In 1935, Lise
Meitner, Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman began work to sort out all of the
substances into which the heaviest of natural elements transmuted under
neutron bombardment. By early 1938, they had identified no fewer
than ten different half-life activities. At the same time, Irene
Curie began looking into uranium and came up with results which
contradicted those of Hahn and Meitner. The debate raged on.
Not long after, Hahn and Strassman (Lise Meitner had by now fled to
Stockholm after her Jewish origins came under question after the Nazis
marched into Austria) succeeded in identifying no fewer than 16
different radioactive substances with varying half-lifes. Three of
these substances were previously unknown isotopes, and were felt to be
isotopes of radium. At this time, the 59 year old Otto Hahn was
unquestionably the ablest radiochemist in the world. He would need
all of his 40 years of experience to decode uranium.
After several more weeks of tedious work, it seemed that these
"radium" isotopes must be barium, element 56, slightly more
than half as heavy as uranium. At first they could not
believe the results they were seeing and cabled Lise Meitner in
Stockholm for some sort of confirmation. Her reply seemed to
suggest that although it appeared to be "impossible", they
should keep an open mind. Hahn and Strassman continued with
further refinements and again cabled Meitner: "Our radium proofs
convince us that as chemists we must come to the conclusion that the
three carefully-studied isotopes are not radium, but, in fact,
barium." On
January 3rd of 1939, Otto Frisch returned to Copenhagen from visiting
his aunt, Lise Meitner, and informed Niels Bohr of Hahn's
"barium" hypothesis. Niels Bohr was immediately gleeful
as if he had been expecting such results. That same day, Lise
Meitner cabled Hahn again: "I am fairly certain now that you
really have a splitting towards barium and I consider it a wonderful
result for which I congratulate you and Strassman very warmly...You now
have a wide, and beautiful field of work ahead of you..."
What they had succeeded in doing, for the first time, was
"splitting" an atom.
As a final step, these results need further interpretation. Lise
Meitner in Stockholm and her nephew in Copenhagen did so by
long-distance telephone. Frisch carried out some further
confirming experiments in his own lab using a simple ionization
chamber. Over the following weekend, aunt and nephew conferred by
phone to prepare two papers for Nature: a joint explanation of the the
reaction and Frisch's report of the confirming evidence of his
experiment. Both reports - "Disintegration of uranium by
neutrons: a new type of nuclear reaction" and "Physical
evidence for the division of heavy nucleii under neutron
bombardment" - used the new term "fission" for the first
time. The
"word" spread like wild-fire. Leo Szilard, having read
the Hahn-Strassman paper wrote to Lewis Strauss on January 25, 1939:
"I feel I ought to let you know of a very sensational new
development in nuclear physics. In a recent paper...Hahn reports
that he finds when bombarding uranium with neutrons the uranium 'breaks
up'...This is entirely unexpected and exciting news for the average
physicist. The department of physics at Princeton, where I have
spent the last few days, was like a stirred-up ant heap. Apart
from the purely scientific interest there may be another aspect of this
discovery, which so far does not seem to have caught the attention of
those to whom I spoke. First of all it is obvious that the energy
released in this new reaction must be very much higher than all
previously known cases...This in itself might make it possible to
produce power by means of nuclear energy, but I do not think that this
possibility is very exciting, for the cost of investment would probably
be too high to make the process worthwhile. I see...possibilities
in another direction. These might lead to large-scale production
of energy and radioactive elements, unfortunately also perhaps to atomic
bombs. This new discovery revives all the hopes and fears in this
respect which I had in 1934 and 1935, and which I have as good as
abandoned in the course of the past two years." |