6
$\begingroup$

There are quite a few Nobel Prize winners (e.g. Physics) who worked on the Manhattan project in the development of the atomic bomb. But, did any Nobel Prize result from direct research performed on the Manhattan Project? For example, although Feynman was a key participant in the Manhattan project, his Nobel did not derive from work specific to the development of the bomb. But, are their other Nobel Prize winners in Physics (or, Chemistry) whose work can be considered a descendent of work performed in support of the work on the atomic bomb?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Certainly not. It is explicitly stated in the conditions of the prize that it has to be a work "to the benefit of mankind". Whether nuclear bomb benefited mankind is subject of discussion, but most people tend to think it did not. $\endgroup$ – Alexandre Eremenko Sep 11 '15 at 20:39
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexandreEremenko -- Maybe I should have clarified my question. I was not limiting my question to the engineering required to construct a bomb. But, rather, the scientific discoveries (whatever they might be) that were part of the work performed directly or indirectly in the bomb effort. $\endgroup$ – K7PEH Sep 11 '15 at 23:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Another reason why I think that the answer is "no" is that most of this work was classified until it became obsolete. Scientists who left Manhattan project switched to their other "normal" activities. $\endgroup$ – Alexandre Eremenko Sep 12 '15 at 1:39
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexandreEremenko: The Manhattan Project was not just a bomb-building project. It started out as a much broader project. They had ideas like using nuclear power for submarines. The first big accomplishment was to build a nuclear reactor that achieved a self-sustaining chain reaction. That was the crucial first step on the road to the peaceful use of nuclear power. $\endgroup$ – Ben Crowell Jan 29 at 17:13
6
$\begingroup$

Seaborg received a Chemistry Nobel in 1951 for exploring the chemistry of transuranic elements. That presumably would include his work with Plutonium during the Manhattan project.

I'm pretty sure that's the only one (and it admittedly only sort of counts). Most of the scientific discoveries necessary for the bomb were done in the late 30's. The Manhattan project itself was mainly concerned with the resulting engineering problems.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think it counts and I should kick myself for not seeing that one myself. $\endgroup$ – K7PEH Sep 12 '15 at 20:22
  • $\begingroup$ Joint with Edwin McMillan. $\endgroup$ – Francois Ziegler Oct 16 '17 at 4:50

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.