THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box 618
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER .Editors
$1.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAR
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoffice
at Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
>
Monday, Noveniber 24,1947
The “Secret” Of The Atomic Bomb
(By Frank Carey)
WASHINGTON—The significance of Soviet Foreign
Minister Molotov’s statement that the “secret of the
atomic bomb ceased to exist a long time ago” depends
-on what he meant by the word “secret.”
If he meant only that the fundamental physics of the
bomb is known to all nations, he wasn’t dishing out any
thing new. The fact of nuclear fission—that is, that ura
nium-235 nuclei split into almost equal parts after bom
bardment with neutrons—was discovered in 1938.
Then, right after Hiroshima, the famed Smyth report
disclosed many of the results that had accumulated dur
ing the wartime hush-hush.
If Molotov meant that some nation or nations other
than the United States actually knew how to make the
actual ingredients of an A-bomb, assemble it and cause
it to explode successfully—and had actually done all
these things—that’s something else.
Let’s see what actually has been published about the
bomb. It is known that:
1. Nuclear fission exists.
2. Energy is released in the process of fission.
3. When an atomic nucleus “splits,” more than one
neutrcn is emitted in the process and thus a “chain re
action” can be set up.
4. A chain reaction can be produced not only in ura
nium-235, but in the new element “plutonium.”
5. In order to make a chain reaction “go,” you must
have a sufficient amount of fissionable material present
—a so-called “critical mass.”
6. If you assemble an amount of material exceeding
this critical mass, you can have one of two things. If you
make your system only slightly ‘over-critical,” you get a
“controlled” chain-reaction—such as takes places in the
chain-reacting “ovens” or piles where plutonium is
made from uranium. If you make your system strongly
“over-critical”—suddenly bring together amounts of
fissionable material that exceed the critical mass—you
get an atomic explosion.
What has not been published?
1. No information has been released on what makes
a “critical mass” for either a uranium or plutonium
bomb or on how to bring sub-critical amounts of the ma
terial together within the bomb.
2. Neither have exact details on various technical
processes involved in making the wherewithal for a
bomb or a bomb itself.
3. Nor has the low-down been given on such things as
remote-control devices used in the “pile” production of
plutonium.
4. Nothing has been said about other materials, in ad
dition to fissionable material, that go into bomb making.
Does Russia or some other country know those ele
ments of the atom bomb secret? Molotov didn’t say*.
If so, does Russia or some other country have the in
dustrial ability to build and operate necessary factories?
A group of Los Alamos scientists, in their publication
“Our Atomic World” had this to say a good year ago:*
The U.S.S.R. has the raw materials, the scientists and
the industrial potential to make atomic bombs. The
United States required four years of determined effort
to apply the fundamental science and produce bombs.
“The time it would take the U.S.S.R. or any other
country to achieve the same development would tend
to be less because our success has reduced the number
of problems that they would have to solve.
“On the other hand, the time would tend to be greater
because their industrial strength is so much less.
“It is reasonable to expect that some country willing
4 a aLa A A 1 A ^A%%4 ••••* Jmm — A • S • •
SHORT ORDER
7 ONEBB€Ad\
5ANDWl£M AMD V
i Ahunkofpib/)
quick;/
i®r,
Stoi»-$ap AID
Marshall planT
I RESTAURANT
! FULL COURSE DINNERS T
l COWED TO ORDER ;
} EXCELLENT CUISINE J
in five years.” That would be about 1951.
Last spring, the unofficial views of some anonymous
officers of the army general staff were published in a
document prepared for the Library of Congress.
This document said:
“At present, to the best of our knowledge, only the
United States has developed and manufactured atomic
bombs. . . . Our best estimates indicate that it will take
any other nation several years successfully to complete
one bomb. ... For a number of years, perhaps as many
as eight to fifteen, only the U. S. will possess atomic
bombs in significant quantities.”
They pointed out that this did not consider the possi
bility that meanwhile international control of atomic
energy might be achieved.
Dewey’s Foreign Aid Proposals
(Rocky Mountain News)
GOVERNOR DEWEY in his recent foreign-affairs
address supporting the Marshall Plan for American aid
abroad made several constructive suggestions.
His inclusion of China is exceedingly important. The
economic emergency is at least as great in China as in
Europe, and the military threat of Red armies is more
immediate. If the administration persists in ignoring!
this fact, as it has been doing, it will run into trouble.
Moreover, the governor is wise in warning against
any discrimination as between friendly socialistic and
free-enterprise nations, of which few remain. As he says
“so long as human liberty is maintained as a principle
objective of a government, that government is friendly.”
Whether a representative government has, or has not,
nationalized some of its industries is none of our busi
ness. Conservative leaders in Europe have made it clear
that they, no less than Socialists, would resent any anti
Socialist riders on American aid as dangerous foreign
interference in their internal affairs. And of course that
is precisely what Moscow accuses us of doing.
Governor Dewey wants a bipartisan board, with re- j
construction loans—as distinct from relief grants—ad-(
ministered by American businessmen.
We are inclined to agree that a bipartisan agency, the
smaller the better for efficiency, is preferable to the un- j
equipped and already overloaded State Department or
to a cumbersome inter-departmental body. But even
with a bipartisan agency, the overriding policy deci
sions within the law laid down by Congress must be
subject to the President and his Secretary of State. *
Hurting Themselves
(The Denver Post)
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of union workers are
being deprived of the services of the national labor rela
tions board by the refusal of their official representa
tives to'comply with provisions of the Taft-Hartley act.
In some cases, union leaders have declined to file the
have balked at filing the financial
and other reports which the law
calls for.
In defying the law, these labor
leaders are hurting nobody but
themselves and the people whose
interests they are supposed to be
protecting. They are not discredit
ing members of Congress who en
acted the law. But they are de
priving union workers of privi
leges for which they tough* for
man} >ears. And among the rank
and file of organized labor there
must be more and more wondering
.ino!*t the kind of leadership which
thumbs its nose at the government
and forfeits their rights.
In refreshing contrast to the
builheadedness of labor leaders
who are shouting defiance of the
law, even though what they are
doing may wreck their unions, is
the attitude of Patrick Ratigan of
Omaha. Until a few days ago, he
headed a packinghouse workers'
union in the Nebraska city. But
when it decided its officials should
refuse to sign the anti-Communist
affidavits required by the Taft
Hartley law, he resigned his
union office. He said:
"I am for the repeal of all anti
union legislation, but as a good
American citizen I take the posi
tion that this should be done le
gally—through the ballot box or
the courts. I will not, as a good
citizen, defy my government. In
the American trade union move
ment there is no place for Com
munistic labor leaders or fellow
travelers.”
What a pity organized labor in
this country is not blessed with
more leaders who hold these
views.
That’s That
By BRUCE GUSTIN
♦
Religious freedom is one thing.
Fanaticism is something entirely
different. A 4-year-old girl suc
cumbed to meningitis at Greybull,
Wyo., a few days ago. Her parents
refused to allow her to receive
medical treatment. They depended
upon “the promise of the Lord” to
save her. They said they “were
certain the Lord would raise her
up and strengthen her.” But she
died.
The idea that constitutional
guarantees of freedom of religion
tie the hands of the state and pre
vent it from stepping in and com
pelling parents to allow sick chil
dren to receive medical attention
is preposterous. If adults, in case
of illness, want to rely entirely
upon prayer, that may be their
privilege. But little children
should not be denied medical care
just because parents have more
faith in prayer than in doctors.
That’s carrying “religious free
dom” too far.
While official figures have not
been announced, it is reported
from Washington, D. C., thaf, up
to Oct. 1, Russia received from the
United States nearly $48,000,000
this year in relief and rehabilita
tion donations. During the first
seven months in 1947, it is said,
lend-lease shipments to the Soviet
Union never fell below $1,000,000
a month. *
The explanation of commerce
officials that, although lend-lease
is legally dead, the United States
is under a moral obligation to ship
these goods to Russia is asininie.
The alibi that most of the ship
ments to'Russia were in lend-lease
“pipelines" when lend-lease was
ended is too raw for anybody to
swallow. With Russia openly
figHting American attempts to re
habilitate western Europe, it does
rtrtf malm can rn fnr Ip