the results will be bad,” insisting, “there are some scientists who left the program after they became convinced that Germany—Hitler—couldn’t build an atomic bomb.”

Egyptian novelist Ahmed Samir Saad, a professor of anesthesiology at Cairo University’s Faculty of Medicine, believes the film may have tried to exonerate Oppenheimer, but it never exonerated the US government.

The film juxtaposes Oppenheimer and Nobel, both rushing after scientific paradigms, the first returning and struggling to develop the hydrogen bomb and atomic weapons, the second winning the Peace Prize. The film attempts to separate scientific achievement from its political utility.

Chad added, “I don’t see much difference between what I read about Oppenheimer and the events depicted in the film, except that the film was certainly sympathetic to him, and it highlighted his strong psychological influence and his opposition to nuclear weapons to the point of being accused of treason.”

But did the scientists involved in the project know how dangerous and destructive the use of the bomb would have been, says Chapin, the Los Alamos scientist: “They did not think about whether the weapon could be used against Germany or whether the threat of its use would be sufficient.”

He added: “This is a very difficult scientific and technical problem and they are fully committed to making the project a success.” Therefore; The moral and political anguish over the bomb and what to do with it began to emerge in a short period towards the end of the project, a period in which relatively few people were involved.

After the defeat of Nazi Germany, some project scientists felt that there was no need to drop the bomb on Japan, and that Japan could be told clearly that the bomb existed and what it could do, but according to Chapin, Oppenheimer did nothing to help them. Nor is it clear that Oppenheimer could have had much influence over the use of the bomb. He had intellectual authority, but not much political power. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki decisions were both military and political decisions.

Innocent politician

Bird tries to paint a broader picture of Oppenheimer, saying, “He was multi-talented and fascinated by Hinduism.” He added, “Yes, he is a stupid and naive politician. He didn’t know what he was going to do. Despite this, Baird commented on Oppenheimer’s position on nuclear proliferation: “This is what we need now. We need more scientists who are willing to talk about the hard truths of how to integrate science with life and make it non-destructive.”

Byrd answered the most important question of how people will remember Oppenheimer’s legacy of a terrible and deadly weapon: it depends on what happens in the future, and if there is another nuclear war, surely he will be considered the scientist responsible for that too.

Oppenheimer was born into a wealthy family in New York City, USA in 1904, and graduated from Harvard University in 1925, where he majored in chemistry. Two years later, he completed his PhD in physics at the University of Göttingen, Germany, one of the world’s leading institutions for theoretical physics. Although admittedly disinterested in politics after the invention and success of the atomic bomb; Oppenheimer publicly supported social progressive ideas. His partner, Kitty Boning, was a left-wing extremist whose social circle included Communist Party members and activists. This may have been one of the reasons why he was later accused of being a communist sympathizer before his death on February 18, 1967 at the age of 62.