On Apr 12, 11:33 pm, thro...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Wayne Throop) wrote:
> No, not that either. Signing a letter stating that it was possible is
not
> "responsibility for".
Einstein's prestige, when added to the letter drafted by Leo Szilard,
certainly did help that letter get attention, and it did lead to the
government making serious efforts towards developing the atomic bomb
at an earlier time than would have happened otherwise.
Note, as well, that the atomic bomb still had not yet become available
by the time Germany was defeated. Thus, had it not been for the letter
signed by Einstein, unless the dogged resistance of the Japanese
indeed caused the war in that theater to drag on indefinitely, it
might well not have been ready in time for the war. This could have
led to efforts to create it being abandoned once it was no longer
needed.
Einstein certainly didn't do the work of creating the atomic bomb,
thus he doesn't deserve all the credit for it, but since his
contribution, symbolic though it may have been, was still quite
possibly a _sine qua non_ for its development, I suppose that one
could argue that, if the atomic bomb was a bad thing, it placed a
burden on his karma, as well as that of others.
As my thinking is that the only bad thing about the atomic bomb is
that the Russian spies got a hold of its plans, I reject the
negativity towards Einstein for other reasons.
John Savard
|
